EVE Search - Sticky:Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

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)
Archare SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t 69	Posted - 2012.01.06 16:51:00 - [1591] - 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!
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 856	Posted - 2012.01.06 19:59:00 - [1592] - Quote I agree with Mogosian about some of us here being a bit too rude (includinf meh but schhhss) about this ammo stuff, let's try to at least think some resolutions are being taken and that our feedback has some repercussions so let's try to do it fair and well for everyone please. I haven't tested yet the new hybrid numbers on SISI I admit, I'll do it ASAP tomorrow before I even think about log on TQ, it's my priority. Has weird has that may seem my full priority is to stop using Minamatar stuff and use the one I've chose at he first place and at other ocasions than gate camps. I'm not about having gallente stuff all over Minmatar, I want f++cking balance and use my favourite ships in the same scenarios with same efficiency, witch doesn't mean same tactics, so nerds gtfo with your sh+»t comments. The day where with a single TE, no MFS -since dmg mods lows you have to choose between tank or gank right nerds? ill be able to hit crap at disruptor distance and profit from my f++cking lvl5 gunnery support skills I'll be happy for once. Man, I had to train AWU at 4 to even fit correctly my Navy mega without many PG/CAP/CPU issues, train f++cking gunnery support skills at 5 to be able to hit crap decently (doesn't mean with decent dps) at stupid distances. Then I've sarted using Minmatar battleships, had far too much cpu left, couldn't fit enought T2 crap to eat all the PG, couldn't even be caped out by two or 3 Canes neuting me, enough shield natural regen to alpha crap at decent distances and most important, I could only imagine what was the feeling about put 1500dmg shots with 720hotwizer arty when with my 250mm RG i can hardly put 150dmg in optimal ange and perfect trajectory. Do I think hybrids and blaster/rail platforms will be good tomorrow? -absolutely not. Do I think We're on the verge of some changing and see those start having some use, or better, start seeing full gallente fleets doing what they're supposed to do? - maybe, but it's certainly not for tomorrow Imho, we'll not have something competent and overall a viable choice before another 6months if Tallest ver has the time and will to do so, witch makes me think and say that hybrids rebalance will not evolve much more than those crapy numbers we see for a few months now, Top 20 will not move before a few years again.
Morgan North The Wild Bunch Electus Matari 61	Posted - 2012.01.06 20:10:00 - [1593] - Quote I agree that for weapons with the highest fitting requirements, while wasting cap per shot, and unable to select damage types, the fact that autocannons have so many advantages is plain wrong. The solution? Increase autocannon fitting requirements and lower hybrids. You barely even have to touch the damage f you allow for more fitting options.
Fade Azura Azura Industries 124	Posted - 2012.01.06 22:22:00 - [1594] - Quote Magosian wrote: Fade Azura wrote: an extra couple of km on blasters using null ... lol ... WHOOPTY DOO ... not going to change anything ...and pretty pathetic attempt at a fix. if this is the best they can do ... we might as well just sell our gallente characters on the bazaar before a Gallente skills penalty is added to character pricing because all their skills are worthless in comparison to winmatar. i for one do not want to fly minmatar ships all the time. or better yet we can just stop playing this game and find one that actually has a working pvp system. i hear star wars online already has 100x the customers of eve in a few months although i have never tried it ... i bet they actually got more then 1 guy working on balancing as well lol. its pretty sad that this game has been running for 10 years now and CCP still cant figure out how to balance their game. guess it goes to show how much they appreciate their customers. i am sure they are working on other more important things like justifying selling more nex store items. i have a feeling the exodus created during incarna is going to continue in the next year or 2 until this game is officially dead ... cause the developers are failing so bad at their jobs. nice try CCP tallest .. but until i see better results .. you have failed at your task. and eve online is losing customers monthly. but who knows maybe you can get a job at star wars as an assistant when this game is over .. i give it 1-2 years max. I think you're being a bit harsh. I've been passionate about getting hybrids buffed for years, and only became vocal about it for the past two months (basically as soon as I heard it was being addressed on Sisi). I mean, think about that, two months time and they HAVE implemented something. My only concern was that they would leave it as is, despite numerous forum posts stating the work was incomplete. Admittedly, I was also about to throw in the towel, thinking hybrids got a half-assed makeover which didn't change a thing. Hearing about Null changes on SiSi, though, it's changed my attitude a lot. That being said, I am totally with you: more needs to be done. If you ask me, Gallente ships still need survivability. If the Null changes go live, this puts Gallente ships somewhat on par with Amarr. I still think Amarr get the edge in better effective range in scorch, instant ammo swap, and absolutely staggering armor tanks. Caldari, while in some cases they seemingly need love, will have ECM, the best-bang-for-your-buck Drake, the Tengu, and I'd bet any amount of money the Naga becomes popular in the next six months. Minmatar will remain undisputed kings of small scale pvp because other races, pound for pound, have yet to receive tools matching or beating the trio of capless guns, fastest speed, and alpha. To summarize: while this thread is about buffing hybrids, I think it is equally important to recognize the pitiful rarity of Gallente ships in pvp, which also happens to mirror a likewise lacking presense of hybrids in pvp. In many respects, they are one and the same. To reiterate this point for anyone at CCP who might be reading: You must also increase the defensive abilities of the hybrid delivery platform, a.k.a. ships with hybrid bonuses, in SOME way, if you are serious about making hybrids a popular and viable choice in pvp. Anyhow, Gallente still need survivability just as much as hybrids need something to make their "on-paper" stats effective. While new Null buffs open a small window to fend off skirmishers, it still does nothing preventing Minmatar ships from overwhelmingly dictating the course of small engagements. In other words, the Null buffs only result in a skirmisher POSSIBLY having to consider retreating when fighting a blaster boat. Hybrid ships need to bring something to the table EVERYTIME they are picked, or no one is going to want to use them. Ideally this would be defensive in nature as Gallente is the only race which really has no passive defensive capability: Minmatar: nano/speed, capless guns Amarr: best ehp in the game, fleet-friendly lasers Caldari: best shields in the game, capless missiles (this is not exactly great, but it does propel the Drake to the most popular ship in the game, and the Tengu to the most popular ship in its class) Gallente: NOTHING CCP, you still need to fill the above Gallente gap, or the Null buffs are in vain. :( Nikuno wrote: It'd be a shame if TE's became the new mwd and were a compulsory fit for every ship - pretty soon we might as well have it all hardwired into the ship if that becomes a trend :) ... Alternatively the 50% boost would work, but then that might be too much for the large guns. Yea, I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed disparities between hybrid turrets as ship size increased. The weakest of the weak hybrids are found on the medium-sized ships, no doubt. And yes, TE's are a little too powerful/fotm. Strange that TEs actually provide better bonuses than the TC, which has more fitting requirements, requires a script, and requires activation.... Personally, I equate them to pre-nerf multispectrals, but whatever. yes i realize i am being a bit harsh but sometimes it is needed to let someone know they are doing a bad job ... i ran a construction company for many years and if i got someone who is messing up constantly or doing half ass jobs on their work and cant get it together eventually i just tell them do your damn job correclty or i am going to fire you ... and after years of hybrids having no presence in pvp and sucking terribly compared to the other races its pretty much at that point ... and i think they realize that or they wouldnt be doing what they are doing now. but honestly all these changes are half-assed jobs IMO blasters will remain niche and rails suck. nothing changed
Fade Azura Azura Industries 124	Posted - 2012.01.06 22:40:00 - [1595] - Quote i actually would love to see some more buffs to rails to actually make them a competitve weapon system ... i mean CMON eletromagnetic railguns firing ANTIMATTER rounds is the worst long range weapon system? and some crap archaic artillery that i guess still uses gunpowder in space(lol) because it doesnt use cap is easily outperforming a much more modern and space-type weapon ... you cant even roleplay that lol. unless blasters are tottaly reworked they will always remain a small gang niche .. and i mean SMALL GANG .. they will fail terribly even on medium sized fleet engagements. which leaves gallente only hope of getting back in the fleet fights with railguns ... which are being ignored now apparently they are just fine. even if you copied autocannons and arties properties and gave it to blasters and rails they would still be slower use cap and not be able to select ammo type .... total crap. nothing will change from what ive seen ... which makes gallente still the worst overall PVP and PVE race by a long shot even after these buffs which were very minor compared to the projectile buff which put minmatar FAR above any other races. FAIL -1 ccp
Fade Azura Azura Industries 124	Posted - 2012.01.06 22:56:00 - [1596] - Quote it is time to admit that projectiles are whats overpowered and in need of the big ole nerf bat if you cant get hybrids to par with your changes. whoever did the projectile buff did such a terrible job its pathetic and made the game far more unbalanced. right now minmatar got the best of everything and its not even close .... they are fastest(by alot) got the best guns(by far)at short and longe range and the ability to dictate range in any fight against any other race 90% of the time. no wonder everyone is flying them. i used to think the drake was a bit OP but now its the only thing holding back minmatar from dominating everyone everywhere.
Magosian Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 177	Posted - 2012.01.06 23:28:00 - [1597] - Quote Fade Azura wrote: it is time to admit that projectiles are whats overpowered and in need of the big ole nerf bat if you cant get hybrids to par with your changes. whoever did the projectile buff did such a terrible job its pathetic and made the game far more unbalanced. right now minmatar got the best of everything and its not even close .... they are fastest(by alot) got the best guns(by far)at short and longe range and the ability to dictate range in any fight against any other race 90% of the time. no wonder everyone is flying them. i used to think the drake was a bit OP but now its the only thing holding back minmatar from dominating everyone everywhere. Despite our different levels of passion on the matter, you thoughts are sound. I do hope they get this right, not to SHIFT the balance of power, but to: -give veteran players more options to exercise ALL of their skills, in a more diverse manner -give newer players the true avenue to evolve themselves by not allowing them to regret their skill and race choices -bring balance to the economy, which currently [and naturally] favors effective ship and weapon systems over the crap ones It is inexcusable for EVE, a game fundamentally-based on player versus player, to allow a race's line of ships and weapons to be immeasurably inferior when compared to the others. My only disagreement would be to nerf projectiles. I think it would be better to get everything up to their effectiveness rather than to take a step backwards. There was a time when projectiles weren't so hot, and for [mostly] the same reasons hybrids are not so hot today. I'll do my best to be hopeful now that i see Null is getting reworked, but again, more is needed!
Fon Revedhort Monks of War DarkSide. 651	Posted - 2012.01.06 23:44:00 - [1598] - Quote At this point my biggest hope is in CCP Tallest being calm at all those rants produced by people with very limited PvP experience (if any at all). Either that or they are just ashamed to post with their mains. Either way, it's better to discard these pathetic claims. Railguns are more than fine now. Blasters will most likely become fine after the lattest iteration on Null. It's just the right time to address other issues - like passive overtanking, rigs, shield extenders with no mobility penalties and so on. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 856	Posted - 2012.01.07 00:10:00 - [1599] - Quote How to discredit yourself after posting with your main? Fon Revedhort wrote: Railguns are more than fine now. Blasters will most likely become fine after the lattest iteration on Null. It's just the right time to address other issues - like passive overtanking, rigs, shield extenders with no mobility penalties and so on. Blasters got some love with that crappy long range ammo change -now you can at least hit crap at over 30km at BS size with a single TE and this is really important, they have to choose to either seriously engage or both have now the ability to gtfo since one can't use any more his distance advantage to keep you disrupted knowing you couldn't hit and elephant at that distance (25/30km) The tracking/falloff/cap penalties should be at same level with hail/multi has barrage/scorch or whatever Rails ammo still in need of a very much big dps boost at least for long range ammo, I'm still preferring to pick the Tornado over Rails Talos or Naga everyday, and there's a reason for that: Tornado puts 2 shots on your bones you feel it deep. If it's some Naga or Talos you just know they're there but can wait before you warp out. Rails themselves are in need of changes at med and large size. 625mm for BS and 375mm for meds would be quite nice because it's cool the 12% less here and the 30% less there but the fact is that they're still crap. I'll still pick the 720mm T2 hotwizer Cane over 250mm RG Diemost, one is JUST a battlecruiser, the other is JUST THE HAC of gallente lineup. Why compare both? - well zealot is much better than any amarr BC withc is good, a specialised ship for dps should be the best at it, either close or long range, zealot is the good example. 720 Vaga is crap but 720 Munin is great Cerberus is little special, crappy tank but for sure a very good dmg dealer no matter the distance. Problem with gallente HAC is that you either use Blaster Diesmost or Drones Ishtar because rails are plain crap and on Diemost you can see it how bad they are that you could give those 50% more dps they'd still be subpar
Monica Sharezan Azura Industries 43	Posted - 2012.01.07 03:38:00 - [1600] - Quote Fon Revedhort wrote: Railguns are more than fine now. How much you wanna bet there not a single railgun in the top 20 turrets making kills at the end of this month?(except 425 mb at the bottom everytime) but yes they are fine i agree ..... fine as long as you dont equip them on your ship!
Fade Azura Azura Industries 124	Posted - 2012.01.07 04:30:00 - [1601] - Quote Fon Revedhort wrote: At this point my biggest hope is in CCP Tallest being calm at all those rants produced by people with very limited PvP experience (if any at all). Either that or they are just ashamed to post with their mains. Either way, it's better to discard these pathetic claims. Railguns are more than fine now. Blasters will most likely become fine after the lattest iteration on Null. It's just the right time to address other issues - like passive overtanking, rigs, shield extenders with no mobility penalties and so on. ohh please show us your vast experience with railguns Mr. Wizard .... i looked at your killboard and you have not got a kill with a railgun in over 16 MONTHS and that was with a nighthawk? wtf probably an error i doubt you have any experience with rails.... and in that time guess what you have been using 99% of the time? projectiles and heavy missiles and a few token blasters kills .... lol STFU and GTFO you dont know anything about railguns except you never have seen them in pvp in about 2 years and its obvious that you just want to retain your FOTM status by spewing propaganda like a little punk. probably becuase you know without flying your fotm ships you arent really that good. if you look at my killboard you will see that i actually use rails of all sizes and in actual recent history all t2 guns and my railgun skills are 100% maxed .... i have an 9.00 standing with all the diffrent faction navies all in a sentry/rail domi and have more experience using rails in pvp and pve then you ever will. i have tried several times to use rails in pvp but their alpha is way to weak and dps doesnt overcome arties until like an hour of shooting at something by the time the rails dps starts working the fight is already over and doesnt mean jack.. and the only time they do well is at pos bashes thats it. i always use a sentry boat+rails usually to take down a pos cause that is the only situation they are good at. these are rail setups but sentries like to get on the KM much more. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11931167 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=10672750 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=9400676 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=9173600 http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=9797238 i use my rails now only during stuff like this and i am sure 90% of railguns KM's are at pos bashes an thats it. i never claim to be some master of pvp .. far from it ..i quite often play after i have had a drink or 2 and mess up alot sometimes. i only play here and there when i got the time and just an average joe. but i know intimatly how railguns work far better then you ever will and as good as anyone can and actually use them in combat in the small niche they have(otherwise my maxxed skills on them are wasted). so please take your propaganda and stick it where the sun dont shine and thx. opps last pos KM was a sentry gila in a c1 i think or something like that lolz and also if rails are fine why havent you used them in 16 months if you ever have? ........... thats what i thought
Monica Sharezan Azura Industries 43	Posted - 2012.01.07 05:06:00 - [1602] - Quote i can confirm that fade knows more about railguns than 90% of eve. no point in even arguing with him about it also .. wheres all the usual "lol you trained rails to max? why didnt you train arties or lasers?" as thats what he gets 90% of the time when he tries to use them in pvp in game. but he tends to shut people up as he will be top dmg at the pos bash everytime using railguns provided he isnt late =) still doesnt mean they are good in fleet vs fleet warfare. because they are the worst ... besides maybe cruise missles lol
Zarak1 Kenpach1 Aperture Harmonics K162 40	Posted - 2012.01.07 05:42:00 - [1603] - Quote I think a subtle solution to gal survivability would be to drastically reduce signature sizes of gallente cruiser/BS hulls. this keeps them from becoming better tankers raw HP wise than amarr while still making the reduction of speed a web brings against blaster boats less effective.
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 856	Posted - 2012.01.07 07:41:00 - [1604] - Quote Player driven content. CQFD
Fade Azura Azura Industries 124	Posted - 2012.01.07 10:13:00 - [1605] - Quote Magosian wrote: Despite our different levels of passion on the matter, you thoughts are sound. I do hope they get this right, not to SHIFT the balance of power, but to: -give veteran players more options to exercise ALL of their skills, in a more diverse manner -give newer players the true avenue to evolve themselves by not allowing them to regret their skill and race choices -bring balance to the economy, which currently [and naturally] favors effective ship and weapon systems over the crap ones It is inexcusable for EVE, a game fundamentally-based on player versus player, to allow a race's line of ships and weapons to be immeasurably inferior when compared to the others. My only disagreement would be to nerf projectiles. I think it would be better to get everything up to their effectiveness rather than to take a step backwards. There was a time when projectiles weren't so hot, and for [mostly] the same reasons hybrids are not so hot today. I'll do my best to be hopeful now that i see Null is getting reworked, but again, more is needed! i do applaud your calm and hopeful approach towards this hybrid rebalance good sir despite all the obvious trolls and minmatar fanboys that are trying their hardest to say otherwise with basically bold faced lies,propaganda, skewed stats, and other terrible examples and reasons why gallente is fine
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 199	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:04:00 - [1606] - Quote Hopefully Tallest will be able to come out a good idea for rails, I cant see how current rail mechanism could be balanced at all. There is no advantage for rails ,especially as beams are way better and has the same mechanism , but no ammo need and insta reload. Imho rails should be able to track much better at closer ranges than beams , so you can use med ones at 15-30km. And at longer ranges they shouldnt loose that huge dps ,so the dps curve should be much flatter and ammo basically defines mostly tracking vs range and maybe alpha less dmg vs range. Also maybe they could add differend dmg types or remove emp from projectiles. Oh and fix the tier scaling for rails ,the difference between 250mm 200mm and dual 150mm is just way too much , you loose too much optimal by choosing smaller caliber , for arties they loose much less in % vise t2 250mm 28,8km+12km opt+falloff 40,8 200mm 21,6+10km 31,6 loss 23%range dual 150mm 14,4+6km 20,4 loss 45% range arties: 720mm 24+17,5km 41,5 650mm 19,3+17,5km 36,5 loss 13% Maybe lower falloff for arties as it makes large arties closest range ammo outdmg medium range ammo up to 90-100km that is insanse.
Morgan North The Wild Bunch Electus Matari 61	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:11:00 - [1607] - Quote Rails should deal Alpha. Thats what they are there for. DPS should be Artilery/Autocannons/Blasters. Thats pretty much how you balance the things and make them viable.
tEcHnOkRaT Aliastra Gallente Federation 19	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:15:00 - [1608] - Quote Morgan North wrote: Rails should deal Alpha. Thats what they are there for. DPS should be Artilery/Autocannons/Blasters. Thats pretty much how you balance the things and make them viable. thumbs up reduce the artilary alpha and give it to railguns
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 199	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:39:00 - [1609] - Quote tEcHnOkRaT wrote: Morgan North wrote: Rails should deal Alpha. Thats what they are there for. DPS should be Artilery/Autocannons/Blasters. Thats pretty much how you balance the things and make them viable. thumbs up reduce the artilary alpha and give it to railguns yeah if game was new ill say the same but imho too late for that change
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 45	Posted - 2012.01.07 16:45:00 - [1610] - Quote Well with the null change I make the ranges for the medium and large blasters to be as follows (appropriate skills at lv5 for range modifiers) without and with a single TE (to the nearest whole km); Heavy electron 9 12 Heavy ion 12 15 Heavy neutron 15 19 Electron cannon 19 23 Ion cannon 25 30 Neutron cannon 30 37 So close to removing the biggest bug bear - namely being kited at scram range without any reasonable chance to do much to escape. It'd be a shame if TE's became the new mwd and were a compulsory fit for every ship - pretty soon we might as well have it all hardwired into the ship if that becomes a trend :) .I have no issues at all with large blasters set at this level personally, but think the mediums could do with an extra 1.5km as their base, just to get everything into the scram range limit for being able to respond in some way. I guess the guns themselves would require that tweak, rather than the ammo. Alternatively the 50% boost would work, but then that might be too much for the large guns. Of course, this only applies to t2 guns if it's adjustment by ammo, so every T1 and faction blaster will still be the current flavour of crap.
Jaigar Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O. 35	Posted - 2012.01.07 17:33:00 - [1611] - Quote Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: I think a subtle solution to gal survivability would be to drastically reduce signature sizes of gallente cruiser/BS hulls. this keeps them from becoming better tankers raw HP wise than amarr while still making the reduction of speed a web brings against blaster boats less effective. This is an issue. Say, Armor Cane vs. Shield Cane. Now, the armor cane has a speed penalty for his tank, and the shield cane has a sig radius penalty for his. But really, does this sig radius increase actually make a difference at all if these 2 are brawling (and yes, I know the armor cane does benefit from higher eHP and more utility for webs and whatnot, but if the shield cane wants to kite around 20km and has those extra lows for TEs he will lay out alot more damage.) I think the heart of the Gallente problem comes down to the disadvantages of armor tanking being significantly worse than shield when you need speed. Armor however, is better for logistics (when compared to a LSE fit bassy) simply because a 1600mm plate affects a guardian about the same amount as it would on a harbinger, but a LSE on a bassy has 2-3 times the signature radius effect as it would on a drake. Gallente need an option to tank yet have some reasonable speed. Honestly I like your suggested change, but it would need to be pretty extreme to have any actual effect, and then more likely than not you will just see more shield tanking brutixs Lets assume that Gallente speed is increased significantly (say 20-40 m/s per ship or something). Outcome: More shield Gallente ships since they would be fast enough to catch those shield ships. However, you run into the problem of no one wanting to use armor on them because they'd still be too slow (14.3% speed reduction from 3 trimarks hurts too badly assuming max rigging skills). And you are back to square one. Perhaps another angle to this could be a massive railgun buff, being able to effectively punish those who are kiting you. But Caldari Hybrid shields tend to have an optimal range bonus and are better suited for rails(and with the SiSi Null ammo buff are looking better for blasters), whereas the Gallente seem to have more tracking bonuses which are difficult to take advantage of with blasters. For example, the Vindicator. Why do you need a tracking bonus with 90% webs? The Talos is the exception to this because of the nature of its platform: its fast moving and using oversized guns, so that tracking bonus is a tremendous help. Honestly I don't think there's an easy tweak for this, but my list would be: 1. Sig radius reduction on Gallente ships. 2. Increase medium sized weapons to sig radius/explosive radius of 140. 3. A way to use Mid slots for armor ships to sacrifice tackle/eWAR for speed yet make it undesirable for current nano-fleets (say a mod that reduces plate mass modifier) 4. Increase Warp-To Range to 200km to give railgun battleships a specialized range. 5. Give Hybrids a more unique ammo choice by not changing damage, but changing the Rate of Fire. So instead of +40% range ammo doing say 60% less damage, it would cycle whatever percentage slower to equal about the same DPS and still hit just as hard. Thus it gives railguns some alpha choices at longer range ( I REALLY LIKE THIS IDEA). I had to bold number 5 because I really really like the sound of that.
thoth rothschild First Aid Emergency Service 67	Posted - 2012.01.08 00:12:00 - [1612] - Quote 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
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 45	Posted - 2012.01.08 00:40:00 - [1613] - Quote 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.
Archare SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t 69	Posted - 2012.01.08 04:54:00 - [1614] - 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
Laurence Pinkitin Aliastra Gallente Federation 5	Posted - 2012.01.08 07:42:00 - [1615] - Quote Morgan North wrote: Rails should deal Alpha. Thats what they are there for. DPS should be Artilery/Autocannons/Blasters. Thats pretty much how you balance the things and make them viable. the thing is its up to CCP to decide whether high alpha is good for teh game or not. Once they decide that they can start balancing long range guns. If they want high alpha then they need to increase railguns and beams alpha(no idea how good beams alpha is admittedly). Artillery, Railguns and Beams should all have comparable dps and alpha imo. Obviously the one with the least range has the highest and vise versa. As it stands now the difference it too great.
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 45	Posted - 2012.01.08 10:51:00 - [1616] - Quote Archare wrote: 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. Figures Good, your figures and mine match. Not sure what figures Thoth was looking at. So the point remains, this makes large blasters workable, medium T2s almost there if there's a slight tweak, and every other blaster other than T2 (including faction) still pretty crappy. I suggest that T1 ammo also requires adjustment if this isn't what you're aiming to achieve. Perhaps alter T1 ammo bonuses to affect both optimal and falloff and alter the numbers to make it work. Null will still enjoy the advantage of damage superior to everything longer range than lead.
tEcHnOkRaT Aliastra Gallente Federation 19	Posted - 2012.01.08 13:01:00 - [1617] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: tEcHnOkRaT wrote: Morgan North wrote: Rails should deal Alpha. Thats what they are there for. DPS should be Artilery/Autocannons/Blasters. Thats pretty much how you balance the things and make them viable. thumbs up reduce the artilary alpha and give it to railguns yeah if game was new ill say the same but imho too late for that change it is never too late projektiles where crap before 2007 now they are overpowered what does it tell u ??
Hamox The Scope Gallente Federation 24	Posted - 2012.01.08 13:37:00 - [1618] - Quote tEcHnOkRaT wrote: projektiles where crap before 2007 now they are overpowered what does it tell u ?? That Hybrids will be overpowered 2017?
tEcHnOkRaT Aliastra Gallente Federation 19	Posted - 2012.01.08 15:47:00 - [1619] - Quote Hamox wrote: tEcHnOkRaT wrote: projektiles where crap before 2007 now they are overpowered what does it tell u ?? That Hybrids will be overpowered 2017? i was hoping to say that huge changes can be made any time in mmos. and i dont wont hybrids to be overpowered just equal with less then 5% diference in performance compared to other guns. thats balance what we have now are huge jumps between them
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 45	Posted - 2012.01.08 17:29:00 - [1620] - Quote tEcHnOkRaT wrote: Hamox wrote: tEcHnOkRaT wrote: projektiles where crap before 2007 now they are overpowered what does it tell u ?? That Hybrids will be overpowered 2017? i was hoping to say that huge changes can be made any time in mmos. and i dont wont hybrids to be overpowered just equal with less then 5% diference in performance compared to other guns. thats balance what we have now are huge jumps between them I prefer balance to be that all weapon systems have something unique but equally desirable according to circumstances AND every ship in a given class should have an option to be able to defend itself. Being able to pin someone at a range (outside of specialist ships for the purpose) whilst able to shoot them and not be shot in return is the major imbalance for blasters. Rails have no unique desirable feature.

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.