EVE Search - Sticky:Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Sticky:Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 30 40 50 60 .. 66 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
Shpenat Pafos Technologies 2	Posted - 2011.11.11 14:04:00 - [541] - Quote I think the proposed changes are good. But I have few thinks to consider (they are not mine originally) Consider ammo reload time based on fire rate rather than constant time. For example with 10s reload time small electron blaster will miss 5 shots while reloading which is a lot. On the other hand Neutron Blaster Cannon (Large) will skip only 1.2 shot which is not that much. Do the same for projectiles (with longer time though). Maybe add some diversity. remove some ranges of ammo from hybrids. Allow blasters to fire auxiliary rounds (0 damage, do some other effect like slightly bumps the targeted ship). Allow rails to fire penetration ammo (ammo is hitting shields, armor and/or hull at the same time (with different percentage).
Moonaura Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi 11	Posted - 2011.11.11 14:11:00 - [542] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: Here are the stats I posted the other day and some ship examples with guns and damage mods... http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b180/pinky_81/SisiStatsNovember.jpg There are a few guns sticking out with weird stats, but the guns look pretty fine if you at the same time look into drone bays, amount of available lowslots and secondary bonuses. Still waiting for: Additional speed/acceleration balance between Gallente/minmatar Hybrid ammunition clean-up Fall-off nerf on Tracking enhancers / Tracking computers Armor rig penalty replacement (with sensor strength?) Caldari optimal bonus -> damage bonus * * To give Gallente an advantage over the caldari dps wise: Suggestion 1 : Hyperion damage bonus -> ROF bonus (Hype get 6,4% more dps) Suggestion 2 : Remove 1 gun on Rokh (Rokh gets 9,375% more dps total - 12,5% less than Hype) Also while doing those bonus plz change bonus for Apoc and Prophecy. They will benefit a lot from losing their optimal bonus and their laser bonus. Also when all above is done it's time to tweak single ships 1 at a time I think :-) Urgghhh. Caldari doesn't need the range bonus changing, it needs tank bonus to Caldari Hybrid ships only; Less spank with more tank = balance. The idea that every ship in the game should do the same damage at the same range, and all go the same speed will make EvE dull and ship choice just cosmetic. And because the Hyperion sucks you want to make the Rokh even suckier? I know you might not see fleets full of Hyperions, but Gallente have this other ship called a Megathron. Caldari? When was the last time you saw a fleet of Ravens and Rokhs bearing down on you? And half of scorpions are armor fit because so many gangs roll armor, and they tank great with armor right? ;-) Hyperion gets more low slots, a damage bonus, and more mid slots to fit things other than a tank. Rokh can do none of those things, all its mid slots are needed for a MWD and tank, and then it still has 90,000 less EHP than a similar fit Abaddon (It's direct Armor equivlant) with 5% lower resists when finished, 50% larger signature once all those shield extenders and rigs are installed and the boat still moves the same speed as a pack mule with three legs and one of those legs is lame. And you want to nerf it?
Sir Fury Valar Morghulis. Get Off My Lawn 1	Posted - 2011.11.11 14:19:00 - [543] - Quote Jazz Styles wrote: It all comes down to getting the ship into the engagement zone of its weapons. In this instance, Gallente blaster boats either need to: a) Be the fastest and most agile, .... Speed & agility are not mutually inclusive. Speed will be enough. & I'm in favour of a conditional speed (AB/MWD bonused) as opposed to simply making Gallente the default fast race. (I wouldn't mind if they were from the start, but I think the CCP Devs won't be willing to go that far, as besides affecting the lore aspects, will need changes to the speed bonused Minmatar hulls like the Vigil, Stabber, Vagabond, etc, to be consistent with that new philosophy. thats too much of a hassle in itself, & not really feasible). The bull needs the speed. The matador needs agility. Not the best of analogies, but there you have it.
Allfa Borealis Mining Concern IMPERIAL LEGI0N 0	Posted - 2011.11.11 14:36:00 - [544] - Quote Don;t make the gallente the fastest but instead: -Give blasters more damage to make them worth it -Make a new niche for rails, the curent one is uselles (make them the best trakers with the best ROF for medium/high ranges, wit low/medium DPS), you get ships which are better for fighting smaller ships at range Galltene huls: DO NOT MAKE THEM THE FASTEST..instead, put medium (not light) webing drones, that have increased cargo size so Gallente make the most of them (bigger drones bay) So what we have is: A Deimos will be kited and killed by a Vaga (Exactly as is should be) if: 1 H dosen't land on 0 or the vaga pilot make's a mistake (curent state of broken balance) 2 He dosen't have webing drones, which will give him a window to kil the vaga
Autonomous Monster Paradox Interstellar 20	Posted - 2011.11.11 14:40:00 - [545] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: Here are the stats I posted the other day and some ship examples with guns and damage mods... http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b180/pinky_81/SisiStatsNovember.jpg Those numbers seem odd to me. What ammo are you using? Hype with AM (just vanilla AM, not even Navy) + 2 damage mods does 826 dps in my pyfa. Up to 985 with 4.
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League 30	Posted - 2011.11.11 14:48:00 - [546] - Quote Moon - I personally love the Hyperion... It's is a beautifull and dangerous ship, however what is severely broken is the active repairing for PvP. Give the repper modules a boost and the Hyperion will shine for small and medium scale engagements while you still have the Megathron for large Fleet scale operation. Also the new hybrids even if still lacking a clear role looks pretty nice to me... And yes I agree the range bonus might be usefull on many ships the battleships certainly get a disadvantage. Thats why I wanted to close the gap of dps between the Caldari and Gallente. The extreme range has a few advantages that will rarely work in practice in the current TQ environment. You cannot fly them with other ships because the ranges doesn't match and the damage usually applied will be too little... And yes there are many suggestions to fix the rokh - I would love for the Rokh to have a hi-slot moved to a medslot, but I would insist on getting the optimal bonus changed to damage... As mentioned only to make it viable and not to make it identical. Pinky
Moonaura Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi 11	Posted - 2011.11.11 15:14:00 - [547] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: Moon - I personally love the Hyperion... It's is a beautifull and dangerous ship, however what is severely broken is the active repairing for PvP. Give the repper modules a boost and the Hyperion will shine for small and medium scale engagements while you still have the Megathron for large Fleet scale operation. Also the new hybrids even if still lacking a clear role looks pretty nice to me... And yes I agree the range bonus might be usefull on many ships the battleships certainly get a disadvantage. Thats why I wanted to close the gap of dps between the Caldari and Gallente. The extreme range has a few advantages that will rarely work in practice in the current TQ environment. You cannot fly them with other ships because the ranges doesn't match and the damage usually applied will be too little... And yes there are many suggestions to fix the rokh - I would love for the Rokh to have a hi-slot moved to a medslot, but I would insist on getting the optimal bonus changed to damage... As mentioned only to make it viable and not to make it identical. Pinky Hey Pinky, First off, I agree the gallente need 'fixing' and I have posted suggestions regarding that. But I think you're thinking that the only fleet fit for Rokh is with Rails and at longer range. Personally I would roll them out with blasters, where the range bonus is very useful to make the ship viable at close and medium range engagements. This is why they have a 5% shield bonus to survive close range. But they can't compete with Amarr. Even with the range bonus, Pulse Lasers reach further and do more damage. That is fine, but then Amarr get all the other bonuses I previously mentioned (such as being the best buffer tank in the game) while Caldari get lumped with a fat signature and less EHP. The Abaddon even has mid slots to extend the laser range and tracking with scripts if need be without affecting the tank. I would go the other way, and remove a low slot on the Rokh and put it in the mid along with a 7.5% resist bonus instead of 5%. It is a gun boat, that is it's role, and a role it can't really fulfil at present, let alone if you give it one less gun - and for what - to fix it for one vs one against Hyperions? To fit an active tank on a Rokh is a nightmare, with not enough power or CPU to do it properly, all the rigs are power grid rigs etc. It's not meant for that role, so I don't think it can be compared to a Hyperion that is meant for smaller gangs and solo (given it's tank bonus). If the Rokh was perfect at present, people would use it in fleets, but they don't - and it really was designed to be the Caldari Fleet boat in the same way the Megathron is etc - it even says as much in the Rokh description. Comparing DPS graphs does not take into account all the other variables such as speed, tank numbers and types of fits etc, and so I don't think it is so easy to look at that and say give this more dps etc. Thats why Caldari Hybrid boats need better buffer tanks to truly represent the shield version of what Amarr is to armor. In this way, the Rokh would be viable, but just giving it more damage, still leaves it weaker than the Abaddon with lower resists, which makes a massive difference in fleet logistics and their ability to tank bigger fleets. If you are going to compare active tanked ships, the Caldari equivalent of the Hyperion is the Raven, which gets the active shield bonus, and on the DPS graph, it needs to be compared to a Megathron as a fleet boat. Anyway, good debate. But where is the chase and how do I cut to it. At this stage I would sort of like to hear what CCP Tallest think to all the feedback on this thread.
Magosian Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 126	Posted - 2011.11.11 17:50:00 - [548] - Quote This overall effort by players and devs alike is NOT getting anywhere. Before you look at stats, ships, ammo/fitting bonuses, there is only one question that needs to be asked (thank you Gypsio III): Can hybrids do something which can't be done by lasers or projectiles? BTW the answer is NO. Hybrids do not provide a passive, inherent advantage to the pilot. This is the SOLE reason why hybrids are an afterthought. The upcoming winter expansion MUST provide pilots with an absolute/distinct/passive/core/unique/effective benefit BEFORE an engagement ensues. CCP, I've gone through this ENTIRE thread and presented the #1 problem for you. I saved you the trouble of reading and deciphering it. I probably missed MANY more, but the concensus remains: the PLAYER COMMUNITY has established a core shortcoming of hybrids and this is why they are not used. It must be addressed BEFORE statistics to hybrids are changed because projectiles and lasers are chosen for passive benefits BEFORE turret stats are considered. Give hybrids a reason to be used. Give hybrids a single, core, unique benefit which is NOT offered by lasers or projectiles. Do this and you have tackled the biggest thing plaguing hybrids. If hybrids are to have any chance at being viable and popular turret, THIS ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ADDRESSED! That aside, you should still look into tweaking the hybrid stats as you've been; there are plenty of other secondary problems with hybrids. But understand modifying turret stats and making small modifications to ship stats is not going to make anyone think "Hrm, hybrids would be great weapon to use because, as a pilot, I like to do A B and C...." And please don't take my word for it, take theirs: #19 Mariner6: HYBRIDS: Ok, Blasters. They have the worst aspects of lasers and projectiles and none of the benefits #31 Imawuss: Performance issues aside, Why do Hybrids have no inert advantages like missiles, lasers, and projectiles have? #31 Imawuss: Really Hybrids need an inert advantage, then they need all the other stuff #37 Narjack: Still just too many draw backs on the rails vice arty and torps. The blasters? Well, again, they are a bit better, but again, no way I'd stick my neck out in a fight with these #55 Mekhana: the design in itself is flawed. Unless CCP is willing to redesign hybrids and Gallente ships from the ground up or making every kind of gun similar to each other we'll never get anywhere #84 Mr Painless: As I see it the main problem with hybrids is that they are inferior to other turret systems #101 Gypsio III: To fix hybrids, you need to fix that problem - intrusion of lasers and projectiles into hybrids' home territory #114 Vilgan Mazran: Rails in general seem to suffer from an identity crisis. What is their role? #119 Jiji Hamin: hybrids are still pretty much utterly worthless for anything larger than a frigate with these changes. if it is not readily apparent why, then you deserve to be fired #129 Alice Katsuko: it doesn't address the underlying issue of hybrids being underwhelming as a weapons platform #134 Imawuss: If you make them behave like pulses and AC's they become that.... that wont happen either. They must be unique #138 Pinky Denmark: Currently we have a change of stats that makes hybrids better but the hybrids still need a UNIQUE ROLE to fit the current game mechanics #149 Yvan Ratamnim: It's quite simple, hybrids have every negative #151 Jiji Hamin: This list of changes is pretty much the minimum that I could imagine for making hybrids worthwhile, keeping blasters interesting, maintaining ship diversity, and so on without revamping both gallente and hybrids from the ground up #162 Deviana Sevidon: I fear we will end up with a train-wreck of a half-assed attempt to fix hybrid weapons but without a concept for the weapons #180 Monger Man: What if hybrids instead changed how they worked #186 Gecko O'Bac: I'd take "effective" over "exciting" any day #190 PinkKnife: Hybrids have no real gains over the other turrets, ignoring raw numbers #211 Cuane Jeran: After more playing (and comparing) Hybrids really need something else #255 Hungry Eyes: i really hope the ship and ammo buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships #259 Mag's: I still don't see a reason to fly blaster ships with these changes #300 Hungry Eyes: CCP, no one will be flying hybrid platforms #323 Gypsio III: addressing the problem of intrusion of lasers and projectiles into blasters' and rails' niches #344 Dare Devel: In my humble opinion, at the moment after the next round of changes announced, we are still 75% behind the optimum buff to rebalance Hybrids #360 Jerick Ludhowe: What we need is something unique, something not present or available from any other weapon system #367 Gypsio III: Put simply, hybrids do nothing that cannot also be done with lasers or projectiles. As long as this situations exists, there is still no reason to use hybrids #371 Gypsio III: Flexibility is important, and hybrids simply don't have it #381 Julius FOederatus: I appreciate that CCP is looking at this issue, but frankly I don't think you guys are appreciating the magnitude of hybrid inadequacy #412 Gypsio III: [Tallest,] discuss the environments in which they're supposed to excel and where they should be inferior, and the capabilities that allow them to fulfil their intended design #437 Keen Fallsword: Changes that are on SiSi are not enough #446 Grimpak: test server changes on both blaster hulls and blaster themselves are just half-assed attempts in all honesty...these tiny changes simply served to make the glaring issues less glaring #508 Shadow Lord77: What advantage do hybrid weapons have?
Hungry Eyes Ministry of War Amarr Empire 161	Posted - 2011.11.11 18:11:00 - [549] - Quote hi mom. anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments?
Nimrod Nemesis Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 53	Posted - 2011.11.11 19:39:00 - [550] - Quote Hungry Eyes wrote: anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments? Smart money is on "this is will require more booze, err- thought, than we considered. See you next week!"

Keen Fallsword Billionaires Club C0VEN 16	Posted - 2011.11.11 20:06:00 - [551] - Quote Hungry Eyes wrote: hi mom. anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments? Yep we are waiting guys... I was on SiSi today. I was flying almost any hybrid ship.. Its a Joke ? Or a Crap ? or Bullshit ? Everything in mid ships lvl is the same unplayable as it was. I think that the bigest issue with "so called hybrids re-balancing" is that Devs are doing it in Ms Excel Everything is nice on paper but its not PRO way to do this. Go on Sisi and TRY it...
Miriiah Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 7	Posted - 2011.11.11 20:21:00 - [552] - Quote Not a ranting post or anything, but I'd like to hear CCP's work so far since last sisi update, some ideas they might have or whatever.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 31	Posted - 2011.11.11 21:41:00 - [553] - Quote Keen Fallsword wrote: Hungry Eyes wrote: hi mom. anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments? Yep we are waiting guys... I was on SiSi today. I was flying almost any hybrid ship.. Its a Joke ? Or a Crap ? or Bullshit ? Everything in mid ships lvl is the same unplayable as it was. I think that the bigest issue with "so called hybrids re-balancing" is that Devs are doing it in Ms Excel Everything is nice on paper but its not PRO way to do this. Go on Sisi and TRY it... nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is
Hamox Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts 1	Posted - 2011.11.11 21:47:00 - [554] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: Keen Fallsword wrote: Hungry Eyes wrote: hi mom. anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments? Yep we are waiting guys... I was on SiSi today. I was flying almost any hybrid ship.. Its a Joke ? Or a Crap ? or Bullshit ? Everything in mid ships lvl is the same unplayable as it was. I think that the bigest issue with "so called hybrids re-balancing" is that Devs are doing it in Ms Excel Everything is nice on paper but its not PRO way to do this. Go on Sisi and TRY it... nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is Patience, give them two or three more years, they just started to work on it.
Zircon Dasher Zirconia Trade Group 23	Posted - 2011.11.11 21:48:00 - [555] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is Have the optimal fits for all ships been decided upon already? Crap. I have been slacking on my EFT warrior time.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 31	Posted - 2011.11.11 21:54:00 - [556] - Quote Zircon Dasher wrote: Naomi Knight wrote: nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is Have the optimal fits for all ships been decided upon already? Crap. I have been slacking on my EFT warrior time. there is a button for it in the newest version , top left use it
Zircon Dasher Zirconia Trade Group 23	Posted - 2011.11.11 22:01:00 - [557] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: there is a button for it in the newest version , top left use it push button recieve 'leet fit?? I dont know if I should cheer or cry.
Shadow Lord77 Shadow Industries I 57	Posted - 2011.11.11 22:03:00 - [558] - Quote Magosian wrote: This overall effort by players and devs alike is NOT getting anywhere. Before you look at stats, ships, ammo/fitting bonuses, there is only one question that needs to be asked (thank you Gypsio III): Can hybrids do something which can't be done by lasers or projectiles? BTW the answer is NO. Hybrids do not provide a passive, inherent advantage to the pilot. This is the SOLE reason why hybrids are an afterthought. The upcoming winter expansion MUST provide pilots with an absolute/distinct/passive/core/unique/effective benefit BEFORE an engagement ensues. CCP, I've gone through this ENTIRE thread and presented the #1 problem for you. I saved you the trouble of reading and deciphering it. I probably missed MANY more, but the concensus remains: the PLAYER COMMUNITY has established a core shortcoming of hybrids and this is why they are not used. It must be addressed BEFORE statistics to hybrids are changed because projectiles and lasers are chosen for passive benefits BEFORE turret stats are considered. Give hybrids a reason to be used. Give hybrids a single, core, unique benefit which is NOT offered by lasers or projectiles. Do this and you have tackled the biggest thing plaguing hybrids. If hybrids are to have any chance at being viable and popular turret, THIS ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ADDRESSED! That aside, you should still look into tweaking the hybrid stats as you've been; there are plenty of other secondary problems with hybrids. But understand modifying turret stats and making small modifications to ship stats is not going to make anyone think "Hrm, hybrids would be great weapon to use because, as a pilot, I like to do A B and C...." And please don't take my word for it, take theirs: #19 Mariner6: HYBRIDS: Ok, Blasters. They have the worst aspects of lasers and projectiles and none of the benefits ... ... ... #508 Shadow Lord77: What advantage do hybrid weapons have? Nice summary. My post was last. I asked a question which I already knew. Blasters have an dps advantage in close range where tracking isn't so much an issue. Railguns have an advantage that they have a slightly higher optimal over other weapons. The problem is that it's rare that you can use blasters at such short range with such slow ships and they aren't of any use at long range. The problem railguns have is that they're mediocre at long range, the other weapons platforms are similar to its optimal and falloff so the advantage isn't always there. And it's tracking is SO poor that if enemy ships get within 20km or maybe even more and start orbiting, you're screwed. This in the mindset of a 425mm Rokh or something along those lines. Yeah. Even with these proposed changes hybrids will always be the underdogs. Why use railguns when you can use artillery, why use blasters when you can use auto-cannons. etc.. Eve combat as it stands, hot-drops are often, hybrid ships are screwed under those circumstances, minmatar ships could probably kite blaster boats while warp scrambling them... so yeah. It's not balanced at all. Hybrids aren't even useful for pve compared to the relative strengths of other weapons platforms unless the person in question simply likes the idea of hybrids in general over useability or core dps. Don't judge me by my character's face, or by the name I made up when I was 16. Judge me by my ideas. And basically I think because sometimes it's nice to have a long-range optimal, and sometimes it's nice to have close-quarters dps, and because the core behavior of railguns and blasters isn't going to change that take a long look at the idea of making blaster turrets able to maybe operate at long range doing lower-dps, and giving railguns awesome tracking. It solves all the issues with railguns being useless when the enemy uses basic game mechanics and warps in on you and scrambles your ship. And it solves blaster ships problems with doing no damage at range while keeping the core idea that railguns do medium damage at range, (but now can hit enemies at close range), and blasters being unable to do anything at enemies where you can't get to. Either that or simply unify the turrets like in my other idea. Make a transformer sequence between the blaster and hybrid model, (maybe going back into it's hole and then coming out as one or the other), when the enemy comes near enough the turret switches out to the blaster model and begins to do blaster damage, and when they get far enough away the turret switches out to a railgun model and begins doing railgun tracking and damage, make it to be able to be toggled manually, put out the changes on SiSi, test it out and see how many people use hybrids because even though you do poor damage and tracking at range there's a change you can do a lot of damage close up. Create some penalties for this new system, and voila! You have solved the issue of railguns being ****** at close-range and blasters being useless at distance.
Hamox Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts 1	Posted - 2011.11.11 22:45:00 - [559] - Quote We do not need to post any more ideas or thoughts about hybrids or how to fix them. Everything that needed to be said has been said in this thread, it is full of great ideas, solutions and possibilities. So instead of posting ideas and solutions we should only post one sentence and hope CCP will read it: LISTEN TO YOUR COMMUNITY AND FIX HYBRIDS PROPERLY. After you have fixed the hybrids fix all the other issues, there is a lot to do so stop talking start doing! There is nothing else left to say in this thread.
Shadow Lord77 Shadow Industries I 57	Posted - 2011.11.11 22:54:00 - [560] - Quote Basically what I meant by my post is that while some people like the idea of blasters doing a lot of DPS at close range, and the idea of railguns doing medium-sized dps at longer ranges the two conflict with current game mechanics. It's easy to warp on-top of someone so the rail-gun advantage is hardly to be seen. Blaster ships are difficult to get in within range in PVP combat because Caldari ships are slow in game and Gallente also when armor tanked. So why not unify the two with a few penalties? I keep mentioning it, but most of the people on this thread keep ignoring it besides Monger Man. Even if rails were buffed slightly they'd still be poor dps long-range weapons which wouldn't stand a chance in close-range combat. Is that what you want? If the SiSi changes to hybrid turrets were reverted and all the optimal ranges of the turrets were kept the same, but the experimental mechanic of the turrets switching out to either blaster or railgun depending on range was put in place. Hybrid turrets would still be ineffective between the ranges of ~17km-35km, (Assuming large neutron blaster and 425mm,) because of tracking and optimal range issues and it is intuitive to see that this problem exists even with SiSi's 5% tracking bonuses on rail-guns or blasters. This experimental mechanic would be cool to test please think about it CCP.

Monger Man D.S.A. 7	Posted - 2011.11.11 23:26:00 - [561] - Quote Shadow Lord77 wrote: Basically what I meant by my post is that while some people like the idea of blasters doing a lot of damage at close range; and the idea of railguns doing lesser damage at longer ranges the two inherently conflict with current game mechanics. This is because it is easy to warp on to someone who is using rail-guns therefore their advantage is negated. Blaster ships are difficult to get in within range in PVP combat because in-game Caldari ships are slow and armor-tanked Gallente things are also slow as well. So why not unify the two with a few penalties? I keep mentioning it, but most of the people on this thread keep ignoring it besides Monger Man. Even if rails were buffed slightly they'd still be relatively-low damage long-range weapons which wouldn't stand a chance in close-range combat. Is that what you want? If the SiSi changes to hybrid turrets were reverted and all the optimal ranges of the turrets were kept the same, but the experimental mechanic of the turrets switching out to either blaster or railgun turrets depending on range was put in place. Hybrid turrets would still be ineffective between the ranges of ~17km-35km, (Assuming large neutron blaster and 425mm,) because of tracking and optimal range issues and it is intuitive to see that this problem exists even with SiSi's 5% tracking bonuses on either rail-guns or blasters. This experimental mechanic would be cool to test please think about it CCP. You're not going to gain any traction with you're idea because you haven't helped to solve the problem with hybrids. Under you're idea, you still have to much range with rails (to easy to warp to) and can be completely kitted with no way to close in. You've left 90% of the field open to the enemy. If you unify blasters/rails into one turret governed by ammo, the idea is you can now cover all ranges by switching ammo. The big problem is still 1. Its to powerful, you have all the answers with a turret that does all ranges very well. or 2. Its not helpful, you have all the ranges with a turret that's to week to matter at them. I'm partial to the idea. But I still cant see a way out of 1 or 2.
Jazz Styles Sileo In Pacis 6	Posted - 2011.11.12 02:33:00 - [562] - Quote I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns. As for blasters, if they're going to stay as ultra short range weapons, then you need to make them powerful enough so that Gallente pilots will be eager to get in suicidally short range, and make other pilots regret it. Redonkulous firepower, I mean.
Opertone Signal 7 6	Posted - 2011.11.12 02:59:00 - [563] - Quote Highest ROF? Have you considered ammo costs? Railguns should be the most accurate weapon in game, which means very good damage vs small targets. I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat. Rail guns inherent advantage - hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade. Railguns should not be noodle hard. 300 DPS is not worth it, noodle soft weaponry is nothing like Caldari.
Jazz Styles Sileo In Pacis 6	Posted - 2011.11.12 03:08:00 - [564] - Quote Opertone wrote: Have you considered ammo costs? Railguns should be the most accurate weapon in game, which means very good damage vs small targets. Lower ammo costs then. We're only talking 10% faster ROF, so 10% cheaper to make will cover it, and might even help make blasters more attractive. Opertone wrote: I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat. They're already the longest range sniper weapons in the game, and apparently that's not good enough. Opertone wrote: hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade. You just described every long range turret in the game. Try thinking outside the box.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 44	Posted - 2011.11.12 04:12:00 - [565] - Quote Jazz Styles wrote: I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns. For a given dps, For a given level of dps, alpha is superior to rate of fire. How about drop arty r.o.f by another 20% to lower their dps instead?
Monger Man D.S.A. 7	Posted - 2011.11.12 04:20:00 - [566] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: Jazz Styles wrote: I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns. For a given dps, For a given level of dps, alpha is superior to rate of fire. How about drop arty r.o.f by another 20% to lower their dps instead? Its an interesting idea but I don't think CCP is going to do any nerfs at the moment. It would be very dangerous for them to.
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League 30	Posted - 2011.11.12 06:25:00 - [567] - Quote I think next move is on CCP - players pretty much gave them all we could with plenty argumentation for everything... Also note that energy and projectiles seems rather balanced so except nerfing tracking enhancers/tracking computers for fall-off and look at gallente/minmatar speed/mass/agility we shouldn't really touch anything but the hybrids with these changes (at least for now). minmatar have the lowest dps already but a alpha 3-4x bigger than other systems with capless select damage type ammo and having ships with a double damage bonus. So lets wait to see the additional tweaks coming from CCP (because I severely hope for ammo, TE/TC and other mentioned issues will get adressed as well) Happy weekend to all of you
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 32	Posted - 2011.11.12 07:59:00 - [568] - Quote I cant see where matar has the lowest dps , they easily out dps my rokh /eagle/ferox anytime. The best part is that every matar ship gets rof bonus which is way better than the dmg bonus for dps. And due to capless and overbuffed ammo capacity , matar dont get any disadvantes from the rof bonus , while a rail/blaster ship would use more cap and run out of ammo meaningfully quicker. Also an arty ship need like 1k ammo only for any fight, while rail ships would need 4 times as much and the projectile ammo m3 is smaller,that is just so dumb???
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 37	Posted - 2011.11.12 08:31:00 - [569] - Quote Opertone wrote: I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat. Rail guns inherent advantage - hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade. Railguns should not be noodle hard. 300 DPS is not worth it, noodle soft weaponry is nothing like Caldari. This is the first suggestion that I think would make railguns interesting and unique . . . battleship sized guns doing full damage to cruisers at long range would definitely be a niche that could be filled Any ideas for blasters? I was thinking highest close range alpha maybe . . . remove the cap buff, nerf ROF by 200% and increase damage by 250%? That still wouldnt help them get in range, but they'd only have to get in range once to make you wish they hadnt . . .
Jazz Styles Sileo In Pacis 6	Posted - 2011.11.12 08:42:00 - [570] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: I think next move is on CCP - players pretty much gave them all we could with plenty argumentation for everything... Yeah this has been a very thorough discussion, I can't think of anything else that needs coverage so I'm done here. Hoping for big improvements to hybrids real soon



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 30 40 50 60 .. 66 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.