Make them dominate the close in fight and give people a reason to commit to the fight and probably still lose their ship.

[quote=Pinky Denmark]

Most of you guys need to chill out big time. The purpose of hybrid changes is to make them a viable choice and get a balance between the 4 races. The majority of suggestions in here will just make blasters the most powerfull thing in EVE and break the game even more than now.


Pinky

I think Pinky Denmark's point is that we don't need to over boost hybrids when the reality is the ships themselves are broken. It was the same deal with minmatar, decent enough line up with poor BS's and Caps... Boosted weapons and now we have Abaddons with 1400mm's as the top fleet ship.

Beyond a few changes (ammo, blaster tracking) I feel it's time to move on and focus on specific ships. I mean, most of the comments have been that Gallente need more speed, which has very little to do with the weapons themselves.

Would blasters be broken with 10% more damage and even more tracking? No, but I fear there will be several ships that will be no better after this change and that's the problem.

So maybe some factions simply shouldn't be the FOTM in fleet warfare. Ditto for being successful solo boats. Near as I understand it, being able to get into range shouldn't be an issue if you're working with fast tackle that can hold the target down.

No to 40-50% more damage. Most of these comparisons ignore the drone bays of ships. And also forget that any damage increase is a range increase due to the nature of fall off.

Have you every tried an over sized AB on much?

Try fitting a 10nm AB catalyst. It fits with electrons.
Now go out and try to turn at all. And see if you can keep blaster ranges.

You wont. Its a terrible fit.

Even if you could fit a web. You wouldn't be able to keep anyone in blaster range.
So then you would need an agility boost.
And then on top of it you would become immune to anything at all bigger than you hitting you.

hello.
Did a long post, in this forum but i make a new post instead a reply.

So sorry if i crosspost, ill give here only quick note to my idea, if you dont think its a complete crap please read the entire post.

My idea is to give blaster weapon a "web effect". Immagine that blaster weapons and antimater affect opponent engins making them less effective ( -25%). this will make blaster user "faster" in blaster range and make them have a chance to come close again to the opponent after a bump. DPS changes are cool, power requirement was badly needed, but blaster ships should be able to keep close range when the succeed to come close. and maybe a key is here. Let do blaster affect opponet angine. We can also give different ammo a different percentage ( less dammage, more pebbing effect) because francly.. there is any reson to use t1 ammo that is no antimater? here we could have one.

Blasters will be unique and people will have a reason to not use autocannons.

I made more extensive consideration in a separate post, sorry again for the double posting.

Sniper HACs and BCs w/ best T1 ammo :

Zealot w/ Heavy beam (2 HS) - 380,4 dps (22,5+10km), 0.04125 rad/sec, 1004 volley
Muninn w/ 720mm Arty (3 Gyro) - 340,9 dps (22,5+21,875km), 0.0378125 rad/sec, 2815 volley
Deimos w/ 250mm Rail (2 MFS) - 355,3 dps (18+22,5km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1247 volley
Brutix w/ 250mm (1 MFS) - 332,7 dps (18+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec,1367 volley
Hurricane w/ 720mm Arty (3 Gyro) - 409,1 dps (15+21,875km), 0.0275 rad/sec, 3379 volley
Hurricane w/ 720mm Arty (2 Gyro) - 363,9 dps (15+21,875km), 0.0275 rad/sec, 3198 volley
Harbinger w/ Heavy beam (2 HS) - 399,4 dps (15+10km), 0.04125 rad/sec, 1401 volley

Looks pretty balanced on the medium long ranged weapons too...

Pinky

i only care about rails at this point; blasters are a lost cause.

This would bringt blaster and autocannon ranges closer together so the blaster is a poor copy of an autocannon.

How about a webifier range bonus on blaster boats (cruiser-size upwards), increasing with hull size (BSs bigger bonus than BCs, which get more than cruiser)? Not talking about 5%, more something like doubling or tripling the range. So we get fired at while "crossing the gap" but actually get a chance to arrive over there...

Just a thought that crossed my mind...

ok another brilliant idea....DENERF SENSOR DAMPS and give all gallente cruisers and above an appropriate effectiveness bonus.

5% for BS per level
7.5% for BC per level
10% cruiser per level
none for frigs
***remove Gallente's ability to use railguns
1) solves range problems passively by forcing your target into range of webs
2) no need for speed buff
3) hybrid damage buffs are sufficient now, since the real issue is employing blasters at range
case closed...move along please



******note. only allow sensor damps to be used by gallente ships

Big big problem with this. Gallente pilots would be forefitting the boosted resists to armor/shields on t2/t3 ships unless this change also included additional resists were also applied to hull, and I don't see that happening.

Still, the idea is not totally lost on me. Isn't it strange that Amarr/Minmatar not only have the best turrets, but their t2/t3 ships also are best-suited for omni-tanking? Hrm....

Blasters are supposed to fit the medium between Falloff dependent Projectile weapons and Optimal range dependent Energy weapons.

With good piloting, range will only be an issue when facing nano fleet gangs, especially since the speed/agility buff should even negate some of those problems.

For the blaster side of the fence I believe these changes are done, you've made blasters a VERY competitive arsenal yet again.

If you can only out-damage your target at 20km and above, how will you ever keep that distance if they're faster than you?

If you start out at 0km, the long-range ship doesn't even have a chance to make distance thanks to speed-reducing ewar.

Sorry, it's not that simple.

I would like to point somehting out to alot of you people which many seem to miss :3, as I understand it... and correct me if im wrong, Tallest was going to boost the tracking of blasters by 20% correct?

And people still say the blasters will hit like **** within their range? your forgetting one important factor, so will the enemy, you will just hit better then he will and therefor have higher real dps (unless he has same turrets or better fit, or smaller class)

And that is ofc true,also why I suggested CCP makes gallente have better agility compared to minimatar, while minimatar still maintains higher speed (that doesn't break the design does it?)

Very few people I have met are as qualified as Julius to comment on the current state of Hybrids and Gallente boats.

[
Aye, most everything has already been said, but I figure this is the case of the squeaky wheel getting the oil. It took years and huge threadnaughts to get CCP to this point, so why stop now when the consensus is the changes aren't adequate. We have to drive it into the devs' brains til they accept it.

probably not... rush module would jump (so it could be named microjumpdrive) to target nearly instantly (5 sec or so ) or XY km closer to it or to target but activation range is XY km.

As for blaster only - well it could have it's effects simply highly diminished by certain factor on other ships (im sure someone can come up with something clever, but that's not the point now ) THe shorter range weapon system the better parameters of drive. SOmething like activation range 25 km - microjump to 1 or so. Activable only on enemy ship ( hostile, kill rights, enemy corp etc ) also different attributes dependent on something

random negative input.

It is overpowered and makes combat
rather drawn out and boring.

Surely a better idea is to give the Blaster boats a bonus to damping? thus forcing their opponents into their ranges? granted you would have to use scripts to make it work properly but it fits with the Gallente up close preferred method of fighting.

but would also keep them a bit slower at MWD speeds than Minmatar. It would also reduce the impact on speed and agility of adding armour plates.

Gallente shouldn't be faster than Minmatar. They should be able to run them pretty close, but Minmatar should still retain their speed advantage

It's not speed that makes Minmatar OP. It's the excessive range of their ACs when they slap on a couple of TEs (which they always do). With less damage at range, kiting from outside Null range wouldn't always be a winning tactic.

[quote=Nemesor]

Ok, so let's turn this around. Make Gallente the fastest. Now, all it takes is to fit railguns instead of blasters, and you've just mirrored the same problem.

So you missed the part where CCP Tallest buffed railgun tracking and damage, and uffed Javelin tracking? I guess you missed the bit where I called for a nerf to autocannon tracking and the falloff bonus from TEs too.

You cannot make Gallente faster than mimatar, Why? because then rail guns would be the new kite weapon of choice, Also Blasters would Alwasy be able to maintain range, making them OP as well. All this would do is shift the imbalance. This also ignores all caldari ships.... Lets not forget that. Adding extra stats to ships/new hybrid only modules again ignores Caldari and does not balance hybrids instead it just mask's the problem.

The only way to fix Hybrids is to FIX hybrids. Small changes to ships can happen but they cannot encroach on mimatar. Playing with stats and ammo is the only way. Stop dreaming of all Gallente getting damp bonuses, or a dash (thus making recons worthless fyi) Every ship needs a weakness and advantage you cannot paint with a broad brush.

This conversation needs to be directed at Hybrids not the Ships. Ships are used to cater to particaular tasks and situations further giving them dedicated roles.

Blasterboat bonus in particular, Buff the bonus, so you know the Mega bonus:


yeah where is there a damping bonus there? or maybe the Thorax?


im not talking about the Fing ewar ship bonus which is nice for what target practice? damping works in a fleet not in isolation 1:1 damping boat? yeah i will sacrifice my ability to hold you down or possibly catch up with you, or be cap stable-ish? Nice one, i was refering to a bonus on the ships themselves remove the MWD / dmg bonus and turn it into a damp bonus. Just an idea, nothing more than that and it still doesnt solve the PvE issues Hybrid boats have to deal with.

FYI, the vast majority of my SP is dedicated to Gallente ships and hybrids. I only ever fly any other race through gritted teeth. I have a vested interest in Gallente and hyrids being buffed, but I want there to be balance more than I want to fly a new FOTM.

Don't mess with armour plates and agility/mass penalties when the problem lies with the weapons.

Armor plates and agility and mass penalties are new to the game compare to the stats that the weapons have and were never balanced with them in mind. HENCE it might being a good idea to do so.

[quote=Jazz Styles]
Don't mess with armour plates and agility/mass penalties when the problem lies with the weapons.

One last thought from me:
Why Warp Scramblers prevent from warping AND prevent from using MWD?
Lets change this module to only prevent from using MWD. You still can use Warp Disruptors.

That way the oponent also needs to use one additional slot for a scrambler.
The blaster guy even doesn't need a web becouse he is faster with MWD.

There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.

If you buff blaster boats base speed, people will just fit ACs and have a better kite boat than Minmatar itself. Nerfing Gallente agility also doesn't make sense at all, since they require good enough agility to orbit at the very tight range of blasters.

Again, what Gallente lacks is a way to be considerably faster for a brief period of time, just enough to get into blaster range, and be penalized on MWD capacitor usage to force a balance between cap drainage from sprinting vs. cap available to actually shoot the blasters. The MWD bonuses mentioned are a way to achieve this. It's just like the RoF bonus most Minmatar boats get or the capacitor bonuses to Amarr - it's the bonus that gives you an edge when you fly the boat the way it's intended to be flown.

Turning Gallente into Minmatar is not the answer to fix blasters. Also, you don't fix the game by nerfing Minmatar.

[quote=Cyvhiros]
I do agree with u in that something needs to be done, but if we give gallente ships a straight speed bonus + a DPS bonus + a range bonus, were going to make gallente OP, and thats what we dont want.

Blah blah blah. Thats what our input sounds like to Tallest.

Looking forward to Tallest's next update. Hang in there big guy! If you can pull this off, odds are you'll become the EVE equivalent of a deity and people will sing hymns in your name until the end of days.

I hope that the devs seriously think through some of them and decide if they would be desirable/practical to implement.

The best part is how many people were saying how it was such a shitBoost, and how matar would still be worthless after the patch.

But the same thing happened during the amarr boost so....... I am predicting hybrids will be considered OP in 8mo. :))

I dont know why people are so pissed.

All this silence is terrible. I'm bracing for the worse at this point.

Tallest, you wanna go over some of the upcoming ship changes with us? there are upcoming ship changes, right? we're dying here.

CCP Tallest, I know your busy but it would be great if you could answer a few questions:

I can do so. We're not going to stop balancing. It will be a part of every major release we do.

RAGE

[quote=CCP Affinity]
- Autocanons being too easy to fit, having too much range with some ships/fits.

- Large shield extenders too easy to fit, to the point that anything with 4 mids must be shield tanked, and the lows are only for DC/tracking/damage.

LSE II requirement:
0.0472 powergrid per shield HP given

1600mm rolled:
0.119 powergrid per shield HP

Is getting into range only really a problem against faster Matari ships with dominating falloff? Would an adjustment to autocannon falloff / falloff bonused hulls / tracking enhancer falloff bonuses get you where you need to be?

Hang on, the Hyperion's intended niche is small-scale combat. It should be the Rokh that should be on par with the Abaddon in fleet. The Hyperion should be focused on smaller fights, which means that it needs much more mobility.

I'll only start thinking Hybrids are balanced when I can triple plate my Vigilant with a full neutron rack and a 1600.

lol!

Go do your own homework sonny boy.

its not my job to show you how to fit ships appropriately. you have the same ability to click modules in EFT and try it out on SiSi just like i did.

now hippity hop to it young buck

pot calling the kettle black on the ignorance jive.

you so funny mister. heres a nickel for your empty cofee cup

are you going to sit there and press refresh over and over or actually go test things out and provide feedback to ccp like i did?

I like this info because it accounts for cross weapon fitting (artillery abaddons etc) but how does this calculate "kills" is it the killing blow? because if so, I would tend to think this stat is a bit skewed . . . additionally, I would think the top 10 would be all you need to show, because there are fewer common weapon systems than there are common ships . . .

Informal quick sample poll with latest kills on BC (top damage dealer)

Proj: 19
Missile: 5
Laser: 2
Drone: 2
Blaster: 1
Rail: 0

Wow, doing this I even saw ACs on a harpy. As the top dmg dealer.

Blaster kill was of a cyno heron.

2 of the missile kills were from a Ferox, a "rail boat" by definition, rest were drakes of course.

What struck me was the number of Cynabal solo kills. I smell a new FOTM.