|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
3
   |
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Simply Not enough.
Hybrids still have all the disadvantages of every weapon system with no advantage to speak of. Lasers get unlimited ammo and insta load but use cap, Projectiles get damage type, plus range modifiers, and no cap, but have 10 second load time. Missles get damage type and no cap, but have 10 second laod time.
Hybrids get range selection that can not be fully be utilsed because of 10 seconds load time and nerfing dps. But for that they get cap usage, and 10 second load time. This load time should be reduced from 10 seconds to 5 seconds, If you need to justify this hybrid ammo is smaller than projectile ammo and missles so it would make sense that it could load faster, they need an inert advantage here.
Another problem was being able to apply your dps. +10 m/s and agility will not solve this. Someone earlier suggested having ammo trade cap for range instead of DPS for range. This makes sense, currently Blaster which can only be used in extremley short range are penalised for using them in extremly short range because it cost them more cap to do so. That does not make sense, the longer the range the more cap you use, this is how hybrids should work. This should also be combined with reducing hybrid ammo load time from 10 to 5 seconds so that they can easier switch out ammo to actually utilize this while fighting.
until then
Blasters will still be useless in fleets because they cant engage/DPS at normal fleet ranges,
Rails will still be useless because their DPS is sub-par at normal sniper fleet ranges.
SImply the negatives still outweigh the positives by a large factor. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:Eiyla Rindour wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
THIS. Would make blasters useful, but not OP. +1 +1. This is what blasters should be.
Um no -100.
This would make Blasters even more useless.
Why? because now all you need to do is stay at 15km and Gallente dies every time. Kiting is already an issue so you want to make it worse? Sure you will be better off in the 10% of situations you start off in optimal, but now you will be completly owned in the 90% you do not. Not to mention now you have 0 purpose in any fleet except for gate camps and even then still outshinned by AC's because the chance they come in next to you is less then them coming at the other side of the gate. By the time you burn to them they are already melting.
DPS in range is not the issue its the lack of range or being able to apply the DPS that was the issue. Increasing dps and shortening range makes Gallente even more niche, a very small one. They would be relegated to high sec station games and useless in all other situations if you made that change. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Imawuss wrote:Um no -100.
This would make Blasters even more useless.
Why? because now all you need to do is stay at 15km and Gallente dies every time. Kiting is already an issue so you want to make it worse? Sure you will be better off in the 10% of situations you start off in optimal, but now you will be completly owned in the 90% you do not. Not to mention now you have 0 purpose in any fleet except for gate camps and even then still outshinned by AC's because the chance they come in next to you is less then them coming at the other side of the gate. By the time you burn to them they are already melting.
DPS in range is not the issue its the lack of range or being able to apply the DPS that was the issue. Increasing dps and shortening range makes Gallente even more niche, a very small one. They would be relegated to high sec station games and useless in all other situations if you made that change. So you want long range blasters? Would you like that at Scorch range or EMP range? What I described would actually fit what blasters are SUPPOSED to be, as well as provide a niche that an intelligent pilot could exploit. Amarr ships are great if you can control range, but they aren't the fastest so you need a smart pilot. Caldari ships are great if you can MAINTAIN range (and somehow figure out how to keep the guy on grid), but have crap for DPS and are useless up close. Minmatar have amazing kiting ability with their speed and falloff giving amazing flexibility with range and damage type while on grid. What do I want with Gallente? I want a ship that when I get a warp in, or the opponent makes a mistake, I can drop a scram and web on him and eat him alive. I would prefer that EVE Online never has a Jack of all Trades ship that can truly own everything (though at times the Vagabond has come pretty damn close), and for that matter I'd like to see Gallente truly excel at one specific area while on grid. I described it as creating a zone of death, and I think that metaphor fits quite nicely for what blasters *could* be if CCP agrees.
So basically, you want Gallente to be to be useful only in small fleet vs 1 ship gank situations? Because you need to have 1500 dps in one ship for that to work right... all other situations you will be kited and killed @15km becuase you are slower and cant get into web range without help from another ship. In fleet situations your are useless. If this happens Gallente will only be useful in 5% of combat situations. I'm sorry not acceptable.
I would like to see ammo lose its dps for range stats and instead some sort of cap for range stat and reduce ammo load times from 10 seconds to 5 or instant. Then on top of that something like this would be more useful:
MeBiatch wrote:
here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50%
2. Decrease rate of fire by 30%
3. Increase falloff by 15%
4. increase tracking by 37.5%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15%
2. Increase rate of fire by 15%
3. decrease activation cost by 40%
4. increase tracking by 37.5%
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
I'm disapointed with CCP yet again. With all the ideas that have been put forth by the community, ie: short range arty long range AC's or extremely short range deathrays that kill all out to 10km but not any further or changing falloff mechanics to work like a shot gun where you always hit but do less damage or changing ammo to work on more cap for more range instead of less damage for more range. Wether you like these ideas or not they are at least unique in their own ways and add to the diversity (or increase their niche effectivness) of the hybrid weapon system as well as make them more useful.
So what does CCP give us?
something that could be done by 1 developer in 1 day. They boost a few stats on the weapon system while not even addressing the main issue with them. As someone put it, its akin to rebuilding an aluminum a car out of carbon fiber and adding a spoiler to reduce weight and handling while forgetting you designed the thing with square wheels and saying that the new features make it viable in races. How much work does it take to go in and change those stats?
99% have spoken these changes dont go far enough, the community has given many great and varied ideas on fixing hybrids. Now CCP lets see if you are truly listening to the community as you say you are now doing.
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
[quote=Digital Gaidin]
I only ask that CCP doesn't try to stick blasters in the same box as Projectiles and Pulses. [quote]
I fully get this, i just dont prefere your plan to others. Its not a bad an idea i just think some of the other ideas suggested keep the uniqueness of Blasters while adding more survivabilty/versatility and use less warp to 0 and pray tactics.
I do however prefere your plan over what CCP has put out, which i feel is half assed and probably took 1 dev 30 minutes to come up with and then maybe a few hours to implement. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:26:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lets look at some numbers this rebalance will give us shall we? Since T2 Ammo is also getting a buff lets focus there by comparing Blasters to Autocannons using their respective t2 short range ammo types. No skills added or ship bonuses just turret + ammo.
Neutron Blaster II with Void
Range: 10,400m
Tracking: .03637
DPS: 32
800mm Repeating Artillery with Hail
Range: 21,600m
Tracking:.03024
DPS: 25.28
Heavy Neutron Blaster II with void
Range: 5,200m
Tracking: .84
DPS: 24.64
425mm Autocannon with Hail
Range: 10,800m
Tracking: .0739
DPS: 18.99
So Large and Medium Autocannons have 207% more range than Blasters.
Large Blasters will have 27% more DPS and 20% more Tracking than Large Autocannons
Medium Blasters will have 30% more DPS and 13% better tracking than Medium autocannons.
So ships that are faster and more agile with comparable tanks have over 207% more range over Blaster boats while doing only 27% less DPS. And in practise they will have much higher range becuase TE's and TC's will benefit Autocannons much more becuase of the much higher starting stats they have. So how quickly can you cover 5 to 15 km to actually apply that massive 27% more DPS to actually win the fight while in web/scram range chasing down faster ships...? i bet that extra 10 m/s will really help out in that? Look we dont need Gallente to become Mimatar ships or blasters to become Autocannons. Plenty of good and varied ideas to fix this have been told to you (CCP) by the community now please use them and not this half assed attempt.
Congrats CCP in the same patch to buff Hybrids you have also managed to make them obsolete with this Hail buff (removing the .5x falloff modifier). |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
Before this patch and after this patch Blasters are still only 27% more useful in 3 situations and Rails are still useless:
1. Station undock games
2. Gate Camps
3. Small fleet vs 1 where the blaster boat warps to 0 when the target is tackled. ( which also mean your missing out on the first 10 seconds of the fight or so, at 800 dps, thats 8000 dps you did not do so the damage when you arrive better make up for that very quickly, becuase AC's and Pulses have been chugging along doing thier damage the whole engagment)
Meanwhile AC's get very a substantial boost to Hail in effect doubling its range increasing their versatility and effectivness.
If this is the final rebalance, what is the best way to move forward? Simple let us take back our skill points in gallente hulls and hybrids and put them where they are useful AC's or Pulses. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 08:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
We are not caring about pve right? Just want to check.
I mean Caldari (missiles) is just ok with pvp but its God like for pvp
Amarr Lasers and Min projectiles can do well in pve but shine more in pvp.
Hybrids are the red headed step child for both pve and pvp.
The proposed changes dont change the pve aspect and only slightly help the pvp aspect while still being inferior. I mean a torp raven can still out DPS a mega with Blasters...
If the proposed changes are the best CCP can come up with fine im over it. Just give us an option to get our SP's we spent in hybrids back and problem solved.
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
Honestly i dont think CCP is willing to do a revamp of the hybrid weapons system. They see it as working as intended and just needing a little love. I get this from the dev responses i have seen. So in that regard best we will get is them playing with the current system and just adjusting stats.
With the Hail buff that made its way in with the peculiar absence of corresponding void and conflag buffs i can assume they have no intention of de-throning projectiles as king of the hill or making hybrids a worthy challenger. Hopefully they just add a skill re-allocation option as the primary buff to hybrids.
Just curious but has anyone ever taken the Gallente hulls switched the hybrid bonuses to projectiles and done some eft projections with them with AC's and arties to see what would happen? I would be curious to see if they would be more effective. Man i think a dual repped Hyperion with bonused AC's would be very nice :) or an arty Dominix with t2 sentries.... ohh man that would be a damm fine ship. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:34:00 -
[10] - Quote
I'm curious why these changes are so tame? CCP themselves (at least in a dev blog) said a little unbalance is a good thing. Having FoTM is good, it forces people to adapt, train new skills, learn new strategies, and explore more of the game. CCP's words not mine (paraphrased).
So a company that thinks FoTM is good why is this hybrid "rebalance" so mediocre?
My thoughts? the devs love their winmatar boats they fly and have not had their fill yet, hence the buff to hail increasing AC's best ammo DPS range by 50%.
So why CCP are you choosing to go against your own ideology when it come to hybrids? |
|
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:56:00 -
[11] - Quote
Foum ate my post. So smaller version after the hybrid "buff" we have:
Blaster negatives:
Use Cap
fixed damage type (just happens to be the 2 highest average resist on T2 ships..)
10 second reload time (makes switching ammor types extremly disadvantagous)
Poor Range (outranged by an averge of 2x-4x by other weapons)
Postitives:
Higher DPS (on average +17% vs pulse/ +27% vs AC's, after fitting/skills averages to be about +20%)
So lets say you do 800 DPS you oppent does 640 using AC's or Pulse, this mean you are outranged. Lets say it take you 10 seconds to get into your damage range. By that time you have taken 6,400 damage. With your higher DPS it will take another 40 seconds of non-stop firing in your range to make up that difference. 40 Seconds!!!! just to be back on par again....
Conclusion:
unless major changes happen to hybrids Please just refund all hybrid SP's, poeple that liked to be useless in lge fleets and be blown up in nice looking ships can then re-apply back into hybrids, all others can join the masses like they should have done from the begining and get into lasers or projectiles. (also all hybrids are still outperformed in all areas in pve) |
|
|
| |
|