Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 42 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:05:00 -
[781] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:make the 7.5% bonus to internal armor repair mods work also for external incomming Remote Repair mods...
This is a good idea in principle but unless you also balance Minmatar with Gallente in general, it actually works out as another Minmatar boost. This is because the ships that are more powerful today will benefit more from such a change, making it a relative boost to the Sleipnir over the Astarte, the Cyclone over the Brutix, and in particular, the Maelstrom over the Hyperion. Not clever.
Quote:Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
As noted by others, this idea has the same problem - the biggest beneficiaries are the Amarr armour-rigged ship. Also, it's a pretty rubbish drawback, it's the same as its benefit, just an EHP modifier. |
Kazetsu Davaham
North Star Networks The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:24:00 -
[782] - Quote
Hello
would it not be cool if blasters had a small splash dmg ? similar to shotguns.
this would give them advantage over smaller ships/drones |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:52:00 -
[783] - 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. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 11:06:00 -
[784] - Quote
Imawuss wrote: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.
Arty megathrons out dps rail megathrons (yes they loose all bonus but they do more dps, go figure)
425mm Brutix kicks ass (shield is far better)
The ones I've tested and are clearly better, In brutix case is the ability to apply dmg from far distances and select dmg that makes it better than blaster option, but for gank mackinaws sure go with blasters.
Edit: also 425mm AC Myrmidon kicks ass and you should try the shield brutix with rails+AM full lows of TE's MFS's, of course the armor rep is very useful on a better ship with shield tank than armor |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:14:00 -
[785] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote: For top-grade rails the fitting requirements are (were?) much more of an issue in my opinion, but those do NOT provide a significant damage advantage over their smaller versions. Their distinguishing attribute is range! Higher grade rails have significantly higher optimals, but the damage barely increases. This is especially true if you include the reload time, since the internal ammo storage halves for every step up in size/grade. This leaves (T2) small and medium rails with about 1 dps advantage (around 3-5%) for each bigger size on a hybrid bonused platform, and about 2 dps for larges (about 5%). Even with the 10% damage increase this is really FAR away from the 50% increase you suggested. More like 15% at best...
You are 100% correct and I'm an idiot.
I compared damage mod stats on the guns only. I was actually fitting guns to ships in EFT, but only to check PG usage, not the DPS.
Talk about embarrassingly stupid - I did the same exact damn thing I've accused some other posters of doing in this thread - ie. comparing raw stat numbers and not actual performance.
Good catch, Creat Posudol - you have my respect. Everyone else has my apologies.
Creat Posudol wrote: Which brings me to my next point: the reduced fitting requirements will not allow you to go up a grade for your guns. So any fit that doesn't use the highest grade guns already can now do so only by reducing the tank (if it had that much free PG it was a really REALLY bad fit).
I did not mean to say that you could simply replace neutrons for ions, or 425's for 350's, and the PG usage would work out to be the same. I apologize if my poor wording led to the wrong conclusion.
My point is that many of the Gallente ships suffer difficulties in balancing gank vs. tank, due to the high PG reqs of both hybrid guns and armor plates. There are many potential fits which won't work because of tight PG issues. This is true for the buffer-tanked blaster boat - for example, where using neutrons puts you just a bit over on PG, because you were also trying to fit an 800mm plate. So, since that fit won't work, you might downgrade to ions to keep the 800mm plate, or switch to a 400mm plate to keep the neutrons. If you insist on keeping the gank of neutrons, plus the tank of the 800mm plate, you might make it work by adding a PG mod/rig, or by swapping the single 800mm plate for two 400mm plates. But, in this case, you are sacrificing a low slot or rig slot - which everyone hates to do.
With the PG reduction on guns, in this example, I'm saying that the original neutron gank + 800mm plate tank might now fit, without a PG mod/rig. If so, you would no longer need to downgrade to ions, downgrade to a 400mm plate, or sacrifice a low/rig slot to make things fit.
I probably should have written something more like:
If you had to settle for electrons in one of your old loadouts, you might now be able to redesign your loadout to use ions.
If you had to settle for ions, you might now be able to redesign your loadout to use neutrons.
If you had to use two 400mm plates, you might now be able to use a single 800mm plate.
If you had to use two 800mm plates , you might now be able to use a single 1600mm plate.
If you had to use a PG mod/rig (such as an RC, PDS, or ACR), you might now be able to get rid of it.
If you free up a low slot or rig slot, you can now use it to fit for additional gank, tank. or speed. |
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:45:00 -
[786] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode GÇ£You go into combat, and itGÇÖs NOT going to be WagnerGǪindustrial techno or really hard drum and bassGÇ¥
Reynir Hardarson, founding member of CCP Games, 2002. |
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries The Black Armada
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 13:43:00 -
[787] - Quote
IMHO, minmitar weapon systems are better all the way around when compared to hybrids which go against the idea of weapon systems filling niches
Blasters vs Auto cannons After the speed nerf (for the most part) minmitar keep their ability to dictate ranges with speed on auto cannons boats as compared to GallenteGÇÖs blaster boats. Back in the day, the only thing going for Gallente blasters boats is the huge damage modifier and the ability to get in close fast and web the **** out of foes before their cap ran dry and melt face. This tactic is somewhat the same for auto cannon boats but, unlike blaster boats, auto cannon boats have awesome tracking which allow them to maximize their DPS while in a GÇ£dog fightGÇ¥ doing their Ricky bobby thing that they do orbiting their target. Contrasting this with the tactics used for Gallente, in a blaster boat you get in close with MWD and web down your target and have a good slug fest until they melt before you.
IMHO, CCP needs to give all Gallente blaster boats a web bonus and small boost to speed. This will allow the boats to get in close fast again, to start the slug fest, and the web will allow them to keep them there. To balance this, I would reduce the mid slots or nerf CPU in most blaster boats so in most cases pilots will have to choose between sebos, points, webs, and ect. Also, I would consider reducing all the blaster boats sensor strength so they would be more susceptible to ECM. This will make ECM bursts useful again as well and a good tactic if you want to disengage with a blaster boat in small gang warfare.
Rails vs Arty Rails are ****, complete **** in PvP. Artys have amazing alpha (as they should) but crap DPS because of crap ROF. Contrasting with rail, rails have **** alpha, crap damage, and normal ROF To fix rails, I would increase the ROF while keeping damage low. This will allow an increase in DPS without making rails **** face at long range. To balance this I would nerf the CPU or reduce the mids and increase the base lock time for rail boats. The reduce cpu/mids would limit the number of sebos and would pigeon toe the rail boats into the high lock time.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:09:00 -
[788] - Quote
Imawuss wrote: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.
CCP, if this is the case, you really need to wake up. hybrids need either a serious buff (10x what youre doing now), or a complete revamp.
|
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:10:00 -
[789] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: "Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
Re-group tanking rigs into active tanking and passive tanking rigs rather than armour and shield.
Give the passive tanking rigs the current armour rigs speed penalty and give the active tank rigs the sig radius penalty that is currently for shield rigs.
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:20:00 -
[790] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done. If you're going to switch the penalties to things which are utterly inconsequential you may as well just remove them altogether. edit: having said that, rigs, their effects, calibration, and penalties are all over the place and need looking at one way or another anyway. This.
And, why do we need the penalties at all? Energy grid rigs don't come with a penalty. |
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:28:00 -
[791] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:MeBiatch wrote:make the 7.5% bonus to internal armor repair mods work also for external incomming Remote Repair mods...
This is a good idea in principle but unless you also balance Minmatar with Gallente in general, it actually works out as another Minmatar boost. This is because the ships that are more powerful today will benefit more from such a change, making it a relative boost to the Sleipnir over the Astarte, the Cyclone over the Brutix, and in particular, the Maelstrom over the Hyperion. Not clever.
yes that is true with todays hybrids... but hopefully hybrids are going to get another round of boosts that should bring them on par with the other weapon systems and then it wont been seen as a major boost for minnie over gallente...
your argument could be used to compare the rokh and the abbadon... sure the abbadon is the better ship now but lets see what happens after the boost hits sisi and ccp tallest has some time to play around with the numbers...
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:03:00 -
[792] - Quote
Currently ships with bonus for active tank is at a disadvantage due to the massive dps people can dish out with ease thx to tier 2 battlecruisers and a massive influx of players the last few years. In my opinion it is long overdue to boost the hitpoints repaired for all shield boosters and armor repairers. Today you will have to use a serious amount of pricey modules and make sure to only fight very few ships at a time. And then you also have to be carefull about neutralizing which has become rather common :-)
I believe the active tank bonus is the main reason people are not using Hyperion a lot for pvp. The Maelstroms are used as alphaships in 0.0 warfare and only rarely used as intended in lowsec and for otherwise only for carebearing.
Also the poor performance is why super capitals neglect the capital reppers and get an insane RR-tank instead... |
Bluemelon
Polaris Rising PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:21:00 -
[793] - Quote
To cut all the whining and flaming going on.
This is a very good start, CCP. There are some issue's in the fact that it is not a gallente EXCLUSIVE buff.
The additional speed and Inertia has been a long time coming, however It will not be enough to make the gallente ships competitive. Armor boats are slow, especially the trimarked ones. A megathron would be dead or close to it by the time he even got close to a tempest.
In order to make Gallente a viable, usable and appealing race, the gallente ships need a bigger buff than this.
This change will let us see more Brutix's and Mega's....but still barely any compared to the prefered Cane, Tempest, Maelstrom, Drake and Amarr ships.
Just my little input there
-Blue
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:24:00 -
[794] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Currently ships with bonus for active tank is at a disadvantage due to the massive dps people can dish out with ease thx to tier 2 battlecruisers and a massive influx of players the last few years. In my opinion it is long overdue to boost the hitpoints repaired for all shield boosters and armor repairers. Today you will have to use a serious amount of pricey modules and make sure to only fight very few ships at a time. And then you also have to be carefull about neutralizing which has become rather common :-)
I believe the active tank bonus is the main reason people are not using Hyperion a lot for pvp. The Maelstroms are used as alphaships in 0.0 warfare and only rarely used as intended in lowsec and for otherwise only for carebearing.
Also the poor performance is why super capitals neglect the capital reppers and get an insane RR-tank instead... If anything, I take this as a call to reduce the remote repair power of Logistics and Non-Triaged Capital ships!
Using a dedicated "healer" or "repairer" is a force multiplier, allowing for more EHP and the ability to repair faster. For those who understand resistances over raw hitpoints, some truly nasty combinations can be fielded which makes for a very challenging time to kill even a single hostile ship (see Hellcat configuration for Abaddons).
Gallente/Minmatar both lends themselves to active tanks, while Amarr/Caldari lend themselves to passive tanks. Is it no wonder why the latter two are better fleet ships? If Caldari weren't so married to missiles and/or hybrids weren't as gimp as they are, they'd be used a lot more in fleets (for now, Tengu/Drake armies are the primary fleets running Caldari). Amarr are obviously used in the AHAC and Hellcat arenas for their tanks, and Minmatar are primarily used because of their weapon system AND their ability to fit a reasonably high shield buffer tank in their high slots combined with plenty of damage/speed mods in the lows. Gallente don't have the slot layout or weapon system to run a fleet setup using shield buffer tanks, and when they run armor buffers their usefulness falls below that of most Caldari gunboats due to their weapon systems (drone boats being an exception with very large tanks AND very reasonable DPS, but game mechanics make Drones marginal at best for real PvP outside of empire). |
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:34:00 -
[795] - Quote
Role bonus: 65% damage bonus to hybrid turrets on Deimos. Skill bonus - 12% bonus to the speed increase of MWD per level with 7.5% increase in capacitor cost of MWD per level (which skill? idk... total of 60% mwd speed increase at level 5 but it can't go fast for long)
Thoughts?
Please note this is a brainstorm style idea and it hasn't been thought out in full, or really much at all. I'll let you guys do that for me. It makes "Ship A" from earlier a better blaster boat by a good bit. A crazy high dps boat at super short range that has the ability to get in close but does it at the expense of cap. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:37:00 -
[796] - Quote
Vrykolakasis wrote:Role bonus: 65% damage bonus to hybrid turrets on Deimos. Skill bonus - 12% bonus to the speed increase of MWD per level with 7.5% increase in capacitor cost of MWD per level (which skill? idk... total of 60% mwd speed increase at level 5 but it can't go fast for long)
Thoughts?
Please note this is a brainstorm style idea and it hasn't been thought out in full, or really much at all. I'll let you guys do that for me. It makes "Ship A" from earlier a better blaster boat by a good bit. A crazy high dps boat at super short range that has the ability to get in close but does it at the expense of cap. A "dash" bonus for blaster boats wouldn't be too bad of an option if implemented reasonably across the board (very similar to the capacitor reduction bonuses for Amarr gunboats). It accomplishes the same thing as the agility idea a few pages back, without introducing too many game breaking mechanics (like insta-align).
I'd rather see blaster boats have their weapons revamped rather than just push a massive damage multiplier, but something like you said where blaster boats have a "+15% bonus to the speed increase of MWD per level" would do rather nicely. With MWD penalties already in place via the modules, it might be interesting to hold off on a penalty and give Gallente pilots the option of having long burn with the right fits, but slower if not burning. With tracking on blasters the way it is, and generally only blaster boats receiving this bonus, Gallente will need to slow down once in their targeting envelope to land hits due to the close range of their weapon systems and the potential for traversal to play a much greater role. This would also push Gallente away from afterburner fits, and make cap stability a challenge to balance with active tanking and capacitor usage on guns. |
lexa21
RED ROSE THORN RED Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:43:00 -
[797] - Quote
Hum... When i saw topic on forum i was glad, but then i read it. There were only one thing You tell right. Powergrid requirements for neutron medium blasters are too much for any tank fitting. All other stuff is not necessary but railgun damage. 10% is not enough. All of eve community were waiting for that day. And what do we see? 600 dps of rail mega changed to 630? Thats not enough. And by the way the first page of this topic on Russian forum is shining of facepalms, tears and answers about artillery buff. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:45:00 -
[798] - Quote
lexa21 wrote:Hum... When i saw topic on forum i was glad, but then i read it. There were only one thing You tell right. Powergrid requirements for neutron medium blasters are too much for any tank fitting. All other stuff is not necessary but railgun damage. 10% is not enough. All of eve community were waiting for that day. And what do we see? 600 dps of rail mega changed to 630? Thats not enough. And by the way the first page of this topic on Russian forum is shining of facepalms, tears and answers about artillery buff. 10% of 600 is what? Not 630... lol! Also, if that is added to base damage, once bonus multipliers are added it gets even larger. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:58:00 -
[799] - Quote
Bluemelon wrote:
There are some issue's in the fact that it is not a gallente EXCLUSIVE buff.
The Gallente do not need an exclusive buff. Balancing hybrids affects both the Caldari and Gallente, and while these changes may help some missioners, the biggest area of EVE these changes will affect is PvP. From this point of view it's arguable that Caldari need the buff more than Gallente. I've never met a FC that would prefer a Caldari damage ship over a Gallente damage ship, as the damage rails add to a fight is minimal to non-existent, missiles can take up to 20 or more seconds before applying damage, and most Caldari ships simply can't spare the mid-slots to fit a MWD/AB, web, and scram/disruptor: three required mods in small scale and solo combat. While Gallente blaster boats are in need of buffs to bring them up to par, simply having other people to help web targets can make them somewhat of a threat in small scale PvP, something that can't be done to fix the failings of Caldari combat.
Don't get me wrong, Gallente need this, but so do Caldari. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:00:00 -
[800] - Quote
Okay....... I've actually resubbed via hours for PLEX to put a PLEX on my account to be able to post on the forums. Daft that I actually have to have an active Eve account to post on the forums after years of subs but meh...... I want in on this debate.
Right. These initial balances are a step in the right direction. A baby step but it is at least in the right direction. I also want to thank CCP for making a concerted effort and listening to the player base for feed back.
Now.... Onto balancing these damn guns!
TL;DR:- Nerf Pulse tracking. Nerf AC damage and increase fitting reqs. Buff Blaster tracking and damage and reduce fitting costs. Rework Ammo to be useful for something other than Damage or Range
First off. We have to accept that the whole turret system is pretty borked. Pulses and AC's work at close range and in some cases outperform Blasters because of certain problems with hulls. Pulse lasers can track far too well at close range. AC's simply deal far too much damage. In order to fix this issue we need to give the weapons highly defined roles. To put it bluntly when talking about short range weapons only: Pulse should be the king of "Long Range" Blasters should be the king of "Short Range" AC's should be the king of "Versatility"
Basically speaking in a rock paper scissor environment: Pulse Laser boat should always try to out range it's target where it has the damage advantage. Blaster boat should always try to get within very close range where it will out damage its target (vs AC's) and speed tank it's target (vs Pulse) AC boat is always going to choose to out range vs Blaster or get under the guns vs Pulse in order to out damage it's target. These weapons systems should never ever outperform another weapons system inside of that weapon's operation zone. AC's should never out DPS Blasters at close range or out DPS Pulses at long range Pulses should never out track Blasters or AC's at close range. However, currently some of the above is true. AC's simply do too much damage overall and Pulse lasers simply track far too well at close range. Blasters (at present) can't deal enough damage or track their targets well enough within their optimal ranges. So: Nerf Pulse tracking, Nerf AC damage, Buff Blaster damage and tracking. Another problem with turrets (Hybrid & Energy) is their ammo. It's simply too unilateral in you choose either short range hi dmg or long range low dmg. This idea basically makes 6/8ths of the ammo availible to each weapon redundent as people will always choose either close range (AM/MF) or long range (Iron/Radio). The other ammo types need to be appealing to use for different hulls and situations. To that end I would change Hybrid and Energy turret ammo's into something like this:
Multifrequency (short range EM) : Remains as is except high EM low Thermal Gamma (short range hi RoF) : +50% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) : -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg) : +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) : +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) : As MF but with hi thermal damage Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal +15% Cap use Radio (Extreme long range) : +60% optimal
Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is High Thermal low Kinetic damage Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking) : -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff Lead (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal Iridium (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +15% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off
The idea behind this is that certain hulls will favour RoF over damage due to hull bonuses and because these weapons are locked into EM & Thermal and Thermal & Kinetic the short range ammo at least has a bit of a choice between the two similar to projectile ammo which has a choice between all damage types. The idea behind the "Sniper/Alpha" ammo is to give these ships a realistic Sniper option as alpha is king in sniper roles. This won't however deal greater alpha than Arties but will have a decent volley damage. The idea behind Hybrids getting one ammo for falloff and one ammo for optimal is because of Gallente and Caldari having the differing bonuses but using the same weapons. **All numbers are just for example purposes and are subject to change to satisfy balancing** |
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:06:00 -
[801] - Quote
Along with the above post I would change several hulls in the game to make them competitive in their class and to start removing the tier system...... Here is an idea of the types of changes I would make to ships including the buff/nerf to weapons I posted above:
Eagle: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU. Combine the double optimal bonus into a single +20% Hybrid optimal per HAC lvl Add +5% Hybrid RoF Bonus per Caldari cruiser lvl This would make the Eagle a very attractive Blaster or Rail boat.
Ferox: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU This would make the Ferox a very good Blaster or Rail boat but does not outperform the Eagle
Deimos: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU Switch one of the +5% Hybrid dmg bonuses for a +5% RoF Bonus Increase hybrid falloff bonus to 7.5% per level This would give the Deimos exceptional closerange DPS and better performance with Rails
Brutix: Remove armour rep bonus and replace with a 7.5% hybrid falloffper BC lvl bonus More PG less CPU Removing the Rep bonus for a falloff bonus clearly defines the Brutix's role and segregates it from the Myrmidon instead of just making it a lower tier BC.
Myrmidon: Increase Dronebay to 200m3. Increase Drone bandwidth to 100Mbit Remove 2x turret hardpoints but keep the hi slots as utility slots. This is to increase the Myrmidons versitility as a solo/fleet platform.
Prophecy: Replace energy turret cap usage for a 10% per lvl optimal bonus This gives the Prophecy a far better role as Fire support rather than just a tank. Useful with Pulse or Beams without stepping on the Zealots toes.
Cyclone: This ship is simply a little low on CPU. A little more CPU would push this already decent BC into an excellent solo platform.
Hyperion: More PG. Needs 125 Mbit drone bandwidth and 150m3 Drone bay. This will allow the Hyperion to actually compete with the other 3rd tier BS's
Also..... All blaster boats need to be super fast but have low agility. This way they can get into range easily but also be out manoeuvred by Minmatar hulls which shouldn't be faster but should have much higher agility. We need to accept that Minnie shouldn't have the speed and agility to easily fly circles around everyone. Just the agility is enough with some clever piloting. |
ConXtionS
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:31:00 -
[802] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point.
So, 3 years, thousands of complaints, another 37 pages of "I think you need to look at this harder" and you STILL THINK this is a good starting point?????
|
Betid
Dead poets society The Laughing Men
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:36:00 -
[803] - Quote
Please paste this into the dev blog: All warps to probed ships less than 5au away introduce a 95% chance of landing between 20km and 60km from the target.
People don't need fitting changes to crave rails. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:00:00 -
[804] - Quote
Kazetsu Davaham wrote:Hello
would it not be cool if blasters had a small splash dmg ? similar to shotguns.
this would give them advantage over smaller ships/drones
Ideas that propose to give blasters some form of area damage are not thought through. There have been proposals a couple of pages back where a sort of "focused smartbomb" was proposed. How do you discriminate between targets? What if a fleet member is close to the target (maybe also with blasters)? Or it only applies to targeted ships, which would be one solution, but then you open another can of worms: What about the mate I have targeted because I want to remote repair him, or tracking link him or whatever? This would also put target count limits on ships in a completely new perspective due to a single weapon system requiring multiple targets. Will 5 (ish) targets be enough for a cruiser sized blaster boats? what if he wants to shoot at drones, where a single enemy already brings 5 of those (plus the enemy himself)?
It also means you basically can't use blasters in high-sec (depending on how you decided you want to distribute the damage), or your target just parks a cloaked ship (non-WT) close by just to get you concorded. There's a reason nobody uses smartbombs in high... Or he decloaks right before your salvo if it doesn't work on cloaked ships (generally AoE weapons do work just fine though).
It would also likely cause additional server stress. You'd have to check if you hit a target for every possible target. This includes selecting the target (via cone ot proximity to actual target), then performing normal "hit checks" for every one of those. They only relatively recently reduced the server load by grouping guns as those are not as cheap to perform as you might think! Just to put the magnitude of this problem into perspective: Imagine 20 blasterboats shooting at a group of "whaterver"-target-ships, grouped close enough that you have a chance to hit them all. After this change it would need to calculate which ship is a target for 20 shots and 19 potential targets (one is the primary target, no need to check there), then have hit/damage checks for the resulting ships (I propose half as an example). So we'd have: 20 shots with 19 potential targets + 10 hit checks each = 3800 checks (!!!!) Currently a salvo of the blaster fleet would cause 20 hit-checks. That's it... Now have a guess what will happen with 200 ships on each side...
If you somehow derive if the surrounding ships are hit from the hit check on the primary target you'll get exploits. Say a fleet is attacked by a skirmish-like gang of smaller ships they can't properly hit. They start shooting one of their own ships (heavily tanked, potentially with logistics or something) to hit the surrounding smaller ships.
All in all: incredibly STUPID and IMPRACTICAL idea! |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:03:00 -
[805] - Quote
Blaster boats do not need sped. engagement starting at 15 and what.. flying toward target, target kiting you, so you need more speed to catch them.. and even more speed to catch faster than he could kill you.. And then we have second minmatar.
Blaster boats need acceleration and agility that it could dash short range faster than opponent (projectile user.). Leave speed for minmatar, give blaster boats agility.
Without revamping whole blaster concept we wouldn't move from this dead point. ships are to sluggish to be used with shortest range gun system. if we give range, it would be invasion to other system fields, mainly projectiles. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:16:00 -
[806] - Quote
Betid wrote:Please paste this into the dev blog: All warps to probed ships less than 5au away introduce a 95% chance of landing between 20km and 60km from the target.
People don't need fitting changes to crave rails.
Rails, as they are now, are really only useful for the +150 km ranges. Landing even 100 km away from the targets would most likely put the rail fleet at a severe disadvantage. Landing at anything closer than 60 km would in most cases spell the death of the rail fleet, as those ranges start to see speed out-tracking rails.
Opting instead for 20 km to 60 km deviation from desired warp in point would be a better potential fix, but would almost always spell death for a FC that warps his fleet; as the fleet could end up scattered over an area of 120 km. This could still work as a fix, however, by not applying the deviation to ships in fleet warped to. Thus forcing someone to act as a dedicated prober in hopes of quickly getting to a good staging point for the rest of the fleet.
This is approach would be making rails better by trying to shoehorn the extreme range role back into the game, and while CCP could take this route, I'd prefer a more elegant solution in tweaking the ships and modules themselves.
What about the introduction of a third T2 ammo for both hybrid systems? Something that gave strong damage (somewhere near antimatter and plutonium) at 0% range bonus. This, combined with a modest increase to railgun damage (at the cost of some range) and blaster tracking and optimal (at the cost of some falloff) could go a long way towards fixing hybrids. |
DHB WildCat
Club Bear The Seventh Day
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:32:00 -
[807] - Quote
LMAO at all the sniping changes!
They act like sniping is even viable in this game. We dont care about Rails / or long range ammo. Just blasters......
Maybe if you fix it so snipers cant be scanned in under 8 seconds then we will care about powergrid / cpu of rails, and long range ammo of any kind other than barrage.
You cant really be that out of touch with your own game? |
NutyNUTS
Federation Mission Acedemy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:37:00 -
[808] - Quote
Yes, Yes, Yes. with these changes I will now finally have a point having large railguns on my domi instead of just afking and letting my drones do all the work like others i know who fly them. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:37:00 -
[809] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:lexa21 wrote:Hum... When i saw topic on forum i was glad, but then i read it. There were only one thing You tell right. Powergrid requirements for neutron medium blasters are too much for any tank fitting. All other stuff is not necessary but railgun damage. 10% is not enough. All of eve community were waiting for that day. And what do we see? 600 dps of rail mega changed to 630? Thats not enough. And by the way the first page of this topic on Russian forum is shining of facepalms, tears and answers about artillery buff. 10% of 600 is what? Not 630... lol! Also, if that is added to base damage, once bonus multipliers are added it gets even larger.
While you caught his 10% error, you're completely wrong about the increase in damage if it's applied to the base. Adding 10% is a multiplication, everything that adds ors reduces damage in game is also a multiplication (ship bonuses, gun damage modifier, tracking, signature vs resolution, ...). Multiplications are commutative. The order doesn't matter. 10% more base damage is 10% more damage in the end. Period.
Example time! "mythical ammo" has 6.5 base damage. Adding 10% makes it 7.15. If you have a gun with a multiplier of 7 and a ship bonus of 25% you get 6.5 * 7 * 1.25 = 56.875. Adding 10% results in 62.5625. If we start with the already added 10% we get 7.15 * 7 * 1.25 = 62.5625. Who would have though?
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutative_property
Spugg Galdon wrote:Also..... All blaster boats need to be super fast but have low agility. This way they can get into range easily but also be out manoeuvred by Minmatar hulls which shouldn't be faster but should have much higher agility. We need to accept that Minnie shouldn't have the speed and agility to easily fly circles around everyone. Just the agility is enough with some clever piloting.
Yes! Exactly! THIS! like I've been saying! No need be agile or nimble (that's Minmatar), give us Gallente huge engines that gives us alot or straight line speed but the turning radius and time of a planet :) |
Hyrath Rotineque
Atlas Research Group Vanguard Venture Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:49:00 -
[810] - Quote
Overall I think that a few additional fixes could be thrown in and not make everything super crazy right away.
I really like the idea of blaster boats getting a MWD speed boost at the expense of additional cap drain - Could be the extra sprint mechanic that everyone seems to agree that is needed. (Remove active repper bonus on the boats)
People are saying that if the ships are going faster they'll need more tracking so give blasters just that. Even more tracking to make sure that it's not going to hinder blaster boats even more to make them fly up to something and miss most of it's shots because of it. (Not giving an actual number because personally I have no idea what is exactly needed)
Also on the issue of rails being useless at super long ranges possibly change the warp distance requirement. It was mentioned in a thread not too long ago that I read, something in the area of 200km distance required to warp so Hybrid Rails may have some further use in game again for PvP. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 42 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |