|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
making noise for blasters, hopes ccp tallest does as well soon..... |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:59:00 -
[2] - Quote
So these are the changes that are going live? If balance is going to be a part of every major release does that mean we have to wait another 6 months with an imperfect new BC that's just patched up with drones while ships just collect dust? Will further fixes/adjustments come along beforehand?
The overall changes to grid and cpu will have a large effect on possible fits, increasing overall dps, but not capability. The compromise of the design philosophy in the Talos is evident of need for further review of the weapon system, and/or ship hulls. I think half the anxiety is that hybrid weapons will be left half done or forgotten about like many other projects. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 23:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Dont know if you know this yet, but you guys sure have butterfingers... Currently on sisi the reload time on hybrids os 0.005 sec... or insant basicly
Currently on SIsi all weapons are bugged reloading instantly including missile launchers. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=372781#post372781 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
mate teahupoo wrote:Like i said, I have not been following this too much, nor been on the test server to try it out. Thanks for the clarification.
Before the changes tracking on blasters were over all either about the same or worse than AC's. After the changes they will track slightly better than their AC counterpart
Small weapons
AC 125mm II vs Light Electron II's (TQ) vs Light Electron II's (Sisi) 0.4170 vs 0.3650 vs 0.4380 goes from -13% tracking to 5% more relative tracking than AC's
AC 150mm II vs Light Ion II's (TQ) vs Light Ion II's (Sisi) 0.3620 vs 0.3360 vs 0.4032 Goes from -7% to 11% more relative tracking
AC 200mm II vs Light Neutron II's (TQ) vs Light Neutron II's (Sisi) 0.3150 vs 0.3165 vs 0.3798 Goes from 0.01% to 20.01% more
The relative difference in tracking of medium and larger sized weapons is the same. Keep in mind however this is only off the base stats of the respective weapon systems and does not factor in player skill training, or ship fittings and bonuses which further magnify any differences.
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 23:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:That was a few nasty comments showcasing a lot of assumptions without any arguments of why my statement would be wrong - I just said a Ferox finally works better with hybrids than it does with Autocannons... They will still be different and you can find advantage and disadvantage everywhere, but plz show me why a Ferox shouldn't be viable with rails or blasters with the current changes?
I didn't say the current changes were perfect. The ammo is still screaming for a revamp and the hybrids seems to lack a final touch, but the current changes gets us far in many ships...
The changes will make the ferox more functional but how much more? Could you link some fits/comparisons between the two and explanations? I don't fly a ferox myself or any caldari for that matter, though I might train cruisers to 3 for the BC's since it's a quick train. Some quantifiable numbers and in game applications would be appreciated to demonstrate their abilities. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 15:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
rant
Hrm... It's funny seeing so many people that seem to be afraid that their current role will be encroached upon come out of the woodwork. Well to put it simply yes that can and will happen if blasters are made effective. If they can finally perform a role which isn't overshadowed by the fact that other ships/weapons can do them nearly as well or better then that will be a direct or indirect nerf to the capabilities of the other systems. If you think the current changes are enough and that people should "wait and see", then obviously you're either just lying to yourself or afraid of changes to the balance of power. If these changes were enough the markets in Eve would have adjusted considering the changes have been out for 2 weeks now. As it stands the only thing we'll see is more than likely an outcry that blaster frigates are too powerful so everything should be nerfed.
/rant
anyways glad to see gallente ammo being looked at so there's more options than faction AM and null. Stasis webs drones at first sound like "wow cool I can load them on my brutix!" until you realize almost every cruiser sized ship and above will be able to use them which means the range disparity gap increases even further for blaster boats. I hope that CCP will be willing to make changes to the game and make it so deciding what ship to fly is actually hard since there will too many good options. Also could we get a time frame on when further adjustments would be made? |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 17:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
M1AU wrote:Archare wrote: anyways glad to see gallente ammo being looked at so there's more options than faction AM and null. Stasis webs drones at first sound like "wow cool I can load them on my brutix!" until you realize almost every cruiser sized ship and above will be able to use them which means the range disparity gap increases even further for blaster boats. I hope that CCP will be willing to make changes to the game and make it so deciding what ship to fly is actually hard since there will too many good options. Also could we get a time frame on when further adjustments would be made?
If I think about it loudly, a Brutix with a Bonus to Webifier Drones in addition to the Hybrid Weapon Damage bonus could probably work.
Ideally even in a 1v1 unless the drones are significantly bonused I don't think the brutix would be able to close distance. Currently proposed but not published changes to web drones pulled from http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/sisi_changes.php are warriors doing 5% per drone and valkyries doing 10% per done. With 5 drones that will equal a roughly a -15% and -31% web effect. Taking for example a Shield brutix and hurricane and load 5 web drones here are the speed numbers.
Brutix (on Sisi) goes 1687 m/s overheated. With a flight of light web drones that would drop to 1433 m/s. Hurricane Is 1894 m/s, which drops to 1306 m/s with a flight of medium drones. This allows the Brutix to close speed at a whopping 127 m/s which if they were 20km apart would take about 86 seconds to get within non overheated scram range. Granted this would be an improvement from forever but over the course of those 86 seconds the hurricane would be doing on average 491 dps, or (491*86) 42268 points of total damage*. Over the same distance a Brutix will do roughly 200 dps over the same distance or 17200 total points of damage. If they gave bonuses to web drones the bonus to webbing speed per drone would have to increased by at least 20% per level for an idea to be even worthwhile due to stacking penalties. and even then since they're drones so both sides can kill them and we're back at square one.
*dps values are rough calculations with RF ammo and not barrage, and null ammo loaded in the brutix. Both ships using the largest medium sized weaponry, and assuming the brutix is just beelining aproach on a cane that is burning straight away in one direction. Yes I know falloff damage is not linear, but for the small sample window is good enough for estimation. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 17:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
Quote:* Hail (all sizes): Reduced falloff penalty from 50% to 25% So... patch is live and Hail has no falloff penalty.... |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 22:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
Gonna repost 2 fits to show how great the hail buff is!
[Thorax, Crucifer]
Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Stasis Webifier II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Reactor Control Unit II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II
Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x5
298/343 OH dps with Fed Navy AM 237/273 OH with Null add another 158 dps from hammerhead II's or 80 dps from warrior II's
If you swap an EANM for a Magstab you get 366/422 dps with AM with 31k EHP
And if you wanna be like a true precursor to the Diemost go dual magstabs for 438/504 dps with AM with 25k EHP 1212/1715 m/s 37k EHP
Versus
[Thorax, AutoCrux]
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Stasis Webifier II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Reactor Control Unit II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II
Medium Projectile Collision Accelerator I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x5
218/251 dps with the new buffed hail ammo. Roughly 75 less dps than my earlier fit
Oh did I mention that optimal + falloff is double that of the other fit? 220mm Hail 1.35km optimal + 11km falloff = 12.35 km Ions w/ CN AM 1.88km optimal + 5km falloff = 6.88 km
Suffers in tracking Hail .106 vs Ion .165
but it's capless!
why do I use hybrids again? |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 19:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Yeah web range bonuses hulls would just make the premier weapon of Gallente ships webs and not hybrids |
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 19:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
Zachis wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:Rock, Paper, Scissors, Iron Bar, Puddle of mud, Plastic cup, chocolate teapot has too mant combinations/permutations for the little minds at CCP to ballance. It never will be.
Game is out of ballance at a fundimental level when the smallest class of non cap ship (Frigate) can have over half the damage of the largest non cap ship (Battle ship). If CCP really want a game in which case all classes of ship are used they need to adjust the ship classes massively so that a BS can only hit a Frig one in one hundred times. (the one should be a kill shot though) and a Frig should do very little damage to a BS.
Admit the game mechanics are fundamentily flawed and go back to the drawing board and come up with new calculations to determine ship class ultimate damage, ship class weapon targeting/tracking/potential damage delivery. If a frig cant do any real damage to a BS people will need to take out larger ships. If larger ships cant hit smaller ones all fleets will also need smaller ships. This will necessitate fleets have ships of all classes so newer players are not left out but also that high skill players are also valued.
I'd love to know the velocity projectile guns actualy spit out rounds so that damage is instantaneous. Have a feeling the game mechanics are breaking the laws of physics. unless each round has a micro MWD fitted to it that is.
If a damage time delay was added to all projectile based weapons Hybrid & Projectile) that might lessen the uberness of projectile weapons, only laser based weapons should have near instant damage. If they added in a signature radius component to the damage from turret ammo, similar to the missile damage formula, I think this would go a long way toward solving this issue. Currently, signature radius only applies to the turret tracking formula. Which means, if a BS sized weapon can track a frigate, long range or webbed, that frigate is going to take full damage. This change alone would allow them to more easily balance hybrids and blaster boats without making them too effective against small targets.
Signature radius is already a factor in turret damage calculations. The difference between turrets in missiles in this aspect is that sig radius and movement speed work independently of each other in missiles while with turrets they are tied together. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 03:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
Hrm... well other than constantly bumping this thread I wondering where CCP wants to go with blasters now. Are they satisfied with their performance as a weapon system? Are they *ahem* working as intended? On paper before ship bonuses are factored in do they perform within a tolerable difference? There is a lot of fumbling in the dark lately since the changes came live and not very much good information. If some direction or information as far as the status of hybrid weapons, and the platforms that carry them and whether or not anymore changes are coming would be appreciated as it's been 2 weeks since they changes came to TQ and over a month on the test server.
TLDR: bump, Some input plz CCP to spur discussion. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 16:50:00 -
[13] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Thx for the notice - will you be sharing your thoughts in time for us as a player base to give feed back and still have time to reflect on those? Also will you be able to hint what you are NOT working on since lots of ideas and suggestions have been put up for debate about minmatar/gallente speed/mass/agility, hybrid ammunition, changes to tracking computer/enhancers affect on fall-off, ship bonuses, signature resolution and unique advantages? Pinky ^this Some general new framework or direction as to what is currently being looked at could make the discussion refreshing. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 16:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Well for some more news on blasters....
LIVE ON TEST SERVER
Null ammo range buff increased from 25% to 40% |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 16:51:00 -
[15] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Incidentally, shouldn't this thread be sticky again if hybrids are still being reworked on SiSi?
Well considering the changes haven't even been mentioned by a certain person of above average....
height.
Still I welcome more work on my preferred method of destruction. I see the null buff as a normalization of the general range increase relative to scorch and barrage. I think like the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg, hybrids still feel incomplete because only half of the problem has been worked on. Overall the changes have been good but more is desired because the ships that mount them. Overall I hope more changes/tweaking/rebalancing for hybrids and the platforms that carry them come soon! |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 04:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:above numbers are still not correct!
recalculate plz.
optimal from 1.25 => 1.40 falloff from 1.25 => 1.40
For Example base of heavy neutron blaster with 0 % bonus ammo
9 km optimal 13 km falloff
with the NEW null ammo it gets to
12.6 km optimal 18.2 km falloff
with 1 TE 14 km optimal 22.4 km falloff Not sure where your figures are coming from, but mine are from in game and correct as far as I can tell.
Numbers pulled directly from Sisi Gallente cruiser V Sharpshooter V Trajectory V HAC V BC V Heavy Neutron Blaster II Null ammo On a Thorax 6.3 km optimal 8.75 km falloff +1 TE 7.24 km optimal 11.38 km falloff +2 TE 8.18 km optimal 14.34 km falloff +3 TE 8.89 km optimal 16.8 km falloff
On a Deimos (Optimal is same as Thorax) 6.3 km optimal 13.12 km falloff +1 TE 7.24 km optimal 17.06 km falloff +2 TE 8.18 km optimal 21.51 km falloff +3 TE 8.89 km optimal 25.19 km falloff
On a Talos 12.6 km optimal 17.5 km falloff +1 TE 14.49 km optimal 22.75 km falloff +2 TE 16.38 km optimal 28.68 km falloff +3 TE 17.78 km optimal 33.59 km falloff
On a Naga 18.9 km optimal 17.5 km falloff +1 TE 21.74 km optimal 22.75 km falloff +2 TE 24.57 km optimal 28.68 km falloff +3 TE 26.67 km optimal 33.59 km falloff |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 19:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
Sam Bowein wrote:anyone knows the new stats for null ammo following the changes in the 1.1 patch ? Quote:Blaster Ammunition: Null Gets a Boost
Range and falloff bonuses for all sizes of Null ammo have been improved to bring the stats more in line with Barrage and Scorch ammunition.
It's increasing null from +25% to optimal and falloff to +40% to optimal and falloff on the test server currently.
I posted range numbers earlier in the thread here : https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=620115#post620115 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 07:32:00 -
[18] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:Naga sucks, talos over powered. Buff naga.
wrong thread mate
anyways i think hybrids and gallente ships still need more tweaking overall. There has definitely been a marked improvement. I think part of the problem now, or at least the biggest one is the platforms that use hybrids.
Railguns are looking better on paper and are comparable to pulse lasers except for the tracking. Still haven't used those for pvp yet though as i haven't found any reason to bring railguns on the field. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 13:47:00 -
[19] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Hamox wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: you surely are one hell of an optimist. today is the last of january, we'll see if tallest comes up with something. after that there still is enough time to be pessimistic...
How much time is left till February? ;) Edit: I guess we will take EVE time zone, right? OK then 27 minutes to go. I'm sooo excited what might come up the next few minutes! :) since it is officially february (even in eve time), you shall be granted the right to be overly pessimistic ;P your sarkasm and irony are refreshing. you may keep that, too. no really, its on the house ;) time to rant, i guess? but then, after 90 pages one is surely past the point of ranting.... Waiting for another post of top 20 from eve-kill... then more questions requesting responses from the man with above average.... height. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 17:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:yep they are done with galente so now everyone train minmatar and amar :) or wait another 5 years till they try to fix galente again how very exiting or u can go to the fanfest and trow some shoes at devs, and scream galenete murders
Well you can try and throw your blaster shoes at the dev, but you will be too fat and slow to get within your weak throwing arm range. |
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 06:42:00 -
[21] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:I will say this: the more you buff the range of blasters, the better caldari blaster boats get. I already can get a nearly 20km range on my eagle using null without the use of any tracking enhancers or computers.
People use eagles? |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 15:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I believe those ship tree and skill changes will eventually be great, however with the current imbalance of weapon systems CCP will have a hard time balancing the ships properly..
- Hybrid ammunition is still a mess with weird cap bonuses and fixed damage types - Gallente ships don't have the acceleration and agility to burst themself into blaster range (especially not angel/minmatar) - Railguns are still not having any role but "a little extra range" (double alpha could be nice) - Armor rigs hit Gallente blaster ships too hard on a crucial attribute - AC's have too much tracking/fall-off (compared to energy and hybrids) easily slaughtering frigates at 24km
Most of this can wait, but if not dealth with there will be a risc of imbalancing the racial ships to compensate for the imbalance of weapons. And that would be a shame..
Might as well tweak railguns, ship mass/agility and autocannons/tracking enhancers now before they start Also armor rigs is a huge hinder for Gallente blasterships - make the penalties to sensor strength instead (eccm)
Pinky
The cap bonuses and fixed damage types definitely could be adressed. Most people i know only bother with antimatter. The increased range from iron or lead ammo generally is not worth the reduced damage output on blasters. Null on the otherhand preserves decent damage at range in comparison. Also having 1%-15% increments of range and damage between levels of ammunition is pointless, as is carrying any reasonable amount of all these ammo ranges to cover the rainbow. Unlike laser, hybrid charges take up space so it's unfeasible to have 8 different ranges in the cargo hold.
Going a step up in range from antimatter to plutonium gives a range increase of 13% to optimal for a loss of almost 10% dps. While this appears to be on par with the step up from multifreq to gamma crystals in lasers, Lasers ranges are dictated by optimal, while blaster ranges operate on a split between optimal and falloff. This issue was recognized this the changes to null ammo, and the rest of the gallente t1 ammo could be brought inline. The biggest issue with this however is the effects of increasing the falloff on t1 ammo would have on railguns.
The speed/agility issue goes along with the general ship/tier/slot layout issues of gallente. While hybrids are much better after the patch, they are still lacking in comparison. The application of the weapons feels limited by the ship hulls now more than the inherent deficiencies of the weapons themselves tho further refining is still needed on both sides.
*and hooray for new autosave feature saving my post |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 01:37:00 -
[23] - Quote
It's a new module on the Chaos test server.
It's a proposed mid slot item that will jump/warp a battleship 100km forward at the end of it's 30 second activation timer. This and the proposed bounties on drone poo were scraped and posted this weekend. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 02:58:00 -
[24] - Quote
While the it's the another delay with the "soon(tm)" response, i guess it's better than "working as intended"... |
|
|
|