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) |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
162
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest. |
|
To mare
Advanced Technology
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
remove the tracking pnalty from void (or the falloff) and they are fine |
Red Teufel
Eternity Inc
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
To mare wrote:remove the tracking pnalty from void (or the falloff) and they are fine
I agree or you better make the void ammo dish out way more damage to make it worth getting 2km from your target. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
257
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Every Caldari hybrid ship needs a look. (more drones, more speed)
Every Gallente ship with an active tanking bonus needs a change also (though not necessarily the tanking bonus) Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
please remove speed penalties from armor rigs, or just make Gall ships shield-tankers. |
Desiderya
Tirokkunone
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Give the optimal range bonus on caldari hulls a rethink, such as adding a 5 or 10% falloff bonus on top of it. Given the nature of hybrid ammo ( high damage, optimal debuff) and blaster turrets ( almost equal optimal and falloff ) the inherent range advantage shrinks to a basically unnoticable distance.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:03:00 -
[7] - Quote
Desiderya wrote:Give the optimal range bonus on caldari hulls a rethink, such as adding a 5 or 10% falloff bonus on top of it. Given the nature of hybrid ammo ( high damage, optimal debuff) and blaster turrets ( almost equal optimal and falloff ) the inherent range advantage shrinks to a basically unnoticable distance.
because there's no way a blaster boat can get into range before getting shredded by AC's or pulses. we're back at square one really.
rails need more damage and tracking as well. (or fix the ship bonuses) |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tallest, the problems of blasters are that the small blasters are fine and were even not too bad before these proposed changes, but that medium and large blasters need more damage to compensate for their lack of tank and speed. In stead of changing the blaster s again, why not add some range to null and some damage to medium and large antimatter ammo.
The Deimos, Brutix and Thorax all suffer compared to their Minmatar cousins (somehow no one is noticing that Amarr cruisers are even worse off, except for the Arbitrator and Zealot)
Medium Antimatter: 10% extra damage Medium Null: 10% extra falloff
Large Antimatter: 5% extra damage Large Null: 5% extra falloff |
Harotak
Malicious Destruction War Against the Manifest
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Additional changes I want;
Small Blasters +5% DMG Medium Blasters + 15% DMG Large Blasters +10% DMG
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
49
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
Harotak wrote:Additional changes I want;
Small Blasters +5% DMG Medium Blasters + 15% DMG Large Blasters +10% DMG
pointless. need range through ship bonuses or a huge Null buff. |
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102
Some other things: - The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres.
A few things about ammo: - Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters. - Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo. - Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20. |
Harotak
Malicious Destruction War Against the Manifest
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Harotak wrote:Additional changes I want;
Small Blasters +5% DMG Medium Blasters + 15% DMG Large Blasters +10% DMG
pointless. need range through ship bonuses or a huge Null buff.
Change Null, Barrage, and Scorch to +50% optimal and falloff. |
Cunane Jeran
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:08:00 -
[13] - Quote
Fitting wise, they are a dream. Excellent work
Rails are great, when used in conjunction with tracking mods Blasters are fine, but a little extra damage would go amiss
For those saying change it to shield, Do you really want to have to try getting a Booster/MWD/Tackle/Tank on 6 slots. Please think about it. Armour works damn well. Maybe a little more speed would be nice, but it's definitely the way forwards |
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy Spreadsheets Online
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
I like the changes so far for hybrids but still lacks that 1 special sauce. If I'm flying with lazors i'm almost certainly using scorch. Scorch rocks. If I'm flying with projectiles im flying with barrage. If im flying with torps, with the new buffs, I'm flying with rage torps.
Null or void just isn't really that special.
-5 second reload time could be a small differentiation. Could even make this a skill. 1second per level.. considering how rapid firing level 4 or 5 is for projetiles only.
-Null be nerfed for a short range, very high tracking would make the orbit @ 500 strats that much better.
-void penalties make it only usable on the 90% web ships. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
49
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:39:00 -
[15] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102Some other things: - The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres. A few things about ammo: - Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters. - Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo. - Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20.
i wholeheartedly support this. Tallest, you guys could resolve a LOT of issues by buffing hybrid ammo in this way. take this guy's suggestions into account. honestly, i think it's the best idea on these forums right now. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 17:03:00 -
[16] - Quote
I'm going to take this opportunity to quote myself from the other thread.
Kiev Duran wrote:While most people see these changes as a Gallente boost, let's not forget that Caldari use hybrids and could use a little love too.
The role that CCP seems to have envisioned for Caldari ships does not exist.
The Caldari, based on most ship bonuses, are put into the "medium damage from extreme range" role. A role that no longer truly exists on any level of play. This does not just affect railguns, but missiles also. However, I'll focus on hybrids as they are the focus of of this thread and devblog.
Extreme ranges are usually considered 150 - 250 km out, and the Caldari have several ships that can, in theory, reach out and touch someone from those ranges. The real question is why would you want to do this. Considering the simple facts that not everyone flies or enjoys flying Caldari means that several people in any sufficiently large fleet will not be able to shoot from more than about 100 - 120 km. The fleet's optimal range is only as long as the member with the shortest optimal range. This means that any Caldari pilots will be forced to fit for shooting at literally half of their optimals. This means that Caldari could potentially choose a new ammo so that he'd do more damage, but in many cases this can actually lead to a damage reduction or an insignificant increase in DPS (if not using faction ammo) as spike does do significant damage for it's range bonus. Furthermore, at any ranges exceeding the warp range, it is no trouble at all for a covert ops to place himself where the enemy fleet can simply warp to their optimals. With the changes to scanning, this can take any organized fleet as few as about 12 to 13 seconds.
In smaller scale and solo stuff long range just doesn't work because of the range of warp disruptors and scramblers.
The extreme range role simply doesn't (and perhaps cannot) exist |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 17:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
i can still scan someone down in 8 seconds snippings is still useless... change the optimal range bonus for a fate of fire bonus ...
its great that blasters have good dps but thats not enough to warrent using them at such a low range limitagions we needs a massive alpha boost to make them worht while...
the tanking bonus on gal ships needs to either boosteed or changed to a armour amount per lev... that way you wont have to fit trimarks or 1600's if you want to be fast and have an armor tank.
the mrym needs 100mn band withdth to be usefull 3 heavy drones is not enough for a bc...
change the trimakrs to agility nerf from speed...
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:please remove speed penalties from armor rigs, or just make Gall ships shield-tankers.
Disagree. Make the sped changes directly to the Gallente ships. If you do it to rigs then you just make the other races (mostly ammar even more badass to fly. An armor tanked cane with its tiny sig radius and full speed would be absolutely devastating.) |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:06:00 -
[19] - Quote
The idea of messing with rigs seems like a poor idea. It affects too many aspects of the game and in the end will only make the other platforms that much better over the hybrid boats, particularly if Amarr gets a speed bonus from changes to armor rigs and the shield tanked Minmatar boats don't get a sig radius increase from shield rigs, because they already enjoy a very low sig radius to start with. Messing with rigs just impacts so many other aspects of ship designs of all the races. The changes need to be Gallente boats specifically. Caldari long range rails I think is simpler to deal with directly to the rail gun stats.
I think the most succinct argument to date is that there is just no good reason to fly Gallente boats. Whether you are talking solo/small groups or in bigger fleets. They tend to be more expensive and every time you go into a fight, you are committed 100%. All the other races can fight aligned or kite out of damage and warp. Even fighting within single point range is viable and can be exited from with MWD. Gallente fight inside scram/web/neut range. The cost/benefit just isn't there. In the POP,POP, POP of fleet fights its often very frustrating for a Gallente pilot to try and get into range of primary as targets change. Right as you get there, primary goes pop and now new primary is far away again. Even with frigate tackler support most Hurricanes have such high tracking that if frigs try to tackle with a scram on, they die. But scram is what is need to slow the immense speed of these ships.
There has to be a reason to fly Gallente over other options. Currently there are none, except maybe the Arazu.
SPEED/AGILITY arguments: These boats need both but I think agility cannot be overlooked or nerfed. The speed required to catch a kiting target is ridiculously high and only viable for small ships. We don't have to be faster than Minmatar, but we need a bit more than now. Tactics and using a cloaky or a inty is key to this effort. But even if you can land at zero on a kiter, by the time you align, approach, target and try to apply scram/web, they are out of range. So the ability to quickly achieve speed is key for any hope of catching targets. This also applies to orbiting w/ speed in a fight and the ability to rapidly change direction in fleet fights as different targets are called. And we must do this as we lack weapon range to be effective otherwise. CCP is on the right track with increasing this directly to Gallente ships, they just need a larger increase directly applied to overcome the rig penalties a bit. Removing rig penalties or changing them only then make the other races more appealing.
The SECOND BONUS: Any Gallente ship that has the horrible 7.5 armor repair bonus(and the stupid Thorax's MWD cap bonus) should have that replaced with something that assists with controlling range in a fight. My recommendation would be for some, like the Brutix to have a significant range bonus to SCRAMs only. Some should have a bonus to WEB velocity factor or WEB range. This would make them much more capable of achieving a lock down when warping in on someone. Catching a kiter is rarely viable in a pure speed race. That requires good use of cloaky's and inty's.
Tank: Fine, Gallente should be shield tanked to be a close in brawlers w/speed, but they are not. Even some ships that will attempt shield tanking like the Myrm and Hyperion just aren't as effective since their sig radius are already big, and when shield tanked the Myrm is almost Battleship size. A fully shield tanked cane is roughly the same sig radius as a armor tanked Mrym. CCP will not support 3 shield tanked races. So the tank needs to be impressive on a brawling, close in fighter that has to commit 100% every time to every fight. Half the reason why people don't fly gallente is that they get tired of being killed because they have to commit every time to do so. Can't warp of like every one else. So do a slight plug of the Explosive hole in every Gallente ship to help increase tank. Maybe 20% to T1 hulls, higher in others.
HYBRIDS: Ok, Blasters. They have the worst aspects of lasers and projectiles and none of the benefits. 1) Since they will deal with the highest transversal (closest to the center of the orbit circle), they should have the highest tracking. This needs serious boost since low slots on armor tanks have to be dedicated to armor unlike the shield tanked Minmatar boats. 2) Instant ammo changes to help control application of DPS in the high stress/quick decision cycle of close in fighting. 3) Much lower CAP usage as we fight in Neut territory. I'd say remove all together frankly. Or give a utility high slot to every Gallente boat for a vampire perhaps. (which some have, and probably boost performance of vampires in general) 4) Increase damage by 30%. Make them dominate the close in fight and give people a reason to commit to the fight and probably still lose their ship. 5) Increase range by just a bit of optimal. Not crazy but on some of these its damn near seems like zero. Just perhaps 10% to optimal. 6) Get rid of void's tracking/cap penalty. If you can get this close, you deserve to **** your target. DRONES: Add a Scram drone. That would help with catching kiters. They still have a chance to blow up the drones before you catch them. I would think that with 3 light scram drones applying effects, that should be enough to shut down the MWD. the other 2 are buffer or even web drones. Some of the Gallente Drone boats need some love. A bit of bandwidth would help some for the Mrym for sure.
So that's my piece of advice that will absolutely get ignored and probably trolled. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:33:00 -
[20] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Make them dominate the close in fight and give people a reason to commit to the fight and probably still lose their ship.
I agree with every point of the above post. Gallente used to be the Lord Nelson "Go straight at 'em" style of ship. Now... well. No one flies most of their ships because Speed nerfs, Agility Nerfs, Armor rig nerfs, Laser and projectile buffs have all made Blaster boats completely obsolete.
I would actually encourage an even larger damage boost. To 40 percent.
|
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:43:00 -
[21] - Quote
Harotak wrote:Additional changes I want;
Small Blasters +5% DMG Medium Blasters + 15% DMG Large Blasters +10% DMG
At least this is needed. Hybrid ammo changes would help as well. |
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:43:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:please remove speed penalties from armor rigs, or just make Gall ships shield-tankers. Disagree. Make the speed changes directly to the Gallente ships. If you do it to rigs then you just make the other races (mostly ammar even more badass to fly. An armor tanked cane with its tiny sig radius and full speed would be absolutely devastating.)
Agree with this. Leave rigs alone. Just finished some testing. Couldn't really see any difference that make me overcome my complete happiness with what I already fly (Amarr and Minmatar). Gallente buffs simply meh. I need to go see how a hurricane will do with the new Hail. I haven't checked to see yet if that change has been applied. |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
blaster boats need more mobility or features like web range bonus on every boat. (no joking) or blasters should have much more dps to be able to kill kiting boats even if they (blaster boats) got into their optimal after some time.
because now even if blaster boat pilot is skilled enough to get into close range to his opponent - its already too late, too much damage taken and blasters dps cant compensate time spent on getting into scramrange.
moving gallente to shield tank is also a go. boss n i g g e r |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
thanks for another Minnie buff CCP. i guess? cuz thats what we needed. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:32:00 -
[25] - Quote
Raimo wrote:Harotak wrote:Additional changes I want;
Small Blasters +5% DMG Medium Blasters + 15% DMG Large Blasters +10% DMG
At least this is needed. Hybrid ammo changes would help as well.
or how about 10% across the board but to achieve this do a 50% increase to base damage a 30% reduction in rate of fire...
that way you get a nice alpha boost tooboot! and only shoot 1-1.5 seconds slower...
|
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:53:00 -
[26] - Quote
while I think it's interesting to push for more hybrid ammo buffage, i also think that many people in this thread are thinking about this the wrong way.
there's a certain point at which we need to agree that we want ship diversity, and that hybrids should be balanced to do something particular, and do it will, rather than to just demand that they be able to do what other guns can. So, I actually disagree that range is what we need, we need damage, tracking and ease of fitting on blasters, and give up on the idea of their being useable in fleets. Make them hard to get in range, but epic in dps, for smaller fights, and then just buff rail tracking/dps until they can pick up the slack and cover medium ranges. web bonuses give me a boner.
similarly, we do need to figure out cladari hybrid platforms, and what can be done with them that keeps them substantively different from gellente hybrid platforms, because until caldari hybrid platforms have dronebays and damage bonuses they will always be worse at the whole "Antimatter slugger" thing then gal. so what do we want them to do? be the same? and if not, then what? design them from the ground up as railgun ships? well, that's what we already have. design them to be epic when using null? well, there's a cool idea.
finally, i'm not certain that I want to see the active armor rep bonus go. sorry, everyone. i love a triple rep hyperion. i love double rep and triple rep myrmidon. and i think that anyone who advocates those bonuses being applied to incoming RR are complete imbeciles. While some of those ships may need buffs, whether it be more agility or better hybrids or better base shield HP or resists or better armor resists or armor reps getting their HP at the beginning of the cycle or WHATEVER, but I don't think we should give up on that bonus.
ps i saw someone in this thread make a comment about amarr being overshadowed/outperformed by minmatar. never say that amarr pilots have it rough. we don't. amarr are in no need of buffing as a shipline (although i will admit that legion bites) because lasers are totally epic and we have no shortage of drones or utility highs or low slots or armor resist bonuses or neut bonuses. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:58:00 -
[27] - Quote
I'm crossposting this even though it's technically off topic... However very relevant even to the interests of this very thread:
If you want to appear as a "new" improved and caring CCP, I strongly suggest seeding the common faction ammos on SISI right about now. Asking us to test things and even test balance on SISI and *still* neglecting to provide the most used on TQ PVP ammo is so "old" (*AWESOME*) CCP. It cannot be that hard, can it? |
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:00:00 -
[28] - Quote
Raimo wrote:I'm crossposting this even though it's technically off topic... However very relevant even to the interests of this very thread:
If you want to appear as a "new" improved and caring CCP, I strongly suggest seeding the common faction ammos on SISI right about now. Asking us to test things and even test balance on SISI and *still* neglecting to provide the most used on TQ PVP ammo is so "old" (*AWESOME*) CCP. It cannot be that hard, can it?
+1billion |
Kyoko Sakoda
Veto. Veto Corp
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:15:00 -
[29] - Quote
There is still a little too much cap use. A Rokh with 8x 425mm Railgun IIs and 2x Power Diagnostic System IIs still has some issues maintaining capacitor. I of course think that if the ship is capped out, it shouldn't be able to fire, but it should be able to sustain fire on its own. |
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:26:00 -
[30] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Every Gallente ship with an active tanking bonus needs a change also (though not necessarily the tanking bonus) Active tanking in general needs looks at. Changing the rep bonus to
Quote:7.5% bonus to armor repair amount of armor repair systems and remote repair received per level. might be a start. Changing the penalty for active armour rigs (and only active rigs, not Trimarks) to something else might help; pg/cpu/cap use of reps, agility maybe. I get that you're supposed to be trading off speed tank for other types of tank, but losing range control at the same time is a killer. Maybe a sig radius penalty...?
I'm not fond of the shield tanking solution. It'd require reworking the slot layouts of most of the Gallente lineup, and would screw over any Gallente pilot who hasn't cross-specced into armour. I think we should at least try to make the current paradigm work before we burn it down and start over.
I don't want to EFT warrior, so I'm not going to comment on the changes so far until I've actually tested them... but I do think a (small) DPS buff to blasters or a nerf to ACs (and maybe pulses at short range) might be warranted. Something to give the greens a real edge in point blank damage output. |
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:41:00 -
[31] - Quote
Performance issues aside, Why do Hybrids have no inert advantages like missiles, lasers, and projectiles have?
MIssiles: no cap, pick damage type Lasers: insta load ammo, pick ammo range and actually use it because of instant loading ammo. Projectiles: no Cap, can pick damage type, can pick ammo range (to an extent, has load time)
Hybrids: can pick range but cant take advantage because of 10 second load time. But they also use cap, stuck to therm, kin damage, and extremely short range. all this for an extra 17% damage over lasers and 27% over projectiles (but only up to 10km..)
Really Hybrids need an inert advantage, then they need all the other stuff. |
Shanlara
IDDQD Industry
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:45:00 -
[32] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:So that's my piece of advice that will absolutely get ignored and probably trolled.
We better not let that happen, ccp please take a look a this guys contribution, he points out all the good points, that really need to be taken a look at, fixing hybrids will be a bigger work then just fixing afew stats here and there, they been left alone for so long that it'll take a bit of work getting them back on track now. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:03:00 -
[33] - Quote
Also having an offensive weapon system using cap combined with ship bonuses that give advantages to active tanking seems odd. Perhaps change the 7.5% armor rep amount to a 5% armor hp amount per level which at level 5 would be equal to about 3 trimarks (give or take). This would allow Gallente to use DPS rigs instead of trimarks so we are not gimping our speed for tank and we can get the DPS boost we want.
Also would love to see a 50% boost to damage and 30% reduction in RoF like others have suggested giving a 10% overall boost to DPS but also would slightly lower cap use as well.
|
Holy Cheater
Monks of War DarkSide.
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest. No offense, but in my opinion you got it all wrong.
The proposed changes won't do much good for blaster boats. They do not have significant difference in speed or damage. But they do lack firing range. How do one supposed to get in range of blasters to make some damage before destruction?
Okay, blasters are very short range weapons, blaster boats risk themselves by getting in this range. But is it worth the risk? It takes time while you catching someone and there's a chance you won't catch anybody. And if you do - you make damage which can't be exactly described as devastating.
And now compare it to the minmatar autocannon boats. You choose the damage type, you make some distance between you and your target, you can outrun your enemies.
Also, armor tanking and blasters do not fit for each other. It takes precious slots for damage mods, it further reduces your speed making it harder to make the damage which is not worth the risk. Take an autocannon-boat, you wouldn't risk a thing and still kill your target.
So blaster boats needs something which would make them worth of flying. Whether the change would be increasing damage/shipspeed, increasing firing range, changing tanktype from armor to shield or even maybe make some unique properties which would allow them to escape their enemies from short range distances - the change is needed. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:18:00 -
[35] - Quote
In test server
8x 425 mm Railgun II 4x Mag Stab Javelin L - DPS = 689 Optimal- 27 KM / Falloff-28.8 KM / Tracking-0.015
CN Animatar L - DPS = 679 Optimal- 54 KM / Falloff-28.8 KM / Tracking-0.012
Defence 111k EHP (2x Large Shield Extd, 2x Invul t2, 1x DC, 3x Core Def Shield Extend 1)
DPS wise this is fail. BCs can do better damage.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:22:00 -
[36] - Quote
Hello Tallest,
As you canGÇÖt yet tinker with ships/bonuses a'la 'Gallente MkII' () IGÇÖll be a succinct as possible with thoughts regarding blasters:
1.Try iterating the tracking boost between values 20 % and 50% while nerfing the tracking on Null correspondingly.
2.Iterate the overload bonus from 15% to values between 30-50% (30% represents parity with an overloaded armour repairer).
3.Reduced fitting has slightly helped in opening up a couple more possible fits.
4.Cap usage GÇô cap injectors still mandatory on the larger boats, but this does help the die-most and Thorax. Has nicely balanced out the cap usage on the Moros meaning you can actually take advantage of that ROF bonus.
5.Agility/speed changes are somewhat noticeable; 2 MWD cycles to get up to -+ speed in my Megathron, albeit still far slower than back in its prime. War-Machine |
Narjack
CragCO
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:41:00 -
[37] - Quote
Well, lets see, Yes Tallest they are better. But nothing really game changing. Don't see anything here that would even come close to enticing me really focus on these guns vice the other options out there. 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. Which frankly is fine by me. I enjoy seeing Gallente ships die. I'm just fine with missiles. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:50:00 -
[38] - Quote
Much of what Mariner6 said earlier i do approve of.
Gallente Blaster boats commit 100% so yes they fight in scram/web/neut range. Because of this Gallente Blaster boats need to be made of sturdier stuff than they are now. Boost armor RESISTS! not HP amount as that will affect performance. The Drake is a tech1 BC yet it has 5% to all Shield resists per lvl. Apply some of the same thoughts to gallente boats.
Also im unsure of this but i believe gallente ships should have either a buff to cap capacity or a buff to cap regen to make them more resilient in neut range compared to other platforms. Making hybrids less cap intensive is a buff to all ships that want to use hybrids. Gallente ships should be built to withstand the cap intensive nature of hybrids a LOT more than other ships!
Also T2 Hybrid ammos need more love as been said previously! Hail defintiely needs a 50% to optimal and falloff. Void still needs a damage bonus more than it has so far.
in general Gallente's secondary bonuses should be considered to be web range if anything, for example 10% per lvl to range, NOT to velocity factor! even with a domination web ur not getting to max t2 point range and ur not encroaching on rapiers range territory. Yet it WILL actually bring some level of catch it kill it to gallente design. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 22:04:00 -
[39] - Quote
New hybrid changes are great - still got more to work on though...
Rigs?
Hybrid guns?
- Proposed alterations sounds good, however I would make sure the new fittings doesn't lead to extinction of smaller tier hybrids. Perhaps make sure the tracking beats the bigger tiers a lot to make them attractive. Low tier guns have been neglected for like forever..
Hybrid ammo
- Nobody will ever change ammo in pvp more than once with the current often useless hybrid ammo. Consider dropping hybrid reload time from 10 to 5 secs and people might consider it.
- Change attributes on ammo to have 1 short range, 1 mid range and 1 long range. Each having 3 variants of damage distribution (20/80, 50/50 and 80/20 therm/kinetic - maybe change 50/50 to include 3rd damage type if it doesn't break anything)
- Forget penalties for T2 ammo.
- Reduce charge size plz...
Ship stats
- Give the Gallente blaster ships a signature buff on top of the other changes. Taking longer for others to lock them up they should have a few more seconds to catch targets, a few more seconds without taking damage and they should be able to avoid more dps at least from bigger weapons. Thisalong with the changes should be more than enough to compete with Minmawinners.
Ship bonus
- The hybrid buff alone will never make ships like the Moa, Ferox and Rokh work well. Explanations are many but in short pvp today makes it very, very difficult to obtain any advantage from having an optimal bonus. Even making it a optimal+fall-off bonus won't cut it. The shield based hybrid ships need an extra medslot (for a hi/lowslot) making them able to either tank longer as compensation to their missing damage bonus or using tracking computers or webifiers to avoid getting roflstomped completely by anything solo, in groups or in fleets.
It is my sincere opinion that Hybrid ships need more medslots than a missile ship of the same class to work effeciently and it might be exactly what it takes to get Railguns back in fleets while making the Ferox and Moa work for PvP without gimping their tanks while they do less dps from the start...
Pinky |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 22:22:00 -
[40] - Quote
1) TY for reducing the charge size \0/ 80 large void per gun is nice. 2) maybe reduce the reload time to 5 secs(or none at all)? 3) maybe buff the damage on void & null slightly(yes, I know it has been, but blasters should do epic short range damage hello)
Off topic regarding the Talos----> maybe decrease the cpu requirement slightly.
My sisi initial Talos fit :8 large T2 neutrons, 2 T2 Webs, 1 meta 4 mwd, 1 TC2, 1 DC2, 2 T2 EANMs, 1 1600mm plate, 1 Reactive plating left me with just 1 cpu left \0/ nice and tight! :) |
|
Spartan dax
0utbreak Outbreak.
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 23:51:00 -
[41] - Quote
Regarding Rails. Atm They're just Beams light with no real GameGäó application. Beams do way more dps with short range ammo and ties or surpasses them at 100-120k which would be a range where you'd expect Rails to surpass their beam equivalents. The tracking argument is kinda moot as Beams can switch instantly to high tracking ammo. Combine this with the scripted Tracking computers and you'll end up in a situation where beams always outdps or outracks their Railgun counterparts.
The Fix. (which will work for blasters as well)
Non range related damage ammo. IE Antimatter has the same damage as Iron. We give Antimatter the 1.2 tracking modifier instead of boosting blaster tracking by 20% and work our way downwards as we go further out in range. All of a sudden we have Railships with anemic shortramge damage compared to beams but vastly improved dps at range.
Also have a look at tracking computers, they've been unneccesarily nerfed with the scripts. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 23:56:00 -
[42] - Quote
I am flying the ROKH with blasters and rails in the test server testing on different fits and engaging different battleships (mostly MACHs and Nightmares) After losing about 15 ships (in test server) I made following observations.
1) ROKH with Rails: I tried to keep range with my MWD (1 Cycle) used Javelin L with T2 425MM) *I lost a lot of cap so I had to shut down my MWD and I got caught up. There after the opponent scrammed me with a faction scram (15km) and orbit me at 15 km with 225m/s speed. I could not break away. Opp was hitting me for 1000 - 1800HP and I was hitting for 200-800HP. My med slot had 4tank mods, 1 MWD and 1 Sebo.
Final conclusion: For PvP I will never use Rails.
2) Rokh with Blasters: I used various fits. Med slot distribution was 4 tank mods, 1 web and 1 Prop. I failed massively where my prop mod was MWD. My biggest problem was when I was chasing the Opp with MWD ON, I was getting neuted. Few occasions my gun shut down because I could not break away sooner. Blaster damage was between 1000-2000HP per volley. I tried overloading MWD but to reach full speed it would take about 20 secs+. By that time my cap would be less than half.
3) Finally I tried the following fit.
Rokh=New Brawler rig slot 0 type=Large Hybrid Ambit Extension I rig slot 1 type=Large Hybrid Ambit Extension I rig slot 2 type=Large Core Defence Field Extender I med slot 0 type=Stasis Webifier II med slot 1 type=Large Shield Extender II med slot 2 type=Large Shield Extender II med slot 3 type=Invulnerability Field II med slot 4 type=Invulnerability Field II med slot 5 type=100MN Afterburner II low slot 0 type=Magnetic Field Stabilizer II low slot 1 type=Magnetic Field Stabilizer II low slot 2 type=Magnetic Field Stabilizer II low slot 3 type=Tracking Enhancer II low slot 4 type=Damage Control II hi slot 0 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 1 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 2 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 3 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 4 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 5 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 6 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II hi slot 7 type=Neutron Blaster Cannon II qty=4 slot=drone bay type=Warrior II qty=1 slot=drone bay type=Berserker TP-900 AMMO CN Antimatar and NULL I constantly chased the Opp with AB on. My rigs + Ship Bonus + 1x TE gave me 7.76 KM optimal and 19KM Falloff. My volley was between 1250 to 2200HP. The drone gave me an advantage by extra webbing. The Opp just MWDed to 50 KM and killed the drones with his gun and warped out. The Opp was in a Mach. In the above fit I observed that while I was unsettling Opp's orbit range I was not able to catch it. I have to lose a tank mod fit a scram and shut down Opp's MWD. Even if I would web the Opp, it could easily wriggle out of heated range of 13km.
My gun range was my biggest problem. At 17KM + the volley damage would fall drastically to 200-600HP even if we are flying in one straight line.
Final conclusion: A fitted ROKH would cost me 220Mill ISK. Losing it in a battle would be 90% probability. So I will never bring it to a battle. I have already trained Amarr Cruiser LvL 5 and Logi 5. I will happly fly a gaurdian supporting a Abbadon fleet that is at least twice better in value than the ROKH.
|
Demon Azrakel
Defiant.. Narwhals Ate My Duck
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 00:06:00 -
[43] - Quote
The Dread Blaster Changes were unnecessary. The whole balancing factor for that huge DPS buff was going to be the capacitor usage. Now, the Moros is actually somewhat OP. Dread Rails may actually need a nerf to bring them into line with other weapons. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 00:25:00 -
[44] - Quote
Just took a Deimos out for spin without plate and armour was about 1740m/s with 2450m/s overheat speed. Fitting Neutrons still seems really tight and I have max fitting skills I always thought that I would still need an ACR with a repper in the lows but still cannot T2 the microwarpdrive, just need a tiny amount more grid.
Was the full 12% reduction applied?
Cap life looks a lot better now.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 00:52:00 -
[45] - Quote
I'm telling you the shield tanking hybrid ships (Moa, Ferox, Rokh) need an extra medslot to make the optimal bonus work... |
Kietay Ayari
Monopoly Money Operations
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 00:56:00 -
[46] - Quote
D: Range bonus on a weapon system that can already not take advantage of it's range. If one thing changes please give Caldari hybrid platforms a different bonus than range :D Ferox #1 |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 01:30:00 -
[47] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:I am flying the ROKH with blasters and rails in the test server testing on different fits and engaging different battleships (mostly MACHs and Nightmares) After losing about 15 ships (in test server) I made following observations. ....
I see where the problem is. |
Tantabobo
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 01:42:00 -
[48] - Quote
While I agree that blasters/gallente ships could use a buff. Please don't remove the flavor of the gallente ships. The armor repair bonus on them is awesome in many situations (especially solo pvp). |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 03:08:00 -
[49] - Quote
Tallest, may I suggest that you tweak Tracking Computers or consider the introduction of a Federation Navy Tracking Enhancer that specifically caters to Blasters? |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
101
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 03:12:00 -
[50] - Quote
Tantabobo wrote:While I agree that blasters/gallente ships could use a buff. Please don't remove the flavor of the gallente ships. The armor repair bonus on them is awesome in many situations (especially solo pvp).
you dont have to get rid of it all you have to do is make it so it affects incomming RR... that way the bonus is usefull for fleet warfare... |
|
Kale Eledar
Mining and Industrial Services The Irukandji
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 03:46:00 -
[51] - Quote
I'm in favor of a more drastic boost to dps. I think that there's nothing wrong with Blasters outperforming EVERY. OTHER. TURRET. TYPE. at their range, which is extremely close. I'd say up to a 50% buff of damage would make blasters match their in game description.
That being said, I'm sure it's a dumb idea, but: How about a module that acts like a tractor beam on ships, pulling them into blaster range? It would have to be cap heavy or have a large drawback in order to not make it OP. Unfortunately, things that affect other ships like that seem to lean more towards a specialized, T2 role or module.
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
257
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 04:04:00 -
[52] - Quote
Some thoughts from 6 hours on the test server today...
Blasters: Increase the tracking boost from 20% to between 40% and 50%. Increase the drone bay of all blaster orientated ships by 25m3 including the Talos. Why? Surviviblity through utility drones will improve the risk vs reward ratio most pilots asses when choosing a tool for the job.
Rails: Javelin should be the only t2 ammo with a tracking increase (again, it should be 40% at current optimal, or 20% at antimatter optimal with increased cap usage) VERY IMPORTANT! - Quake needs to be changed so that it has -30-50% fall off. The current tornado has 125km fall off with Quake, combined with a 25% tracking speed is nuts! I've said this before and I'll say it again... T2 ammo should accentuate the differences between the races, instead of homogenising them. - Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off. - Gleam - Increases damage - 15% more damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking and 33% less optimal range. - Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 50% increased capacitor usage.
For the benefit of Rails, I still recommend increasing the base damage of of spike by 25% - Why? Rails should = high dps, and high range. As it stands, tachyons out damage rails at almost all ranges when a damage bonus is applied. Not good enough.
Eos and Astarte should switch roles.
Myrmidon should lose turrets, grid , again drones, be less like the vexor, and more like the really fun ship people flew back when gallente was still cool....
Hyperion should be completely re-tasked. Even mission runners don't make use of it's tanking bonus. New slots, new bonuses (ewar boat perhaps to deal with the new BC's?) - I personally think the megathron with the current changes (mostly power grid increases) and speed, is fine, although a little extra speed via rig penalty change wouldn't go amiss)
Deimos probably either needs to be a nano boat, ehp brick or have a substancial DPS increase - the fundamental problem with it is survivability, HAC's are too expensive to be risked for so little gain in those point blank situations.
The Talos needs drones, extra CPU for most rail fits. It's also currently un-usable with blasters. (mostly due to it's the speed/ehp coefficient) and it's tenancy to be two volleyed by Tornados... Using quake.
Could you maybe decrease the powergrid usage of medium and large electron blasters and lower tier rails by another 5% please? Would make various fits (ishtar, Phobos, Proteus, Deimos, thorax, talos, domi) that currently use autocannons not need to use autocannons any more. Alternatively, could you look at a 5% PG increase on those ships?
The moros is very much OP in it's current config. Best dread at every range, due to the way the fall off mechanic works.
Tomorrow i'll be looking more at the Caldari side of things although I don't really think much has changed. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Kale Eledar
Mining and Industrial Services The Irukandji
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 04:15:00 -
[53] - Quote
Interesting ideas, but I'd love to keep the Hyperion as a dedicated blaster boat.
Only one that isn't an odd bird that everyone hates flying because it's bad at what it's supposed to be good at. |
Anikan Fernardo
CAPTAIN BLACKS ORE BRAGADE
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 05:59:00 -
[54] - Quote
I'm going to agree with the people saying " Lower ROF and then increase Damage ". It solves several problems at once, chiefly, having to carry tons of ammo wasting valuable space that could be used for cap boosters, as well as lowering the need of said cap boosters since we aren't chucking all of our cap at the enemy with our insane ROF. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
287
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 06:09:00 -
[55] - Quote
As I have said before 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. |
Party Lips
Blackened Skies
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 06:39:00 -
[56] - Quote
blasters need more dps.
what are rail guns for again? |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
164
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 07:06:00 -
[57] - Quote
Have you ever thought about just having a racial fitting bonus system?
Like every minmatar ship gets 25% less pg to fit Speed mods
all gallente ships get 25% less mass from armor rigs?
caladri get 25% less CPU for fitting shield resistance mods
Ammar get 25% less cpu when fitting cap mods? |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
164
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 07:20:00 -
[58] - Quote
Pinky Denmark hit this one the head.
Gallente ships should have a built in obvious advantage when it comes to lock times. Without lowering the sig radius of those ships, since that is minmatars big advantage.
If it took them 25-50% longer to lock, then they would have a much better time getting into range. |
Gilbaron
The Scope Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 07:43:00 -
[59] - Quote
after doing some rough math and a lot of reading on different eve forums:
im not sure if damage is ok now, due to the massive problems of bringing armor tanks to close range you should consider something more: (for blasterships only, im not really sure whether railguns need additional fixing !)
cruiser, battlecruiser and battleships still wont be able to get in range of a moving enemy
consider some of the following (shamelessly stolen from various boards, im not (always) the guy with the idea !)
- reduce minimum range required to enter warp, also reduce cap required to enter warp (based on C/BS/BC skill) - a massive speed bonus to MWDs + a massive gain of mass when using an MWD so only flying in a direct line is possible to intercept orbiting enemys, also reduce the time it needs to turn a ship in a specific direction (inertia modifier ?) - in combination with blasters some gallente ships are able to fit a new kind of MWD which can be activated for a specifc amount of seconds and has a cooldown after each activation, cooldown and cap use based on C/BS/BC skill, also to intercept orbiting ships - consider changing the reload time for blasters, 10 seconds is just to much, 5 might be more suitable due to the small frames in which the available ammo is usefull - a different and interresting approach would be changing the ammo feed: ammo for blasters is given out in ammo belts, the pilot can choose which belt will be emptied next -- 20 shots in blaster, automatic refill from one stack in cargo belt my english sucks so i made a picture to explain better
the promised new EWAR drones could also add some interresting tactical maneuvers, im thinking about web/scrambling drones here |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 08:27:00 -
[60] - Quote
Some more test stuff after extensive testing. Ship - ROKH From a dead stop position to turn and align full speed with AB II on reaching 90% @ 280m/s 45 secs From full aligned to turn and align full speed with AB II on reaching 90% @ 280m/s 49sec From full aligned to turn around warp out 35 secs
I think with a blaster platform, we have to forget about breaking away once we commit. We either win or lose. Chasing is out of question. But with the following fit if I tackled something then it stays tackled. MWD can be shut with a scram therefore AB II may be the choice. Tank 81K EHP. I used following fit, High
8x Neutron II
Med slot
1x Photon II 1x Invul II 2x Statis Web II 1x Scram 1x AB II
Low SLot
3x Mag Stab 1x Tracking II DC II
Rigs
2x Hybrid Metastasis ADjuster I (tracking bonus) 1x Thermal Resist I
Drone
4x Warrior II 1x Berserker (web)
|
|
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 09:17:00 -
[61] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Hyperion should be completely re-tasked. Even mission runners don't make use of it's tanking bonus.
Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I know I do. I love My mission Hype. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 12:28:00 -
[62] - Quote
Autonomous Monster wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Hyperion should be completely re-tasked. Even mission runners don't make use of it's tanking bonus. Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I know I do. I love My mission Hype.
I'm not sure because I don't fly gallente, but I think what Monster meant is that while, ofc, you can find somebody flying just about anything, there are far more efficient ways to spend money for ratting/missioning. IE: You could probably rat decently in a rail rokh or a cruise scorpion, but there are better ships, with similar skill requirements, for that niche. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:26:00 -
[63] - Quote
i was playing around with rails last night and honestly... i like what you have done with javilin... but its not enough...
Rails need a base boost to thier tracking (i am still hopping for at a min 30%)
and they still need about 5% more base damage and increased rate of fire of 15%... reduce the cap activation by another 40% and we should have a weapons platform that can actually do damage and be worth fiting...
and i still stand by my suggestion to drop the optimal range bonus its useless... snipping past 150km is pointless and optimal range bonus on the shortest ranged weapons is also pointless...
but a rate of fire bonus will increase dps by 33%
Which in turn would make Caldari hybrids higher DPS while Gallente will be higher alpha... its a good trade off IMO...
Plus blasters are not good enough... Null needs more of a range bonus (make it so they can shoot out to kitting range in heavy falloff)
plus blasters still need about 20-30% more tracking to make up for the loss of the signature bloom from an active MWD...
and i still stand by the fact that there needs to be an alpha boost... i want 50% with a reduced rate of fire of 30%...
blasters needs to do OMFG damage when you get close and each hit should be a sledge hammer to the face with death spikes... |
Joelleaveek
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:01:00 -
[64] - Quote
The hybrid changes are ok. Gallente ships need to be faster though. Fastest in the game. Otherwise you still wont be able to catch your target. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:25:00 -
[65] - Quote
looks like there's a consensus among players. Tallest, i hope you can use the feedback to massively buff blasters, rails, ships and hybrid ammo for the next version of SiSi. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:33:00 -
[66] - Quote
some kind of solution to all this could be some sort of RUSH ABILITY. Something like short range warp with cooldown like allready proposed. I think it is really a natural way to go, as in every EVERY single multiplayer game you can think of, melee classes have some sort of this ability. and 3km optimal is a melee in space:P -seriously only the fact that some sort of rush is in everygame talks for it self .
Dunno why are you thinking in terms like hmm i buff a little of this and little of that and it should be fine while the whole concept in general is flaud, correct is : THE FASTEST SHIPS SHOULD HAVE THE SHORTEST RANGE WEAPONS -also very logical, so either switch galente with min in speed ( simply from now on galente is known as a fastest race ) or switch weapon systems ( as they are -hybrids do min and projectiles to galente, or just switch they range - from now on autocannons will be known as shortest range uberdamagers ) I know ccp made up they race profiles and want to stick to them ( min fastest etc ) but they simply made a bad combination with weapon systems, sipmle switching (with some minor changes) would be ok.
In terms of dmg in general there should be considered some basic equation: short range ship vs long range ship: they both should destroy eachother at the same time, and the short range ship should have that more dmg than long range so when it comes to range(and it should be able somehow), it will catch up with damage dealt until the point od both destroying each other.
For example: long range ship: 10000 hp, 200 dps, 40km range, 500m/s speed short range ship: with also 10000 hp, it means it will take 50 sec for long range to destroy it, and thats how long it should take the short range ship to get in range and destroy the long r. one. (asuming that the long range is running away that any smart pilot would do). with 20 km range it needs to cover distance of 20 km and kill it in 50sec. So you can set the speed and dmg as you want: for example 1500m/s speed (-500 because long r ship is running from you) so it will take you 20 sec to get in range, and than 333 DPS, it it wil take 30 sec to kill long range ship - together 50s and both ships are destroyed. OR 1000ms, so you will get in range in 40 sec and 1000dps sou you will kill each other.
It is of course somewhat simplyfied, but this rule should allways be preserved. SO systems are balanced and the choice od ship is simply a players preference, not that 1 is just stronger than other. Now mins are faster and dont need that range as galente - evidently broken.
|
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
73
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:44:00 -
[67] - Quote
For Blasters it is a complete failure.
Blasters get what? 10% more damage then autocannons, maybe 5% more then pulse lasers and are still range crippled. A Tornado for example has no problems hitting something at 70km range and the Talos struggles with 25km.
Either give the blasters a range that can at least compete with other races turrets or give them a damage that really makes up for all the drawbacks they have.
The only role the Talos has now is as a suicide ganker, awesome.
|
Red Teufel
Eternity Inc
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:51:00 -
[68] - Quote
did a bit of testing with the brutix now. it's pretty amazing if you put isk into it. put reps including resists & resist rigs. then drop in some rep implants and a pill you got an in your face repping crazy machine. with the hybrid changes i can slap on ion blasters on this boat. it worked very well and I was very impressed with it.
as for the sniping gangs we will be running into i allready got a counter for them >:) |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:21:00 -
[69] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102- Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters. - I am backing this fully.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:00:00 -
[70] - Quote
Tallest,
I appreciate what you have tried so far, but trust me, the issue with blasters will be taller than you until you give them a 40 percent damage boost. :-D |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:10:00 -
[71] - Quote
What is wrong with forums eating my posts??? Grrr....
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.
Lets get some time on testserver and get some constructive feed back for the tall guy to work with... Stuff like boosting blaster damage with 40% will merely ruin blasters and comparing 425mm Railguns with Tachyons is a total misconception. Get in there and get some descriptive feed back with thoughts about pros, cons, loopholes and suggestions.
Pinky |
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
73
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:22:00 -
[72] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:What is wrong with forums eating my posts??? Grrr....
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.
Lets get some time on testserver and get some constructive feed back for the tall guy to work with... Stuff like boosting blaster damage with 40% will merely ruin blasters and comparing 425mm Railguns with Tachyons is a total misconception. Get in there and get some descriptive feed back with thoughts about pros, cons, loopholes and suggestions.
Pinky
Amarr Pilot spotted.
There are a lot of good suggestions here and a huge DPS increase in exchange for the crippled range blasters have is hardly imbalancing. Show us where the misconception is when we compare Railguns to Beam lasers? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:38:00 -
[73] - Quote
Post 52 complains about Tachyons vs Rails... Also I fly all races with maxed skills and would love for Blasters to get good, however the ships need more love than the blasters.
So far the problem is more about getting close enough to use blasters than blasters not doing enough damage which is why half the hybrid buff is about speed and agility. If you just buff blaster dps with 40% you'll imbalance more than you would think... Ofcourse people should come with their opinions but you cannot balance with on 1 single attribute alone.
Pinky |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:42:00 -
[74] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:
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
hai thur. have u ever done ne pee vee pee |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:56:00 -
[75] - Quote
Deviana Sevidon wrote:Amarr Pilot spotted.
There are a lot of good suggestions here and a huge DPS increase in exchange for the crippled range blasters have is hardly imbalancing. Show us where the misconception is when we compare Railguns to Beam lasers?
well back in the day before cap ships ccp introduced tachions to be extra large weapons for lazors... this was also around the time when you could fire torps from rocket launchers and have deul mwd ravens...
time has changed but his perceptions about comparing the largest of the 3 weapons types has not...
they will argue till kingdom comes that you can only compare 425 to mega beams...
personally all they need to do to bring tachions in line is reduce their fittings... then we should be fine in comparring them...
If you look at tachions and 1400's they are balanced but 425's are not...
its 2011 here people not 2005.... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:59:00 -
[76] - Quote
I killed the first and afaik only Adrestia ever lost on TQ... That could ofcourse happen for anyone, but plz keep on subject? Well documented agruments will beat my 5 years of pvp experience any day and yeah the railguns must be in need of the biggest buff no doubt... |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:05:00 -
[77] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:[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
Pinky,
I have been PvPing since 2005 and started out as a Pure Gallente pilot. Now, I have all level V skills in every weapon class and every ship from Battleship down in every Race.
Trust me when I tell you that Rails are the weakest weapon system, followed by Blasters. A massive boost to their effectiveness will not make them the most powerful thing in EVE. A massive boost to blasters will make them the most powerful thing in EVE from ranges of less than 10km or so. That is as it should be. Blasters are supposed to dominate up close. If you defecate yourself a little when a Blaster Megathron comes out of warp on top of your Abbadon, then Blasters are exactly where they need to be. Just as a Megathron pilot curses when that same Abbadon is 30km away. EVE isn't about making all things the same. Its about making everything shine at the right time and under the right circumstance. Since 2005, CCP has slowly nerfed and buffed their way into a corner. If they boost Blaster range then Blasters become lasers. If they boost Blaster damage then people like you will complain about them being OP. If they nerf anything right now people will justifiably hang the DEVs from the nearest tree.
Boosting the damage is the best course of action given the circumstances. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:06:00 -
[78] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I killed the first and afaik only Adrestia ever lost on TQ... That could ofcourse happen for anyone, but plz keep on subject? Well documented agruments will beat my 5 years of pvp experience any day and yeah the railguns must be in need of the biggest buff no doubt...
ive been pvping since eve's beta...wth is your point? just because u have pvp'd and maxed a bunch of skills blindly, it doesnt mean u have a good understanding of whats going on. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
262
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:19:00 -
[79] - Quote
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. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:24:00 -
[80] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Deviana Sevidon wrote:Amarr Pilot spotted.
There are a lot of good suggestions here and a huge DPS increase in exchange for the crippled range blasters have is hardly imbalancing. Show us where the misconception is when we compare Railguns to Beam lasers? well back in the day before cap ships ccp introduced tachions to be extra large weapons for lazors... this was also around the time when you could fire torps from rocket launchers and have deul mwd ravens... time has changed but his perceptions about comparing the largest of the 3 weapons types has not... they will argue till kingdom comes that you can only compare 425 to mega beams... personally all they need to do to bring tachions in line is reduce their fittings... then we should be fine in comparring them... If you look at tachions and 1400's they are balanced but 425's are not... its 2011 here people not 2005....
Well, feel free to up the fitting of rails of you improve their performance. Currently there is nothign adequate long-range gallente cna fit on their ships: rails track badly and when they hit they only are chipping paint. There only advantage is range, but it does not come in useful anywhere, unles you want to give us 200 km points. (not such a good idea) |
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:32:00 -
[81] - Quote
Joelleaveek wrote:The hybrid changes are ok. Gallente ships need to be faster though. Fastest in the game. Otherwise you still wont be able to catch your target.
Care explaining what aspect of the hybrid changes are ok ???
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:47:00 -
[82] - Quote
Hi CCP Tallest,
I've been thinking about my previous suggestion about giving the Rokh and Eagle more DPS. While it still might be worth giving the Eagle another high slot, I think a damage bonus is actually a mistake for Caldari ships.
To fix Hybrid for Caldari and yet, keep them unique in the EvE universe here are my suggestions:
- Caldari Hybrid ships should be about being good at Medium to Long range, so retain the 10% range per level bonus.
- Caldari should remain slow.
- But to make them 'Unique' in EvE and easily resolve their readily apparent weakness against other races comparable ships, the fix is to give them more tank and better resistance.
- So the existing 5% resistance buff becomes 7.5 and shield HP is increased.
tl;dr - Caldari Hybrid should be about lower DPS but be about surviving longer once the faster races catch up and close range to make the fight 'fair' and balance Caldari Hybrid ships in EvE.
Example: Rokh vs Abaddon
At present, the Caldari buffer tank seems strong, but is comparatively weak. The Amarr Abaddon is the Armor version of the Rokh, with a 5% armor resitance bonus like the Rokh has a 5% resistance shield bonus.
But with a (very) large buffer tank, the numbers show the weakness of Caldari. These figures are without command ship gang links etc, which only serve to increase the differences between the races. I have tried to match the tank like for like so, 3 armor 1600 plates, for 3 large shield extenders etc.
Rokh: 170,923 EHP, average of 75% resistances, signature 648, 412 dps with blasters and null ammo Abbadon: 209,682 EHP, average of 80% resistances, signature 470, 442 dps with pulses, but 55km range!
The Rokh has 4 power diagnostics in the low slots, without these - and frankly you wouldn't want to fit them normally - the EHP drops to just 147,478. The Abaddon also has plenty of fitting overhead, with three mid slots left for cap boosting and other goodies.
If the tanking numbers were far higher, these issues would be understandable, but it's tank is inferior in every way. There are also no implant set that increase shield tanking numbers, only a set to reduce signature size, so slave set also = win. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:05:00 -
[83] - Quote
Reduced Capacitor usage: GÇó All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Currently in Live a Neutron Blaster Canon II with CN Animatar uses 2.3 cap 18.2 activation/7.87 ROF According to the reduction that is going to use per turret @1.62 cap 12.74 activation/ 7.87 ROF
Since that scales with guns we will save x(Fitted Turret) * 0.68 cap /second.
LOL |
Mr Painless
Temnava Legion
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:40:00 -
[84] - Quote
My 2 cents on the subject:
As I see it the main problem with hybrids is that they are inferior to other turret systems (and missiles), but most attempts to buff them basically turns them into projectiles or lasers, thus making them lose their uniqueness.
Also, lore-wise, railguns are (shield tanked) Caldari racial weapon, which are at war with (armor tanked) Gallente, story is the same for blasters, only vice-versa.
My suggestion: keep hybrids as they are, or maybe tweak them a little, keeping most of their basic strengths and weaknesses as they are. But, make railguns do significantly more damage to armor part of ship's tank by applying say, 30% reduction in armor resists against them (the 30% is a complete wild guess and is certainly subject to change), and do the same to blasters agains shields.
This will make hybrids unique. Their use will be situational - they will be mostly sub-par when fighting against "wrong" type of tank, but they will shine against "right" type of tank. Think for example, a blaster Brutix that will be able to **** a Drake, but still lack in performance against a Harbinger or plated Cane. Or maybe a rail Rokh, which could shine against armor tanked snipe battleships, but still be quite sucky against shield tankers.
Just a thought... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 19:12:00 -
[85] - Quote
Everything I wrote about myself was a reply to someone trying to patronize or ridicule me. I do agree blasters need a buff and railguns need a miracle. But we must be carefull not making blaster boats invincible even if it has taken like forever for CCP to realize something was out of order. See you on the test server :-) |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 19:26:00 -
[86] - Quote
give 50% more damage to blasters, further 20% damage to rails hybrids fixed |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 19:31:00 -
[87] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote: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.
Hybrid balancing is the subject at hand. Does Tallest have the authority to balance ship hulls? Thats why I have been concentrating on Hybrids. One part of the problem at a time and all that.
Yes, Blaster boats need more speed. Consider this for a moment: What if blaster boats accelerated to their top speed very quickly. A short dash like a cheetah catching its prey. Rather than giving them a boost to top end speed... give them a distinct advantage to closing that 20-40km distance.
10 percent buff to damage is really conservative. A short speed burst with at least a 30 percent DPS buff would help a great deal.
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 21:03:00 -
[88] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote: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. Hybrid balancing is the subject at hand. Does Tallest have the authority to balance ship hulls? Thats why I have been concentrating on Hybrids. One part of the problem at a time and all that. Yes, Blaster boats need more speed. Consider this for a moment: What if blaster boats accelerated to their top speed very quickly. A short dash like a cheetah catching its prey. Rather than giving them a boost to top end speed... give them a distinct advantage to closing that 20-40km distance. 10 percent buff to damage is really conservative. A short speed burst with at least a 30 percent DPS buff would help a great deal.
Well he must have some ability to change hulls as he has already applied a whopping 10 m/s bonus to speed and a 5% (I think it was 5 or something similarly insignificant) to the Gallente boats and some Caldari ships. I was almost able to detect this massive fix on Sisi. I think it subtracted about .4 sec from my align time. Additionally, he did some pretty major changes to the destroyers if you've read the post. They are now OMG ass kicking. Though again, the thrasher will absolutely rock. I went head to head last night with one on Sisi in an Enyo and got just owned in a very point blank fight. His AC's absolutely ate through me. Before I would have probably won that fight. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 23:56:00 -
[89] - Quote
I just compared a Neutron-fit Megathron to a Mega Pulse-fit Armageddon on PyFA, with the new hybrid and ship stats. Note that these stats are the ones taken from the Chaos build leak, and so are the same as has already been announced by CCP. (hybrid changes and speed buff)
Both fits are armour buffered, and I've given them two damage mods each. Both ships have seven turret slots, fitted with each race's highest tier of short-range weapon system (Neutrons and Mega Pulse). Both ships have 125m3 of dronebay and bandwidth.
Armageddon EHP is 120. Megathron is 121. Armageddon speed is 116/792(MWD). Mega is 127/900. Armageddon's turret DPS with IN Multi is 760 with 15km optimal and 10km falloff. Megathron turret DPS with FN AM is 832 with 4.5km optimal and 12.5km falloff.
So, after factoring in a full flight of Ogre IIs for both ships, the Megathron gets a whole 6.6% more DPS than the Armageddon, with 13.6% more MWD speed, and an extra mid slot to play with (but very tight CPU).
The price of that 6.6% better damage output is having less than a third of the optimal range.
Using long-range ammo (Null and Scorch), the raw damage difference is just as negligible. But the range difference increases yet further, with Scorch-loaded Pulses outdamaging Null-loaded Neutrons for 3/4 of their optimal range.
Gallente ships are supposed to be designed around very close range, very high damage blaster combat and drones. The Megathron is pretty much the embodiment of that philosophy. And yet, in the Armaggeddon we have a ship that does equivalent damage both inside and outside blaster ranges, can apply the same damage as the Megathron at three to four times the range, has an identical drone bay and bandwidth, has the same tank (more of which is in armour, compared to the Megathron's redundant hitpoints in shield and hull), and that only closts 3/4 of the higher tier, supposedly superior Megathron.
Considering the similarities of the hulls, it's obvious that there are serious problems with the hybrids themselves, as well as with Gallente ships. Blasters are supposed to have vastly greater damage potential than other weapon systems, but even in their sweet spot, the difference is insignificant.
Unless CCP massively buffs blaster (and rail) damage beyond what they have done already, changing Gallente ship stats and bonuses alone won't fix the problem. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 00:19:00 -
[90] - Quote
i have been playing around with the kronos with 425II and rails and from the talos to this there is a big difference... rails desperatly need more tracking... i have maraders lev iv so 30% would be more then enough... among that 5% more damage and 15% faster rate of fire would make them pretty much awesome... but you would also have to reduce cap useage to compensate...
but rails are still useless on the rokh low dps does not make up with range that cant be used... caldari need a rate of fire bonus...
i was also playing around with the talos with 3 mag stabs 2 te II and 8 nuetrons II with null... shoots out to 40km... not bad at all... (personally a boost to null falloff would suffice for me)
of coarse all gallente ships need a speed boost but not 10m/s per sec increase more like 10% increase...
yes to the ammo changes... make them split damage like has been proposed... but also add a tracking bonus like you did to projectiles...
i still feel that blasters need more sting to them 10% more dps with 50% more alpha would be the trick... plus a rof reduction of 30% would also help with cap... though blasters need soemthing to make up for the loss of sig radius bloom caused by an active mwd... either reduce the blasters sig resolution or increase thier tracking by atleast another 20%...
plus please unbork drone ships... |
|
Pyre leFay
True Blue Haulers
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 01:55:00 -
[91] - Quote
Main problem is not really the fault of the ships or the weapons but of the environment they are in and the current rules there in.
Blasters are like a shotgun. Nothing is wrong with the weapon system, its just that there is zero cover in space. You need to be fast or outlast and wear out your target. Yet to do anything not involving speed, you need speed. Neuts, webs, scrams or a massive tank, yet all other weapons systems can operate outside of these utilities and widdle you down. It is dependent on counterparts to intervene and not a solo system at all.
Rails suffer from the reverse. in grid probe and everything is on top of them. |
Party Lips
Blackened Skies
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 04:25:00 -
[92] - Quote
yup i think they got the hint that they didn't buff the hybrids enough. waiting for a patch or news on how they plan to fix em. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 06:29:00 -
[93] - Quote
My input:
The peak DPS of blasters needs to be increased much more with respect to the current changes. The current peak DPS doesn't make up for the lack of range of blasters when compared to ACs and Pulses. A 50-60% increase would get you in the ballpark. Leave fitting, ship bonuses and tracking alone. Reduce the ROF slightly, increase the alpha for a net result of 50%+ increase in DPS.
A blaster ship should be THE scariest thing on the battlefield at close range.
A lot of changes over the years have marginalized blasters: increased static EHP of ships, increased peak active tanking, defensive rigs far outweighing the effectiveness of offensive rigs, reduction in T2 ammo peak DPS. The list goes on and on. Blasters need to do BIG damage at close range. All the other weapon systems have their unique advantages and abilities. The only way to fix the problem is to do something radical and extreme. Otherwise you're just going to end up with oatmeal. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 07:13:00 -
[94] - Quote
I'm still in agreeance with the idea that blasters need the close range face melt role more defined. They need more damage, period. Especially in Cruiser and BS classes. |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 07:46:00 -
[95] - Quote
Nemesor wrote: A massive boost to their effectiveness will not make them the most powerful thing in EVE. A massive boost to blasters will make them the most powerful thing in EVE from ranges of less than 10km or so. That is as it should be. Blasters are supposed to dominate up close. If you defecate yourself a little when a Blaster Megathron comes out of warp on top of your Abbadon, then Blasters are exactly where they need to be. Just as a Megathron pilot curses when that same Abbadon is 30km away. EVE isn't about making all things the same. Its about making everything shine at the right time and under the right circumstance. Since 2005, CCP has slowly nerfed and buffed their way into a corner. If they boost Blaster range then Blasters become lasers. If they boost Blaster damage then people like you will complain about them being OP. If they nerf anything right now people will justifiably hang the DEVs from the nearest tree.
Boosting the damage is the best course of action given the circumstances.
THIS!
- CCP Please Increase the damage for Blasters.....pretty please?
- CCP Please give Gallente cruisers and above a 'reasonable' straightline speedboost(not agility).
- CCP Please give the Myrmidon,Eos, and especially the Proteus,125 drone bandwidth.
- CCP Please give the Gallente a little love.
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 07:59:00 -
[96] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote: A blaster ship should be THE scariest thing on the battlefield at close range. .
That should be the end result of this hybrid balance. "Up Close and Personal" or decent damage output from long range.
Another ship should not want to fight at those ranges with a blaster boat if it knows what it is going to get at that close range. Or a long range Rail boat finds a place in FCs recommended list or becomes a Missioner's choice again.
A blaster boat once commits to a fight either explodes or create explosions. A decent rail boat at long ranges give those Hybrid trained pilots an opportunity to get into a long range fleet alongside Maelstroms or Apocs
Current hybrid changes are -30% Cap consumption +20% tracking on turrets -1 to 5 cpu depending in gun size -12% Power Grid
My proposal is as follows(exclude Capital) ... (- means reduction, + means addition, * means no change) (Also you may not want to apply the above -30% Cap consumption or +20% tracking on turrets) -15% Power grid requirement on Hybrid guns -10% CPU requirement on Hybrid Guns +7.5% tracking bonus on Antimatar ammo 20% on Iron Ammo (So scale it up from 7.5 to 20 between the ammo accordingly) +50% increase to Damage Mod to Hybrid Turrets +7.5% Cap recharge rate on Antimater to 15% in Iron Charge *No Changes to range
Reasons for such changes... -15% Power grid requirement on Hybrid guns -10% CPU requirement on Hybrid Guns Allow us to fit T2 MWD, with T2 Tank mods and T2 tackle. This is much needed for Blaster as well as Rail boats.
+7.5% tracking bonus on Antimatar ammo 20% on Iron Ammo (So scale it up from 7.5 to 20 between the ammo accordingly) This will scale properly with number of turrets. We can free up one slot for fitting a tackle mod which is much needed for a blaster boat or a sensor mod for rail boat.
+50% increase to Damage Mod to Hybrid Turrets This will give much needed DPS increase to Rail. They will get to 800+ dps bracket with max damage ammo. Blaster will reach about 1100 dps at close range.
+7.5% Cap recharge rate on Antimater to 15% in Iron Charge We do not have to fit 3 CCC rigs along with 3 cap recharge mods to regen enough cap to counter cap consumption for chasing around with prop mod on, opponent Neuting, tackle mods, tank and Guns.
The above are absolute necessity.
We have rallied with CCP for Hybrid balancing for too long a period (years). We have no juice left in us now to carry on further. This is our moment when CCP announced Hybrid Balancing. It is like seeing light at the end of the tunnel. If you take that away from us I will forget hybrid forever and move to Minmatar. I have only invested my time on the guns about 4 mill SP so will stand to lose about 3 months of training time. I will have to suck it up.
Have a nice day all.
|
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:55:00 -
[97] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
169
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 09:59:00 -
[98] - Quote
One other idea is to take away falloff range completely, and re-focus them with this in mind.
Increase optimal range a bit, so it's hit or miss as far as range goes. Then Give them another 30-40% increase in damage. don't increase tracking too much you don't want to overpower them.
Maybe add some kind of DoT effect so they burn through shields even if you miss a shot.
or make it so each shot nuets some cap.'
Anything to make them so different they don't have to compete with auto cannons, they just ARE different. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:08:00 -
[99] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote: A blaster ship should be THE scariest thing on the battlefield at close range. .
+7.5% tracking bonus on Antimatar ammo 20% on Iron Ammo (So scale it up from 7.5 to 20 between the ammo accordingly) This will scale properly with number of turrets. We can free up one slot for fitting a tackle mod which is much needed for a blaster boat or a sensor mod for rail boat.
I think you have this backwards. You're just thinking of blasters as being like all the other weapons, but their very short range makes them different. The tracking is more of an issue at CLOSER ranges so any tracking bonus should be LARGER for SHORTER range ammo. So with your numbers it should be 20% on antimatter and 7.5% on iron, but even then i think the antimatter bonus will prove to be too small for medium and large rails. Why do you feel the need to treat the small blasters, which don't have too much problem, the same as the other sizes which have an ever increasing problem? I'd say 30-40 on large, 25-30% on mediums, 10-15% on smalls for the antimatter scaling down to the 7.5-10% level for iron (and include this level of bonus in the t2 ammo too) |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:22:00 -
[100] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Dare Devel wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote: A blaster ship should be THE scariest thing on the battlefield at close range. .
+7.5% tracking bonus on Antimatar ammo 20% on Iron Ammo (So scale it up from 7.5 to 20 between the ammo accordingly) This will scale properly with number of turrets. We can free up one slot for fitting a tackle mod which is much needed for a blaster boat or a sensor mod for rail boat. I think you have this backwards. You're just thinking of blasters as being like all the other weapons, but their very short range makes them different. The tracking is more of an issue at CLOSER ranges so any tracking bonus should be LARGER for SHORTER range ammo. So with your numbers it should be 20% on antimatter and 7.5% on iron, but even then i think the antimatter bonus will prove to be too small for medium and large rails. Why do you feel the need to treat the small blasters, which don't have too much problem, the same as the other sizes which have an ever increasing problem? I'd say 30-40 on large, 25-30% on mediums, 10-15% on smalls for the antimatter scaling down to the 7.5-10% level for iron (and include this level of bonus in the t2 ammo too)
Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range... You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.
Does that make sense?
|
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:34:00 -
[101] - Quote
CCP,
You haven't fixed rails because:
Sniping beyond 150 km is still irrelevant because of instant probing and warping, Artillery and Tachyons are still far superior closer in, Large rails still offer no advantage over tachyons on optimal-bonused Apocalypse, The Eagle still does less damage than an Aurora Zealot at 100 km, despite being fatter, much slower, and far harder to fit.
You haven't fixed blasters because:
Blasters still offer no significant applied damage advantage over Pulse and especially ACs at blaster optimal, despite suffering massive range disadvantages, Blaster hulls are slower than AC hulls, despite also using the shortest-ragne weapons (seriously you must be on ether if you think it's sensible to put the shortest-range weapons on the slow hull).
You will not solve these problems by fiddling about with 20% tracking, 10% fitting requirements or 10% damage. The sad truth is that your previous episodes of ill-thought out power creep have enable projectiles and lasers to usurp hybrids from hybrids' niches. If lasers and projectiles are also effective in hybrids' niches, then, given the severe range limitations of hybrids, there is no reason to use hybrids. To fix hybrids, you need to fix that problem - intrusion of lasers and projectiles into hybrids' home territory.
Good luck.
Oh small hybrids were basically fine and do not need a boost! Boosting them will damage frigate diversity as everyone switches to Daredevils, Taranises and Comets. |
Keras Authion
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:16:00 -
[102] - Quote
This might be a bad idea, but what if the hybrids got the ability to hit one size smaller craft with some kind of efficiency? By this I mean that a large rail would hit a cruiser like a medium rail would but with say 67% efficiency. The penalty is necessary so that there is a use for the smaller guns.
Now we would have a unique role for hybrids that doesn't overlap with other weapons. Lasers still have a great control over range, projectiles have the capless selectable damage type and hybrids would have more versatility in choosing the target size.
Of course this still does not solve the getting in range problem with blasters but at least rails would now have a clear advantage over the other weapons. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:03:00 -
[103] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:
Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range... You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.
Does that make sense?
Not really. I mean, it does make sense from an EFT perspective, but if you ever tried blasters in a real combat (PVP) situation, you'd find out that tracking is much more of an issue on those short ranges, even accounting for the scrambler. The webber would help, but many (probably most) blaster ships aren't able to fit a webber as well as a MWD and a scrambler (and possibly tank). Especially if you consider frigates, where fitting an AB is quite a good idea, if the ship lets you do that. |
Shin Dari
The Vendunari Warped Aggression
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:04:00 -
[104] - Quote
Please CCP give them some more damage, but with a different spread across damage types:
Railguns: EM: TH: 30% KN: 40% EX: 30%
Blasters: EM: 30% TH: 40% KN: 30% EX:
Thus railguns will be still weapons for the Kinetic damage race (Caldari) and be a bit more effective against Armor ships. And Blasters will be still weapons for the Thermal damage race (Gallente) and be a bit more effective against Shield ships |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:06:00 -
[105] - Quote
Keras Authion wrote:This might be a bad idea, but what if the hybrids got the ability to hit one size smaller craft with some kind of efficiency? By this I mean that a large rail would hit a cruiser like a medium rail would but with say 67% efficiency. The penalty is necessary so that there is a use for the smaller guns.
Now we would have a unique role for hybrids that doesn't overlap with other weapons. Lasers still have a great control over range, projectiles have the capless selectable damage type and hybrids would have more versatility in choosing the target size.
Of course this still does not solve the getting in range problem with blasters but at least rails would now have a clear advantage over the other weapons.
I'd say this is a bad idea. Balance in eve depends also on relative sizes. Smaller ships can maneuver better and can thus get "under the guns" of bigger ships. Bigger ships have either to specialize in hunting smaller ships or rely on a support fleet.
If you make a weapon able to deal equally well with targets of different sizes, you're basically screwing with balance... And so you can now bring a 200 man fleet which can deal with BSs and support fleets better than a 100 man bs fleet + 100 man support fleet. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:36:00 -
[106] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:
Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range... You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.
Does that make sense?
Actually tracking is much more important up close because of a long standing flaw in the formula - there is no term describing relative change in target size - i.e. get really close your target should be hard to miss, except in Eve there is no accounting for this, only angular velocity - hence really short range weapons get boned.
Tried to discuss this a couple of years back, including several ways the formula could be tweaked, but it generated no Dev interest.
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:49:00 -
[107] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Dare Devel wrote:
Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range... You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.
Does that make sense?
Actually tracking is much more important up close because of a long standing flaw in the formula - there is no term describing relative change in target size - i.e. get really close your target should be hard to miss, except in Eve there is no accounting for this, only angular velocity - hence really short range weapons get boned. Tried to discuss this a couple of years back, including several ways the formula could be tweaked, but it generated no Dev interest.
There's also another thing, which isn't obvious... While in RL a ship circling around a (static) target would have guns fixed on the target with no adjustment needed (as long as the route the ship is keeping is on the surface of a sphere centered on the target), in EVE even your speed matters, and in fact the speed which is used in calculations, IIRC, is the difference vector between your ship's speed and your target's speed. Two ships orbiting reciprocally at close range will often cause spikes in the difference vector, thus easily overwhelming the tracking of your guns. |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:52:00 -
[108] - Quote
Different idea to help balance Gallente and add more fun to EvE combat.
A lot of folks have asked for speed boosts and I can appreciate why given the way Blasters work. Perhaps Gallente do need to become more like the Armor versions of Minmitar to make blasters work well for them, but this sort of feels a bit to easy to my mind, an alternative that could work well, would be making better use of the mid slots.
Gallente get more mids slots than Amarr, but perhaps there is a way to make those extra mid slots help with the range issues while making the Gallente more tactically interesting and relevant, basically putting pilot skill and fitting back into the equation, rather than just a raw speed boost.
My thought was the creation of some specific mid-slot modules which have a short 'burst' effect, for say, 20-30 seconds, but then have a long cool down and couldn't be used again for 5-10 minutes say, and perhaps Gallente get a bonus to reduce the cooldown or increase the length of the burst. Each race could have different bonuses even, for certain types of modules relevant to their race.
But the basic ideas is that when the pilot chooses to use the module, it has a big, but very brief impact and makes eve far more tactical and interesting.
The modules could cover a variety of different uses, and be relevant to all races perhaps, but these could have a tactical dimension that could keep the different races distinct and I think could add a lot of fun to the combat in EvE because of their long cool downs.
So for example, there could be a module that does indeed give the ship more speed, but only for 30 seconds, before the cooldown kicks in. There could be a module that briefly boosts tracking, or damage, or any number of factors in eve, from locking range, to perhaps a brief tank bonus.
I think these would add a lot of fun to EvE combat, both for fleets and one vs one and skirmish engagements, and more options to FC's and alliances in how they play. But critically, it could offer Gallente with a way to get in range, not all the time, but some of the time and at the pilots discretion, without making Gallente so fast they become overpowered.
Thoughts welcome. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:03:00 -
[109] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:
Thoughts welcome.
The idea isn't bad, but I'd keep it to a propulsion only module, perhaps even just a script for the mwd, which allows it to pulse up for a couple of cycles for great speed, while having to stay shut for some time after activating... Something like
+ 200% cycle time + x speed (50%?) + acceleration (though with the speed boost, if it keeps the same acceleration as the normal mwd it's probably enough) + y seconds cooldown period (perhaps a minute? something long enough to avoid making it a full propulsion module, but short enough to be viable to actually catch something with it).
While this is a good idea and may solve some problems (and may be worth suggesting separately), I still think that hybrids and the focus of hybrid caldari/gallente ships should be revised on its own, mostly because it seems to me that we're trying to fit a square peg in a circle hole. |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:06:00 -
[110] - Quote
Thanks for the +1. My only difference with your opinion is the active tank part. Buffer is the only viable option for Gallente ships due to all the things you talk about (being in close.) Once Neuted, that active tank is worthless. Active tank is only good in solo, 1v1 and PVE in my opinion. Get rid of all the active tank bonuses to these ships and give us something to help control range in a fight. SCRAM and WEB distance. |
|
Sirinda
Offworld Miners and Fabricators Guild
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:08:00 -
[111] - Quote
Keras Authion wrote:This might be a bad idea, but what if the hybrids got the ability to hit one size smaller craft with some kind of efficiency? By this I mean that a large rail would hit a cruiser like a medium rail would but with say 67% efficiency. The penalty is necessary so that there is a use for the smaller guns.
Now we would have a unique role for hybrids that doesn't overlap with other weapons. Lasers still have a great control over range, projectiles have the capless selectable damage type and hybrids would have more versatility in choosing the target size.
Of course this still does not solve the getting in range problem with blasters but at least rails would now have a clear advantage over the other weapons.
I was actually talking about something like this in private chat the other day. Basically, introduce something like Aerotech bracketing to Eve gun systems. This would result in grouped guns to get a modifier on their to-hit probability on small craft by modifying their minimum signature radius and at the same time divide the damage per salvo by number of guns. A formula:
SigN = SigO / ( [ GêÜnG] * nG / nM)
SigN = new signature radius SigO = old signature radius (400 nm for 425mm railguns)
nG = number of guns grouped nM = minimum number of guns needed for it to work (usually 4, since dreadnoughts with this ability == bad idea)
This would, for a ship mounting 4 425mm rails, result in 200 nm of signature radius modifier by dividing their damage by 4 if they hit. An 8-gun ship with the same guns would get around 70 nm sig modifier, dividing its damage by 8.
Also, since this doesn't touch turret tracking, it'd still be possible for small ships to get under bigger ships' guns. It'd be just a bit harder.
Another possibility would be adding some kind of spaceburst ability to hybrid and projectile ammunition. Enough shrapnel will kill anything, basically. Of course, there is no such thing as photonic shrapnel, so beams wouldn't get a bonus like this. OTOH, since they have next to no travel time, they could receive an added modifier to reflect higher accuracy in the above equation.
if either of these were to be introduced, it'd probably be via new skills.
I'm aware most of you will just say "Meh, bad idea" and shrug, but if you do, please tell me why you think it's a bad idea and if you think it's the concept that's flawed or just my attempt at fleshing it out.
Reading over this I realize I kind of missed the topic of "How To Improve Hybrids", but meh.
Also, I hate the forums for eating my first two attempts to post this. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:11:00 -
[112] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:Moonaura wrote:
Thoughts welcome.
The idea isn't bad, but I'd keep it to a propulsion only module, perhaps even just a script for the mwd, which allows it to pulse up for a couple of cycles for great speed, while having to stay shut for some time after activating... Something like + 200% cycle time + x speed (50%?) + acceleration (though with the speed boost, if it keeps the same acceleration as the normal mwd it's probably enough) + y seconds cooldown period (perhaps a minute? something long enough to avoid making it a full propulsion module, but short enough to be viable to actually catch something with it). While this is a good idea and may solve some problems (and may be worth suggesting separately), I still think that hybrids and the focus of hybrid caldari/gallente ships should be revised on its own, mostly because it seems to me that we're trying to fit a square peg in a circle hole.
Still won't work. Even if it helped for gal vs amarr, the minmatar get more mids than gal, so they'd fit these mods for sure and become even more unstoppable. This is why it has to be something applied to ships, not new mods which everyone will access. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:14:00 -
[113] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Gecko O'Bac wrote:Moonaura wrote:
Thoughts welcome.
The idea isn't bad, but I'd keep it to a propulsion only module, perhaps even just a script for the mwd, which allows it to pulse up for a couple of cycles for great speed, while having to stay shut for some time after activating... Something like + 200% cycle time + x speed (50%?) + acceleration (though with the speed boost, if it keeps the same acceleration as the normal mwd it's probably enough) + y seconds cooldown period (perhaps a minute? something long enough to avoid making it a full propulsion module, but short enough to be viable to actually catch something with it). While this is a good idea and may solve some problems (and may be worth suggesting separately), I still think that hybrids and the focus of hybrid caldari/gallente ships should be revised on its own, mostly because it seems to me that we're trying to fit a square peg in a circle hole. Still won't work. Even if it helped for gal vs amarr, the minmatar get more mids than gal, so they'd fit these mods for sure and become even more unstoppable. This is why it has to be something applied to ships, not new mods which everyone will access.
Yeah like I said it would help in some cases, hybrids should be fixed on their own. Though for minmatar a normal MWD is probably still they way to go. |
Vilgan Mazran
Aperture Harmonics K162
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:48:00 -
[114] - Quote
Couple comments:
Medium rails had worse problems (imo) than their large equivalents. They might need some additional buffage. Rails in general seem to suffer from an identity crisis. What is their role?
Lot of OP suggestions in here. Blasters need a bit more facemelt imo, but not 50%. Maybe 10% bonus? Also boosting base speed up a bit more seems appropriate.
2-3 gallente ships with a role that lets them continue to MWD (but not warp) while scrammed would have some awesome possibilities. Not the frigates, maybe the hyp and brutix and deimos?
Changes seemed encouraging though. Please continue to iterate, as I think a lot of people are (reasonably) concerned that CCP tends to one and done when it comes to balancing. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 15:15:00 -
[115] - Quote
Vilgan Mazran wrote: Lot of OP suggestions in here. Blasters need a bit more facemelt imo, but not 50%. Maybe 10% bonus? Also boosting base speed up a bit more seems appropriate.
I wouldn't dare suggesting a specific % of damage, but I'd say that 50% is more likely to be accurate given the situation than 10%. pulse lasers and autocannons do roughly 90% of blaster damage right now. But they have other, quite more important, advantages. Like tracking, range and overall better platforms to mount them on. Pulse lasers can outrange blasters by up to 300% IIRC, autocannons roughly have 50% to 150% more range, much better tracking and almost always have the speed advantage. Plus, they can change damage types. Lasers can change ammo type trading dps for range instantly. Autocannons don't use cap.
So Blasters have to: get in range, while getting damaged by their counterparts, fire, and hope to have enough spare HP to win the fight. Right now this means that blasters are only useful if you manage to start the fight already inside your optimal range. Which isn't exactly easy. If that's not the case, minmatar ships will simply kite you forever, outranging, outrunning and outtracking you. Amarr ships will do a lot of damage to you from extreme ranges and even if you manage to get them, they will probably kill you anyway. Hell, even close range missiles are probably better than blasters. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 16:16:00 -
[116] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:One other idea is to take away falloff range completely, and re-focus them with this in mind.
Increase optimal range a bit, so it's hit or miss as far as range goes. Then Give them another 30-40% increase in damage. don't increase tracking too much you don't want to overpower them.
Maybe add some kind of DoT effect so they burn through shields even if you miss a shot.
or make it so each shot nuets some cap.'
Anything to make them so different they don't have to compete with auto cannons, they just ARE different.
tbh this is what I have been saying all this time. blasters should be able to:
- do substantially more damage (40%+), - track a bit better, - to counterbalance, make them useless beyond 15km ranges (decrease optimal and/or falloff, or get rid of falloff entirely)
this however would only work if blaster ships themselves are able to move fast enough and withstand the approach to target, AKA "bull rush". Damage projection on blaster platforms should be provided solely by the ships' capability of getting to the target, guns be damned.. Result should be a ship that deals tank-smashing cataclysmic-level damage but at spit ranges and needs to commit to the target to bring its full brunt to bear, as blasters should have been. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 16:22:00 -
[117] - Quote
Might be completely off the wall, but if tracking is that much of an issue for blasters, why not give all Gallente boats a hull bonus to hybrid turret tracking speed on top of the existing tracking boost, much as Amarr get a hull bonus to laser cap use? It would keep blasters individually from being overpowered, but might encourage pilots to fit them on Gallente boats.
Rails could become viable in long-range snipe fleets, but only if (1) it takes more than 10 seconds for a decent prober to get an on-grid warp-in point, and (2) if rail-based boats are able to deal sufficient dps or alpha at range to kill something in the time it would take for a decent prober to get a warp-in point. A possible "solution" to rails' low dps might be to get rid of longer-range ammo entirely except for Iron (T1) and Spike (T2), and boost their damage output so that they have dps higher than artillery but lower than tachyons, and alpha higher than tachyons but lower than artillery. Or vice versa, although I think that artillery should remain the king of alpha and beams the king of dps. But either way rails would retain their damage-dealing ability all the way to maximum targeting range, unlike artillery and beams.
Then again, as far as fleet viability is concerned, from what I've seen, beam lasers and autocannons aren't very common in fleets nowadays either, but that does not make them broken.
Most long-range fleets nowadays focus on alpha, and not just because of lag. Forty Maelstroms or their equivalent in 1400mm artillery turrets can usually one-shot an Abaddon, making logistics and buffer tank essentially irrelevant, and don't depend on cap. It might take twice as many ships to burn through enemy logistics if tachyons or rails are used. So long-range fleets tend to use artillery, even on Abaddons and Rokhs. Tachyons may offer higher dps at the same range, but have significantly smaller alpha. Ditto for rails, which will always be the case unless rail alpha is buffed to artillery levels, and that won't be a good thing.
Pulses are still viable at short-range (50km or less) engagements because of Scorch, which allows them to deliver good dps at their maximum range. I haven't seen too many autocannon fleets, outside of some specialty fleets based around Vagabonds or Machariels or somesuch, probably because autocannons' higher dps and cap-independence doesn't compensate for their shorter range. Blasters will be in the same boat unless their range is buffed to Scorch levels, but then we're once again looking at homogenization of weapons and that is not a desirable outcome.
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. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 16:41:00 -
[118] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote: 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.
I don't think fleet warfare is being discussed specifically.
30km to close on a target is still 17 seconds of unanswered fire when you are in a gallente BS. Ok... the Baddon is tackled and is not going anywhere... Decloak and start huffing and puffing 800ms to get into range... all while taking Lasers to the face. Obviously you either do not fly blaster boats. (In before the "Yes I do" : Then you are doing it wrong).
A substancial speed boost (Enough to chase down other races) with enough DPS buff to make up for taking punishment in the face while chasing them down worthwhile. (40 percent)
|
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 17:54:00 -
[119] - Quote
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.
there is another thread going about hybrid balance and active armor balance in case this threadnaught doesn't have enough.
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
266
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:00:00 -
[120] - Quote
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.
After some time in caldari rail boats I can only suggest a few things. The 10% per level optimal range bonus should become 20% per level - if so, having them as slow as they are with as little tank as they have would be acceptable. In addition, the Moa and Eagle need an additional Turret, a lot more grid.
Vulture needs a shield HP bonus in addition to the resists bonus (losing it's second optimal range bonus)
I think the frigates are more or less fine.
Naga.... Should be a cruise missile and torp ship. Needs a 25% damage bonus to kinetic missiles.
I still strongly recommend these ship changes Myrmidon = -2 turrets, +50mb drone bandwidth Eos = +50mb drone bandwidth
Hyperion = Maybe loses it's damage(or)tanking bonus and drones for a sensor damping bonus and an extra mid?
And yeah, 3 big things your going to need to do during, or before summer...
1) Increase the difference in speed between the classes: Frigates and Interceptors: +1.7km/s to microwarpdrive speed Destroyers and Interdictors: +1km/s to microwarpdrive speed (with thrasher and Sabre getting much less of a speed increase) Cruisers, HAC's and tier 3 BC's: +500m/s to microwarpdrive speed (with cynabel and vagabonds getting much less of a speed increase)
2) Unfuck the commandships: Disable off grid gang boosting. Give all fleet commandships HP bonuses Give field commandships higher command bonuses or bonuses that improve there ability in someway (eg lower cap, the ability to use whilst in warp etc etc)
3) Disable the ability to fit oversized speed mods...
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:10:00 -
[121] - Quote
the problem with making the optimal range bonus better is A... wtf about spike and B... 250km max targeting.. C. 150km probeming....
i still feel that a rate of fire bonus of 5% per lev would be much much better then the optimal range bonus... |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
123
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:12:00 -
[122] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote: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
thus why if boosting this hard, blasters should have shorter ranges (either falloff and/or optimal reduced, or complete removal of falloff) [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
266
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:23:00 -
[123] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:the problem with making the optimal range bonus better is A... wtf about spike and B... 250km max targeting.. C. 150km probeming....
i still feel that a rate of fire bonus of 5% per lev would be much much better then the optimal range bonus... For caldari, antimatter will probably be the only ammo they'd need for rails. With blasters they finally become competitive with lasers using null. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:31:00 -
[124] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote: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.
Your only suggestion in this thread specifically to hybrid turret balancing is to increase the tracking 25 percent, which does approximately jack all to help with fundamental issues with the weapon system. A tracking buff is needed but it is only a small portion of a solution. In your previous post, you bring up everything except hybrid balancing... Other than to say no to a damage buff. Oh.... and to suggest a damper bonus on the hyperion. A broken piece of EW gear to compensate for having broken turrets. Lets replace all Minmatar falloff and rate of fire bonus's with Target painter bonuses instead.
How does tracking help a Gallente ship close 30km to target and still overcome the unanswered DPS the enemy has spewed at him? It does not and he cannot. You also seem to suggest EW drones as a way to mitigate damage for blaster boats. News Flash: Other races have drone bays and they do the same thing. Specific ship fixes are great but are not the way to fundamentally balance hybrids. A 40-50 percent buff in damage output for blasters would obviously require falloff adjustments as well as optimal adjustments but coupled with a ship speed and tracking buff would balance hybrids.
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
266
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 19:07:00 -
[125] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:How does tracking help a Gallente ship close 30km How does any hybrid boost solve this? At least with additional tracking, the damage that you do have can be properly applied with all the speed everyone wants after rubber banding in web range of the target.
Also, see the link in my sig. Focus on specific ships, increase damage bonuses there if necessary, anything else would just provide another round of mudification. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 19:30:00 -
[126] - Quote
Honestly on top of current buffs i would:
1. give optimal a 100% increase and falloff a 80% decrease. 2. increase damage by 20% 3. reduce RoF by 10% 4. Instant loading ammo (Hybrids need some sort of inert advantage like every other weapon has) 5. Adjust T2 ammo as needed. Since Hail got that -50% falloff modfier taken off all other t2 ammo should get the same type of buff, or remove the tracking penalty with void and adjust the range modifers to match the new optimal favored range hybrids would have.
6. (this one would be a bit more experimental) Ammo cap usage goes up with the extended range, not down. Also damage reductions for range are reduced. This could work if cap penalties are severe enough, Making Hybrids viable only for short periods at null ranges but dealing more damag at that range. So they could fight at that range but would cap themseves out if they did the entire fight at range. When combined with insta load ammo we could apply some dps while we get in range then switch to more cap freindly ammo. Mimitar would still be the kite Kings and able to own at mid range and amarr would still be able to apply much more DPS at range. All keep their uniquenss and Hybrids are much more competive. On top of that its just involves changing some stats so its not even that much work for CCP. Win win win as far as im concerned. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 19:41:00 -
[127] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote: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 thus why if boosting this hard, blasters should have shorter ranges (either falloff and/or optimal reduced, or complete removal of falloff)
You know why this wont work... Because at a certain point how much damage you do does not matter if your range is gimped too far. Lets say you get a weapon that does 2500 DPS @ 5km. I can do 700 @ 45km. I would choose 700 @ 45km everytime. Even moreso if its in a faster ship. Sure you would get a few kills here and there but even a broken watch is right twice a day. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
123
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 20:40:00 -
[128] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Grimpak wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote: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 thus why if boosting this hard, blasters should have shorter ranges (either falloff and/or optimal reduced, or complete removal of falloff) You know why this wont work... Because at a certain point how much damage you do does not matter if your range is gimped too far. Lets say you get a weapon that does 2500 DPS @ 5km. I can do 700 @ 45km. I would choose 700 @ 45km everytime. Even moreso if its in a faster ship. Sure you would get a few kills here and there but even a broken watch is right twice a day.
forgot the bit where one adds more mobility to blaster ships too
no really, there's 3 ways to fix blasters: one you boost damage, cut range, and give good mobility to blaster ships, other you make them behave like AC's and/or pulses, and the other is simply forget about them and make gallente ships focus solely on drones and caldari focus on missiles, thus removing the need to even think about blasters and rails. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:13:00 -
[129] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Alice Katsuko wrote: 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.
I don't think fleet warfare is being discussed specifically. 30km to close on a target is still 17 seconds of unanswered fire when you are in a gallente BS. Ok... the Baddon is tackled and is not going anywhere... Decloak and start huffing and puffing 800ms to get into range... all while taking Lasers to the face. Obviously you either do not fly blaster boats. (In before the "Yes I do" : Then you are doing it wrong). A substancial speed boost (Enough to chase down other races) with enough DPS buff to make up for taking punishment in the face while chasing them down worthwhile. (40 percent)
I don't fly blaster boats. Just going by what I've read and seen, and trying to address some of the complaints regarding hybrids. I don't think that the absense of Gallente boats in big fleets is an issue, nor is their dependence on other ships to catch things. 17 seconds of laser fire from an Abaddon shouldn't be much of an issue for an armor-tanked ship, especially if you deliver higher dps.
From what I understand, Gallente boats are already getting a speed and agility boost across the board. The problem with giving them a huge speed boost is that it doesn't address the underlying issue of hybrids being underwhelming as a weapons platform. Boosting Gallente ship speed without addressing blasters and rails would simply result in a lot of autocannon-fit Megathrons and such.
A 40% damage boost may be a bit excessive. Damage increments in EVE are 5% for most things, and 2% for more than a few skills. I would rather see how the current damage and speed boost plays out in TQ before boosting damage even further. Even without a damage boost, blasters already deal the highest dps within their optimal. A good tracking boost will make that damage easier to apply. Boosting damage even further, combined with a significant speed boost, might make Gallente ships superior to autocannons in virtually all situations, which would be just as bad as the current situation. |
Dr Cedric
Orbital Industry and Research.
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:21:00 -
[130] - Quote
Don't know if this is the place, but Here's my two cents:
Fitted a Naga w/ 8x 425 rail II's, spike charges. Easily hit ranges on the guns of 250 km plus, with TE's, so I switched them out for MFS's to up damage. Tracking computers w/ tracking speed scripts, 10 MN MWD and a bit of tank, and I"m off to lvl 4.
It was very fun, although somewhat time consuming to orbit at 200km and plink the mission rats to smithereens. Not sure if its the most efficient (did you catch my sarcasm) but it was a change and fun. Would be interesting w/ a fleet of 3-5 of these things, new fleet blitz option : )
Thanks for at least something good CCP |
|
Soon Shin
Abyssal Heavy Industries Narwhals Ate My Duck
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:26:00 -
[131] - Quote
Blasters have several times less range than pulses and autos while having only 10% more DPS. That is a terrible trade off, those who disagree are fools.
Blasters need a SIGNIFICANT Increase in damage in order for them to be even worth using. A mere 5-10% is not enough. Those who disagree don't want gallente to be a good race. Increasing the range will just make blasters pretty much the same as autocannons and pulses.
Blasters are meant to be close range and HARD Hitting guns, therefore they need an enormous Damage advantage to make them worth using for all the disadvantages that they have.
I propose at least a 20+ % increase to the damage of blasters, in order to make up for the very short range and the fact that blasterboats are slow and have trouble catching targets. This will mean that Blasters Will Dominate in Close range, while being poor in medium and long ranges that Pulses and Autos are good at. This will finally give Blasters a role that is not done by Autocannons and Pulses.
Blasters have 3-5 times less range than Pulses and Autos, so it is only fair that they should have an enormous DPS advantage to compensation. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:35:00 -
[132] - Quote
Alice Katsuko wrote: I don't fly blaster boats. Just going by what I've read and seen, and trying to address some of the complaints regarding hybrids.
If you havent flown one and just read about it then please keep your thoughts to yourself. You will never ever be able to address our problem. To address our problem you have to fly it for years and gather your frustrations, as we hybrid users have, then pour your heart out in this thread.
Till then goodbye have a nice day. |
Dr Cedric
Orbital Industry and Research.
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:45:00 -
[133] - Quote
Again, not sure if this is the place,
Has anyone tried making blaster range based 90% on optimal, 10% falloff? Similar, only reversed to projectiles falloff>optimal scheme?
If my theory crafting is up to snuff, that would mean as soon as your target is in range (whatever range that is) you're basically applying all of your damage to the opponent. I know that everyone thinks Projectiles have awesome damage, but a good portion of that is mitigated due to the fact that projectile boats fly and shoot in falloff, rather than at 1.5km, which is their optimal (estimation).
This also would give a "bonus" to tracking enhancers optimal boost for the blasters. IIRC i read a decent post stating that small optimal plus small falloff time tracking enhancer still equals small boost (for blasters). SInce projectiles have such a huge falloff, the tracking enhancer gives them a much bigger relative boost. With the above scheme, you could get your blasters to shoot out to a decent range to help "close" the distance between you and the other guy.
Just a thought |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:51:00 -
[134] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Imawuss wrote:Grimpak wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote: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 thus why if boosting this hard, blasters should have shorter ranges (either falloff and/or optimal reduced, or complete removal of falloff) You know why this wont work... Because at a certain point how much damage you do does not matter if your range is gimped too far. Lets say you get a weapon that does 2500 DPS @ 5km. I can do 700 @ 45km. I would choose 700 @ 45km everytime. Even moreso if its in a faster ship. Sure you would get a few kills here and there but even a broken watch is right twice a day. forgot the bit where one adds more mobility to blaster ships too no really, there's 3 ways to fix blasters: one you boost damage, cut range, and give good mobility to blaster ships, other you make them behave like AC's and/or pulses, and the other is simply forget about them and make gallente ships focus solely on drones and caldari focus on missiles, thus removing the need to even think about blasters and rails.
Boost damage, cut range, increase mobility.... Wont work for reasons i stated in what you qouted. Mobility will never reach or surpass Mimatar because then you are Mimatar, and boosting damage and cutting range only exasterbates the issues. If you make them behave like pulses and AC"s they become that.... that wont happen either. They most be unique.
My idea above the one you qouted is a good idea for an added buff. That will make blasters disirable, without going ape **** and making them the new FoTM.
1. give optimal a 100% increase and falloff a 80% decrease. 2. increase damage by 20% 3. reduce RoF by 10% 4. Instant loading ammo (Hybrids need some sort of inert advantage like every other weapon has) 5. Adjust T2 ammo as needed. Since Hail got that -50% falloff modfier taken off all other t2 ammo should get the same type of buff, or remove the tracking penalty with void and adjust the range modifers to match the new optimal favored range hybrids would have.
6. (this one would be a bit more experimental) Ammo cap usage goes up with the extended range, not down. Also damage reductions for range are reduced. This could work if cap penalties are severe enough, Making Hybrids viable only for short periods at null ranges but dealing more damag at that range. So they could fight at that range but would cap themseves out if they did the entire fight at range. When combined with insta load ammo we could apply some dps while we get in range then switch to more cap freindly ammo. Mimitar would still be the kite Kings and able to own at mid range and amarr would still be able to apply much more DPS at range. All keep their uniquenss and Hybrids are much more competive. On top of that its just involves changing some stats so its not even that much work for CCP. Win win win as far as im concerned. |
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:59:00 -
[135] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Alice Katsuko wrote: I don't fly blaster boats. Just going by what I've read and seen, and trying to address some of the complaints regarding hybrids.
If you havent flown one and just read about it then please keep your thoughts to yourself. You will never ever be able to address our problem. To address our problem you have to fly it for years and gather your frustrations, as we hybrid users have, then pour your heart out in this thread. Till then goodbye have a nice day.
OR, roll gallente, love gallente, stick SPs into gallente, realize that your relationship will never work until they get their act together, leave gallente for amarr with tears in your eyes, let multiple years pass during which you still secretly harbor feelings for gallente, vent about how those SPs will continue to be near worthless even after the proposed changes. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
123
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 22:26:00 -
[136] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Grimpak wrote:Imawuss wrote:Grimpak wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote: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 thus why if boosting this hard, blasters should have shorter ranges (either falloff and/or optimal reduced, or complete removal of falloff) You know why this wont work... Because at a certain point how much damage you do does not matter if your range is gimped too far. Lets say you get a weapon that does 2500 DPS @ 5km. I can do 700 @ 45km. I would choose 700 @ 45km everytime. Even moreso if its in a faster ship. Sure you would get a few kills here and there but even a broken watch is right twice a day. forgot the bit where one adds more mobility to blaster ships too no really, there's 3 ways to fix blasters: one you boost damage, cut range, and give good mobility to blaster ships, other you make them behave like AC's and/or pulses, and the other is simply forget about them and make gallente ships focus solely on drones and caldari focus on missiles, thus removing the need to even think about blasters and rails. Boost damage, cut range, increase mobility.... Wont work for reasons i stated in what you qouted. Mobility will never reach or surpass Mimatar because then you are Mimatar, and boosting damage and cutting range only exasterbates the issues. If you make them behave like pulses and AC"s they become that.... that wont happen either. They most be unique. My idea above the one you qouted is a good idea for an added buff. That will make blasters disirable, without going ape **** and making them the new FoTM. 1. give optimal a 100% increase and falloff a 80% decrease. 2. increase damage by 20% 3. reduce RoF by 10% 4. Instant loading ammo (Hybrids need some sort of inert advantage like every other weapon has) 5. Adjust T2 ammo as needed. Since Hail got that -50% falloff modfier taken off all other t2 ammo should get the same type of buff, or remove the tracking penalty with void and adjust the range modifers to match the new optimal favored range hybrids would have. 6. (this one would be a bit more experimental) Ammo cap usage goes up with the extended range, not down. Also damage reductions for range are reduced. This could work if cap penalties are severe enough, Making Hybrids viable only for short periods at null ranges but dealing more damag at that range. So they could fight at that range but would cap themseves out if they did the entire fight at range. When combined with insta load ammo we could apply some dps while we get in range then switch to more cap freindly ammo. Mimitar would still be the kite Kings and able to own at mid range and amarr would still be able to apply much more DPS at range. All keep their uniquenss and Hybrids are much more competive. On top of that its just involves changing some stats so its not even that much work for CCP. Win win win as far as im concerned.
that's making them into a bit more like lasers with worse optimal and more damage. at least that's how it looks like.
also what's so wrong in making blaster boats faster? if any, matari ships are supposed to be nimble things that zip around. nothing wrong in making galente ships faster but still hard to corner with them. granted matari ships lose their "fastest ships in this size of the 'verse" place, but if people play with the numbers right, it's doable to do this and not break things. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
M1AU
Rheintal Underground Rising
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 22:33:00 -
[137] - Quote
Jiji Hamin wrote:Dare Devel wrote:Alice Katsuko wrote: I don't fly blaster boats. Just going by what I've read and seen, and trying to address some of the complaints regarding hybrids.
If you havent flown one and just read about it then please keep your thoughts to yourself. You will never ever be able to address our problem. To address our problem you have to fly it for years and gather your frustrations, as we hybrid users have, then pour your heart out in this thread. Till then goodbye have a nice day. OR, roll gallente, love gallente, stick SPs into gallente, realize that your relationship will never work until they get their act together, leave gallente for amarr with tears in your eyes, let multiple years pass during which you still secretly harbor feelings for gallente, vent about how those SPs will continue to be near worthless even after the proposed changes.
Well I'm actually exactly in that boat as I'm flying almost exclusively Gallente ships.
Back then when I started playing EVE, I always thought that it would be balanced. After skilling everything Gallente specific almost to the max - that's for ships skill, hybrid skills and drone skills - I was still at the low end compared to my low SP Caldari friends. They where already flying lvl 4 missions in there Ravens all the time and I still struggled doing the same with my high SP Gallente boats.
Now after so much time and frustration, I would really love to see Gallente ships getting some serious love, regardless of how it will look like. I'm ready, at least SP wise. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 22:58:00 -
[138] - Quote
After a weekend looking into the current hybrid changes :
This balance need more work. 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.
Hybrid fittings : Fitting up lots of ships I was happy to see hybrids fitting better without allowing oversized guns or mods. I did with maxed fitting skills and no ACR rigs often end up having a surplus of PG indicating that perhaps a 10% powergrid reduction would be sufficient. Will have to look closer into this...
Hybrid capacitor : The suggested 30% cap reduction on all hybrids doesn't have as much influence as I imagined. It does however help the battleships run 425mm railguns without having them dry out the capacitor on their own as they do now on TQ. I love the cap reduction, however for this to really matter CCP should either do 50% or change the ammunition to use less cap for short range and more cap for long range.
Hybrid tracking : 20% better tracking should allow blasters and railguns to gain a crucial advantage against especially the autocannons. This said in close range where blasters belong I'm still having the experience of poor tracking at times. This is most likely fine but I would perhaps attempt a 25% increase equal to a T1 Tracking computer.
Railgun damage increase : Railguns right now have only 1 broken advantage: range... I don't want to list all the disadvantages, however 10% damage inrease is not enough. No matter what ships I compare it seems railguns need at least 20-25% more to match the dps of other ranged setups. Also without a boost to blasters it looks as if they can never get enough bite into other ships. Getting within 1-2km and staying there is near impossible with the weaker webs and blasters should definately receive a boost to their damage. Not as spectacular as other people might suggest but definately 5-10% to make it a respected CQB weapon.
Ship stats : Velocity and Agility boosts will certainly help and especially the blaster ships should feel their ships respond better. That is ofcourse if it wasn't for being primarily armor ships with plates and armor rigs. I don't mind the minmatar having a speed advantage, however with their transformation into shield fleets the gap has opened up too much. In my opinion the base velocity of minmatar and gallente should be reversed while armor rigs and plates will balance out that advantage in return for EHP. This change might be too big right now, but then other attributes should be tweaked to allow the blaster ships to catch up - How about looking into the gallente design trades like "signature radious" and "mass"? Also: Plz do NOT boost the recons as they are all RANGED ships and already difficult getting close to.
Resumé and suggestions :
- Hybrid fittings - Works well, however maybe 10% PG reduction is enough?
- Hybrid cap reduction - Nice, but could easily use a bigger reduction.
- Hybrid tracking boost 20% - Much needed to gain advantage close range.
- Railgun +10% dps increase - Simply not enough. I would boost hybrid ammo 10% and then on top of this boost the railguns additionally 10%
- Ship speed/agility increase - A good step on the road, however the gallente ships does still have trouble catching up to especially the fast minmatar ships being at a disadvantage not only in base velocity but also from armor rigs and plates compared to shield rigs and extenders.
All the above attributes are traditional key attributes for boosting hybrids and the ships using them, however to really fix blasters and railguns we need to create a unique role. In my opinion CCP Tallest need to make a new definition for hybrids including the T1 ammunition and creating a usefull role instead of being able to shoot at range nobody want to fight...
T1 Ammunition : Right now people rarely use anything but antimatter for hybrids due to blasters being short range anyway and railguns having a super sweet range. I would suggest a remake like this:
- Antimatter -50% range -->> Same range, same dps +10% (20/80 therm/kin distribution) and -20% cap use bonus
- Plutonium -37,5% range -5% cap use -->> Same as antimatter but 80/20 therm/kin distribution
- Uranium -25% range -8% cap use -->> Same range, same dps +10% (20/80 therm/kin distribution) and -10% cap use bonus
- Thorium -12,5% range -40% cap use -->> Same as Uranium but 80/20 therm/kin distribution
- Lead 0% range -50% cap use -->> Same range, same dps +10% (20/80 therm/kin distribution) but 0% cap use bonus
- Iridium +20% range -24% cap use -->> Same as Lead but 80/20 therm/kin distribution
- Tungsten +40% range -27% cap use -->> +25% range, same dps +10% (20/80 therm/kin distribution) and +10% cap use
- Iron +60% range -30% cap use -->> Same as Tungsten but 80/20 therm/kin distribution
- Have the T2 Spike do a +50% range bonus
Railguns and blasters : The suggestions already on the table will definately help patch the gap between railguns and other long range weapons, however to make them unique and usefull in pvp I suggest the following:
- Change reload time from 10 to 5 seconds to make changing ammo usefull
- Hybrids in general need 5-10% more dps on the ammo and railguns need additional 10% dps
- Adjust "Signature Resolution" on railguns so smaller tier railguns hit smaller targets better
(Example : dual 250mm = 300m, 350mm = 350m, 425mm = 400m)
Blaster ships : Currently the blaster ships seems to be the primary downfall for hybrids as they have a near impossible task of getting the guns as close to the enemy as possible in spite of being armor tanked with penalties from plates and rigs. I would look into also reducing gallente mass and maybe even their signature about 10%. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:01:00 -
[139] - Quote
Damn that was a long post - I hope it was worth it because the hybrids still need a few more tweaks to be worth it... Post took 4 hours to write |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:07:00 -
[140] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Imawuss wrote: 1. give optimal a 100% increase and falloff a 80% decrease. 2. increase damage by 20% 3. reduce RoF by 10% 4. Instant loading ammo (Hybrids need some sort of inert advantage like every other weapon has) 5. Adjust T2 ammo as needed. Since Hail got that -50% falloff modfier taken off all other t2 ammo should get the same type of buff, or remove the tracking penalty with void and adjust the range modifers to match the new optimal favored range hybrids would have.
6. (this one would be a bit more experimental) Ammo cap usage goes up with the extended range, not down. Also damage reductions for range are reduced. This could work if cap penalties are severe enough, Making Hybrids viable only for short periods at null ranges but dealing more damag at that range. So they could fight at that range but would cap themseves out if they did the entire fight at range. When combined with insta load ammo we could apply some dps while we get in range then switch to more cap freindly ammo. Mimitar would still be the kite Kings and able to own at mid range and amarr would still be able to apply much more DPS at range. All keep their uniquenss and Hybrids are much more competive. On top of that its just involves changing some stats so its not even that much work for CCP. Win win win as far as im concerned.
that's making them into a bit more like lasers with worse optimal and more damage. at least that's how it looks like. also what's so wrong in making blaster boats faster? if any, matari ships are supposed to be nimble things that zip around. nothing wrong in making galente ships faster but still hard to corner with them. granted matari ships lose their "fastest ships in this size of the 'verse" place, but if people play with the numbers right, it's doable to do this and not break things.
Well Yes it does make them more like Lasers, they are hybrids after all. But with very key differences, They still are short ranged weapons unlike AC's and Pulses that can do short and mid range and in pulses case long range, they have a higher alpha and lower RoF like projectiles (artis), they do more damage, thier ammo functions differently. Basically this turns them into a hybrid of both projectiles and lasers with the advatages while still being unquilly suited for short range combat. Currently they are a hybrid in that they share only the disadvatages of each system. This only adds two things in common with lasers, instant ammo, and optimal is much higher than falloff. Lasers still would have vastly superoir range and more constant damage and still distinctly different and usable in different situations. we still have to carry ammo limiting our range choices we take with us. unlike lasers.
However increasing mobility in order for that to be worth while you ships would have ot be as fast if not faster than Mimatar. They are supposed to be able to kite, play with range. Now you have Gallente take over this roll, not going to happen. Plus if you "fix" hybrids in that matter what abbout Caldari boats that use hybrids? ar ethye now going to be able to kite as well? your fixing the wrong issue by doing that ie: the ships, not the weapon system. |
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:36:00 -
[141] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:
Still won't work. Even if it helped for gal vs amarr, the minmatar get more mids than gal, so they'd fit these mods for sure and become even more unstoppable. This is why it has to be something applied to ships, not new mods which everyone will access.
It could work. Let me explain:
First off, I would call them 'Tactical Modules' as that is their usage and benefit.
Basically the tactical modules would be designed for everyone to use, while giving relevant bonuses for a specific race. Tactical Modules are entirely optional, they don't have to be fitted, but can offer a tactical edge if they are. By being pilot controlled and not a permanent effect, it makes timing their activation entirely relevant; this makes combat more diverse and interesting.
Tactical modules could be limited so that only one of them can be installed on a ship, thus avoiding stacking issues and ships with lots of mid slots abusing them.
In addition, by giving extra bonuses to the relevant races, you increase the chances of them being used by the race they were intended for, and instead help balance that race, while not unbalancing the game.
But in a stroke, you give Gallente pilots a fix for getting in range for blasters, while not unbalacing the game and turning them into Minmitar ships with blasters basically, and not having to give larger damage increases that could make Blasters insta-ship-pod-death when in range.
Here is a rough list to get the idea across about what these modules could be / do:
- Speed Burst: Tactical Module: Improved engine interfaces allow for engines to be briefly stressed, increasing ship speed by 25% for 10 seconds. Gallente get 200% bonus to burst duration. 5 minute cool down.
- Armor Resistance Boost: Tactical Module: Through advances in repair nano technology, briefly increases armor resistance by 25% for 10 seconds. Amarr get 200% bonus to boost duration. 5 minute cool down.
- Signature Reduction: Tactical Module: Helps to mask the ships signature to briefly reduce ship signature by 10% for 10 seconds. Minmitar get 200% bonus to boost duration. 5 minute cool down.
- Shield Resistance Boost: Tactical Module: Advances in shield matrix technology, briefly increases shield resistances by 25% for 10 seconds. Caldari get 200% bonus to boost duration. 5 minute cool down.
You could offer tactical modules that do other things briefly, for say e-war, but still have race bonuses in the same way. But, hey, I think this would be cool and 'could' add something fun to combat. It would give everyone a new way of thinking about combat in EvE, from FC's of 100 man gangs, to Skirmish Gangs or one-vs-one engagements, and even be of use to PvE pilots who want to get past difficult parts of a mission if it is used correctly.
It needs thinking through for sure, but my overall point is that to help solve the 'Gallente Blaster' issue while keeping the game balanced and races unique, while giving everyone something to get their teeth into.
Feedback welcome, thanks chaps and chappesses. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:38:00 -
[142] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:your fixing the wrong issue by doing that ie: the ships, not the weapon system.
but the issue with blasters IS the fact that both the ships AND the weapon systems are screwed up in the first place. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:52:00 -
[143] - Quote
Yep there still sucking high wind compared to other Gunnery systems.
But they are better off then they were before.
Edit: What I mean is there will be no massive huge move to Hybirds but the people that are already using them will feel a little better off as now some better fits become avalible. Bigger guns and what ever alse you can come up with on EFT waring. |
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:52:00 -
[144] - Quote
M1AU wrote:Jiji Hamin wrote:Dare Devel wrote:Alice Katsuko wrote: I don't fly blaster boats. Just going by what I've read and seen, and trying to address some of the complaints regarding hybrids.
If you havent flown one and just read about it then please keep your thoughts to yourself. You will never ever be able to address our problem. To address our problem you have to fly it for years and gather your frustrations, as we hybrid users have, then pour your heart out in this thread. Till then goodbye have a nice day. OR, roll gallente, love gallente, stick SPs into gallente, realize that your relationship will never work until they get their act together, leave gallente for amarr with tears in your eyes, let multiple years pass during which you still secretly harbor feelings for gallente, vent about how those SPs will continue to be near worthless even after the proposed changes. Well I'm actually exactly in that boat as I'm flying almost exclusively Gallente ships. Back then when I started playing EVE, I always thought that it would be balanced. After skilling everything Gallente specific almost to the max - that's for ships skill, hybrid skills and drone skills - I was still at the low end compared to my low SP Caldari friends. They where already flying lvl 4 missions in there Ravens all the time and I still struggled doing the same with my high SP Gallente boats. Now after so much time and frustration, I would really love to see Gallente ships getting some serious love, regardless of how it will look like. I'm ready, at least SP wise.
the dominix is at least as good as the Raven for PvE imho and in the opinion of a lot of experiences players.
i mostly meant for pvp. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 00:28:00 -
[145] - Quote
made a post sporting stuff about "win"matar, who by the way have to earn that "win" through experience and time consuming skilling in 10 directions at once. up until then they are mostly loosematars as frustrated as blaster user seem to be. i deleted it because it just will get flamed anyway, because winmatar are obviously faceroll winmatar no matter what.....
my opinion to the hybrid changes: (hybrid includes rails, blaster obviously not ... "thx cpt. obvious" ^^ )
- changes on sisi are a step in the right direction.
- tracking needs to be adressed again. hybrids should have no difficulties hitting targets of same size in their optimal, even when using a propulsion mod. remove falloff.
- revisit med slots and cpu/pg of gallente ships. making it possible of sporting prop mods and nasty stuff like points, webs, dampers. blaster boats should use dampers more often, since they force opponents towards the blaster range or making locks on the blaster boat more difficult (in a manner of time and range). leaves the opponent with the possibilities of enganging at smaller range or be on his way. maybe look at dampers without making them uber. gallente ships should be able to sport more mid slot gadgeds than other races.
- give a bonus on cap usage on blaster (maybe hybrid) skills, making sensible cap usage a thing of unskilled blaster users and amarrians, like using cap for warp can be made insensible with the according skill. gallente fight in the range of every obstacle possible and should use that cap for the other stuff like propulsion and ewar. reduce cap of hybrid using ships (magnitude open for discusion)
- when buffing the dmg of hybrids, don't buff them directly. look at the dmg mods for the low slots and buff them (rof/dmg multiplier). maybe separate blaster and rails dmg mods to adress certain problems (dmg/rof) seperately. throw in ammonition which is sporting some explo dmg.
- move web bonus from minmatar ships to according gallente ships (but leave sensor dampening) and give minmatar something more suiting to their slipery nature. like neut range bonus (the arch nemesis are the cap hungry amarrians after all...) and remote sensor boosting. how about remote sig reduction for bigger minmatar ships. would give gallente gangs more possibility to slow down and catch opponents and minmatar sporting their hit and run strategy.
- add more rof to rails ( in addition to changes above), making them good tracking, weak hitting, fast firing longe range weapons.
- gallente should be the second fastest race in eve.
- i think min warp distance should be one grid ore at least 200km, thus opening a market for long range engagement and give interceptors and - dictors someting to do.
if properly done this changes would leave the hybrids in their intended role and bring hybrid users up to a similar lvl of op-ness. gz newborn winlente, pwndari
fly safe, your "win"matar aka "faceroll" (insert your flame here) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 00:31:00 -
[146] - Quote
A quick EFT comparison with all the railgun fits that i could think of and similar fits from other races showed that a 20% damage increase of railguns would only almost bring the railguns up to equal dps with similar weapon systems, while systems like artillery still have a 4x as big alphastrike, 0 cap usage and ability to select damage type and beams often out-dps'ing the 2 other systems with a near instant ammo change.
So lets get the 10% hybrid boost to ammunition and additional 10% on railguns and give us some unique features like reduced reload time, less cap usage, ammunition revamp, better tracking and increased signature resolution.
If this works out all CCP will have to look into is how to improve the gallente armor ships and figure out why the Caldari optimal bonus stinks...
EDIT: If anything I think the Gallente ships should have the fastest base-velocity, however from fitting armor rigs and plates become slower than the minmatar ships using shield fits. This on top of making them have signature features like lighter/smaller adjusting mass and size should have them able to catch stuff and keep stuff tackled... The Caldari optimal bonus is hard to crack but with a decent hybrid buff and decent tanks it might not stick out as bad. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 00:53:00 -
[147] - Quote
Look. A solution needs to be KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid!) in order to work very well.
Complicated solutions by adding new modules or giving Gallente built in EW bonuses like Web range (minmatar bonus so no!), Web velocity factor (Serp bonus so no!) or a scram range bonus will not "fix" blaster boats as people will simply put AC's on them and use the EW bonus with AC's. So that rules out EW bonuses.
First lets look at what the traits of Hybrid weapons are or are supposed to be:
Blasters: Extreme short range very high damage
Railguns: Extreme range High RoF
Now lets consider the problems with the weapons relating to their traits and current game tactics and strategies:
Blasters: Gallente hulls are too slow so they are unable to get into range. Blaster boats are total commitment to engagement hulls Blasters struggle to track at their optimal range due to web nerfs. (being addressed with tracking boost) Blasters don't deal significantly more damage compared to their counterparts even at short range. Caldari hulls get a range bonus and lack competitive damage output. Higher tier weapons are very difficult to fit (being addressed with fitting boost)
Railguns: Difficult to fit (being addressed with fitting boost) Deal very little damage in volley (alpha) and DPS Extreme range (>150km) tactics are not viable due to current on grid Probe to Warp tactics/mechanics Very slow tracking (being addressed with tracking boost)
Realistic fixes for the above issues that are not currently being addressed:
Blasters The first fix is to blaster being able to get into range which is addressed simply with speed. Blaster boats, Gallente in particular, should be the fastest straight line speed ships in the game. However the cost of this speed needs to be agility. This is to allow for pilot skill to allow for out manoeuvring. Speed also addresses the engagement commitment issue. With speed you can attempt to break away from the target and outrun your enemy.
If we were to choose agility over speed we will still be in the same situation we are in now. Blaster ships utterly helpless trying to catch ships faster than themselves. It won't matter if they can out accelerate their target because your target will almost certainly have velocity as you land on the grid and will burn away from you as you try to accelerate from zero. It simply won't work and will be a very dull "SPAM APPROACH" and pray you will be able to snag them instead of clever manoeuvres.
If we choose to increase blaster range we begin to leave the blaster trait of extreme close range and start evolving them into lasers or projectiles. Not the ideal route.
Blasters need a little buff to damage output or AC's and Pulses need a little nerf to damage output. Perhaps the best solution is a little of both nerf and buff to prevent the dreaded "power creep".
Caldari hybrid platforms lack, for the most part, the ability to deal competitive damage with blasters. Now changing Caldari hybrid hull range bonuses into damage bonuses will remove a lot of the variation from the game and change the very essence of Caldari battle philosophy. We prefer variation so the optimal range bonus MUST remain. However, inorder to boost damage output of these ships there is a very simple solution. +1 turret hardpoint. Ships like the Ferox and Eagle have a utility hi slot that could be turned into a turret slot. This would boost these ships DPS at the cost of fitting the gun. For example: A Blaster Buffer Ferox would go from 600dps with void to approx 700dps. With a slight boost to Blaster damage output (10%) on top of the this buff the Ferox would be dealing 750-800dps. Only a little less than an armour buffer Blaster Brutix whilst still retaining 62.5k EHP, MWD and tackle. I believe the +1 Turret fix for Caldari hulls will fix a lot of the hulls unable to deal competitive damage.
Railguns Current mechanics allow for ships to on grid warp to targets >150km away. This causes major problems for tactics to use ranges beyond 150km which is the domain of the railgun. If the current minimum warp to range was increased to 250km this would allow for extreme range sniping to occur as it would no longer be as simple to warp on top of these sniper ships without leaving the grid yourself or setting up an inline warp to scout. Current sniper tactics rely heavily on volley damage (Alpha striking). Both lasers and Railguns lack any kind of competitve alpha strike capability. See AMMO FIXES below to address this.
More to follow....................................................................... |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 00:54:00 -
[148] - Quote
AMMO Another issue with Hybrids and Energy turrets compared to Projectiles is versatility. Projectiles can choose their damage type to deal through different choices in ammo. There is also an ammo choice which increases tracking. Hybrids and Lasers are locked into their respective damage types and this won't and should not change. However, their ammo should give them some choices other than slight range and damage differences with a little bit of cap use bonuses thrown in here and there. This current type of ammo design leaves pilots choosing two ammo types from the selection of 8 and only using those. These are almost always max damage + longest range. Projectile users on the other hand tend to carry several types of ammo as they all have a certain use. To that end I propose a rework of Hybrid and Laser T1 ammo to reflect something like what I am Multifrequency (short range EM) : Remains as is except high EM low Thermal Gamma (short range hi RoF) : +50% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) : -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg) : +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) : +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) : As MF but with hi thermal damage Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF): +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal +15% Cap use -30% tracking Radio (Extreme long range) : +60% optimal
Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is High Thermal low Kinetic damage Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking): -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff Iridium (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal Lead (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF): +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +15% Cap use -30% tracking Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 02:28:00 -
[149] - Quote
It's quite simple Hybrids have every Negative .... Ammo reload to switch timer, Cap Usage, Ammo usage, limited damage types .....
Blasters are supposed to be king of damage, with limited damage types!!!! So they really need to have the alpha to match atleast if not the arty volley damage, if not more considering the limited damage types....
One idea i had to even things up a bit, was perhaps to make Hybrid ammo truely hybrid and have it deal like the sansha all 4 types of damage?
Blasters need some way to get in closer to be able to engage,
- FIX STACKING ON WEB DRONES!!!!!!!!!!!! - Slight EHP buff to ships like the brutix that are obvious brawler ships with paper tanks for some reason.. - Boost speed so they can actually get in close - Boost agility NOT NERF!
Scram drones would be nice...
In my view the above, and basically making Rails the autocannons of the hybrids, extremely long range though fast rate of fire, but limited volley, Blasters, very very high Volley damage, i'm talking MASSIVE, if you manage to get to blaster range you need to be able to **** as chances are your getting into your optimal at 1/2 tank left |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 02:40:00 -
[150] - Quote
cant wait to see how Tallest replies this week. lots of good suggestions in this thread. |
|
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 03:48:00 -
[151] - Quote
Hybrids are still excessively weak, as are many of the gallentean hulls bonused into them. 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 which might be what needs to happen:
1. take the deimos and consolidate to have a 10% per level to damage rather than two seperate damage bonuses and give it a web strength bonus of 5% per level as its new 4th bonus OR, seeing as A-Hacs are proved to be effective/popular, give it a 7.5% AB speed bonus as its 4th bonus 2. replace the MWD bonus on the thorax with an AB speed bonus of 7.5% per level and also minorly buff its max cap and cap recharge to compensate for that loss and to keep mwd fits viable 3. give the ishkur a web strength bonus 5% per level as its much asked-for 4th bonus 4. give the enyo an AB speed bonus of 7.5% per level as its much asked-for 4th bonus 5. give the harpy a a web strength bonus of 5% per level OR an AB speed bonus of 7.5% per level as its much asked-for 4th bonus 6. buff the resists, both armor and shield, on all gallente ships currently bonused into active tanking (not by a lot just a little nudge) making the currently-popular buffer fits more viable by a small margine while also buffing the EHP and tanking capacity of those who actually utilize the bonus as intended. 7. make many or all hybrid tracking bonuses into 10% per level, particularly for battleships (mega/kronos/whatevs) 8. give the sin a tracking bonus instead of an align time bonus 9. make armor reppers cycle at the beginning 10. continue with buffage to base movement stats for all hybrid-bonused ships, giving them an extra inch on speed and agility 11. continue with buffage to all blaster and railgun stats including easier fittings for blasters, less cap use for all, buffed tracking for BOTH railguns and blasters and buffed damage for BOTH railguns and blasters 12. buff null and javelin in an attempt to make range-bonused hybrids better. the null bonus would largely be a gift to caldari hybrids platforms for gang warfare. the null-oriented Rokh fitted with a Tracking Enhancer is already cool in concept and some people make it scary in practice on TQ... make it and ships like it better. the spike bonus would be largely to make the railgun a better mid-range weapon for fleets. both of these would be on top of damage and tracking buffs appropriate to rails and blasters specifically AND the massive increase in javelin tracking already confirmed in a devblog 13. completely revamp information warfare links to be useful
then maybe we will start to see gallente ships getting more heavily used, even if only for gang warfare |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
231
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 07:36:00 -
[152] - Quote
Blaster could use another 15% on optimal and fall off. to be in line with their counter parts. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 07:46:00 -
[153] - Quote
We have to remember that changes to be proposed for hybrid re-balancing will have to be limited to existing modules with their current architecture.
If we propose completely a new module or adding a new character to an existing module that will require a new development stream. Which is not going to happen.
All depends on how CCP Tallest replies to this thread. I hope he does since the community had a extensive testing done at the weekend and have presented myraid thoughts. All these thoughts are pointing to the fact that hybrids are still underpowered and need significantly more boost in ... 1) Damage 2) Speed 3) Capacitor 4) Tracking
Also few pointed out other required buffs like 1) Sig radiius 2) Bit more PG + CPU for fitting T2 3) Extended tackle range or Tackle power
But looking at the way Talos was gimped off its 90% web before even coming to test you know what CCP Tallest is thinking - not to increase gallente tackle power.
But I sincerely hope CCP Tallest will come back to the community with his thoughts sooner than later and not keep us guessing.
The worst will be if the changes done to hybrid will go live.
That would be the end of our struggle for years to get hybrid rebalanced.
good luck all. |
Theron Gyrow
Gradient Electus Matari
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 07:57:00 -
[154] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote: Railguns: Very slow tracking (being addressed with tracking boost)
I don't think that rails' tracking is currently being improved at all. Just blasters'.
|
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 08:03:00 -
[155] - Quote
Well all proposed changes and sisi changes are nice- every buff to so underpowered weapon system is nice, but i simply don't understand what the hell it is all about.
*************** THIS NEED TO BE DONE, SIMPLE RULE HAVE TO BE IN PLACE:
1. Ship with short range weapons have to catch long range one - so it has to be the fastest. 2. After getting in its range, its dps have to be that much higher, that it compensates for the time spent (and dmg received) while getting in that range. PERIOD, VERY SIMPLE, THIS BASE PRINCIPLE SHOULD NEVER BE BROKEN and it evidently is in many ways. ***************
The solution is allso pretty evident, and clearly not in lowering cpu req and other cosmetical changes, they don't solve this base problem.
CCP wants to leave their race concepts intact, but they simply gave faster race, longer range weapon system (comparing min and gall) So in theory, gallente will never kill min, even if they start at 0km range, because dmg difference isn't enought even to compensate for time the min ship to run away from gal range :D this should be switched over in some way (either speed or ranges) |
Crat Meina
Gemintron
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 09:24:00 -
[156] - Quote
Just give the blaster boats the possibility to tractor themself to the target... right to the blaster/web range |
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 11:30:00 -
[157] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Blaster could use another 15% on optimal and fall off. to be in line with their counter parts. Very true.
|
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 11:36:00 -
[158] - Quote
Spc One wrote:Obsidian Hawk wrote:Blaster could use another 15% on optimal and fall off. to be in line with their counter parts. Very true.
no, that will make them similar to AC, they should simply be high dps at close range ( with ability to get in that range ) - so: increase dps, do something that blastership can get into range of others. |
Sirinda
Offworld Miners and Fabricators Guild
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 11:42:00 -
[159] - Quote
Theron Gyrow wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote: Railguns: Very slow tracking (being addressed with tracking boost)
I don't think that rails' tracking is currently being improved at all. Just blasters'.
True. Railguns get an increased damage modifier instead. |
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 11:55:00 -
[160] - Quote
i could write a wall-of-text-post, but since there are lots off good suggestions in this and other threads, i'll just write a small conclusion from my POV:
rails: most ppl are right: slightly more dmg would make rails desirable again. apart from that long range setups (in general: rails, beams, artys) need to be looked at again: the new probing system has killed classical long range BS engagements (150k+)
blaster: they still need alot love. but consider this: no matter how much their dmg, tracking or fitting requirements are buffed the main problem is range and speed. as long as gallente hulls have difficulties getting in blaster combat range blasters will remain so called "papertiger" - nice stats, in theory at least. the same goes for web bonuses: you first need to get in range before you can use web...so we're at the beginning again..
so it basicly comes town to: - increase blaster range -> would make them just anoter version of autocannons OR - increase blasterboat speed -> would require fundamental doctrine changes since gallente should have the fastest ships, not minmataar. (in my logic: long range weapons -> slow ships, close range -> fast ships) OR -increase ship speed in a "different way" i.e. give blasterboats no sig increase while mwd'ing (lower the penalty massively) or give them a massive AB speed boost...or similar bonuses OR -a mix of all above: i.e. 15% more range/falloff, 10-15% base speed increase on blaster hulls, decrease mwd sig penalty by 10% per level...or sth like that..make blasters AND blaster hulls a viable choice again..
ps: someone proposed to modify the signature resolution of lower tier guns..i.e. rails: 425mm -> 400m , 350mm -> 350m, dual 250mm -> 300m. i like that A LOT. it would make sense using lower tier weapons not just because you don't have enough pg/cpu to fit the large ones but also give aditional argument to consider fitting lower tier turrets in the first place...
|
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 11:58:00 -
[161] - Quote
Theron Gyrow wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote: Railguns: Very slow tracking (being addressed with tracking boost)
I don't think that rails' tracking is currently being improved at all. Just blasters'.
Apologies.... overlooked that. Maybe a slight boost to railgun tracking would help.
|
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
79
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 13:43:00 -
[162] - Quote
The problem is none of the developers used a hybrid weapon, or tried to use a hybrid-weapon ship in a long time. That much is obvious or otherwise the Talos would have never made it even to Singularity. There is not much time to make significant changes and test them, so 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 and ships. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 14:01:00 -
[163] - Quote
Deviana Sevidon wrote:The problem is none of the developers used a hybrid weapon, or tried to use a hybrid-weapon ship in a long time. That much is obvious or otherwise the Talos would have never made it even to Singularity. There is not much time to make significant changes and test them, so 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 and ships.
base concept should be this : 1. Ship with short range weapons have to catch long range one - so it has to be the fastest. 2. After getting in its range, its dps have to be that much higher, that it compensates for the time spent (and dmg received) while getting in that range.
This is base, other things like tracking ( well that is allready in point 2) pg, cpu etc, are secondary issues.
The sooner this people and mainly devs aknowledge, the better. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 14:39:00 -
[164] - Quote
sq0 wrote: The sooner this people and mainly devs aknowledge, the better.
They can never acknowledge that. Racial differences is the reason. They probably messed up when they first designed races, or at least the environment was much different, fact is: minmatar is the fast race, gallente are armor tanked blaster wielding hedonites. In time, it meant that gallente boats suck because they have incompatible requirements. I honestly doubt they will shift their view on racial characteristics, so we have to take THAT into account while trying to come up with a sensible solution to our problems.
The same goes with "caldari gunships are ranged platforms", which in this environment is completely silly. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:05:00 -
[165] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:
They can never acknowledge that. Racial differences is the reason. They probably messed up when they first designed races, or at least the environment was much different, fact is: minmatar is the fast race, gallente are armor tanked blaster wielding hedonites
I disagree... Minmatar are the Mobility race. Hi agility and versatility.
Not speed. Having the highest speed too is a problem and overpowers Minmatar |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:07:00 -
[166] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:sq0 wrote: The sooner this people and mainly devs aknowledge, the better.
They can never acknowledge that. Racial differences is the reason. They probably messed up when they first designed races, or at least the environment was much different, fact is: minmatar is the fast race, gallente are armor tanked blaster wielding hedonites. In time, it meant that gallente boats suck because they have incompatible requirements. I honestly doubt they will shift their view on racial characteristics, so we have to take THAT into account while trying to come up with a sensible solution to our problems. The same goes with "caldari gunships are ranged platforms", which in this environment is completely silly.
so just switch autocannon and blaster range, FO and dmg, attributes. I really think that fastest ships should have close range guns, with higher dmg ( or different way of getting into range ) this is how ever you take it the most logical concept, if this is broken, mechanics are broken. Just imagine that archer is faster than melee warrior in some rpg, how the fck could warrior kill him? -neverever. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:08:00 -
[167] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Gecko O'Bac wrote:
They can never acknowledge that. Racial differences is the reason. They probably messed up when they first designed races, or at least the environment was much different, fact is: minmatar is the fast race, gallente are armor tanked blaster wielding hedonites
I disagree... Minmatar are the Mobility race. Hi agility and versatility. Not speed. Having the highest speed too is a problem and overpowers Minmatar
That is what you think/would like. Fact is, Minmatar is the fast race. Their ships have the highest base speed, better agility modifiers and lower masses. Which is what I was saying. CCP designed the races like this and it's unlikely they will, now in 2011, change the setup substantially. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:12:00 -
[168] - Quote
sq0 wrote:Gecko O'Bac wrote:sq0 wrote: The sooner this people and mainly devs aknowledge, the better.
They can never acknowledge that. Racial differences is the reason. They probably messed up when they first designed races, or at least the environment was much different, fact is: minmatar is the fast race, gallente are armor tanked blaster wielding hedonites. In time, it meant that gallente boats suck because they have incompatible requirements. I honestly doubt they will shift their view on racial characteristics, so we have to take THAT into account while trying to come up with a sensible solution to our problems. The same goes with "caldari gunships are ranged platforms", which in this environment is completely silly. so just switch autocannon and blaster range, FO and dmg, attributes. I really think that fastest ships should have close range guns, with higher dmg ( or different way of getting into range ) this is how ever you take it the most logical concept, if this is broken, mechanics are broken. Just imagine that archer is faster than melee warrior in some rpg, how the fck could warrior kill him? -neverever.
Positioning, focused defense against ranged damage, short speed bursts, higher durability, higher total dps. These are all solutions adopted in other situations.
In years, I have seen a distinct unwillingness on the part of CCP to modify their approach to racial characteristics. I doubt that is going to change now or ever, that's why I say we have to design AROUND that to find a workable middle ground. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:26:00 -
[169] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:sq0 wrote:Gecko O'Bac wrote:sq0 wrote: The sooner this people and mainly devs aknowledge, the better.
They can never acknowledge that. Racial differences is the reason. They probably messed up when they first designed races, or at least the environment was much different, fact is: minmatar is the fast race, gallente are armor tanked blaster wielding hedonites. In time, it meant that gallente boats suck because they have incompatible requirements. I honestly doubt they will shift their view on racial characteristics, so we have to take THAT into account while trying to come up with a sensible solution to our problems. The same goes with "caldari gunships are ranged platforms", which in this environment is completely silly. so just switch autocannon and blaster range, FO and dmg, attributes. I really think that fastest ships should have close range guns, with higher dmg ( or different way of getting into range ) this is how ever you take it the most logical concept, if this is broken, mechanics are broken. Just imagine that archer is faster than melee warrior in some rpg, how the fck could warrior kill him? -neverever. Positioning, focused defense against ranged damage, short speed bursts, higher durability, higher total dps. These are all solutions adopted in other situations. In years, I have seen a distinct unwillingness on the part of CCP to modify their approach to racial characteristics. I doubt that is going to change now or ever, that's why I say we have to design AROUND that to find a workable middle ground.
higher durability and/or higher dps is matter of course (to compensate for getting dmg while not in range to fire). Positioning - why would i choose a ship that needs some extra possitioning to have even a slightest chance of winning if i have another that is just better in allmost every situation (and in those specific ones it still might be better). Only thing i think is ok is the speed burst - form of rush abilities of melees in other games, but that is again far greater issue than simply changing some stats of hybrids ( where i think is this balancing going ) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:36:00 -
[170] - Quote
I don't mind minmatar being the fastest race, however for the base velocity Gallente should be faster. After fitting a few armor rigs on the gallente armor ships and a nanofiber on the shield tanking minmatar ship the result should be the minmatar ship still being the fastest (in general) while the blaster ships with better agility and less mass should accelerate faster being able to catch their pray... Somehow making the projectiles better and at the same time making minmatar mostly shield tanked with plenty lowslots for damage and speed mods on the already fastest ships in Eve made everything a little lopsided :-(
Pinky |
|
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 16:17:00 -
[171] - Quote
sq0 wrote:Positioning - why would i choose a ship that needs some extra possitioning to have even a slightest chance of winning if i have another that is just better in allmost every situation (and in those specific ones it still might be better).
Well, even in the open space of EVE there are many situations where you have choke points or forced positioning. Gate camping, pos bashing, undocking, PI shuttling, whatever. In these situations a more durable ship, with high dps at close range may win over a faster, lower dps counterpart that is forced to bash through the danger zone.
Not saying that "gate camping" is a great design for any ship, but it's a possibility. As it is, blasters can't really fulfill that role either. (Well, neither railguns can, even though sniping itself is mostly a positioning war)
Edit for ideas: remember, in suggesting we may think outside the box as well... If nothing gets implemented we may still give CCP something to think about... For example a bonus to short range warps... This way a coordinated attack of short range ships could catch an unprepared, but faster, ship. This is NOT a great idea, we have problems with on-grid probing already, but it's still something different and unique other than "MOAR SPEED PLZKTHXBAI" |
NeoShocker
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:14:00 -
[172] - Quote
Been thinking. Of course we want different weapon systems that is different from others. Read most of the thread and I came up an idea.
Blasters and Railgun systems are very much like other two weapon systems. Close range, high DPS and trakcing, and RoF fo blasters. Long range, low DPS, low tracking and lower RoF. Pretty much the same in general for other gunnery weapon systems, just that different damage type, optimal and falloff range.
Why not SWAP around blasters and railguns?
Blasters will have high alpha damage and RoF is reduced by half or 60%, tracking is increased by 25% and the range is the same or 10% more range. Think artilleries, but short range instead of long range.
Railguns, gave more thoughts on this. I really tried it, but it was pretty underwhelming IMO. I think it should be similar to current blaster's mechanics, just the much increased RoF, and slightly increase tracking while maintaining its a long range weapon system. It will be low alpha, but the fast firing long range DPS. Think blasters, but long range and fast firing guns, just semi low damage.
It bothers me a lot when railguns and blasters is trying to be as good and similar as projecties (or so people wanted to). So I really much prefer the idea of swapped roles of the railgun weapon systems or just change the way how it works. Not make it similar roles to other weapons systems. |
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:51:00 -
[173] - Quote
NeoShocker wrote:Been thinking. Of course we want different weapon systems that is different from others. Read most of the thread and I came up an idea.
Blasters and Railgun systems are very much like other two weapon systems. Close range, high DPS and trakcing, and RoF fo blasters. Long range, low DPS, low tracking and lower RoF. Pretty much the same in general for other gunnery weapon systems, just that different damage type, optimal and falloff range.
Why not SWAP around blasters and railguns?
Blasters will have high alpha damage and RoF is reduced by half or 60%, tracking is increased by 25% and the range is the same or 10% more range. Think artilleries, but short range instead of long range.
Railguns, gave more thoughts on this. I really tried it, but it was pretty underwhelming IMO. I think it should be similar to current blaster's mechanics, just the much increased RoF, and slightly increase tracking while maintaining its a long range weapon system. It will be low alpha, but the fast firing long range DPS. Think blasters, but long range and fast firing guns, just semi low damage.
It bothers me a lot when railguns and blasters is trying to be as good and similar as projecties (or so people wanted to). So I really much prefer the idea of swapped roles of the railgun weapon systems or just change the way how it works. Not make it similar roles to other weapons systems.
Fast RoF railguns is a nono, navy ammo already costs enough. If you want to do that, make normal/navy ammo cheaper/take less space |
M1AU
Rheintal Underground Rising
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:04:00 -
[174] - Quote
I just wanted to point out that CCP Ytterbium wrote some interesting stuff regarding the new tier 3 BCs in regards to blaster performance here. |
Daedalus Arcova
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:14:00 -
[175] - Quote
Worryingly, there is no mention in Ytterbium's post of the insignificant damage difference between blasters and their counterparts, and no insights into the problems of railguns. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:33:00 -
[176] - Quote
NeoShocker wrote: It bothers me a lot when railguns and blasters is trying to be as good and similar as projecties (or so people wanted to).
they should be exactly as good, just in different situations, or different aproach, not just wrong and weaker just firing sifferently :D |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:50:00 -
[177] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Worryingly, there is no mention in Ytterbium's post of the insignificant damage difference between blasters and their counterparts, and no insights into the problems of railguns.
on the bright side, they seem aware that the problem runs much deeper. this is a good sign.
and more importantly, theyre understanding that the tornado is OP. |
Abrazzar
284
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:52:00 -
[178] - Quote
OK, quick silly idea here and then I'll shut up.
Add a low mod that reduces shield HPs but increases hull HPs. (putting shield emitters into the hull instead on the outside) Add a high cap use active med mod that increases hull resists. (pumping cap to reinforce hull integrity fields) Add hull repair drones. (still lowest efficiency repair but greater convenience than modules)
And with the already high hull HPs, Gallente ships turn into natural hull tankers that can be fast and durable without throwing med slots for tank. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Daedalus Arcova
52
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:37:00 -
[179] - Quote
This post got me thinking about how to use ship stats for mass, inertia and speed to help Gallente ships stay mobile, even when weighed down with plates.
Bear in mind that mass doesn't affect speed unless an AB or MWD is active.
The obvious way to compensate for plates is to lower the mass of Gallente ship hulls. But this is actually counter-productive, as the addition of plates will actually be a greater percentage increase in mass, and will hurt speed and agility while the AB or MWD is on more than it would with a high base ship mass. By the same token, the difference in AB/MWD speed between an armour buffer and shields will be even greater.
So what I'd suggest (slightly counter-intuitively), is to actually increase the mass of Gallente ships, but also give them a boost to base speed and agility to compensate. This would mean that putting plates on a Gallente hull would make less of a difference to its AB/MWD speed, because the difference in mass caused by the addition of the plate and the activation of the prop mod is smaller compared to the total mass of the ship. Armour rigs would still hurt your speed, but plates would have less of a negative effect than they do currently.
With these changes, Gallente ships would have much higher base speeds, but it wouldn't translate into as much as a gain when using AB/MWD. This also means better mobility when scrammed at present. Currently, even if a Gallente blaster boat manages to get into scram range of its target (as it must), getting scrammed itself often means the target slips away due to their higher base speeds. If Gallente had the fastest base speeds instead (maintaining the Minmatar's superior mobility with AB/MWD), then they'll have a far easier time staying on top of their target in scram range.
Gallente would have the speed advantage inside scram range (assuming single-prop MWDs), but Minmatar would still be the fastest ships with MWDs active.
This is very much just a priori theorising. Someone who is better with formulae than I am ought to do the maths on it, and there are probably unintended consequences that I haven't thought of. However, tweaking manoeuvrability through the use of speed, agility and mass (instead of just speed and agility) could mix things up in some very interesting (and hopefully positive) ways. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:00:00 -
[180] - Quote
I've had an interesting idea.
I'm not the best at pvp so take with a grain of salt.
To me it seems using blaster against amarr generally can work out ok. They don't seem to newt you unless there bonused because they have cap pressure, so you're active tank can hold longer. You have the speed and mids to get on them and hold them. And the dps and tracking to give you a bit of an advantage.
Against minmatar, rails seem to generally work out better, you can stay out of there newt range. Again making you're active tank last a bit longer, keep them in fall off. Keep you're dps up. You're not faster than them but you can generally hold them long enough it seems.
The problem right now is, you're running from a fight depending on how you're fit. No hope with blasters if you see a Hurricane. No hope with rails if you see a Harbringer.
What if hybrids instead changed how they worked with different ammo. You only have hybrids, long range ammo, both close and far. Short range ammo both close and far.
Depending on what ammo you load you're hybrid now works like a rail gun, or a blaster. You could still keep the specializations, they would effect the ammo types. You could keep all there disadvantages (you'd have to), reload time, ammo, cap.
Hybrid boats wouldn't need to be the fastest. Active tanks could hold up a bit better. Maybe even plates in fleet fights might work out better.
The big problem is hybrids would become the most flexible weapon in the game. And I'm not sure if you would end up seeing all gallente boats instead of minmatar.
|
|
Maksim Cammeren
The Tuskers
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:02:00 -
[181] - Quote
On the topic of railguns.
Railguns are designed to be long range weapons, but, as pointed out many times in the thread, they often have more range than necessary in typical engagements (especially on Caldari hulls).
What about nerfing some of their range, but increasing the raw damage to compensate? For example: -20% to optimal/falloff +x% tracking (since you now use them at shorter ranges) +20% damage ?
That way, Caldari hull bonuses are more useful in typical engagements, while the Gallente get a more powerful weapon at medium ranges. |
Daedalus Arcova
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:09:00 -
[182] - Quote
Space newt: http://kitundu.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/space_newt.jpg |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:15:00 -
[183] - Quote
Oh man. Fixed |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:59:00 -
[184] - Quote
For now i think it would be best to just add +20-30% blaster dmg on top of sisi changes to compensate for extremly long time getting in 0range ( if it is even possible).
Problem won't be solved at all, but it's a start. Adressing the deep problem of blasters and blasterships is a longer issue, so for now, i think it's best to add this to next patch and keep thinking about the whole issue. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:44:00 -
[185] - Quote
Monger Man wrote:
What if hybrids instead changed how they worked with different ammo.
i think this is what we'll end up seeing ultimately. it's the simplest solution, and the community seems to not mind it. it's super boring though. cant wait to see how theyve incorporated player suggestions into the next iteration.
|
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:56:00 -
[186] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Monger Man wrote:
What if hybrids instead changed how they worked with different ammo.
i think this is what we'll end up seeing ultimately. it's the simplest solution, and the community seems to not mind it. it's super boring though. cant wait to see how theyve incorporated player suggestions into the next iteration.
Boring, perhaps... Still I'd take "effective" over "exciting" any day. One simple solution would be dramatically increasing damage gains from using shorter ranged ammo.... That at least would solve the Caldari rail problems. Blaster problems need a more organic approach, though a big bump in damage would at least make them worth using in some situations. |
Wylee Coyote
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:56:00 -
[187] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:Much of what Mariner6 said earlier i do approve of.
Gallente Blaster boats commit 100% so yes they fight in scram/web/neut range. Because of this Gallente Blaster boats need to be made of sturdier stuff than they are now. Boost armor RESISTS! not HP amount as that will affect performance. The Drake is a tech1 BC yet it has 5% to all Shield resists per lvl. Apply some of the same thoughts to gallente boats.
and as much as some people are wanting a switch from armor to shield tanking for gallente, i really still feel gallente should stay armor tanky!
Also im unsure of this but i believe gallente ships should have either a buff to cap capacity or a buff to cap regen to make them more resilient in neut range compared to other platforms. Making hybrids less cap intensive is a buff to all ships that want to use hybrids. Gallente ships should be built to withstand the cap intensive nature of hybrids a LOT more than other ships!
Also T2 Hybrid ammos need more love as been said previously! Hail defintiely needs a 50% to optimal and falloff. Void still needs a damage bonus more than it has so far.
in general Gallente's secondary bonuses should be considered to be web range if anything, for example 10% per lvl to range, NOT to velocity factor! even with a domination web ur not getting to max t2 point range and ur not encroaching on rapiers range territory. Yet it WILL actually bring some level of catch it kill it to gallente design.
Agreed.
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
125
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 00:57:00 -
[188] - Quote
Maksim Cammeren wrote:On the topic of railguns.
Railguns are designed to be long range weapons, but, as pointed out many times in the thread, they often have more range than necessary in typical engagements (especially on Caldari hulls).
What about nerfing some of their range, but increasing the raw damage to compensate? For example: -20% to optimal/falloff +x% tracking (since you now use them at shorter ranges) +20% damage ?
That way, Caldari hull bonuses are more useful in typical engagements, while the Gallente get a more powerful weapon at medium ranges.
removal of falloff moderate tracking increase (atm is quite good) 40%+ boost to damage.
that's for blasters alone. blaster ships should receive a mobility upgrade too. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 01:46:00 -
[189] - Quote
a thought I've been cooking up:
a solid rocket booster of sorts.
- uses oxygen for fuel 125-500 units per second, 10 second reload time, total fuel capacity can vary dependent on size and meta level. no more than five seconds worth of boost.(1 cycle)
- no cap usage.
Oxygen's actually pretty big at 0.38 m3, 125 would be 47.5m3... it'd be a conscious choice whether to pack reloads or ammo/cap booster charges.
- Must be used in conjunction with MWD/AB for an additional 100% speed, with massive acceleration, but throws agility into the dirt via a mass multiplier penalty for extreme straightline speed. would negate the chances for kiter abuse, and lead to some interesting options. does not function independently.
or just swap the thorax's 5% mwd cap bonus to a 5% mwd speed one, and mirror it on other blaster platforms (brutix, hyperion both come to mind). the boats are designed to be in-your-face brawlers. let them get there. |
PinkKnife
Garden Of The Gods
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 01:59:00 -
[190] - Quote
Well, in short Hybrids have no real gains over the other turrets, ignoring raw numbers.
Energy turrets - 0 reloading/switching time, no real ammo to worry about. No damage type switching, can swap ammo to stay in range. Uses cap.
Hybrid turrets - 10 second reloading/switching time, ammo costs, no damage type switching, can swap ammo to stay in range, uses cap.
Hybrids have the same ammo system that alters range, but it is rarely if ever feasible to do so because it takes 10 seconds to swap ammo types. So instead of changing ammo to continuously be in optimal range like energy turrets, you end up just moving the ship instead and saving the time it takes.
So, I'd suggest changing the reloading time to hybrids to much smaller durations so that it becomes more reasonable to use multiple ammo types. In addition, a few people had talked about using much large clips (200+) as an added boosts to hybrids that doesn't involve affecting the damage or optimal numbers, but makes them more attractive over missiles and projectiles. |
|
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis Moar Tears
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 03:10:00 -
[191] - Quote
I think Void is fine.
I think Null should focus more on falloff; Tracking Enhancers make a MUCH bigger difference when affecting falloff than optimal, and this is telling in the fact that there are few to no reasonably long-range blaster fits, even on ships that have a falloff bonus to hybrids.
I think that hybrids, blasters in particular, would like to see a slightly bigger boost to tracking. From what I hear in the 3TBC feedback thread, most people think the Talos can't hit jack up close. Maybe they are using it wrong, I don't know.
I think the general hybrid-ship speed adjustment could be amplified a bit. I do NOT think that hybrid ships should EVER be made faster than Minmatar, or every blaster ship ever would be basically a cheap Adrestia, running down Vagabonds and tearing them to shreds.
I think that making Gallente ships in general use Afterburners like others use MicroWarpDrives is a terrible idea. Either they would be slower than they are currently, or they would be immensely overstrong in small numbers and escape ability (re: 100mn AB Tengu trend), or even both. |
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis Moar Tears
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 03:31:00 -
[192] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:- Must be used in conjunction with MWD/AB for an additional 100% speed, with massive acceleration, but throws agility into the dirt via a mass multiplier penalty for extreme straightline speed. would negate the chances for kiter abuse, and lead to some interesting options. does not function independently. Looks like SOMEBODY wants to bump capital ships! |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 04:14:00 -
[193] - Quote
Just a bit of brainstorming...
People have suggested that Gallente get an AB bonus which is on the surface a terribad idea simply because ABs are slower than MWDs. However, what if the gallente had the ability to fit oversized ABs and got acceleration bonus along with it. That would give a HUGE straight line speed boost and mitigate damage on the approach. It would solve cap usage problems. It would still leave Minmatar the most mobile race because an oversized AB is a pain to turn with.
THis along with a decent damage and tracking buff would fix blaster boats overall. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 04:31:00 -
[194] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:
Just a bit of brainstorming...
People have suggested that Gallente get an AB bonus which is on the surface a terribad idea simply because ABs are slower than MWDs. However, what if the gallente had the ability to fit oversized ABs and got acceleration bonus along with it. That would give a HUGE straight line speed boost and mitigate damage on the approach. It would solve cap usage problems. It would still leave Minmatar the most mobile race because an oversized AB is a pain to turn with.
THis along with a decent damage and tracking buff would fix blaster boats overall.
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. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 04:51:00 -
[195] - Quote
Monger Man wrote:Nemesor wrote:
Just a bit of brainstorming...
People have suggested that Gallente get an AB bonus which is on the surface a terribad idea simply because ABs are slower than MWDs. However, what if the gallente had the ability to fit oversized ABs and got acceleration bonus along with it. That would give a HUGE straight line speed boost and mitigate damage on the approach. It would solve cap usage problems. It would still leave Minmatar the most mobile race because an oversized AB is a pain to turn with.
THis along with a decent damage and tracking buff would fix blaster boats overall.
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.
Yes I have played with oversized ABs. I never thought they would work as they do currently... As stated previously, it would require a fast acceleration bonus and be used for short straight line bursts of speed. Yes, an agility boost would be needed and you would not be immune to incoming damage. It would be mitigated. Taking too much damage on the approach being on of the prime problems with blasters after all.
Read the first line of my post... "Just a bit of brainstorming..." then take a deep breath and have a cup of tea. Tailor your responses in a reasonably toned fashion. We are all trying to work on this problem together.
|
Monger Man
D.S.A.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:18:00 -
[196] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Monger Man wrote:Nemesor wrote:
Just a bit of brainstorming...
People have suggested that Gallente get an AB bonus which is on the surface a terribad idea simply because ABs are slower than MWDs. However, what if the gallente had the ability to fit oversized ABs and got acceleration bonus along with it. That would give a HUGE straight line speed boost and mitigate damage on the approach. It would solve cap usage problems. It would still leave Minmatar the most mobile race because an oversized AB is a pain to turn with.
THis along with a decent damage and tracking buff would fix blaster boats overall.
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. Yes I have played with oversized ABs. I never thought they would work as they do currently... As stated previously, it would require a fast acceleration bonus and be used for short straight line bursts of speed. Yes, an agility boost would be needed and you would not be immune to incoming damage. It would be mitigated. Taking too much damage on the approach being on of the prime problems with blasters after all. Read the first line of my post... "Just a bit of brainstorming..." then take a deep breath and have a cup of tea. Tailor your responses in a reasonably toned fashion. We are all trying to work on this problem together.
You're right, my apologies. I don't think an ab boost is a good idea for blaster boats. It again makes rails possibly op. And its a bit of a band aid to the problem.
Obviously the problem being getting in range with blasters, so an ab boost would seem to be a pretty decent idea.
I'm just afraid it would cause issues else where quickly. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:56:00 -
[197] - Quote
As a solution to the non use of very long range weapons like rails and cruise missiles, I suggest increasing the minimum warp distance to 250km although even 200km would be nice. This would prevent probers from allowing an on grid short range fleet to warp to the snipers. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 06:15:00 -
[198] - Quote
Everyone here seems to be operating under the assumption that the only way to increase speed is by bonuses to speed. The problem with blasters and blaster boats is unique, and I believe requires an unique solution.
What about a module that increased speed by changing your top speed directly and then calculating the capacitor cost to do so? Making something like this run for a few seconds and then cycle off for several would give a large boost to speed on slower ships, while faster ships would gain less of an advantage. Giving Gallente either a speed, cap use, or duration bonus on blaster boats would allow them to "sprint" to a target faster or longer than a target could "sprint" away, while still requiring good positioning on the Gallente's part. Combining this with an inability to online ABs/MWDs while this mod is online would prevent abuse.
Very rough draft and needs some work, but I don't think we're going to find the elegant solution we want "inside the box." |
Galen Enderas
Trade Federation of New Eden Pirate Nation.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 07:33:00 -
[199] - Quote
Maksim Cammeren wrote:On the topic of railguns.
Railguns are designed to be long range weapons, but, as pointed out many times in the thread, they often have more range than necessary in typical engagements (especially on Caldari hulls).
What about nerfing some of their range, but increasing the raw damage to compensate? For example: -20% to optimal/falloff +x% tracking (since you now use them at shorter ranges) +20% damage ?
That way, Caldari hull bonuses are more useful in typical engagements, while the Gallente get a more powerful weapon at medium ranges.
I don't think that the extreme range is an issue, as you can switch to certain ammo types (such as antimatter) which have a negative range bonus anyway (solves that problem). What i would like to see is the ability to pull off alpha strikes similar to the mael. So possibly an damage increase for them, I would personally settle for the ability to alpha. I also believe that this will put the Rokh on the road to reclaiming it's former glory. |
Skopia
Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 07:55:00 -
[200] - Quote
Concerning the following:
Max Velocity +10 on the following ships: Arazu, Astarte, Brutix, Catalyst, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Enyo, Eos, Falcon, Guardian-Vexor, Helios, Incursus, Ishtar, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant
Inertia Modifier -5% on the following ships: Adrestia, Arazu, Ares, Astarte, Atron, Brutix, Catalyst, Celestis, Cormorant, Daredevil, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Eagle, Enyo, Eos, Eris, Exequror Navy Issue, Falcon, Federation Navy Comet, Ferox, Guardian-Vexor, Harpy, Helios, Hyperion, Incursus, Ishkur, Ishtar, Kronos, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Merlin, Moa, Phobos, Raptor, Rokh, Sin, Taranis, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant, Vindicator, Vulture
Don't forget the Proteus! |
|
Solinuas
Beyond Evil and Good
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 09:22:00 -
[201] - Quote
Well i have something interesting to put out here, the only blaster ship worth anything i have flown is the adrestia, the reason why is simple, it had the kind of slap in the face close up DPS you would expect from blasters, was fast, and most importantly its 24km t2 scram made reange control far easier what more gallente ships need to see is tat very same range bonus for scrams, but only make it apply to scrams maybe tone it down to less but it allowed range control which is manditory for blasters
And on top of that it fits to the gallente EWAR as it stands anyway, but i dunno it was just my 2 isk |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 09:56:00 -
[202] - Quote
I think that if we were to slap EW bonuses like scram range or web range onto blaster hulls all you will get is everyone sticking AC's or Pulse lasers on them and holding range because there is no real advantage of fighting in your targets scram/web range when you don't have to.
Seriously. If you give me a long range scram I will be flying a shield tanked Brutix scrambling people from 20km away and shooting them with 425's with barrage all day!
Or long range webs I will be armour tanking my Brutix, fitting Pulse lasers, dual web and a disruptor. Even with the targets MWD going my 24 km webs will let me dictate range and I never have to enter scram/web/neut range.
I'm sorry but EW bonuses to T1 hulls is not the answer. |
Dark Voynix
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 11:26:00 -
[203] - Quote
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. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 11:49:00 -
[204] - Quote
Dark Voynix wrote: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.
Then you will have every ship of every class of every race fitting one blaster to slow down enemies. |
Dark Voynix
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 11:56:00 -
[205] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Dark Voynix wrote: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. Then you will have every ship of every class of every race fitting one blaster to slow down enemies.
Then make them chance based. Better effect but chanche based so you need a full rack of hybrids to get a good chance. Also make them able to "web" only the equivalent size or smaller, so frig sized blasters cannot "web", cruiser, BC or BS's.
|
Selar Nox
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 12:37:00 -
[206] - Quote
Adding to lots of others changes mentioned in this thread I would like to throw this suggestion into the ring. It's copied and slightly edited from another thread, but this one seems more appropriate.
I am not saying this is the perfect one-fits-all-solution and will solve the Hybrid/Blaster issue alone. In fact I see this suggestion as one element/module of a more extensive change to hybrid weapons and plattforms.
As many other before me I also agree, that it's not the weapon system alone that needs adjustments, it's the also ship that uses it.
And I also like the idea of faster accelerating ships, that don't touch the domain of Minmatar Ships. So we cannot just change the agility value. And btw, big, heavily armored ships and high agility seems an odd combination.
My suggestion would be to make the Gallente something like the Masters of MWD. Thorax, Deimos and Vindicator already hint that the Federation has its knowledge in this field.
Hm, how to combine these requirements (faster acceleration without touching agility; MWD)?
As we know, an active MWD adds mass to our ship. (Details) And higher mass means lower acceleration and speed.
So how about Gallente Ship Bonus to...
... decrease Mass Gain by MWD Results while MWD is active:
- improved acceleration
- higher top speed
- higher agility (can be countered by an agility malus while MWD is running)
So now we have a ship that when using MWDs accelerates better and can reach higher speeds than before, but has trouble adjusting the direction it is burning. Not the best for orbiting/kiting (Hurray for Minmatar!) and now we come to the problem Velicitia,Pattern Clarc & others already mentioned (in other thread): Overshooting your target.
... control/avoid overshoot better/easier
- reduce cycle time of MWDs -> allows shorter MWD-pulses
- reduce cap need per cycle -> overall cap cost keeps as it is now
Overshooting is still possible, but now it depends more on player skill than cycle time.
Other suggestions (possible, but not necessarily mandatory) bonus on webifier range (faction mods already show, that the federation is quite capable in this field) move mag stabs (and only these!) from low to med slots. This way blasterboats can fit a tank to cross the gap without sacrificing damage (what should be their domain). Instead the decision is now between damage/EWar/Cap. Overall result: Gallente ships can close the gap to the enemy faster to get in blaster range and avoid being hit for too long without an ability to strike back. And all this without touching the agility/speed(-tank) domain of Minmatar ships and similar. Kiting still works, as Gallente ships don't have their agility. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 12:56:00 -
[207] - Quote
Selar Nox wrote: move mag stabs (and only these!) from low to med slots. And screw Caldari rail boats completely? No. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:17:00 -
[208] - Quote
Currently the tall guy will just have to focus on primarily balancing hybrid turrets vs projectiles and energy weapons.
The ships and modules will have to be balanced after the this - including a look into :
- Fail optimal bonus (or fail game mechanics not supporting the bonus)
- Armor rigs and plates slowing down blasterboats while Shields don't hinder autocannon ships
Plz lets get the following things sorted first :
Hybrid ammunition revamp
- Fewer options for range (like -50%, -25%, 0% and 25% range bonus)
- More variation in kin/therm damage distribution (each step of range have a 20/80 and 80/20 distribution)
- Cap bonus on ammo need to be linear and cost more cap the longer range
- 10% more damage to all ammunition
- To enable hybrids to adobt to fast changing range and make them reload in 5 secs instead of 10 secs
Hybrid damage balance With a general 10% increase on hybrid ammo the railguns still need an additional +10% damage to be on par with the other weapon groups. Extreme range with the poor ranged game mechanics we face atm should not be a strong parameter in damage comparisons. Getting them to deal equal damage at their shortest range should be a fine balance while the secondary advantages like Alphastrike, Range, Reload times, tracking and signature resolution should be the spice setting them all apart for taste and preference...
Hybrid tracking With the blaster boats designed to be grinding their hulls against the enemy where tracking gets really tough and webs can no longer stop an enemy ship totally the blasters really need the proposed 20% tracking increase. This will set them apart from autocannons that currently have better tracking and doesn't really need it with the autocannons working just as good kiting as they do close range. The railguns too have a very very bad tracking and would benefit equally. Sniping is almost dead on TQ anyway and as such there is no reason to gimp the railgun tracking anymore. Let all hybrid systems benefit from a 20% better tracking.
Making railguns unique As mentioned above hybrids need a unique role to set them apart from artillery and beam lasers.
- Artillery have the ability to use different types of damage as well as a unique hard hitting alphastrike. Also they use no cap.
- Lasers have a near instant change of crystals to adopt really fast on range. They also have unlimited T1 ammunition, hits very hard and the large lasers have a tier 4 Tachyon dealing waste damage on long ranges if a pilot can make them fit.
Futhermore beams seems to generally do more dps than the competitors and outrange projectiles.
- With the above suggested changes the railguns should have about equal dps as artillery and still less than lasers. They will have the ability to hit better and further out. A fast change of ammunition securing a better adjustment to range, but they will only have 25% the alphastrike from artillery and they will only be able to use thermal/kinetic ammunition.
To further seperate classes of weapons from eachother I would suggest differentiating guns on their signature resolution. Small variations could give the smaller tiers advantages lost in raw dps. It could also be used as a unique advantage on either railguns or beams whereever it will fit best.
Anyway I hope to see a revised set of hybrid changes soon. The 3 types need to be balanced while all being unique - both things are still not taken care of...
Pinky |
Zey Nadar
Aliastra Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:33:00 -
[209] - Quote
Iam Widdershins wrote: I think that hybrids, blasters in particular, would like to see a slightly bigger boost to tracking. From what I hear in the 3TBC feedback thread, most people think the Talos can't hit jack up close. Maybe they are using it wrong, I don't know.
This has always been an issue with blasters. The sweet spot where they an actually do that great damage is very small. (compare to minmatar with whom good falloff mitages the problem to great extent). Gallente ships are the easiest of all to kite.
Quote: I think the general hybrid-ship speed adjustment could be amplified a bit. I do NOT think that hybrid ships should EVER be made faster than Minmatar, or every blaster ship ever would be basically a cheap Adrestia, running down Vagabonds and tearing them to shreds.
Having slower ships with shorter range will always be inferior to faster ships with greater range. Is this the 'balance' you are looking for? "Dashing" into tackling and shooting range with MWD would make more sense if Gallente guns didnt require capacitor.
Quote: On a side note, I think that the disadvantages of Gallente's active tanking bonuses need to be looked at. I think that the Brutix and Hyperion hulls, as well as the Deimos, need their bonus increased to 10% per level. Currently the 7.5% per level bonus yields a 37.5% advantage over base, with no effect on buffer and remote repair; meanwhile, Amarr's predilection for resist bonuses gives those ships a 33.3% bonus to active tanking, AND buffer, AND remote repair.
You hit the nail there regarding how great having resistance bonuses is. Its one reason why Amarr are considered superior to gallente I think. Additionally, gallente having bonuses to active tanking doesnt make sense since they are so hungry for capacitor in the first place, having to use MWD to get in range of their guns, that they should be plated for the most part in real combat.
Maybe Gallente should have a massive bonus to capacitor size? Not only would it be unique (currently no-one has it) and it would help with many of Gallentes weaknesses. Of course they should still retain the cap usage bonuses for active repping and mwd. Allowing Gallente to make perma
I havent tested the current changes yet on SiSi though. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:39:00 -
[210] - Quote
In regards to tracking enhancers benefitting AC falloff more than blasters I propose a minor change to tracking enhancers and tracking computers:
Tracking enhancers seems to favor shield setups more and the minmatar and caldari setups doesn't need much more range. I suggest on a T2 Tracking Enhancer: Optimal bonus 15% -> 15% (or less as it isn't too important for anyone) Falloff bonus 30% -> 15% (less AC pwnage but still a decent bonus) Tracking bonus 9,5% -> 9,5% (All the ships really need this bonus the most)
Tracking computers will limit caldari tank and shield minmatar setups while Amarr and Gallente might better fit these with their armor tanks. I suggest on a T2 Tracking Computer with scripts: Optimal bonus 15% -> 20% Falloff bonus 30% -> 40% or Tracking bonus 30% -> 40,0%
Would be nice and change a little bit of power balance up to the medslots again where a tracking computer is rarely worth it. Also this would likely help the blasters more than the AC's and help balancing everything a little more.
Pinky |
|
Cunane Jeran
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:41:00 -
[211] - Quote
After more playing (and comparing) Hybrids really need something else, I believe ammo changes would be the way forwards, less range variations (hell what difference does -30% and -10% range make to 1k?) and maybe allowing some damage options instead, such as Kin/Exp Therm/Exp and the standard Therm/Kin, leaving EM out of it for Amarr's sake. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:51:00 -
[212] - Quote
Btw Nothing is wrong with the active tank bonuses - what is wrong is the modules benefitting from them in teh light of the many hitpoint buffs... Boost all LOCAL ONLY shield boosters and armor repairs with at least 50% hitpoints pr cycle while changing the crystal implant set into shield hitpoint implants as a counterpart to slaves...
But yes ineed with the current combat mechanics the active rep bonus might seem obscene even if the brutix handles itself very fine indeed hehe
Pinky
|
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:25:00 -
[213] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Btw Nothing is wrong with the active tank bonuses - what is wrong is the modules benefitting from them in teh light of the many hitpoint buffs... Boost all LOCAL ONLY shield boosters and armor repairs with at least 50% hitpoints pr cycle while changing the crystal implant set into shield hitpoint implants as a counterpart to slaves...
But yes ineed with the current combat mechanics the active rep bonus might seem obscene even if the brutix handles itself very fine indeed hehe
Pinky
Active tank bonuses aren't useful because they don't allow you to survive high bursts of damage, they don't give logistics enough time to lock you, they suck local cap on ships which should focus on mobility and damage projection and they don't even give any advantage to received reps.
They are kinda good in very small gangs, or in 1v1, where the probability of getting alphaed is very low and active tanking may give you enough of an edge to survive against multiple attackers. Right now active tanking in pvp only makes sense in the form of spider gangs, or logistics supported gangs. In both cases, a local buffer tank is much better.
Since resist bonuses give advantages both to active and to buffer/passive tanks, they make much more sense than straight active bonuses. Especially if such bonuses are on the module cycle timer instead of rep amount, which makes them, yes, more powerful, but at the same time more cap-intensive. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:35:00 -
[214] - Quote
In big fleets with logistics buffer tanking has huge advantages, but that doesn't mean active tanks cannot shine in many other situations? Before the huge hitpoint buffs active tanks was prefered in most pvp situations... What I was saying don't blaim poor performance on roles, when the problem in reality is in the game mechanics or the module that gets the bonus... |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:41:00 -
[215] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:In big fleets with logistics buffer tanking has huge advantages, but that doesn't mean active tanks cannot shine in many other situations? Before the huge hitpoint buffs active tanks was prefered in most pvp situations... What I was saying don't blaim poor performance on roles, when the problem in reality is in the game mechanics or the module that gets the bonus...
Yeah but what you're saying is kinda like saying "Why an infantryman should whine about being given a Sarissa as a service weapon? Alexander owned much of the old world with them!". We have to balance with the current state in mind. Yes, you can change the system... Or you can change the bonus. Changing the system is almost always the most complicated way to approach the problem, and has far reaching consequences (Like the HP buff... Worked great but at the same time it made active tanking almost useless). Tweaking a bonus on a couple of ships is much easier to do, much easier to test and has much more limited consequences. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:12:00 -
[216] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:In regards to tracking enhancers benefitting AC falloff more than blasters I propose a minor change to tracking enhancers and tracking computers:
Tracking enhancers seems to favor shield setups more and the minmatar and caldari setups doesn't need much more range. I suggest on a T2 Tracking Enhancer: Optimal bonus 15% -> 15% (or less as it isn't too important for anyone) Falloff bonus 30% -> 15% (less AC pwnage but still a decent bonus) Tracking bonus 9,5% -> 9,5% (All the ships really need this bonus the most)
Pinky Denmark wrote: I suggest on a T2 Tracking Enhancer: Optimal bonus 15% -> 15% (or less as it isn't too important for anyone) Falloff bonus 30% -> 15% (less AC pwnage but still a decent bonus) Tracking bonus 9,5% -> 9,5% (All the ships really need this bonus the most)
Pinky
Add to this a range nerf to scorch and you have a winning Hybrid buff for sure :)
As far as my experience with Blaster/Gallente ships on the test server.
Ares: I understand that this ship can be fast and all ceptors will see a "relative buff" post dram nerf but I think it's still a bit sub par. Give it another 10m/s and add +5m3 bandwidth and +5m3 drone bay.
Enyo: This ship needs more cpu, wtf is the point of it compared to an ishkur if it can't even use it's 4th low properly... It trades a mid slot and 4 light drones for 1 low slot and 1 more turret... Un-gimp this ship and give her +25 CPU please.
Thorax: Looking much better after the reduction to fitting requirements however I still feel that it needs another 5 to 10m/s speed buff as well as another 15-20 grid.
Myrmidon: Nothing has really changed for this ship. I'd suggest removing 2 of the turret slots and giving the ship another 25m3 bandwidth.
Brutix: Spent a bit of time in this ship on test and it is FAR more "fitable" than before. The lack of lows is still a huge issue and the small speed increase only ends up netting you another 50ish m/s with MWD. I'd suggest increasing the ships base speed by another 5 MS as well as giving it another 25ish Power grid. I'd also like to see this ship get another low slot however I feel that the addition of a slot is dependent on if CCP decides to buff the other tier1s as well.
Astarte: I also spent a good amount of time testing out this ship on the new test build and have to say that like the Brutix, it has been improved by a small margin specifically in regards to fitting it. The increased speed is really not very noticeable especially considering that the new tier 3 BC are at least 500ms faster with mwd... This ship should receive more or less the same additions that I just proposed for the Brutix. Another 5-10 ms speed, 25ish grid, and another low slot. I believe that this new low slot should be granted as well as an additional slot for the Absolution, and Nighthawk(+grid too). Seleip is already way better than these 3 Field commands so no additional slot is needed there.
Megathron: Perfect CCP!!, finally can get a decent pvp fit w/o the use of faction gear or co-procs. The new tracking buff to blasters ontop of the Mega's Tracking Bonus is allowing for more dps at all ranges. Ship seems to be filling it's niche nicely.
Hyperion: This ship is still a mess... The problem with this ship is that you cannot tank and dps at the same time... and if a Blaster ship cannot dps then wtf is the point of it considering it MUST commit to engage, something that many other ships with comparable DPS and Tank do not have to do.
The ship needs another 2-3% grid, another low slot, and probably another 25cpu (to be able to utilize that low slot). I'd also go as far as increasing it's drone bay (not bandwidth) by another 25m3 giving it at least a small amount of innate anti tackle flexibility when compared to the other tier 3s.
Talos: Honestly? The tier3s are a broken mess right now so I don't have any "useful" suggestions other than CCP needs to rethink these ships from concept. Highest tier large weapons costing under 100 pg just seems silly when highest tier mediums are close to 200.... I'd suggest decreasing their speed and upping the sig a little so they do not step on the role of far more expensive ships such as HACs.
Blasters as a whole: The changes to fitting and tracking are a very nice step in the right direction and I must applaud CCP on not going overboard however I still feel that some minor tweaking is needed.
Changes I'd like to see would first and foremost be some unique flavor shared between all Hybrid weapons. The idea that sparked my interest the most was a small boost to the chance of wrecking hits for ALL Hybrid weapons. This change combined with a rework of current ammo's (think projectile ammo) would most certainly improve the overall effectiveness of Blasters w/o creating a new FoTM, something that needs to be avoided at all costs.
Railsgunz!! The fitting reductions and 10% dps increase is certainly a step in the right direction. I do however think that another small DPS increase is needed of about 5%. The other major issue is the dedicated Caldari ships "designed" to field these weapons. More grid is generally needed as well as maybe another Turret slot on the Ferox and Eagle as both these ships will be superseded by the naga as a cruiser/BC sized sniper.
Thank you CCP for the updates and the mild amount of recent transparency Keep up the good work and make sure to pay attention to your community.
Jerick
|
Selar Nox
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:24:00 -
[217] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Btw Nothing is wrong with the active tank bonuses - what is wrong is the modules benefitting from them in teh light of the many hitpoint buffs... Boost all LOCAL ONLY shield boosters and armor repairs with at least 50% hitpoints pr cycle [...] + half cycle time & cap need per cylce of local armor repairs. So while overall cap cost stays the same we don't have to wait till our armor is gone until the first repair amount comes in. Or even better distribute the armor gain over the whole cycle length (but thats probably not very nice for the hamsters...) Never made sense for me where that by nanobots repaired armor was stored during cycle and how it got magically applied in split seconds at the end of a cycle. (Shield boosters I interpreted like a "shield-capacitor" which gets unloaded to the shields at cycle start and needs to recharge during its cycle) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:50:00 -
[218] - Quote
I always imagined those bots blowing a chunk of metal into the holes like you patch roads and replace a broken brick in a wall... That said indeed the wait for armor reppers to cycle can be fatal |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:14:00 -
[219] - Quote
Ok with only 7.5% per level bonus you end up being 2% more efficiant then the 5% to armor resists per lev... Which sucks when you see that the resist bonus makes you have 20% more hp and more efficiant for rr...
But change that bonus to 10% per lev and make it so incomming rr is also affected by the bonus and then you end up with a bonus that makes up for having 1/5th less hp |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:56:00 -
[220] - Quote
lol RR is already super usefull and how do you calculate those numbers? You nust be forgetting how resistance is calculated... The resistance wont be stacking penalized but you will still get less from adding more resist modules. |
|
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:23:00 -
[221] - Quote
CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:43:00 -
[222] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:lol RR is already super usefull and how do you calculate those numbers? You nust be forgetting how resistance is calculated... The resistance wont be stacking penalized but you will still get less from adding more resist modules.
ok i am at work so i cant pull up eve or eft to support the numbers but here is a post i pulled supporting the same thing but with shields:
IMO making it so the 37.5% increase to internal reps work on incomming remote repair mods... this would greatly make up for gallente/minnie shortcommings when it comes to fleet setups... let me explain i know projectiles are FOTM and make up for this but when hybrids are boosted minnie will fall back in line... Look at what a 25% increase does to effectivness of internal reps, EHP and incomming RR....
But gal/minnie only get a 37.5% increase to internal reps...
look at a nighthawk with one logi ship with 4 large reps it gets 1955 tank but a sleipnir(sp?) with one logi ship with 4 large reps it gets 1649 tank
but if you increased the effectiveness of incomming shield rr for minnie you would see that jump up from 384 every 4.5 sec which is 85.33 hp/sec to 384*1.375=528 every 4.5 sec which means 117 hp/s
so on the same setup one logi ship will now make the seipnirs tank be 2099 tank
this also carries over with armor....
making the 37.5% bonus to internal reps also boost incomming remote repair mods would greatly help offset the dissadvantage minnie and galente have against ammar and caldari...
compare the average minnie/gal setup against the average ammar/caldari setup that gives a resistance bonus you will see much higher ehp on the caldari/ammar over thier gal/minnie counter parts...
now if you took that 37.5% and added another 12.5% to make it 50% then you are looking at the 1649 tank turining into 576 every 4.5 sec which is 128 hp/s so that would 2366 which is about 18% more effective then having a resistance bonus...
so what you end up with is gallente/minnie being better for internal/incomming rr and ammar/caldari being better for ehp...
i think its a good trade off if you ask me... |
Angeliena
Eye of God Controlled Chaos
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:54:00 -
[223] - Quote
Please:
1) increase base web strength to 75%
2) Change speed penalty for armor rigs to a penalty to warp speed only
3) Increase sensor damps by 20%
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:56:00 -
[224] - Quote
The Sleipnir isn't designed as a buffer ship The Sleipnir does way more dps The sleipnir is much faster The sleipnir has more even resists making hardener choice easier The sleipnir is way more popular for pvp than nighthawk The sleipnir seems to be better than Nighthawk even if not using a bonus
Also sorry fo derailing the hybrid thread even if I didn't start... |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
162
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:59:00 -
[225] - Quote
Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter?
Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update.
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%. |
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:00:00 -
[226] - Quote
pinky you are a ding bat...
as i said they were comparrisons i had made a while ago... you can compare any ship that gets the resist bonus vrs a rep bonus... this was just an example...
the point in making rr better for gal is so they can get close (one of the things that hurts gal ships is thier lack of ehp and short range weapons... if you made gal ships more efficiant for rr against the other races this would help galente get close... and just to prove my point 1400 abbadons anyone???? but alas this is more about hybrid boosting then gal ship boosting...
so back to blasters and rails... |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:03:00 -
[227] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
feels like an inch worm but slow and steady we are getting to where we need to be...
any idea when this will be put in sisi? |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
183
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:17:00 -
[228] - Quote
So blaster fits are better than passive since armor plates kill speed.
But active tanks take up cap.
blasters use cap like crazy.
CCP why aren't you interested and a complete reworking of the the way blasters work instead of just changing numbers?
edit: that said barvo on reload changes... Actually reload changes might change dps a lot.... |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:20:00 -
[229] - Quote
don't mind |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:23:00 -
[230] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
awwww why 4 u change?!! |
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:28:00 -
[231] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
CCP Tallest, can we still get a tank increase for Hybrid Caldari ships to at least bring them in-line with Amarr tanks, given they are the lowest DPS, slowest ships, largest signature ships in the game? It is all they need to balance them.
Pweety please :) |
Raid'En
Apprentice Innovations
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:30:00 -
[232] - Quote
if you don't want to change how the defense of gallente ships works, you can always change how the specificity of gallente, the drones, can help them ; some bonus on ecm / weber drones on gallente ships, so that they can get a few more seconds to be able to do their job well. |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:33:00 -
[233] - Quote
I was hit my head this morning so bear with me here.....
The community has stated clearly that Blasters should not be homogenized into the arena of Acs & pulses regarding range and that they should remain up close (only) weaponry so perhaps instead of buffing the overall stats for all blasters on a flat-rate basis maybe this idea would be viable on Gallente Hulls only:
Regarding Damage: For each blaster fitted:
- +3% damage--8 turret slot ships potentially receive a 24% damage bonus and so on....
- +2% tracking---the more turrets you have allows the internal Gallente targetting systems to work more effectively blah blah...
- -1% cap usage--same as above reasoning basically....
Regarding speed: For each blaster fitted:
- +1% base speed
- +3% acceleration when mwd or AB fitted--effectively 24% accell for 8 blaster fit ship to be able to get within blaster range fast.
- +2% cap usage when MWD or AB is on-- effectively prevents perma mwd/ab the more blasters fitted
Regarding a Web bonus( I know, this may embark into the minnie realm a bit but....) For each blaster fitted:
- +2% web range--an 8 blaster ship effectively has +16% web range...not much but would help enough.
- ----this amounts to a Megathron/w 8 blasters and a faction 15k web having a 17k web range after bonus applied. Not a lot...but may be the difference in a fight.... and sets Gallente apart from Minnie web bonuses
Regarding Drones: Since Drones are Gallentes' forte maybe give them specific drone bonuses instead of just saying 'MAOR DRONES PLZ!!'
Only in a Gallente hull,I suggest a: +2% drone range per BC/BS level +5% effectiveness for combat utility & logistics drones per Gallente BC/BS level
I realize these changes may be overly specific or too abundant, but they DO address the problems Gallente have with: Damage, tracking, and speed ,and in a slightly different way than just 'OMG buffing/nerfing' across the board.
ty for your time. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
111
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:35:00 -
[234] - Quote
Hrm, I may have put my posts in the wrong forum section.
Fair warning: they're long, VERY long. Still, it's hard not to be considering all of the things which contribute to hybrid shortcomings.
I'll do my best to summarize:
- Hybrids do not provide the pilot with fundamental benefits. Proposed changes on test do not address this!!!!
Projectiles are cap free and allow the user to change damage types. Lasers are virtually ammo-free and have dominant range. These are PASSIVE benefits. Hybrids have no such bonus. They absolutely need one if they are to compete in a popularity contest, let alone in combat. Bear in mind, if you add a passive benefit, depending on the impact of that benefit, you may not have to change anything else! THIS IS KEY!!!
- Hybrids natively have the most drawbacks in addition to not having any passive benefit. Proposed changes on test do not address this!!!!
Hybrids:
- require cap (less cap is still cap)
- require ammo
- have fixed damage type
- have absolutely horrid range
- do not focus solely on optimal or falloff, making significant boosts to range impossible
- fit on ships which are not fast enough to execute the philosophy of "in-your-face-dps"
- suffer speed penalties for buffing armor tanks (which most Gallente ships are), further exacerbating this failed philosophy
- Proposed changes to hybrids on test show a lack in understanding hybrid shortcomings.
- If hybrids are to retain their ineffective range, they need to be on the fastest ships. There is NO substitute for this condition!
- If hybrids get substantial range boosts, there is no reason to change Gallente/Caldari ship speeds in the first place!
- Hybrid ammunition needs a similar overhaul which projectiles received. No idea how this was overlooked.
- Blasterboats usually need webs to be effective. Assuming the target is webbed, TRACKING INCREASES ARE MOOT!
- Providing speed bonuses to Gallente ships shows an attempt to address some problems, but failure to make them the fastest means blasters will remain ineffective and thus unpopular. Why bother changing anything if it will result in the same outcome?
Two things which absolutely PARAMOUNT in being successful, regarding the whole "back to basics" effort this winter:
- shortest range weapons need to be on the fastest ships, either increase blaster range to something slightly above autocannons or make Gallente ships the fastest
- hybrids need a fundamental "something" which not only makes them unique, but something that HIGHLY appeals to a pilot/gang/fleet. Consider this "something" could eliminate the need to modify anything else, if it is THAT good
If CCP fails to address the above two points, the entire effort is wasted. Mark my words.
That's it really. I break it down much further in the original post. Please take the time to read it. Thanks. |
Cal Menahr
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:37:00 -
[235] - Quote
There seems to be a general agreement between most pilots on what a blaster boat should do and what the main problems are.
Concerning the first iteration of hybrid changes, I think at least the following should be done:
- Blasters need more damage at point blank. This could be tied into AM and Void instead of the guns.
- Blasters might need more tracking, especially at point blank. Void for example should not have a tracking penalty, give it a bonus.
This is directly tied to the role and usage of blaster boats. A fast incoming blaster boat needs tracking to compensate for the movement. I know I know, you don't need it if you go in a straight line, but that's not the fastest way to get next to a target because of the deceleration phase; at least that's my understanding of the approach problem. Also if you'd go in a line and bump (by accident) you might get a range and tracking problem again. Then again you might say that more tracking is unfair against small ships, but think about the role of blaster boats: There is a very limited death zone around those ships and if small (fast) ships go there it's their choice. I'm not sure about the best balance here; Scram and web always mean that an afterburner ship has the mobility advantage inside the death zone and a faster ship with it's own scram and web could leave this zone.
- Blasters range:
A lot of people want more range on blasters. The role of a Gallente blaster boat is / should be a close range damage dealer (with sprint approach, see below). The advantage of more range is also the problem: It works against kiters. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a Minmatar pilot wanting to keep his "I win ship". (I don't want to be forced to fly certain ships just because they are so obviously overpowered, also I like the Gallente way.). By changing blasters range, damage, tracking and ship bonuses the wrong way (depending on the numbers ofc) blasters could make kiting ships useless. But the role of a blaster boat is NOT to deal omg damage in close range AND make kiters useless. -> If you really absolutely want to give a better range option do it with Null (and Iron) and make it weak; damage must be lower than what a good kiting ship would do.
Large Railguns (all hulls): It's kind of pointless to balance railguns without being sure about their exact role. It seems that railguns, especially large ones, were defined to have an advantage in long range fights. Unfortunately the new scanning mechanics (since the introduction of wormholes) make it not worth bringing a sniper fleet at all. Afaik it's possible (with good players) to land tacklers on a sniper fleet within some seconds (let's say 10 seconds, depending on alignment and the lucky timing of the scanner); now compare this to the align time of battleships and their lock time ... Has CCP said anything at all since Dominion about the nature of very fast combat scanning? I think their intention was to make scanning less painfull for new players, wormholes and exploration. But COMBAT scanning should need a lot more time to make a whole group of specialized ships useful again - this affects all sizes of fleets. Making combat scanning harder is also better than only increasing the minimup warp to distance. Eg. a warp distance of 200+ only makes setups up to 200k more useful. But make scanning harder and suddenly all sniper ships, including ultra long range snipers get a chance. Oh yeah, the lock limit of 250k should really be increased. IF (and only if) CCP keeps the current scan and warp to mechanics Gallente Railgun battleships should be balanced to have an dps advantage up to 150k; above Amarr optimal would be nice if possible and / or just balance it with cap, rof, tracking etc. But in that case (scan and warp mechanics) those real sniper battleships would still be useless; sure they could be changed to fit in the up to 150k window, but wouldn't it be boring to have all battleships of Eve used in a window of 4 - 150k? After all we're looking at battleships here, they have large guns and are the natural tech 1 choice for long range fights.
Everyone knows that hybrid buffs / fixes, while nice, are pretty useless without fixing the ships in their respective roles. Therefore I suggest the following changes for Gallente blaster ships (hull bonus):
- 10 - 20 % increase to MWD overload bonus per level of the ship
- 7.5 - 15 % reduction of damage taken on overloaded MWD modules per level of the ship
This is the best change for blaster ships that I can think of so far. If you think about it you'll see that this approach has several advantages:
- solves the main problem of getting in range (again depending on numbers ofc)
- uses in game mechanics and should be easy to implement.
- an obscure ewar bonus would be more likely to be misused. (however there should probably be some kind of penalty so that it would not be used with a shield setup. not sure if that would be a problem on special shield fits, since the overload mechanic limits the use anyway)
- does not invalidate the speed advantage of Minmatar ships
- even if the base agility of Gallente blaster ships is tweaked to be better than that of Minmatar ships, resulting agility with plates would still be worse
- works without changing capacitors or using cap boosters. (however since blasters and mwds in general use much cap, the capacitor of these blaster ships should be balanced with their medium slots and their drones when ccp finally gets to the point of balancing each ship)
There might be more advantages of this mwd concept that I can't think of atm, however I can't see a real disadvantage. Please give me your opinions on this 'cause I think this would be a very important change to make the blaster concept work as intended and I do not think that it can be done without using some kind of hull bonus.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:39:00 -
[236] - Quote
Sorry MeBiatch but let that rest...
Mr Tall those changes are on top of the other changes I suppose? Have you any thoughts/comments on the confusing composition of hybrid ammo? My bet is people rarely use more than a few types and they could really use a close look (shouldn't take long for you to see how messy they are)
so currently: better fitting smaller ammo Hybrids use 30% less cap Tracking blasters +20% and railguns +5% (I still think they deserve 10%) Damage blasters +5% and railguns +10% (Though even 15% is a very little increase in dps) reduced reload to 5 seconds ships getting velocity and agility changed (as long it's only a start)
Missed anything?
Uhh I can't wait to test this. Looks like blasters and railguns are getting looked into seriously now... Im just crossing my fingers for ammo revamp and a little extra dps on rails - then waiting for a ship balance overhaul next hehe |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:52:00 -
[237] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%. This is an excellent compromise and will go a long way to improving blasters and increasing their use in eve.
You da man, Tallest! |
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
72
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:56:00 -
[238] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:So blaster fits are better than passive since armor plates kill speed.
But active tanks take up cap.
blasters use cap like crazy.
CCP why aren't you interested and a complete reworking of the the way blasters work instead of just changing numbers?
edit: that said barvo on reload changes... Actually reload changes might change dps a lot.... Have you missed the part where cap use was reduced by 30% ? |
Harotak
Malicious Destruction War Against the Manifest
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:56:00 -
[239] - Quote
Medium blasters still need at least 10% dps imo. If anything leave small blaster DPS alone, boost medium by 15%, and boost large by 10%. The 20% tracking will be huge for small blasters and down right crazy when combined with better agility on blaster hulls. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
85
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:06:00 -
[240] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
Small hybrids are fine! There's nothing the matter with the Taranis, Comet, Merlin, Tristan or Incursus, they're all competitive, stop going crazy!
You will not fix rails without removing the hard 150 km limit on useful sniping. |
|
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:09:00 -
[241] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
As a bitter vet I have to say that I'm loving the transparency you and your team have been showing us in recent history Tallest. The Charge size and reload time are obviously the biggest changes here however the 5% dmg and 5% tracking are nothing to scoff at.
Understood that it has been stated that the ships themselves may receive further changes 'after' Hybrids have been brought inline. Too avoid any tinfoil hatting I will not ask any specifics as to ships. However I was wondering if you and your team were/are still looking at potentially modifying individual ship stats?
Cheers on the post Tallest and best of Luck to you and the team. -Jerick
|
Tristan North
The Scope
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:13:00 -
[242] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:
Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update.
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
What about the ships? |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:14:00 -
[243] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
I assume these are in addition to what have already been added?
If not, then these are baby steps...remember, damage will be next to nothing if a blaster ship can't get into range i the 1st place.
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
167
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:15:00 -
[244] - Quote
Yes those are in addition to the previously proposed changes. |
|
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:21:00 -
[245] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Yes those are in addition to the previously proposed changes.
wow, I applaud your response time now get back ta work!!
|
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:26:00 -
[246] - Quote
Tallest, thx for your comments; it's awesome to see you devs actually talk to the players here on forums. don't konw how other player tick, but to me this means a lot - it shows that you ppl at ccp actually care...at least you do. thx.
just keep up the good work! |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
275
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:33:00 -
[247] - Quote
Blaster tracking increase should be higher than the original one you proposed, though I feel your squeezing out as much improvement to hybrids as your self defined limits can allow?
Time to fix the gallente active tanking bonused ships, caldari hybrid platforms and hybrid ammo...
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Captain Alcatraz
Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:34:00 -
[248] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
I aint gay but, marry me? This will make blasters awesome but not over the top, LOVE IT |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:38:00 -
[249] - Quote
Uhm... I think I'm missing something... What's the point of reducing ammo size and reducing turret space? Just so you can bring more ammo? |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:39:00 -
[250] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:Uhm... I think I'm missing something... What's the point of reducing ammo size and reducing turret space? Just so you can bring more ammo?
Exactly that. And space to loot stuff etc. |
|
Manar Detri
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:40:00 -
[251] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:Uhm... I think I'm missing something... What's the point of reducing ammo size and reducing turret space? Just so you can bring more ammo?
So you can pack up more capacitor charges and loot off melted wrecks. Also it's in more line with other ammo. |
Garbad theWeak
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:43:00 -
[252] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Yes those are in addition to the previously proposed changes. Tallest, is CCP considering removing on grid probing? Until this is removed, sniping is effectively impossible, and thus, railguns will remain the worst weapon system.
Thanks.
|
mkint
306
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:48:00 -
[253] - Quote
Looks like we're getting closer, for sure. Null ammo could probably still use a major range buff to bring it closer in line with other equivalent ammo types, but we're definitely on the right track.
Also, Tallest, WTB your t-shirt that says "fokking fokk" that you wore in the video. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
276
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:50:00 -
[254] - Quote
Also, would still like a little extra grid for Ishtar, Phobos, Proteus and talos. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:52:00 -
[255] - Quote
i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:58:00 -
[256] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships.
I feel the same way. Although I would much rather the weapon system be the primary focus of the changes. Moderate increases to Gallente speed/agility doesn't actually change a Minmatar-kiting scenario, nor does it do anything about the more substantial speed penalties incurred by buffing an armor tank. |
Daedalus Arcova
60
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:08:00 -
[257] - Quote
Once again, these are very welcome adjustments, but still not far enough.
For the sake of my blood pressure, I'm just going to convince myself that you're also going to nerf pulse and autocannon tracking or replace all Gallente 5% hybrid damage ship bonuses with10% ones.
Don't let me down, Tallest. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:11:00 -
[258] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Once again, these are very welcome adjustments, but still not far enough. I'm just going to choose to believe that you're going to simultaneously nerf pulse and autocannon tracking or replace all Gallente 5% hybrid damage ship bonuses with10% ones.
pulses and AC's need to be nerfed big time to give hybrids some room, or rails need a monstrous buff/homogenization along with the deletion of blasters to fit hybrids in the current meta. thats if we're leaving ships as is. if gall ships are getting some major overhauls, then nevermind what i said. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
2026
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:17:00 -
[259] - Quote
I still don't see a reason to fly blaster ships with these changes.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:27:00 -
[260] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:28:00 -
[261] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Once again, these are very welcome adjustments, but still not far enough.
50% agree. Nice to see work is being done but I still can't shake the impression CCP doesn't understand the underlying issues. How core shortcomings of hybrids are addressed could easily obsolete most of the proposed modifications on test anyhow.
Daedalus Arcova wrote:For the sake of my blood pressure, I'm just going to convince myself that you're also going to nerf pulse and autocannon tracking or replace all Gallente 5% hybrid damage ship bonuses with10% ones.
I see no point in increasing hybrid damage when their ships cannot control, to any degree, the range at which the shooting starts.
|
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
197
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:29:00 -
[262] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update.
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%. Please be careful with sweeping changes to all blasters. The small blasters are quite fine - the frigate-sized blaster (and rail) setups are already very competitive if not "the best" (Taranis, Daredevil). |
mkint
306
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:47:00 -
[263] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships. I feel the same way. Although I would much rather the weapon system be the primary focus of the changes. Moderate increases to Gallente speed/agility doesn't actually change a Minmatar-kiting scenario, nor does it do anything about the more substantial speed penalties incurred by buffing an armor tank. What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates? Does anyone use regenerative membranes anyway? As it is, you'd need 14k raw armor HP for a T2 regenerative membrane to be as effective as even an 800mm plate, which you won't see in anything smaller than a capital. In fact, the most raw HP gallente BS (hyperion) you'd see the equivalent of a 400mm plate. Even if stacking penalties were removed, it would take 3 regeneratives would add the raw HP of 1 1600mm plate on a hyperion. So, what if Gallente active repair ships were given bonuses to using regenerative plates instead?
Just playing with numbers, maybe the fix to the gallente armor/close range conundrum is in the armor modules? |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
137
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:56:00 -
[264] - Quote
mkint wrote:
What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates?
love this suggestion. but...amarr ships would be OP then. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:00:00 -
[265] - Quote
or how about they make different types of plates mean something like 1600 thungsten adds the most armor but should also add the most mass... what if they made crystal plates do like 10% less armor boost but have 50% less mass adition? |
Podcat
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:00:00 -
[266] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
that sounds really nice. the faster reload will be refreshing, however 5% damage isnt enough for blasters. 10% would be a start. also nice to hear hail gets falloff penalty again, it was already good and didnt need buff |
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:03:00 -
[267] - Quote
Careful now, small blasters (thanks to the ships being the fastest/manouverable) weren't uncompetitive before, don't make them OP.
It's just med and large that had problems. |
PinkKnife
Garden Of The Gods
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:03:00 -
[268] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
That sounds awesome, bring it down to about 3 seconds and I think it would be perfect. Still, at 5, it is to the point that I can consider bringing multiple ammo types, especially with the decrease in size. I think 5 is still a long time in most pvp fights, but the 0-1 second would be homogonizing to the enery turrets. 3 seems to be a good compromise in my opinion.
Think about the larger clip size as well as a factor to make them unique (belt loading for lore whores)
Still though, I think this will make life a bit easier for the gallente pilots.
Thanks for listening CCP. <3 |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:05:00 -
[269] - Quote
honestly all i think that is left for blasters is to boost null falloff...
give blasters 5% more damage (with 50% more alpha) and slightly more tracking...
as for rails... if you are going to fix probeing like pattern clerc suggested... then they are pretty darn close to fixed... perhaps spike needs a damage boost?
if not and ccp is standing firm on 150km+ combat being dead... i think rails are going to need alot more work...
also for those who pve please do the 80/20 damage split for the ammo...
that way i can use hybrids to rat against any of the pirate factions with doing either primary or atleast secondary damage... |
indicast
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:05:00 -
[270] - Quote
Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update.
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.[/quote]
but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:09:00 -
[271] - Quote
mkint wrote:What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates? Does anyone use regenerative membranes anyway? As it is, you'd need 14k raw armor HP for a T2 regenerative membrane to be as effective as even an 800mm plate, which you won't see in anything smaller than a capital. In fact, the most raw HP gallente BS (hyperion) you'd see the equivalent of a 400mm plate. Even if stacking penalties were removed, it would take 3 regeneratives would add the raw HP of 1 1600mm plate on a hyperion. So, what if Gallente active repair ships were given bonuses to using regenerative plates instead?
Just playing with numbers, maybe the fix to the gallente armor/close range conundrum is in the armor modules?
This might work if this kind of bonus was Gallente-only, and it's nice to see someone is looking to kill two birds with one stone (nearly useless item is changed to not only become useful, but further augments other, non-related shortcomings). Frankly, in concept, this is brilliant, but overall it's only halfway there. Blaster boats would still need to close the gap to get a shot off, and that's not happening even with the proposed agi/spd increases. And unfortunately, this doesn't provide hybrid turrets with any kind of unique/passive benefit....something I think should be THE #1 priority of any effort that claims to want to "fix" hybrids.
I still think the easiest answer is to increase blaster effective range to something slightly longer than autos or to make Gallente ships the fastest. Rails would still need a dps boost and that unique hybrid "something." |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:23:00 -
[272] - Quote
mkint wrote:Magosian wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships. I feel the same way. Although I would much rather the weapon system be the primary focus of the changes. Moderate increases to Gallente speed/agility doesn't actually change a Minmatar-kiting scenario, nor does it do anything about the more substantial speed penalties incurred by buffing an armor tank. What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates? Does anyone use regenerative membranes anyway? As it is, you'd need 14k raw armor HP for a T2 regenerative membrane to be as effective as even an 800mm plate, which you won't see in anything smaller than a capital. In fact, the most raw HP gallente BS (hyperion) you'd see the equivalent of a 400mm plate. Even if stacking penalties were removed, it would take 3 regeneratives would add the raw HP of 1 1600mm plate on a hyperion. So, what if Gallente active repair ships were given bonuses to using regenerative plates instead? Just playing with numbers, maybe the fix to the gallente armor/close range conundrum is in the armor modules?
2 Word for you:
Super Caps
I'd rather see something like a bonus to plates for gallente ships. Just as the bonus to MWDs, it would decrease the penalty of plates to a point where it would actually make you slightly faster and more agile with plates fitted if you have the ship skill on level V. This would encourage the use of plates over hardeners and give Gallente a boost in small scale without affecting large scale to much since large generally sees more logistics.
|
Podcat
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:39:00 -
[273] - Quote
indicast wrote: but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh
not true. if you run into a kiter you can load null much faster. its a pretty big improvement.
but good point whoever made it, 5% is enough boost for smalls. its mediums and large that need 10% boost, the frigs are pretty good as they are |
Red Teufel
Eternity Inc
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:48:00 -
[274] - Quote
i like the additional improvements. I am still a bit shaky of how the large hybrid turrets will perform so waiting for sisi to update to test them out. |
mkint
310
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:49:00 -
[275] - Quote
Akara Ito wrote:mkint wrote:Magosian wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships. I feel the same way. Although I would much rather the weapon system be the primary focus of the changes. Moderate increases to Gallente speed/agility doesn't actually change a Minmatar-kiting scenario, nor does it do anything about the more substantial speed penalties incurred by buffing an armor tank. What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates? Does anyone use regenerative membranes anyway? As it is, you'd need 14k raw armor HP for a T2 regenerative membrane to be as effective as even an 800mm plate, which you won't see in anything smaller than a capital. In fact, the most raw HP gallente BS (hyperion) you'd see the equivalent of a 400mm plate. Even if stacking penalties were removed, it would take 3 regeneratives would add the raw HP of 1 1600mm plate on a hyperion. So, what if Gallente active repair ships were given bonuses to using regenerative plates instead? Just playing with numbers, maybe the fix to the gallente armor/close range conundrum is in the armor modules? 2 words for you: Super Caps I'd rather see something like a bonus to plates for gallente ships. Just as the bonus to MWDs, it would decrease the penalty of plates to a point where it would actually make you slightly faster and more agile with plates fitted if you have the ship skill on level V. This would encourage the use of plates over hardeners and give Gallente a boost in small scale without affecting large scale to much since large generally sees more logistics. This would also be a Hull based bonus and it could be applied on a case by case base that than buffign Hybrids into Oblivion. I'd say a 25 to 30 % mass reduction for installed plates per level. With 25 % per level one would negate the penalty of plates at level 4 and actually gain a mass reduction worth a quarter of the mass of all fitted plates for your ship at level V. It could replace the repair bonus on the Hyperion for example, or the tracking bonus on the Mega. The main advantage would be that it could be used where its needed without any kind of colateral damage to other ships. I was suggesting that a bonus to the regenerative plates be ship based anyway. I hadn't worked out details in my head, but that's CCP's job anyway (besides they tend to ignore specifics on the early term.). The advantage of using regenerative plates over armor plates would be that it takes another obsolete item (seriously, does ANYONE use them?) and make them useful on specific ships. It would also mean players would be able to decide between a slightly less HP regenerative plate or a more HP armor plate, the tradeoff being massive agility gains. And there are other situations where mass comes into play and should be high, especially w-space, (don't jump bridges? I don't have much chance to do those much), and probably others I can't think of just now. Also, what I'm not sure about, which needs to be considered, is the Kronos largely being a PVE boat has a repair bonus, which seems appropriate to me. What about other boats being used for PVE, and the loadouts that rely on that bonus to even function? Tough calls to make. :( |
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:59:00 -
[276] - Quote
Podcat wrote:indicast wrote: but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh
not true. if you run into a kiter you can load null much faster. its a pretty big improvement. but good point whoever made it, 5% is enough boost for smalls. its mediums and large that need 10% boost, the frigs are pretty good as they are
Void has also become usable with the tracking boost so long as you A. manage orbit velocity B. Shoot bigger stuff.
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:59:00 -
[277] - Quote
Podcat wrote:indicast wrote: but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh
not true. if you run into a kiter you can load null much faster. its a pretty big improvement. but good point whoever made it, 5% is enough boost for smalls. its mediums and large that need 10% boost, the frigs are pretty good as they are
I can't speak to Null S, but Null M and Null L are laughable. |
Dro Nee
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:05:00 -
[278] - Quote
I like the blaster changes but I am pretty sure we will not see a major uptick in blaster boat usage after the first month. Having to go ballsDeep just makes it so you are unable to GTFO if things go pear-shaped. |
PinkKnife
Garden Of The Gods
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:09:00 -
[279] - Quote
indicast wrote: but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh
Because while antimatter does the most damage, if has the worst range. Faster switching times means you can load up your long range ammo and be doing DPS while you're closing distance. It is the same reason energy turrets often carry anywhere from 3-5-8 different crystal types, so they can always be doing optimal DPS.
Having faster switching times means you can now carry your long range ammo, and begin shooting further out while you close in, then switch to anti-matter once you are point blank range.
I started Gallente, and cross trained Amarr, trust me when I say this is a great change. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:18:00 -
[280] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:indicast wrote: but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh Because while antimatter does the most damage, if has the worst range. Faster switching times means you can load up your long range ammo and be doing DPS while you're closing distance. It is the same reason energy turrets often carry anywhere from 3-5-8 different crystal types, so they can always be doing optimal DPS. Having faster switching times means you can now carry your long range ammo, and begin shooting further out while you close in, then switch to anti-matter once you are point blank range. I started Gallente, and cross trained Amarr, trust me when I say this is a great change.
I disagree. Autos and pulses will still have dominant range, and there is nothing hybrids have to compete with this. Loading null just means you're going to be doing 20% damage (if you're lucky) opposed to the 0% of anti/void. Hybrid users still need faster ships, range increases to base hybrid turret stats, or dramatic increases to range of t2 ammo. These changes are a good sign but they are NOT the problem-solvers.
Maybe it's different in the frig world, but this is definitely the case in the cruiser/BC/BS world. |
|
Zachis
TBC
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:26:00 -
[281] - Quote
The problem with the blaster boats even after these changes to the hybrid weapons, is going to be the ability to control engagement range. I'm not a fan of making the Gallente ships themselves the fastest in EvE, but without some way of influencing the combat range at which fights occur, the same basic problem will exist.
I do like the idea of decreasing the time to lock blaster boats to give them some time to get in range.
But, what about showing some love to the Gallente EWAR and give the blaster boats a bonus to sensor dampener effectiveness? This module is custom designed for blaster boat philosophy, make your opponent come closer Or, unable to lock you unless you are in your preferred range. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:47:00 -
[282] - Quote
Wow, I really thought that was all we were getting it's definitely an improvement.
Blasters I think Null is quite good ammo and boosting range may be a step to far however removing the tracking penalty would make it more useful, if you are using it you are normally kiting or being kited and the last thing you need is to be struggling for range and tracking at the same time.
Rails With the ammo changes have you thought of keeping the ammo capacity, this would double the number of shots and may help rails pull ahead DPS wise over the course of an engagement. Currently I believe the larger rails can only fire 40 shots before reloading.
The optimal penalty for Javelin is very harsh perhaps 60% rather than 75% would be more useful and yet still keep the range lower than faction.
Drones Even with all the upgrades I still feel that I need to make full use of my drone bandwidth for combat drones in order to stay competitive it gives me some DPS projection and an alternate damage type. I have seen requests before for an additional 25m3 drone bay to allow utility drones, if I can field a web drone or some ECM drones then maybe I can mitigate for a slower speed.
Also please introduce smaller web drones and look at the stacking, this should not be as overpowered as giving Gallente immense speed boosts as drones can be countered by blowing them up.
Drone Upgrades The new T2 upgrades use a lot of CPU can increasing the CPU on the Gallente drone boats be considered.
While we are asking for things: -
Please look at the Proteus Prop Subs.
Possibly the Localised injectors could be considered balanced but the Grav Capacitor could do with a speed boost, make it faster than the localised injectors as it gets no cap bonus to running microwarpdrives .
Also the Wake Limiter could do with being changed to 15% per level.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:49:00 -
[283] - Quote
mkint wrote:Magosian wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships. I feel the same way. Although I would much rather the weapon system be the primary focus of the changes. Moderate increases to Gallente speed/agility doesn't actually change a Minmatar-kiting scenario, nor does it do anything about the more substantial speed penalties incurred by buffing an armor tank. What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates? Does anyone use regenerative membranes anyway? As it is, you'd need 14k raw armor HP for a T2 regenerative membrane to be as effective as even an 800mm plate, which you won't see in anything smaller than a capital. In fact, the most raw HP gallente BS (hyperion) you'd see the equivalent of a 400mm plate. Even if stacking penalties were removed, it would take 3 regeneratives would add the raw HP of 1 1600mm plate on a hyperion. So, what if Gallente active repair ships were given bonuses to using regenerative plates instead? Just playing with numbers, maybe the fix to the gallente armor/close range conundrum is in the armor modules?
I love this suggestion. It can be easily implemented: Some Gal. Ships, namely the Hyperion and the Britux, have a 7.5% bonus to self-rep. The 7.5% bonus to self repair could also (or instead) add to the armor bonus of regenerative membranes. That way first membrane you equip gives you massive (16+37.5) 53.5 % boost to hp. As you add more plates the stacking penalties make them less effective, preventing you from making a completely insane tank. So in practice we would see a gal. ship with three of these, a DCU, a couple energized adaptives and a damage mod, achieving same EHP as it would with plates. Gallente will be able to have a lot of armor and EHP without loosing ttheir mobility. It can also be used to make other Gal. ships more capable.
|
PinkKnife
Garden Of The Gods
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:52:00 -
[284] - Quote
Magosian wrote:
I disagree. Autos and pulses will still have dominant range, and there is nothing hybrids have to compete with this. Loading null just means you're going to be doing 20% damage (if you're lucky) opposed to the 0% of anti/void. Hybrid users still need faster ships, range increases to base hybrid turret stats, or dramatic increases to range of t2 ammo. These changes are a good sign but they are NOT the problem-solvers.
Maybe it's different in the frig world, but this is definitely the case in the cruiser/BC/BS world.
Of course they do, but that has nothing to do with this change. Auto's don't have to change ammo types at all for their range, that doesn't make them better than pulse though, they are just different.
The point is, the change makes the hybrid ammo easier to use. With the previous setup, it was unreasonable to change range/ammo in the middle of the fight, so you ended up just carrying one type of ammo and burning to the ship so you were in range of said target, and waiting until then to start doing DPS.
In my experience this often led to targets being dead before I got a shot off in a Brutix.
With the new change, it is more reasonable for ships to carry multiple ammo types, similar to energy turrets, and be doing less dps further out, while they close into the target to switch to antimatter/close range ammo.
This is exactly what most energy turret ships do and it makes one of the variables of hybrid turret ammo (range) something we can work with/around.
Loading null and doing 20% damage while you close, is still better than loading antimatter and doing 0% damage while you close. |
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis Moar Tears
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:56:00 -
[285] - Quote
Why are you re-adding the nerf to Hail's falloff? I don't understand! Hail is SO BAD right now, it's practically useless; without having equivalent range to short range ammo, in line with Conflagration and Void (which actually has a better optimal), it doesn't make sense to me from a design perspective. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:04:00 -
[286] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update.
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%. Please be careful with sweeping changes to all blasters. The small blasters are quite fine - the frigate-sized blaster (and rail) setups are already very competitive if not "the best" (Taranis, Daredevil).
Two ships does not make a whole line fine. Im tired of people saying that small hybrids are fine.
Its true they aren't as borked as there larger counter parts.
But the tristan is a real pita to use against a rifter, and the catalyst is just terrible.
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:21:00 -
[287] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
Tallest,
Thanks for working on this issue and responding. Well, I guess this is better than nothing, but probably short of something sufficient to overcome all the problems everyone knows about. I guess I was hoping for a bolder change. No further adjustments planned to the hulls of Gallente ships then? Do you feel this "fixes" the hybrid problem and will be the final changes for the Winter expansion? I would really enjoy hearing your thoughts on what your vision is with these changes. |
mkint
311
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:22:00 -
[288] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:mkint wrote:Magosian wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:i really hope the ship buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships. I feel the same way. Although I would much rather the weapon system be the primary focus of the changes. Moderate increases to Gallente speed/agility doesn't actually change a Minmatar-kiting scenario, nor does it do anything about the more substantial speed penalties incurred by buffing an armor tank. What if there was a buff to Energized Regenerative Membranes, perhaps remove stacking penalties making them nearly (but not quite) as effective as plates? Does anyone use regenerative membranes anyway? As it is, you'd need 14k raw armor HP for a T2 regenerative membrane to be as effective as even an 800mm plate, which you won't see in anything smaller than a capital. In fact, the most raw HP gallente BS (hyperion) you'd see the equivalent of a 400mm plate. Even if stacking penalties were removed, it would take 3 regeneratives would add the raw HP of 1 1600mm plate on a hyperion. So, what if Gallente active repair ships were given bonuses to using regenerative plates instead? Just playing with numbers, maybe the fix to the gallente armor/close range conundrum is in the armor modules? I love this suggestion. It can be easily implemented: Some Gal. Ships, namely the Hyperion and the Britux, have a 7.5% bonus to self-rep. The 7.5% bonus to self repair could also (or instead) add to the armor bonus of regenerative membranes. That way first membrane you equip gives you massive (16+37.5) 53.5 % boost to hp. As you add more plates the stacking penalties make them less effective, preventing you from making a completely insane tank. So in practice we would see a gal. ship with three of these, a DCU, a couple energized adaptives and a damage mod, achieving same EHP as it would with plates. Gallente will be able to have a lot of armor and EHP without loosing ttheir mobility. It can also be used to make other Gal. ships more capable. I think we're getting closer, but even a 50% boost on a hyperion = 1 1600mm plate. Brutix and myrm would need a 100% boost for it to be the same. Cruisers (T1 and T2) would need a 100% boost for it to be equivalent to a 800mm (300% for a 1600mm). What I'm not sure about off the top of my head is if the second one would (I think 43.5% with stacking penalties) apply to the base HP or the base HP + first regen. If it's the latter, then I can see some fun decisions being made about whether to go amor plate + eanm, or 2 regeneratives. If it's the former, then Gallente ships should be able to get a no stacking penalties bonus to ships with the % bonus (assuming that's even possible due to technical reasons.)
Also, I really wouldn't mind if the regens actually regenned armor at a slow rate al a passive shields. Not enough to be a tank, but enough to not have to rep between engagements, though I'm not sure if that would be entirely balanced. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:53:00 -
[289] - Quote
Tallest,
I do appreciate the response. However, the changes are slight and not exactly what blasters need to become competitive. I sincerely hope there are some radical ship stat changes planned for Gallente boats or this TOKEN change of stats for blasters will amount to little to nothing.
Ask yourself, How do the changes made so far overcome the Gallente's major issues of:
1) Making a fast approach into Blaster range without having your face melted off.
2) Having the firepower to overcome said face melting once you have your prey within 10km.
I can answer for you. 1) they don't and 2) while 5 percent is a start... it is quite a long long way from being a serious change.
I do hope that the ship changes are coming in conjunction with these tweaks. It would be a shame to waste the obvious passion and enthusiasm that these possible changes have stirred in the community. I for one do not want another let down. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:54:00 -
[290] - Quote
I was thinking CCP Tallest... you could do the same thing to gallente vs minimatar as you did to daredevil vs dramiel... of cause minimatar should be fastest, but they don't have to be the most agile also... so my suggestion, make minimatars agility less than gallente and reverse...
Then blaster platforms could use a quick dash tactic, to catch stuff before it accelerates beyound its own speed |
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:02:00 -
[291] - Quote
indicast wrote:
Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update.
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
but,why would anyone benefit from that reload bonus?i mean faction antimmater is best ammo to use tbh[/quote]
faster reload means more dps. use your brain. |
Torei Dutalis
Enigmatic Goat Herders
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:11:00 -
[292] - Quote
Personally I think this 5 second reload time is pretty big. Medium hybrids could probably use 5% more damage (rails in specific), but I think it would be premature to ask for more sweeping buffs to hybrid weapons themselves without seeing what the changes to ship hulls will be. Been doing some light testing with the Talos hull, and going over 1800 m/s now strikes me as something that would be dangerous if applied to other mid-sized Gallente hulls.
Hypothetically speaking if cruiser/BC hulls (brutix/thorax) see a transition towards a shield tanking and/or speed approach with "upcoming" hull changes I would foresee a potential imbalance in small gang warfare with further boosts to the hybrid weapon systems.
Additionally, I'd like to reiterate the point that was made by several other posters in the thread that small hybrid guns really need no more buffing after this latest update. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
140
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:22:00 -
[293] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:Been doing some light testing with the Talos hull, and going over 1800 m/s now strikes me as something that would be dangerous if applied to other mid-sized Gallente hulls.
i think its nuts that nano BC's are moving faster than nano HACs. just sayin.
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:40:00 -
[294] - Quote
moved to appropriate forum |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 01:06:00 -
[295] - Quote
These are good changes, but I'd like to see buffs to Void (tracking, damage) and Null (range) to really capitalize on the improved reload time. Both are semi-usable now but are fairly lackluster in comparison to Scorch and Barrage. This regen membrane idea people are toying with also has potential, as long as it's ship-specific. |
Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
415
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 01:08:00 -
[296] - Quote
Since it's the test server and you can try radical changes...
Why not completely swap the stats for hybrids and projectiles? Also change the offense bonuses of Gallente and Minnie ships (web, falloff, tracking, etc) to reflect their roles. The fast shield tanking Minmatar ships would make better fast tacklers/webbers anyway, and can get in close enough to do blaster damage. And the slow-ass Gallente boats could enjoy the extra falloff because they can't catch up.
I'm not saying it's a perfect or even desireable solution, but why not take a few days and test it out? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 01:54:00 -
[297] - Quote
I really start to like the new stats from Hybrids even if the ships have lots of issues like speed of blasterboats vs minmatar ships and the very situational optimal bonus...
So here is some stats on fit ships currently on SiS (using Pinky Denmark) The railgun tracking bonus seems not to be on yet as well as the faster reload
All comparisons w/ best T1 ammo :
Abaddon w/ Tacyons (2 HS) - 657,3 dps (33km+25km) +75m3 drones, 0.01740 rad/sec, 4811 volley Abaddon w/ Mega Beam (2 HS) - 608,6 dps (30km+20km) +75m3 drones, 0.01914 rad/sec, 3012 volley Maelstrom w/1400mm Artillery (3 gyro) - 581,9 dps (30km+43,75km) + 100m3 drones, 0.01125 rad/sec, 9648 volley Hyperion w/425mm Railgun (2 MFS) - 566,8 dps (36km+30km) + 100m3 drones, 0.01203 rad/sec, 3174 volley Rokh w/425mm Railgun (3MFS) - 509,9 dps (54km+30km) + 50m3 drones, 0.01203 rad/sec, 2682 volley Abaddon w/1400mm Artillery (3 Gyro) - 436,4 dps (30km+43,75km) + 75m3 drones, 0.01125 rad/sec, 9648 volley
DPS : Abaddon > Maelstrom > Hyperion > Rokh Volley : Maelstrom > Abaddon > Hyperion > Rokh Tracking : Abaddon > Hyperion > Rokh > Maelstrom Range : Rokh > Hyperion > Maelstrom > Abaddon
I didn't really want to bring it up but that optimal bonus for Rokh stinks - give Gallente a RoF bonus and get the Caldari a Straight up damage bonus plz. Very few battles will let a Rokh sit between 36 and 54km anyway without warping out or closing the distance... Optimal bonus should be for smaller ships than battleships IMO and maybe the Apocalypse will agree hehe
Also the railguns still needs a unique role since range bonus works so bad at least for battleships. Signature Resolution? It's an overlooked possibility Tracking? Currently lasers have this but it could be changed Range? Not very good as it is right now Fastest ROF? I guess that MIGHT be a seller for SOMEONE but not really?
Anyway if the ammo gets straightened out and someone put a fist down for changing the optimal bonus on at least the battleships the railguns starts to be balanced out and working well...
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 Eagle w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 319,6 dps (40,5+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1121 volley Ferox w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 306,9 dps (27+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1077 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
|
mkint
314
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:11:00 -
[298] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: Also the railguns still needs a unique role since range bonus works so bad at least for battleships. Signature Resolution? It's an overlooked possibility
I kinda like that idea. Larges are 400m, mediums are 125m. What if hybrids were somewhere in the 275m range? Seems like that would play well with their mediocre volley damage. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:20:00 -
[299] - Quote
Blasters (larges and mediums especially) probably need more than a 5% tracking buff. They seriously struggle to track anything smaller than a titan when used inside their engagement envelope. Alternatively (and probably, optimally) increase their optimal/falloff ranges so that you can shoot from further away, minimizing the tracking issues and maybe even allowing blasterboats to engage outside of suicidal scram/web range. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
143
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:21:00 -
[300] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: 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
thanks for working out the numbers. i highlighted the lulzworthy part. CCP, no one will be flying hybrid platforms. |
|
Cunane Jeran
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:50:00 -
[301] - Quote
These new changes are fantastic, the old changes had put us in a good place, but I honestly believe this is now really closed down the gap between projectiles and hybrids a bit more while putting us square on par with lasers.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:53:00 -
[302] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: 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
If by balanced you mean still sucking at tracking and still not putting out dps and still not having a range advantage then you are correct sir.
|
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:56:00 -
[303] - Quote
as much as i appreciate your testing pinky, fitting dmg mods for testing is not the way to go - they're ment as extra fitting option, not a must and not a default.
i know many ppl fit them by default, but for comparing weapons the bare fit witout any ( and certainly nor multiple dmg mods) is not helpfull...just use the base dmg for the start... |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 03:08:00 -
[304] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: All comparisons w/ best T1 ammo :
Abaddon w/ Tacyons (2 HS) - 657,3 dps (33km+25km) +75m3 drones, 0.01740 rad/sec, 4811 volley Abaddon w/ Mega Beam (2 HS) - 608,6 dps (30km+20km) +75m3 drones, 0.01914 rad/sec, 3012 volley Maelstrom w/1400mm Artillery (3 gyro) - 581,9 dps (30km+43,75km) + 100m3 drones, 0.01125 rad/sec, 9648 volley Hyperion w/425mm Railgun (2 MFS) - 566,8 dps (36km+30km) + 100m3 drones, 0.01203 rad/sec, 3174 volley Rokh w/425mm Railgun (3MFS) - 509,9 dps (54km+30km) + 50m3 drones, 0.01203 rad/sec, 2682 volley Abaddon w/1400mm Artillery (3 Gyro) - 436,4 dps (30km+43,75km) + 75m3 drones, 0.01125 rad/sec, 9648 volley
DPS : Abaddon > Maelstrom > Hyperion > Rokh Volley : Maelstrom > Abaddon > Hyperion > Rokh Tracking : Abaddon > Hyperion > Rokh > Maelstrom Range : Rokh > Hyperion > Maelstrom > Abaddon
Thanks for pointing this out. The Rokh gets to deal 10% less damage per second with about 33% less volley damage than the next ship up (a ship that is considered so weak as to not be flown) for the glorious advantage of 10 extra km range? That's hardly worth those trade-offs. Caldari ships need to be re-evaluated to even be somewhat viable. When was the last time you saw someone flying Caldari into combat for something other than ECM (something that was considered the only advantage of Caldari right up until it got pummeled with the nerf bat) or POS bashing (an activity CCP acknowledges as being unfun)?
Pinky Denmark wrote:
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 Eagle w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 319,6 dps (40,5+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1121 volley Ferox w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 306,9 dps (27+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1077 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
Okay, this is just comedic. The Ferox does 33% less damage per second than a similarly fit Hurricane with greater than 66% less volley damage? With a range difference of 6km? I knew the Ferox was severely underpowered, but I've never actually dug up the numbers before.
The Eagle is...lacking, the numbers above show that it either needs a DPS increase or a serious volley increase, but the real problems with the Eagle are the ship's speed, agility, and fitting.
This is ridiculous, CCP. Fix Caldari. If these numbers are correct, I can choose to try and contribute to a fight, and not actually matter, or I can choose to not be able to apply damage, because in the 20 - 30 seconds it takes my damage to reach a target the fight's over. Outside of ECM, there is no reason to bring Caldari into a combat scenario. This is bad design.
Pinky Denmark wrote: Looks pretty balanced on the medium long ranged weapons too...
Pinky
You have got to be joking.
I'm not trying to be rude, but seeing everything get buffed up around Caldari for about 5 years now has been extremely grating. The torpedo change, the Falcon nerf, almost every Caldari ship that's been introduced being sub-par or irrelevant, the introduction of explosion velocity. It's all added up and taken it's toll. Caldari is far and away the weakest race for any given combat scenario, outside of about two ships which play a support role instead of a direct combat role. Please fix Caldari. |
Daraja
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 03:22:00 -
[305] - Quote
Hybrid ammo in general still needs to be reviewed and balanced against the rest. It needs it's own gimmick.
Perhaps this should go in a proposal thready instead, but I'll place it here for now.
Since hybrid turrets have a relatively balanced falloff and optimal, why not give variety on ammo as well to penalize by choice.
Example (based on Antimatter damage) -50% optimal, 0% falloff, +25% tracking -25% optimal, -25% falloff, 0% tracking 0% optimal, -50% falloff, -25% tracking
All ammo would have the same overall damage, but you might tweak the kinetic vs thermal distributions.
Take in a step higher and maybe we can introduce additional penalties for added bonus (Based on Lead Charge) -50% optmal, +50% falloff, +25% tracking. 0%, 0%, 0% +50%, -50%, -25%.
|
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 03:27:00 -
[306] - Quote
Daraja wrote:Hybrid ammo in general still needs to be reviewed and balanced against the rest. It needs it's own gimmick.
Perhaps this should go in a proposal thready instead, but I'll place it here for now.
Since hybrid turrets have a relatively balanced falloff and optimal, why not give variety on ammo as well to penalize by choice.
Example (based on Antimatter damage) -50% optimal, 0% falloff, +25% tracking -25% optimal, -25% falloff, 0% tracking 0% optimal, -50% falloff, -25% tracking
All ammo would have the same overall damage, but you might tweak the kinetic vs thermal distributions.
Take in a step higher and maybe we can introduce additional penalties for added bonus (Based on Lead Charge) -50% optmal, +50% falloff, +25% tracking. 0%, 0%, 0% +50%, -50%, -25%.
This could actually be an elegant way to fix railguns, provided the breakdowns extended to faction and T2 ammo. Still needs some work, but it's a good place to start. |
Ephiel
Hello Kitty Space Marines Ev0ke
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 03:42:00 -
[307] - Quote
Like the changes so far!
A little Side note on Hybrids - doesn't fit the stats exactly but its something pretty important in PvP and easy to fix. The Size of the Hybrid Ammunition icons if loaded in your guns are just a bit too big. It covers most of the overheat indicator. Check out Medium and Large Antimatter for example.
If you turn on overheat you can only see the the first 15% of the Bar and then it gets covered by the Ammunition Icons. It will become visible again at about 80% but then its mostly to late in hectic combat to turn off the overheat. Burned many many Blasters this way and had too many expensive enemy ships surviving in structure :/
please resize the icons a little bit. Thanks! |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
143
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 03:43:00 -
[308] - Quote
Daraja wrote:Hybrid ammo in general still needs to be reviewed and balanced against the rest. It needs it's own gimmick.
Perhaps this should go in a proposal thready instead, but I'll place it here for now.
Since hybrid turrets have a relatively balanced falloff and optimal, why not give variety on ammo as well to penalize by choice.
Example (based on Antimatter damage) -50% optimal, 0% falloff, +25% tracking -25% optimal, -25% falloff, 0% tracking 0% optimal, -50% falloff, -25% tracking
All ammo would have the same overall damage, but you might tweak the kinetic vs thermal distributions.
Take in a step higher and maybe we can introduce additional penalties for added bonus (Based on Lead Charge) -50% optmal, +50% falloff, +25% tracking. 0%, 0%, 0% +50%, -50%, -25%.
i am still hoping they will consider this. i only care about rails at this point; blasters are a lost cause. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:01:00 -
[309] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote: i only care about rails at this point; blasters are a lost cause.
I wish I could disagree with you. I renewed my subscription specifically to take part in the Blaster rework after canceling it over the microtransactions debacle. If balance (Hybrid buffs and gallente ship buffs) of some sort is not reached during this expansion I will cancel and wait again. I am not paying to play at a disadvantage. So far it looks like the Matari-centric mindset at CCP is going to continue with small token changes being handed out here and there to the less deserving races.
|
Franklen
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:04:00 -
[310] - Quote
Remove the tracking penalty from Void ammo. Replace it with a penalty to the WEAPON'S sig radius. Give Null ammo more range. |
|
Nataly Fynolds
Clan Fynolds
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:36:00 -
[311] - Quote
Things that should be looked into:
Scorch and barrage increase their effective weapon range by about 40%, null only by 25%. That should be brought in line.
Tracking computers and enhancers increase falloff twice as much as optimal, when they should increase them by the same amount.
This would bringt blaster and autocannon ranges closer together so the blaster has a slightly better chance to fight back when getting kited. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 04:49:00 -
[312] - Quote
Nataly Fynolds wrote: This would bringt blaster and autocannon ranges closer together so the blaster is a poor copy of an autocannon.
Fixed that for you.
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 05:05:00 -
[313] - Quote
are these changes in addition to the previous ones posted or instead? |
Nataly Fynolds
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:01:00 -
[314] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Nataly Fynolds wrote: This would bringt blaster and autocannon ranges closer together so the blaster is a poor copy of an autocannon.
Fixed that for you.
The basic range from autocannons is *still* considerably higher than blasters.
The different T2 ammo and optimal/falloff on tracking mods bring it out of line. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:08:00 -
[315] - Quote
The latest update is starting to point on the right direction, way to go CCP.
The reload time reduction improves DPS but is also a penalty since cap usage increases. Im not sure if this should be compensated with improved cap usage (or more cap on hybrid platforms). Maybe cap usage reduction on selected hybrid ammo (the ones meant to be used close range)?
Rails still suck. They fail at DPS and they fail at volley, for less than 20% advantage in range on most cases. I would say, give 5% increase damage for *all* hybrids to bring rails volley damage closer to decent numbers, or give it a tad over more RoF (which, again, is also a penalty since means increased cap usage).
A increased RoF would play particularly well with Caldari's active shield tanking ships, since that means you would have to choose between long range snipping or tank, making snipers rely even more on support and ECM, but giving superior range with good DPS (instead of having the worst DPS for its range, like today). |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:16:00 -
[316] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
I dont know if that is the solution, but its damn fine anyway. Thank you. |
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:26:00 -
[317] - Quote
Rails are still abit meh, should get another 5% damage buff atleast imo
Was gonna say they should have a bigger clip size asell until they changed the reload time to 5sec, that made their clip size ok(And that's a change I'm happy to see all hybrids get) |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
143
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:33:00 -
[318] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: i only care about rails at this point; blasters are a lost cause.
I wish I could disagree with you. I renewed my subscription specifically to take part in the Blaster rework after canceling it over the microtransactions debacle. If balance (Hybrid buffs and gallente ship buffs) of some sort is not reached during this expansion I will cancel and wait again. I am not paying to play at a disadvantage. So far it looks like the Matari-centric mindset at CCP is going to continue with small token changes being handed out here and there to the less deserving races.
we're in the exact same boat. i resubbed cuz Gallente have my favourite ships. and why should 20% of the combat ships in game be useless? i want to be able to use my Deimos like people have been using the Zealot. Why the hell not? i cannot connect with any other race's ships for some reason (even though i've most of them trained up)...if i cant play Gall properly, wont play at all heh.
reason #2 FW, reason #3 AF's. im willing to continue my sub if hybrids and Gall ships are balanced properly. i dont mind waiting a little bit longer for 2 & 3, but the hybrid buff must be successful for Winter expansion in my eyes. |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 06:39:00 -
[319] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:are these changes in addition to the previous ones posted or instead?
He said in addition. So, i think that totals:
Various cpu reductions -12.5% PG requirements -30% cap use for all turrets +20% blaster tracking +5% blaster damage +15% rail damage +5% rail tracking.
Smaller ammo - 5 secs of reload time.
A damn fine start, IMHO. I presume they wont do tge ship based changes until the next round of updates, but this is a real effort by CCP. Lets give it a chance. The ships will be the ultimate solution, for good or ill.
|
Kozmic
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:19:00 -
[320] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
CCP Tallest best Tallest. |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:39:00 -
[321] - Quote
A few things Things...
I did damage mods on those stats because I wanted to see them at a realistic use - The armor ships have difficulties fitting as many damage mods as the shield tankers without completely sacrificing tank... Judge for yourself. As long you know under what circumstances you are getting the numbers.
Medium railguns - I just found out I had a 5% medium hybrid implant fitted... It looks like Medium railguns need a bigger boost than large railguns for sure.
And yes as someone mentioned the railguns still need an edge other than range. It is very important to shape a usefull role for these weapons. It does look like medium railguns really need more tracking.
Small hybrids: I dont care but be carefull medium railguns: need 5% more dps (15% total) + better tracking + a unique feature besides range large railguns: looks surprisingly good to me if you are not flying Rokh Ammunition: It's a mess and needs to be sorted out
Pinky |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:43:00 -
[322] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: i only care about rails at this point; blasters are a lost cause.
I wish I could disagree with you. I renewed my subscription specifically to take part in the Blaster rework after canceling it over the microtransactions debacle. If balance (Hybrid buffs and gallente ship buffs) of some sort is not reached during this expansion I will cancel and wait again. I am not paying to play at a disadvantage. So far it looks like the Matari-centric mindset at CCP is going to continue with small token changes being handed out here and there to the less deserving races.
It's trivial to make blasters work, it just requires a few nerfs. But CCP doesn't have the balls to nerf anything, hence the incapability of addressing the problem of intrusion of lasers and projectiles into blasters' and rails' niches. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:50:00 -
[323] - Quote
mkint wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote: Also the railguns still needs a unique role since range bonus works so bad at least for battleships. Signature Resolution? It's an overlooked possibility
I kinda like that idea. Larges are 400m, mediums are 125m. What if hybrids were somewhere in the 275m range? Seems like that would play well with their mediocre volley damage.
II'm sure this has been pointed out, but, whatever...
Decreasing signature resolution by x % is the same as increasing tracking by x %/ |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:58:00 -
[324] - Quote
I do remain sceptic on that even if both parameters influence the same outcome : dps But even if that is 100% true you would still see at range where tracking is neglectible the signature resolution still plays an important part in hitting smaller ship classes. The signature resolution has been put in game for balance purpose and as such railguns could easily get a slight advantage here as long it makes sense for Eve. |
Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:59:00 -
[325] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Nemesor wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: i only care about rails at this point; blasters are a lost cause.
I wish I could disagree with you. I renewed my subscription specifically to take part in the Blaster rework after canceling it over the microtransactions debacle. If balance (Hybrid buffs and gallente ship buffs) of some sort is not reached during this expansion I will cancel and wait again. I am not paying to play at a disadvantage. So far it looks like the Matari-centric mindset at CCP is going to continue with small token changes being handed out here and there to the less deserving races. It's trivial to make blasters work, it just requires a few nerfs. But CCP doesn't have the balls to nerf anything, hence the incapability of addressing the problem of intrusion of lasers and projectiles into blasters' and rails' niches.
Actually no, it requires specific changes(web bonuses or general rework of webs and scrams) to make blaster ships worth bringing to web range again. Blaster ships as it stands are similar bad at point blank like any other hull, they lack the ability to control the environment they fight in and the target they fight what is one of the key points to make ships useful in solo/small gang combat. Other ships easily do this with fighting outside of web/scram range or in the case of minmatar ships using neuts and her general flexibility for workarounds for close range pvp. You can nerf the rest all the way you want and you still have no reason to fly a blaster ship in the end.
The original Talso design was good, because it did address this point(slot layout and stats not so much, but nothingness). All the other buffs so far are more or less pointless, because they don't address the core problems(getting the ships in range and make it worth it once you are there, by giving you control, punch and the ability to win fights with it). However I agree that CCP lacks the balls to actually do this. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:12:00 -
[326] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I do remain sceptic on that even if both parameters influence the same outcome : dps But even if that is 100% true you would still see at range where tracking is neglectible the signature resolution still plays an important part in hitting smaller ship classes. The signature resolution has been put in game for balance purpose and as such railguns could easily get a slight advantage here as long it makes sense for Eve.
No, decreasing signature resolution by x % has the same effect as increasing tracking by x %. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:21:00 -
[327] - Quote
Jill Antaris wrote:
The original Talos design was good, because it did address this point(slot layout and stats not so much, but nothingness). All the other buffs so far are more or less pointless, because they don't address the core problems(getting the ships in range and make it worth it once you are there, by giving you control, punch and the ability to win fights with it). However I agree that CCP lacks the balls to actually do this.
I wasn't actually very keen on the 90% web on the Talos. I didn't see how it helped the Talos get to web range in the first place, and once there it had little damage advantage over the Tornado and Oracle. The 90% web didn't help with tracking - you'd still have had to slow down to apply your blaster DPS, at which point the Tornado is also applying its excessive close-range DPS to you.
The only thing that the 90% web really helped with was killing cruisers and frigates, but CCP is right to say that these ships should be vulnerable to small stuff. So it's a shame that they're keeping the Tornado's speed and falloff bonus. |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:22:00 -
[328] - Quote
Kiev Duran wrote: Thanks for pointing this out. The Rokh gets to deal 10% less damage per second with about 33% less volley damage than the next ship up (a ship that is considered so weak as to not be flown) for the glorious advantage of 10 extra km range? That's hardly worth those trade-offs. Caldari ships need to be re-evaluated to even be somewhat viable. When was the last time you saw someone flying Caldari into combat for something other than ECM (something that was considered the only advantage of Caldari right up until it got pummeled with the nerf bat) or POS bashing (an activity CCP acknowledges as being unfun)?
You have got to be joking.
I'm not trying to be rude, but seeing everything get buffed up around Caldari for about 5 years now has been extremely grating. The torpedo change, the Falcon nerf, almost every Caldari ship that's been introduced being sub-par or irrelevant, the introduction of explosion velocity. It's all added up and taken it's toll. Caldari is far and away the weakest race for any given combat scenario, outside of about two ships which play a support role instead of a direct combat role. Please fix Caldari.
I get where you are coming from Kiev, and totally recognise the frustration. I and many others would really want to see the Caldari brought in line with other races. But I am actually okay with Caldari doing the least amount of damage (somebody has to be last) but only if they had a far greater tank to slug it out fairly at a comparable level to Amarr, that way they would be balanced, but still unique in the game.
So, they do less damage, but survive longer = balance.
The Rokh, with only 6 mid slots, doesn't really have the ability to tank as well as Amarr, yet has the larger signature, slow speed, and low damage going against it too. If the tank was greater than Amarr (To make up for the signature!) then we'd have something, but it is far less than the Abaddon, with lower resists, with no mid slots left for things like scrams etc.
However, I am wary of making all ships so similar that it just becomes a cosmetic choice. There should be differences between the races.
When I see calls to make Gallente fly similar speeds to Minmitar I cringe. They don't need speed all the time, they just need speed bursts to get in range and use their mid slots.
I previously suggested Tactical Modules that could offer a temporary speed boost, but heck, it would be easier to have a new sort of MWD module that goes a LOT faster, but for FAR less time, and would need a cooldown on its use to avoid it being abused.
I hope something is done, I would truly love to take Rokh's out in a fleet, but even with the Hybrid tweeks, it is going to be a very tough sell. Don't even get me started about the pathetic Basilisk tank compared to the Guardian and it's tiny signature.
It would also be great to see Gallente get balanced, through a speed burst mechanic. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:22:00 -
[329] - Quote
But in a long range situation with a 400sig res cannon where your tracking is more than enough to keep up with a smaller target will you not benefit more from better sig res than better tracking that isn't needed?
Otherwise that must be a glitch in game mechanics... |
PinkKnife
Garden Of The Gods
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:25:00 -
[330] - Quote
Kiev Duran wrote:
When was the last time you saw someone flying Caldari into combat for something other than ECM (something that was considered the only advantage of Caldari right up until it got pummeled with the nerf bat) or POS bashing (an activity CCP acknowledges as being unfun)?
REALLY?
Drake? The second most often used PVP ship? There is a reason we fit two caldari, two minmatar, one amarr, and one gallente to our jammers.
That aside: Drake, Manticore, Hookbill, Nighthawk, Chimera, Cerberus, Hawk, etc .
This poor Caldari ship isn't going to sail, the Caldari are some of THE most often used ships are there is a reason, they don't need buffing, lest we see even more drake roams of 20-50 drakes at a time.
Kiev Duran wrote:
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 Eagle w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 319,6 dps (40,5+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1121 volley Ferox w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 306,9 dps (27+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1077 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
Okay, this is just comedic. The Ferox does 33% less damage per second than a similarly fit Hurricane with greater than 66% less volley damage? With a range difference of 6km? I knew the Ferox was severely underpowered, but I've never actually dug up the numbers before.
The Eagle is...lacking, the numbers above show that it either needs a DPS increase or a serious volley increase, but the real problems with the Eagle are the ship's speed, agility, and fitting.
This is ridiculous, CCP. Fix Caldari. If these numbers are correct, I can choose to try and contribute to a fight, and not actually matter, or I can choose to not be able to apply damage, because in the 20 - 30 seconds it takes my damage to reach a target the fight's over. Outside of ECM, there is no reason to bring Caldari into a combat scenario. This is bad design.
Again, you're looking at it the wrong way, compared to the other hybrid boats, you're exchanging 20-30 dps for 9-13KM in optimal range, easily a comparable trade. The only REAL outliar here is the insane numbers that the projectiles put out, not only do they get the best volley damage, but they get the highest dps, tracking thats just barely under rails, and greater usable range. |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:25:00 -
[331] - Quote
A cooldown on MWDs would be pretty epic - either that or just lock the MWDs in overheat mode permanently while giving it less penalties... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:28:00 -
[332] - Quote
In defense I did put 3 Gyro on the Muninn that might be a little much compared to the slots it has... But OMG the tracking and 2nd highest dps? You're right |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:33:00 -
[333] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Kiev Duran wrote:
When was the last time you saw someone flying Caldari into combat for something other than ECM (something that was considered the only advantage of Caldari right up until it got pummeled with the nerf bat) or POS bashing (an activity CCP acknowledges as being unfun)?
REALLY? Drake? The second most often used PVP ship? There is a reason we fit two caldari, two minmatar, one amarr, and one gallente to our jammers. That aside: Drake, Manticore, Hookbill, Nighthawk, Chimera, Cerberus, Hawk, etc . This poor Caldari ship isn't going to sail, the Caldari are some of THE most often used ships are there is a reason, they don't need buffing, lest we see even more drake roams of 20-50 drakes at a time.
- Agreed with the sentiment and yeah - Drake lolz.
But Caldari Hybrid boats are a different matter entirely and are not balanced. When was the last time you saw a fleet of Rokh's? Or Eagles... or Ferox's. It just doesn't happen and there are good reasons for that. In relation to my earlier post about Caldari getting more Tank, it is the Hybrid caldari ships that need this to balance, NOT the Caldari missile boats. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:42:00 -
[334] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:PinkKnife wrote:Kiev Duran wrote:
When was the last time you saw someone flying Caldari into combat for something other than ECM (something that was considered the only advantage of Caldari right up until it got pummeled with the nerf bat) or POS bashing (an activity CCP acknowledges as being unfun)?
REALLY? Drake? The second most often used PVP ship? There is a reason we fit two caldari, two minmatar, one amarr, and one gallente to our jammers. That aside: Drake, Manticore, Hookbill, Nighthawk, Chimera, Cerberus, Hawk, etc . - Agreed with the sentiment and yeah - Drake lolz. But Caldari Hybrid boats are a different matter entirely and are not balanced. When was the last time you saw a fleet of Rokh's? Or Eagles... or Ferox's. It just doesn't happen and there are good reasons for that. In relation to my earlier post about Caldari getting more Tank, it is the Hybrid caldari ships that need this to balance, NOT the Caldari missile boats.
Erm, you really sure about including the Nighthawk, Chimera and Cerberus on that list? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:47:00 -
[335] - Quote
I have been calling for extra medslots for a long time on the gallente railboats... I must say though the only boat that really needs it is the Rokh. And to be honest the Rokh would benefit way more from having a 5% damage pr level instead of optimal bonus while to balance giving the Gallente a 5% increased ROF instead of their current damage bonuses on battleships. The Moa and Ferox would love that bonus as well without in any way breaking game balance - and they will still have their best range fluff with Railguns being a little better ranged than others ... |
Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:51:00 -
[336] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Jill Antaris wrote:
The original Talos design was good, because it did address this point(slot layout and stats not so much, but nothingness). All the other buffs so far are more or less pointless, because they don't address the core problems(getting the ships in range and make it worth it once you are there, by giving you control, punch and the ability to win fights with it). However I agree that CCP lacks the balls to actually do this.
I wasn't actually very keen on the 90% web on the Talos. I didn't see how it helped the Talos get to web range in the first place, and once there it had little damage advantage over the Tornado and Oracle. The 90% web didn't help with tracking - you'd still have had to slow down to apply your blaster DPS, at which point the Tornado is also applying its excessive close-range DPS to you. The only thing that the 90% web really helped with was killing cruisers and frigates, but CCP is right to say that these ships should be vulnerable to small stuff. So it's a shame that they're keeping the Tornado's speed and falloff bonus.
Well it was significant faster than other blaster hulls in this class and there is no reason to bring any of the other Tier 3 BCs to web range, with her weak tanks and the tracking of large guns. Ofc it would have lost to the Oracle or Tornado at point blank, this is why I stated that the concept was good, the implementation on the other hand not so much. I'm not even saying that if the intended role of the tier 3 is fleet support and being vulnerable against frigs and cruisers(what however will be mostly a non issue in gang and fleet use) is bad, just horrible one sided for concept for weapons that don't work in gang/fleet scenarios.
I'm not even sad about making the Talos some sort of meh rail platform if CCP really want to apply her overall concept. I just did think, after 3 years, it was the closest to what I would have called a general useful blaster ship design(beside stupidly overpriced serpentis hulls that you see ten times more in Incursions as in pvp). |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:53:00 -
[337] - Quote
Tallest,
CCP, over the years, have nerfed Damps. You have nerfed webs. You nerfed all ships speed and acceleration and you buffed projectile falloff and laser optimal ranges.
Thats all water under the bridge. I am willing to give the game design team another chance. You just have to do one thing for me.
Get me in optimal. Thats it. Get me in optimal with a fighting chance to win against a like skilled opponent. Thats all any Gallente pilot wants.
Your efforts thus far are not doing much to get me in optimal. I am sad when I am not in optimal. I am happy only in the warm orange glow of my opponents melted wreck.
Make more changes to get me in optimal soon. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 11:15:00 -
[338] - Quote
I for one STOPPED PLAYING EVE mainly because everything i've been training from start became pretty useless. It is extremly demotivating when you train few months for gal ships ( t2 guns, bs lvl 5 etc ) and they are useless. Now i paid for month subscription for action price, because i was reading there are going to be big changes to hybrids, but i will probably cancel. (blasters) The time you need to get in range(if it is even possible), use up half a cap and take bilion dmg in process, sacrifice med for web to keep range. after getting in range another precious secs need to stop and alling somehow to be able to track (1on1 not prob because other cannt track either, but in group combat someone will be shooting at you, probably all... ).
After microscopic changes blasters are about to get and not adresing the fastest ship should have shortest range issue.(how the **** im going to kill min). BLASTERS ARE STILL NOT WORTH IT AT ALL !!! |
Selar Nox
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 11:52:00 -
[339] - Quote
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... |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 11:59:00 -
[340] - Quote
Selar Nox wrote: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...
1) we would have to give up a tracking or damage bonus of some sort to get this bonus. Both of which are vital. (Unless its on a worthless active armor ship then its alright)
2) This would infringe upon the precious snowflake Matari's territory and we would not want that!
|
|
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:26:00 -
[341] - Quote
Selar Nox wrote: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... I'd rather like a scram range bonus (+20% per level, so 18km for scram II). That would allow to get close to ships that would normally kite you. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:27:00 -
[342] - Quote
My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.
From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.
Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.
If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses. Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:32:00 -
[343] - Quote
Sam Bowein wrote:Selar Nox wrote: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... I'd rather like a scram range bonus (+20% per level, so 18km for scram II). That would allow to get close to ships that would normally kite you.
There might be a problem with this being too binary. If your target is faster than you and is outside scram range, then you have the current difficulties in getting to blaster range. But if you are able to apply a long-range scramble, then suddenly you have a massive speed advantage and can easily close to optimal.
In the first case, it's too hard to get to blaster optimal; but in the second case it's too easy. Something more graduated would be better. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:35:00 -
[344] - Quote
sq0 wrote:I for one STOPPED PLAYING EVE mainly because everything i've been training from start became pretty useless. It is extremly demotivating when you train few months for gal ships ( t2 guns, bs lvl 5 etc ) and they are useless. Now i paid for month subscription for action price, because i was reading there are going to be big changes to hybrids, but i will probably cancel. (blasters) The time you need to get in range(if it is even possible), use up half a cap and take bilion dmg in process, sacrifice med for web to keep range. after getting in range another precious secs need to stop and alling somehow to be able to track (1on1 not prob because other cannt track either, but in group combat someone will be shooting at you, probably all... ).
After microscopic changes blasters are about to get and not adresing the fastest ship should have shortest range issue.(how the **** im going to kill min). BLASTERS ARE STILL NOT WORTH IT AT ALL !!!
Agreed. I do not understand why CCP Tallest or CCP Ytterbium both keep on saying "we do not want to make hybrid an Op DPS platform....." To make it an Op DPS platform you have to Buff it significantly in the first place.
Currently they are just throwing quarter of a bone to the Hybrid community every time we reach 10 pages of frustration in the forum.
At the moment Hybrid is in such a state that the only players that use it are those who have not trained on any other weapon platform or those who fly ships that are Hybrid weapon Based.
We all know that they are not welcome in any fleet other than the recon for long point or the interceptor.
Till date we only have got insignificant buffs that does next to nothing.
30% cap consumption on guns - This gives us an efficiency of 1 cap per sec per gun (and I am considering large turrets) . With max 8 guns you get 8 cap per sec less consumption. We not only use cap for guns but for blaster boats we use tackle like no other race. Mandatory web + Scram + MWD/AB. What we needed was some kind of cap recharge bonus on ammo that would have allowed us to have some sort of cap buffer against nuets and cap draining modules. 30% less cap cosumption is so so useless.
5% boost to damage output-The blaster guns need a change to their Damagemod at least 30%. Why because we are close range high dps platform. If the DPS of Pulse Laser and Auto Cannon Projectile differ only by 10% from Blasters is that justified? How can we become OP(by this 30% increase) when our largest optimal for heaviest DPS is less than 8KM and Other can do 10% less damage from atleast 20km away. We are not even fastest. Seriously CCP Tallest this is just common sense to me that if you cannot give high speed or agility since you might break Minmatar superiority give them DPS to compensate. By giving an annoying 5% you are just making us more and more frustrated.
20% Tracking-I can live with that
5% agility and 10m/s speed increase on select hybrid ships-I have no problems with this if the Web strength was 90% but because it is only 60% blasters need a buff on webbing strength. Atleast give them some sort of bonus to reach 75% webbing strength. We have to remember that we have an optimal of 8kms only and we need a fair chance to slow them down and keep them in that range.
EWAR like sensor damp is of no use other than increasing the lock time of the targetted ship. With the range the opponent has to be damped to the extent that their targeting range is below 10km to bring them in webbing range. This is impossible.
If you refer to CCP Zulu's post about the agenda for winter expansion following CCP Hilmar's post to the eve community, the first item was Hybrid rebalancing.
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.
Thanks for reading CCP Tallest.
|
Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:37:00 -
[345] - Quote
Selar Nox wrote: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...
This would be bad, because it would remove the valid tactic of kitting blaster ships, has a huge impact on fleet fights(where people would bring them just for the webs w/o ever bringing them into blaster range), would be a unfair advantage with rail fittings and a long range web will always disfavor the weapon system with the smallest range, webbing a blaster ship at 20km makes it complete useless, doing the same with puls or ac ships let them still bite back with scorch or barrage.
A 90% web doesn't do all this stuff, it gives the blaster ship the required control once in range, gives is point blank defense against undersized ships what mostly allowing it to clear tacklers quick and stay mobile(different to a nano ship that uses range to stay free of tackle), improves the applied DPS, gives options to minimize or maximize transversal and adds some utility in 1 vs X situations, since it would take considerable more tackle for the other ships to regain the range control against the blaster ship. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:41:00 -
[346] - Quote
Don't worry - I am sure when the weapon systems are balanced that this team will go straight into balancing ships in regards to supporting their weapon systems of choice... It doesn't look like the tall guy want to leave anything out but it's near impossible to change everything at once without losing the grand overview of balance.
I have more faith now than a month ago (except the tier 3 BC's really freaks me out in a bad way)
Pinky |
Akara Ito
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 12:46:00 -
[347] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:i want to be able to use my Deimos like people have been using the Zealot. Why the hell not?
Because they are 2 different ships. Minmatar have no Zealot substitute as well, get over it. The different ships of a class are different, and not all races need to be good at everything. Crying that you cancel your sub if CCP doesnt do xyz is just pathetic.
|
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:18:00 -
[348] - Quote
Jill Antaris wrote:
This would be bad, because it would remove the valid tactic of kitting blaster ships
THis shouldn't be viable tactics- blaster have no range im faster haha you wil NEVER EVER KILL ME. tactics should be to deal enought dmg to blastership until it gets to me, so i have big enought head start in dmg, since once it will get into range, it's dps is higher. And the dps should be more than 5% higher - i don't believe long range ship will tear down only 5% hp untill i get there... |
Kahz Niverrah
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming Moar Tears
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:21:00 -
[349] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind....
You know.... that actually sounds pretty cool. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:24:00 -
[350] - Quote
In my book Minmatar should be forced to use all their lowslots for speed modules to be faster than blasterships using those lowslots for armor tank... And maybe even their rigs too |
|
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:30:00 -
[351] - Quote
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 TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:48:00 -
[352] - Quote
Bhaal Chinnian wrote: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
Restricting module use to a single race is not a good idea. 10 percent would give us the strength damps had per nerf. Yikes. Making a race completely rely on Ewar to survive is a bit, meh. I like damps though and think they would provide a decent boost to the enviroment if they were buffed a bit.
TLDR: It would help but this isn't a complete solution. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:49:00 -
[353] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Kiev Duran wrote:
When was the last time you saw someone flying Caldari into combat for something other than ECM (something that was considered the only advantage of Caldari right up until it got pummeled with the nerf bat) or POS bashing (an activity CCP acknowledges as being unfun)?
REALLY? Drake? The second most often used PVP ship? There is a reason we fit two caldari, two minmatar, one amarr, and one gallente to our jammers. That aside: Drake, Manticore, Hookbill, Nighthawk, Chimera, Cerberus, Hawk, etc . This poor Caldari ship isn't going to sail, the Caldari are some of THE most often used ships are there is a reason, they don't need buffing, lest we see even more drake roams of 20-50 drakes at a time.
I'll give you that I forgot about the Drake, a who's recent (from my point of view of periods of play spliced with long breaks) popularity has been confusing, satisfying, and frustrating; but the other ships you listed are either weak for combat, out-preformed, or fulfill more of a support or niche role that I was referring to.
The Manticore, while a fun ship to fly, is a stealth bomber that has all the problems of fitting for solo combat that all Caldari run into while only really being useful in full stealth bomber fleets and general covert ops fleets. Extremely niche in it's role; it preforms at more or less the exact same effectiveness as all other stealth bombers, if flown correctly and well fit.
The Nighthawk and Creberus are both overpriced ships that are extremely lackluster in combat as they only receive bonuses to heavy missiles and the bonuses are geared to allow heavy missiles to be used from distances where missiles are extremely ineffective against anything other than POSes and sieged dreads. They are hardly worth flying before realizing that they only do about as much (if not distinctly less) damage than a Drake, which because of costs completely removes any reason left to fly these ships.
The Hawk is an assault frigate, and therefore terrible. No, seriously, why would anyone fly an assault frigate when they could be flying a Rifter? The Rifter pretty much out preforms or preforms at any given assault frigate's effectiveness for less than a third the cost and training time involved.
I've never flown a Hookbill for anything other than lol-ing my way through level 1s, but I can assure you that I've never seen one flown into combat and I'd never want to take a frigate that cost that much into combat unless it was amazing at a crucial combat role, like tackling. It could be that the Hookbill is a wonderful little combat boat that fails for not being as good as a Rifter, a ship that makes up the vast majority of frigate sized, small scale combat because it is arguably the best combat frigate.
The Chimera, a ship that is focused on repairing other ships that are fighting, perfectly fits my definition of "support ship not directly used for combat."
The reason ECM pilots like ourselves fit two Caldari racial jammers isn't because Caldari have good combat ships, but because Caldari make up the largest percentage of races represented in the playerbse and many pilots will fly their own race's ships, regardless of how good or bad they are due to the "fun" factor. That and the proliferation of Drakes, seriously how did that happen?
PinkKnife wrote:Kiev Duran wrote:
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 Eagle w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 319,6 dps (40,5+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1121 volley Ferox w/ 250mm (3 MFS) - 306,9 dps (27+15km), 0.02875 rad/sec, 1077 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
Okay, this is just comedic. The Ferox does 33% less damage per second than a similarly fit Hurricane with greater than 66% less volley damage? With a range difference of 6km? I knew the Ferox was severely underpowered, but I've never actually dug up the numbers before.
The Eagle is...lacking, the numbers above show that it either needs a DPS increase or a serious volley increase, but the real problems with the Eagle are the ship's speed, agility, and fitting.
This is ridiculous, CCP. Fix Caldari. If these numbers are correct, I can choose to try and contribute to a fight, and not actually matter, or I can choose to not be able to apply damage, because in the 20 - 30 seconds it takes my damage to reach a target the fight's over. Outside of ECM, there is no reason to bring Caldari into a combat scenario. This is bad design.
Again, you're looking at it the wrong way, compared to the other hybrid boats, you're exchanging 20-30 dps for 9-13KM in optimal range, easily a comparable trade. The only REAL outliar here is the insane numbers that the projectiles put out, not only do they get the best volley damage, but they get the highest dps, tracking thats just barely under rails, and greater usable range.
Perhaps I am looking at it the wrong way, but in many cases 30 DPS is an entire launcher's or turret's worth of DPS (or more), so forgive me if it's hard to swallow that an Eagle is effectively a Muninn with less Arties, worse tracking, worse speed, and worse agility. In a game where range beyond 100km means nothing, what's the point of an entire race based around shooting past 150km? |
Slaktoid
Aperture Harmonics K162
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:31:00 -
[354] - Quote
I think many of the changes are fine, but I will make a suggestion here. I fly Proteus alot and there's only 1 type of ammo that's usable. Faction antimatter. The rest we just don't care about.
Currently:
* Void M has shorter falloff, worse tracking and just a smidge more dps than Faction Antimatter. Thus it never gets used. * Javelin M has half (!) the optimal range of Faction Antimatter, worse tracking and the exact same dps. It also uses more cap than Faction Antimatter. Thus it never gets used.
In the future I'd like to see Void M/Javelin M have the same dps as now, but better range and better tracking than Faction AM (or at the very least equal to Faction AM). I feel the progression should be Standard Ammo -> Faction Ammo -> T2 Ammo, in line with the skillrequirements of the guns. As it is now theres just no reason to ever use T2 ammo for hybrid mediums (bar maybe Spike and Null in a few situations).
Lower reload times would also help counter the current "One ammo to rule them all" mentality that we have with Faction AM. I especially would like you to compare Javelin M to Caldari Navy Antimatter for example, and at least get it on par with Faction AM.
Keep in mind that these suggestions are colored by a Wormhole Proteus pilot of course =)
Edit: Also before I forget. Ammo should probably take less space, especially for XL. Moros with no ammo is sad Moros =( |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:32:00 -
[355] - Quote
Fine. I'm just gonna lay it out.
All I'm seeing in terms of hybrid-balancing is the juggling of numbers, statistics, and proposed changes to those numbers which may or may not result in a generally-accepted change.
Who cares?
Hybrids are fundamentally broken. This is a fact.
Why?
Projectiles are capfree, provide alpha, focus on falloff to determine effective range, allow the pilot to change damage type, and are fitted on the fastest ships in the game.
Lasers are virtually ammo-free, forcus on optimal to provide dominant range, crystals quickly swapped to dictate effective range, and fit on the best-tanked ships in the game.
Hybrids do not give you anything like this! Hybrids do not provide a unique role.
Allow me to repeat myself, for emphasis, or flavor, or annoyance. Take your pick.
Hybrids are fundamentally broken. This is a fact.
Why?
Projectiles are capfree, provide alpha, focus on falloff to determine effective range, allow the pilot to change damage type, and are fitted on the fastest ships in the game.
Lasers are virtually ammo-free, forcus on optimal to provide dominant range, crystals quickly swapped to dictate effective range, and fit on the best-tanked ships in the game.
Hybrids do not give you anything like this! Hybrids do not provide a unique role.
The proposed changes on test do not provide hybrids with anything which competes with lasers or projectiles at a fundamental level, thus the proposed changes will not have any worthwhile, lasting, desired effect. This is IN ADDITION TO the lackluster stats and effectiveness of hybrids. You're NEED to work on improving the numbers AFTER you've given the turrets some real effective incentive to compete with the likes of other turrets!!! Yes, I said the proposed changes, to date, are worthless. I'm sorry.
As a pilot, I know there are situations where I want my weapons to be cap free. I know there are situations where my first and possibly my ONLY shot, needs to hit HARD; it needs to count. I know there will be times when hundreds of ships will fight at various ranges in long battles, so not only will I want to be able to instantly change my effective range, but if my entire fleet goes balls-deep in the EHP department, chances of overall victory increase dramatically.
The only thing I DON'T know is, when will hybrids be the weapon to compliment situations similar to those mentioned above?
CCP, Please understand I greatly applaud the effort and I think most of the players agree on this. But this makes it all the more frustrating to see it wasted. If you, CCP, are not willing to change hybrids from the ground up so they can compete with projectiles and lasers at a fundamental level, all of these efforts and tweaks are in vain. Please make some effort to show you understand this. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:43:00 -
[356] - Quote
Jill Antaris wrote:Selar Nox wrote: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... This would be bad, because it would remove the valid tactic of kitting blaster ships, has a huge impact on fleet fights(where people would bring them just for the webs w/o ever bringing them into blaster range), would be a unfair advantage with rail fittings and a long range web will always disfavor the weapon system with the smallest range, webbing a blaster ship at 20km makes it complete useless, doing the same with puls or ac ships let them still bite back with scorch or barrage. A 90% web doesn't do all this stuff, it gives the blaster ship the required control once in range, gives it point blank defense against undersized ships what mostly allowing it to clear tacklers quick and stay mobile(different to a nano ship that uses range to stay free of tackle), improves the applied DPS, gives options to minimize or maximize transversal and adds some utility in 1 vs X situations, since it would take considerable more tackle for the other ships to regain the range control against the blaster ship.
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:45:00 -
[357] - Quote
Bhaal Chinnian wrote: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
LOL so what... nobody can shoot you until they're in range of blasters. This wouldn't make Gallente overpowered at all. End irony. |
Willl Adama
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:53:00 -
[358] - Quote
I like the changes so far. No need to overdo the buff, you can always change it later. Latest Video:-á-á Kill Will: Volume 4 |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:01:00 -
[359] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Sam Bowein wrote:Selar Nox wrote: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... I'd rather like a scram range bonus (+20% per level, so 18km for scram II). That would allow to get close to ships that would normally kite you. There might be a problem with this being too binary. If your target is faster than you and is outside scram range, then you have the current difficulties in getting to blaster range. But if you are able to apply a long-range scramble, then suddenly you have a massive speed advantage and can easily close to optimal. In the first case, it's too hard to get to blaster optimal; but in the second case it's too easy. Something more graduated would be better.
The new ranges of scrams and webs using t2 gang links makes adding scram/web range bonuses to blaster boats ineffective.
t2 scrams with a fleet booster now hit at roughly 16km (heated). [DG/SS/RF scrams at about 18.5km] t2 webs now hit at roughly 19km (heated). [FN webs at about 27km]
At those ranges it will not matter if blaster boats get an additional scram/web bonus. Gallente boats, with increased agility, will be crawling as soon as they get within 14-15km.
|
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:16:00 -
[360] - Quote
Magosian wrote:
Hybrids do not give you anything like this! Hybrids do not provide a unique role.
This is think is one of the most fendamental problems with blasters. The decrease in fitting requirments, increased track, reload/ammo changes, and the 5% dmg buff are all nice but will inevitably not have any great impact on the use of blasters as a whole.
What we need is something unique, something not present or available from any other weapon system.
My suggestion is to change the overheating mechanic on blasters. I'd like to see a 10% rof bonus added to heat HOWEVER increase the damage blasters take while overheating by 10-15%. This will allow blasters a significant advantage in dps while overheating compared to other weapons with the tradeoff of slightly less total overheat duration. |
|
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:18:00 -
[361] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Bhaal Chinnian wrote: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 LOL so what... nobody can shoot you until they're in range of blasters. This wouldn't make Gallente overpowered at all. End irony.
Exactly my point! This doesn't make them OP if the proposed change is implemented. It is just a PASSIVE way of forcing your opponent into blaster range(1v1) and is subject to the same rules as CALDARI ECM(oh noes hey I can't shoot qq ).
If say, a Vagabond wants to pewpew with a Brutix....it Kites it as SPEED and RANGE as a defense. if a Tengu wants to fight a proteus....it Kites it as SPEED and RANGE as a defense. if an Abaddon fights a mega, it warps in and melts from range.
Do you see the counter to the above scenarios which DON'T involve drastic numbers crunching and buffing/nerfing/goat****ing both Minnie and Gallente?
Minnie have Speed and Range(with webs/speed/AC falloff) . Amarr have neuts AND Tracking Disruption/ Range. Caldari have ECM(see Falcon) and Range. Gallente have Damage(kind of ), but without speed , it simply can't compete, so if Sensor damps were denerfed it may mitigate some of the advantages(My guns can't track because you are too fast,no range, being kited because I'm too slow) to the other races ships NOT make them OP.
Once again, it needs to be said that IF you are unlucky/unskilled enough to get caught within web range and held there, then you will , in all probability DIAF. TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Torei Dutalis
Enigmatic Goat Herders
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:30:00 -
[362] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
Honestly, kind of love this. Gallente frigs already do this anyway. Here's an opportunity to be original and makes some totally obscure wtf items super awesome. This might be a long-shot batshit crazy kind of idea, but CCP, the people who love blasters are batshit crazy anyway, and this is a perfect fit for Gallente to be relevant and unique little butterflies. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:39:00 -
[363] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:Nemesor wrote:
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
Honestly, kind of love this. Gallente frigs already do this anyway. Here's an opportunity to be original and makes some totally obscure wtf items super awesome. This might be a long-shot batshit crazy kind of idea, but CCP, the people who love blasters are batshit crazy anyway, and this is a perfect fit for Gallente to be relevant and unique little butterflies.
Big big problem with this. Gallente pilots would forfeit boosted resists to armor/shields on t2/t3 ships unless this change also included additional resists applied to hull on those same t2/t3 ships, 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.... |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:43:00 -
[364] - Quote
@Bhaal Chinnian, I feel your pain and agree Gallente need sorting, but just feel this is not an ideal solution for so many reasons, such as jumping into a gate camp, warping to a location etc, you won't get the chance to kite or escape etc in these situations, given the random nature of the gate spawn location you are given etc and it doesn't do anything to counter Amarr and to a degree, Caldari.
I think Gallente need sorting, along with Caldari Hybrid ships, but I just feel this wouldn't work as well as a speed burst mechanic for gallente via a module or other way. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:44:00 -
[365] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Torei Dutalis wrote:[quote=Nemesor]
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
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....
There would be tweaks and such made if this ever was implemented. Why couldn't T2 resists be buffed on Hull a little? An additional benefit is that it would open up another option for the logistics ships. The Gallente logistics being remote hull repairers.
This is just a basic proposal. Nothing specific. Obviously it would require a lot of adjustments.
|
Guirdarr
The Yaar Offices of Pointe Webb and Podemall
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:58:00 -
[366] - Quote
Overall, the buffs for Hybrids seem very reasonable.
Blasters are supposed to fit the medium between Falloff dependent Projectile weapons and Optimal range dependent Energy weapons.
Fitting reductions allows for better or less constraining fits that allow for more elaborate fits. Tracking which really improve the DPS especially in Blaster boats. Overall with more tracking you'll see your DPS go up dramatically. The capacitor reduction will allow for more active tanked inclined fits and reduce the need for cap boosters in larger ships The ammo reload time will allow for blaster boats to use ammo that will still do dps while you're closing range to really melt their face.
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.
However, for rails, there are people still going to be leaning more towards Beams or Artillery. The main reason is that rails are trying to fit the role of Beams with similar DPS and larger ranges and reduced cap. At this point, unlike Blasters, Rails do not have the niche role that they need to be used in combat as frequently.
So far you've increased damage, tracking and cap usage on them which is great! But by creating some role where you have 50/50 optimal/falloff ratio like you do with blasters and make it the highest long range DPS weaponry like you do with blasters.
Don't readily buff everything Hybrids in sight. Many of these posts are trying to make Hybrids the best of the best. Overall I think making hybrids more desirable like you are currently doing is the smartest choice.
Guirdarr out - |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:09:00 -
[367] - Quote
Magosian wrote: CCP, Please understand I greatly applaud the effort and I think most of the players agree on this. But this makes it all the more frustrating to see it wasted. If you, CCP, are not willing to change hybrids from the ground up so they can compete with projectiles and lasers at a fundamental level, all of these efforts and tweaks are in vain. Please make some effort to show you understand this.
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. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:14:00 -
[368] - Quote
Guirdarr wrote: Blasters are supposed to fit the medium between Falloff dependent Projectile weapons and Optimal range dependent Energy weapons.
Umm. What? Did blasters get that memo?
Guirdarr wrote: 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.
Oh. Cool. So tell me Ace: When your ship goes 800 m/s and your enemies goes 801 m/s, what great piloting stunt are you going to pull off to close range if you are 30km away.
Guirdarr wrote: For the blaster side of the fence I believe these changes are done, you've made blasters a VERY competitive arsenal yet again.
Obviously someone that does not use blasters. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
118
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:18:00 -
[369] - Quote
Guirdarr wrote:Overall, the buffs for Hybrids seem very reasonable.
Blasters are supposed to fit the medium between Falloff dependent Projectile weapons and Optimal range dependent Energy weapons.
Why? Is there some rule of which I am not aware?
Guirdarr wrote:So far you've increased damage, tracking and cap usage on them which is great! But by creating some role where you have 50/50 optimal/falloff ratio like you do with blasters and make it the highest long range DPS weaponry like you do with blasters.
The above statement implies blasters already have a role. I should preface that it's not a "role" if it's not unique. Having said this, what would that role be?
Guirdarr wrote:Don't readily buff everything Hybrids in sight. Many of these posts are trying to make Hybrids the best of the best. Overall I think making hybrids more desirable like you are currently doing is the smartest choice.
Guirdarr out -
I disagree.
Why segregate roles between blasters and rails? Autocannons don't use cap. Artillery doesn't use cap. This is because PROJECTILES don't use cap. Same goes for lasers and their logistical benefits of crystal swapping. Projectiles effectively benefit from falloff bonuses. Lasers effectively benefit from optimal bonuses. This is no segregation here, so why would we want to impose limitations between rails and blasters, both of whom happen to be under the weakest of the three turret types? This all goes back to my earlier post about hybrids being fundamentally broken. A pilot will never choose hybrids for practical purposes because other turrets provide SEVERAL passive benefits and hybrids provide zero. This must change. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:18:00 -
[370] - Quote
Guirdarr wrote:Overall, the buffs for Hybrids seem very reasonable.
no offense man, but you've obviously never flown a hybrid ship in pvp. i dont think you know what ure talking about. |
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:22:00 -
[371] - Quote
Ironically, you can argue that hybrids on TQ are already quite well balanced. They have fairly well-defined roles in which they're effective, but outside which they're really not very good. Having a role is a good thing; the problem is that repeated power-creep to laserboats and projectileboats has broadened their engagement envelopes to such an extent that they no longer have well-defined roles - they're effective in any pretty much any situation.
As long as this is so, and hybrids are kept in their defined roles, there's no real reason to use hybrids. Flexibility is important, and hybrids simply don't have it.
Except small hybrids, they're basically fine, don't change them. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
197
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:29:00 -
[372] - Quote
Regarding the speed argument, I can turn that argument around: 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?
The speed question is not a simple issue of "they're close-range, so they need to be fastest"; that simply makes them overpowered. It's already difficult enough to keep range in a duel situation due to initiative of the closer-range ship in initiating MWD or overheat, the initiative of course changes ("rubberband effect"), as well as the simplicity with which you can hold down a fast ship (scram). All of this are balancing factors to being slower.
I do not know how to fix the close-range problem, but simply making them the fastest ships is certainly not the solution.
The agility bonus they got in the changes will go a long way to help there. I'd wait and see how that works out before going overboard with more boosts. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
118
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:30:00 -
[373] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote: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.
Absolutely. This is well stated.
Gypsio III wrote:Ironically, you can argue that hybrids on TQ are already quite well balanced. They have fairly well-defined roles in which they're effective, but outside which they're really not very good. Having a role is a good thing; the problem is that repeated power-creep to laserboats and projectileboats has broadened their engagement envelopes to such an extent that they no longer have well-defined roles - they're effective in any pretty much any situation.
As long as this is so, and hybrids are kept in their defined roles, there's no real reason to use hybrids. Flexibility is important, and hybrids simply don't have it.
Except small hybrids, they're basically fine, don't change them.
Hrm, perhaps I should say "effective role?" I admit, I often use different phrases when attempting to describe the same thing. "Passive benefit" or "unique benefit" would be another. I guess I take the term "role" with the implication of "unique." For example, I think the cap-free benefit of projectiles lends itself to largely benefitting pilots who choose local rep. That would be a role, in my eyes.
Either way, it's evident you understand what I am saying, and I appreciate the articulation. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:39:00 -
[374] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote: 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?
I am going to guess you are a Republic Uni. Graduate.
If you try to maintain distance... and he tries to close distance... and it takes 30 seconds to get you into range... who has the advantage. The ship that has been applying damage the whole time or the ship that has just started to apply damage.
Being able to close range for Gallente isn't overpowered. It is the only way they will ever cause you a single point of damage. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
197
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:43:00 -
[375] - Quote
Nemesor wrote: If you try to maintain distance... and he tries to close distance... and it takes 30 seconds to get you into range... who has the advantage. The ship that has been applying damage the whole time or the ship that has just started to apply damage. 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. |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:59:00 -
[376] - Quote
Quote:
Oh. Cool. So tell me Ace: When your ship goes 800 m/s and your enemies goes 801 m/s, what great piloting stunt are you going to pull off to close range if you are 30km away.
Best sentence ever. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:01:00 -
[377] - Quote
Repeat post please delete |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:02:00 -
[378] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:Nemesor wrote: If you try to maintain distance... and he tries to close distance... and it takes 30 seconds to get you into range... who has the advantage. The ship that has been applying damage the whole time or the ship that has just started to apply damage. 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.
The only times you start at Zero are undocking at a station and landing at a Celestial. If you are at zero with a blaster boat at a station you can dock. If you are sitting at zero at a Celestial, Darwin has decided to remove you from the genepool and good riddance.
How often do you start a fight at Zero? If you say a lot.. or all the time... then you are doing it wrong. If you say... almost never... I will believe you.
|
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:03:00 -
[379] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:Nemesor wrote: If you try to maintain distance... and he tries to close distance... and it takes 30 seconds to get you into range... who has the advantage. The ship that has been applying damage the whole time or the ship that has just started to apply damage. 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.
Not a good argument. Try 180 degrees the other way. start at 100 and ride like the Knights of old!
Who will be doing dps 1st? ---if the pilot is skilled he will vear(sp?) off and try to stay out of blaster boat web/gun range.......which isn't effing hard to do.
Once said ship his an acceptable dps range, they try to stay at it.... if that range happens to be outside of Mr. Blasterboat Range and outside of their web...then Mr. Blasterboat is rendered impotent and dies with cargo hold full of ammo and all dead drone wrecks in space. End of story. TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:16:00 -
[380] - Quote
Arkady Sadik wrote:Nemesor wrote: If you try to maintain distance... and he tries to close distance... and it takes 30 seconds to get you into range... who has the advantage. The ship that has been applying damage the whole time or the ship that has just started to apply damage. 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.
lol...OFC. Same as short range ship don't have chance if you start at 50km - because you will destroy whole ship until it even start shooting...
this time you blaster have chance of eventualy catching you, in your opinion (as it is today) -never ever |
|
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:17:00 -
[381] - Quote
I appreciate that CCP is looking at this issue, but frankly I don't think you guys are appreciating the magnitude of hybrid inadequacy. Just think about it in abstract terms: you crazily overbuffed lasers, then crazily overbuffed projectiles to compensate. Now you're trying to balance this situation by making very timid buffs to hybrids to match the huge buffs to lasers and projectiles. Something in the calculus there just doesn't quite add up.
The fact is that the hybrid problem is the result of many factors, all of which need to be fixed if you're going to actually make it a usable system. If you have a situation where one pilot can never get in range to apply his dps by any action that he does himself, then you have a game mechanics failure. Increasing acceleration without making Gallente ships the fastest does not change the problems we have now. All it does is give you a little more time to catch your targets after you get a warp in. It does nothing to change the current problem with fleet fights where you have to remain on field for extended periods of time and often can't warp around because of points, not to mention ships always moving and not always being very close to each other.
The reality in gang fights is that Gallente ships are going to take losses before they can even apply their dps to a single target. Even if you did buff speed, by the time the Gallente ships actually begin to apply their dps, they've already suffered losses due to them having to travel to target and facing enemy fire the whole way through. Logic would mandate that in order to balance this situation, they have to have something that enables their ships to make up for this loss of dps before they even make it to target, either by giving them much more tank without compromising their speed, or by upping their dps to ridiculous levels. The most sensible option is to find a middle ground between those two and give them more dps than they have now, while allowing them to fit a decent (not ridiculous) tank without hurting their speed. As a side note, you should be aware that if you do not buff their speed, none of it will matter because they will never actually be able to make it to target, and thus no amount of dps or tank buffs will save them.
On that same note, you must take away the speed penalties from armor rigs/plates. Keep the agility penalties if you want, but having their max speed be so negatively affected means that any possible speed buff will be negated by the requirement that they fit the rigs/plates if they want to survive. And make no mistake, tank is absolutely required. A ship that does 1200 dps but dies in two volleys is useless.
All that considered, in order to balance the situation, you guys are going to have to come up with some much higher numbers for buffs. Blasters need at least 20-30% more damage than they have now, they must be the fastest ships with 'meh' agility (so Minmatar ships still have options as far as pilot maneuvers), they need another 20% tracking for good measure, and they need to have armor rigs/plates lose their penalty to max velocity. These changes will make them actually competitive in gang fights.
As an aside, I'd say also that in order to improve Gallente effectiveness in fleet fights, the sensor damp bonuses on the Gall ewar hulls need to be greatly increased. 5% per level is a joke, and at this point in time you need 3 damps from a dedicated ewar boat in order to seriously hamper him. Compare that to a falcon that can potentially incapacitate 4-6 ships by itself. Obviously that situation is not acceptable. Also, if the consensus is that the active rep bonus needs to go, which I don't necessarily agree with, then the best alternative would be to give the ships an armor HP bonus of 7.5-10% per level. That way the ships have the ability to actually fit a tank with their lower low slot counts than amarr tankers. |
Zelphinine
OCTAGON Conglomerate
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:17:00 -
[382] - Quote
Wall of text inbound!
This is some ideas I had with regards to reworking hybrids. They're centered around the idea that hybrids are used by both Gallente and Caldari in (theoretically) both short and long range capacity. As such I tried to move away from the concept of 'Gallente Blaster, Caldari Rail' and focus on associated issues with the weapons themselves and deliver a set of weapons that both races can use in their intended role.
I don't claim this is an omnibus fix, I actually stayed away from specific 'power performance' analysis because there's a pile of it done already and I doubt I'd bring anything new to the table. I'm also not aiming to try to fix the specific 'blasters have ****** range' issue per se - that's a related but seperate problem.
That said, this is what I'd recommend for consideration.
First,for S/M/L blasters I'd reduce rate of fire by 50-70%, giving them a slow cycle speed like artillery. Damage (and cap use) would be increased to compensate. This would help deal with the 'slingshot' issue; Gallente ships now fire slower, more deliberately, but with tremendous alpha. In small-gang situation where lag isn't an issue, can essentially 'pick their shots' for best timing and thus transversal/range. From what I've heard they could use more transversal in general, but I leave that to the wiser.
Option B is to fix your tracking formula so that a kilometer long battleship five hundred meters away actually is impossible to miss because it is an enormous target. But that's not gonna happen. :p
Now we're getting into the real concept rebuilt. The following are specifically intended for M and L blasters, since as I understand S guns in general already function reasonably well and only need a bit of tweaking.
Under what I envision, M and L blaster turrets will include a capacitor bonus. This will help deal with the fact that blaster ships 100% engage within scram and neut range, MWDs having already consumed substantial cap. For some starting numbers, M blasters would provide +100 cap and L would provide +300 (going by the Thorax/Megathron the ration should be 1:4 but battleships have more guns). This would give both Gallente AND Caldari the option to engage effectively up close without suffering catastrophic cap failure before accomplishing anything; as an associated effect it'd also help with capacitor recharge rate to further stave off neuts, MWD consumption - even active rep, if that's deemed to stay as Gallente style. The fluff for this would be that the particle accelerator rings in blasters allow for auxilary power storage which due to modern advances can be properly plumbed into the ship's power grid.
Meanwhile, Rails would get an electronics bonus; Smallest caliber (twins) would get a +signature resolution, midcaliber would get a smaller amount of signature resolution and a boost to targeting range and largest caliber would get a more substantial boost to targeting range. I have not run any major numbers here, but I envision that 425mm rails would add ~4 km targeting range each. Giving a baseline Rokh a targeting range of 152.5 km, with perfect skills. Coincidentally enough that's the limit of effective sniping (funny, eh). A Megathron would go to 116, with a Hyperion about 115. Still needing a sebo to hit 'max snipe range', but giving Railgun platforms the ability to be effective snipers in their own way - by freeing up more slots for useful things, like additional buffer tank. For smaller-caliber weapons instead railgun ships would have vastly superior locking times. Basically in collective, railgun platforms would be flown with the attitude of 'there is no place to hide' - they do not have the DPS of lasers nor the alpha of artillery, but they will be extremely hard to avoid, on the ship level. Likely in practice this would make rails more suited for skirmish and small gang warfare as opposed to the DPSfests of large fleets, but I can't make any real prediction. The fluff here is that properly-integrated sensors on railguns allow for dispersed, additional recievers, improving the tactical sensing abilities of ships.
You might be asking 'But we have Sebos and cap boosters/batteries. All this is unnecessary'. To which the answer is that's the point. To (partially) obselete the use of some modules on Hybrid ships to make up for deficiencies elsewhere - be it in performance or in situation - and to give them their own distinct flavor. And to pre-empt the cap battery issue in specific, NOBODY uses cap batteries. So 'Blasters are better cap batteries than cap batteries' is a null issue, becaus we're looking to make them useful, not useless. The best part is, these would carry over to whatever platform fits them, so cross-racial fitting would bring their system bonuses with them.
And finally, ammunition. There's been a lot of talk on hybrid ammo fixes (which I also think are necessary - the general paradigm set by projectiles is better, IMO)
So I'd suggest the following:
High Damage, Short Range (-30% optimal) Plutonium (80% Therm, 20% Kin) Iridium (20% Them, 80% Kin)
Mid Damage, Mid Range Uranium (80% Therm, 20% Kin) Lead (20% Them, 80% Kin)
Low Damage, Long Range (+40% optimal) Thorium (80% Therm, 20% Kin) Tungsten (20% Them, 80% Kin)
Then we have our two 'specialized' T1 ammo types Antimatter (50% therm, 25% EM, 25% explosive) -50% optimal, -50% cap use, +100% Falloff Iron (100% kin) +60% Optimal, +60% falloff
I'd also boost optimal a bit and reduce falloff to compensate with these suggestions - projectiles fight in fallow, hybrids fight in optimal.
I'm not going to get in to T2 ammo types, though I'd suggest Null be 25% all damage types - it's a tech 2 antimatter particle bolt. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:21:00 -
[383] - Quote
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) |
Jodie Amille
Ascetic Virtues
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:25:00 -
[384] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.
From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.
Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.
If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses. Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
Quoting this cause it's a seriously friggin awesome idea and deserves more visibility. |
Dratic
TURN LEFT
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:27:00 -
[385] - Quote
I'm not sure if this has been covered but are the faction and officer hybrids getting the fitting reductions as well as at the moment t2 are easier to fit than faction which it wasn't before. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:30:00 -
[386] - Quote
Bubanni wrote: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)
You have to get into range for tracking to matter. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:37:00 -
[387] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Bubanni wrote: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) You have to get into range for tracking to matter.
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?) |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:39:00 -
[388] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Bubanni wrote: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) You have to get into range for tracking to matter. yes, you allready suffered by getting in to range and stuff, and now suffer tracking because enemy does too ?:D |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:41:00 -
[389] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Nemesor wrote:Bubanni wrote: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) You have to get into range for tracking to matter. 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?)
With all that increased agility I can put smoke generators and spell out LOL in space as minmatar guns reduce me to slag.
Agility does not help a chaser. Agility helps the chased. Look at a Cheetah and a Gazelle. The Cheetah is faster... the Gazelle can turn on a dime. If the Gazelle is faster... the Cheetah can be as agile as you please and you know what? It will never catch the Gazelle. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
287
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:42:00 -
[390] - Quote
Very few people I have met are as qualified as Julius to comment on the current state of Hybrids and Gallente boats.
If you want to listen to someone from the community, look nowhere else.
|
|
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:43:00 -
[391] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Nemesor wrote:Bubanni wrote: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) You have to get into range for tracking to matter. 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?)
How slightly better turning speed and acceleration helps galente killing much faster minnmatar **** that could simply fly in front of me out of my range ? |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:45:00 -
[392] - Quote
Jodie Amille wrote:Quoting this cause it's a seriously friggin awesome idea and deserves more visibility.
Pimping hull rig proposal. Hull Rigs!
There are a number of reasons why this is a good thing.
1. Brings back some balance between "hull tankers", shield tankers, and armor tankers by providing a hull tanking rig that is on par with CDFEs and trimarks 2. Helps Gallente increase speed - not to the level of Minmatar - without boosting Amarr ships too much. 3. Gallente ships can now have a moderately low tanks, use mid slots for tackle at close range, AND keep up speed. 4. Reinforced bulkheads help out the larger Gallente hulls more than the smaller ones (which are mostly fine). |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
118
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:46:00 -
[393] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Nemesor wrote: You have to get into range for tracking to matter.
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?)
Erm. Better agility doesn't mean faster speed. Minmatar ships are faster pre-SiSi and with the current changes will still be faster post-SiSi. The design was broken prior to any of the changes, and remains broken without properly addressing speed.
I think Gallente vs. Amarr modded speeds will be a wash, but still, I'm not closing the gap on anything when I can fly 800m/s and the other guy is also 800m/s, give or take a few m/s. Blasterboats need to be faster for present and proposed blaster turret specs to work. I don't understand why this is so hard for devs to accept. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:47:00 -
[394] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:Very few people I have met are as qualified as Julius to comment on the current state of Hybrids and Gallente boats.
I read the post. No offense intended when I say that it rehashes everything we have been saying. It does put it all together nicely though.
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:56:00 -
[395] - Quote
Bubanni wrote: 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?)
minmatar ships having higher speed and still keeping their excellent agility, even if gall had higher agility, means that they will still kite effortlessly
I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:03:00 -
[396] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Mekhana wrote:Very few people I have met are as qualified as Julius to comment on the current state of Hybrids and Gallente boats.
I read the post. No offense intended when I say that it rehashes everything we have been saying. It does put it all together nicely though.
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. |
PinkKnife
Garden Of The Gods
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:04:00 -
[397] - Quote
Those wanting to hull tank are forgetting that the reinforced bulkhead mod has the same effects plates do, it essentially works as an inverse nanofiber, it slows you down, which in turn does nothing to help out the gallente ships. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:07:00 -
[398] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Those wanting to hull tank are forgetting that the reinforced bulkhead mod has the same effects plates do, it essentially works as an inverse nanofiber, it slows you down, which in turn does nothing to help out the gallente ships.
Yes, that's why they need to remove or change the penalty of reinforced bulkheads to something else like reduced cargo space. Now you have something to work with that makes sense. |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:07:00 -
[399] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:As an aside, I'd say also that in order to improve Gallente effectiveness in fleet fights, the sensor damp bonuses on the Gall ewar hulls need to be greatly increased. 5% per level is a joke, and at this point in time you need 3 damps from a dedicated ewar boat in order to seriously hamper him
As an Arazu pilot, I can concur with this. Range is the issue(imo the current damage bonuses are decent ,but ...meh) and the only way to make blaster boats viable in Eve Online is to address this by: 1)Actively-By increasing speed. Many great suggestions have been put forth by the community. 2)Passively-By DeNerfing Sensor Damps. Currently an L5 ewar spec pilot can damp a little over 50% range per damp. This only puts ...say a Stabber within disruptor(not overheated) range of a thorax.
I'm not suggesting buff the **** out of damps, but maybe just enough to maintain parity between ships....and then it becomes all about pilot skill (1v1).
Damps aren't 100% effective every time either but neither is kiting. TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:09:00 -
[400] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:[ 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.
No doubt. |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
119
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:12:00 -
[401] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Bubanni wrote: 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?)
minmatar ships having higher speed and still keeping their excellent agility, even if gall had higher agility, means that they will still kite effortlessly I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need
I will concede more range on blasters and rails is an alternative, however, this is somewhat in conflict with the intended nature of blasters. Even with increased range, a blasterboat will still not be able to consistently dictate/maintain a point-blank target.
Personally, I'm still waiting for a dev post acknowledging hybrids need some unique, core benefit to make the weapon-type appealing. After that, THEN we can all play the number-juggling game. Until then, people will still choose projectiles and lasers over hybrids. |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:27:00 -
[402] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:Bubanni wrote: 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?)
minmatar ships having higher speed and still keeping their excellent agility, even if gall had higher agility, means that they will still kite effortlessly I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need I will concede more range on blasters and rails is an alternative, however, this is somewhat in conflict with the intended nature of blasters. Even with increased range, a blasterboat will still not be able to consistently dictate/maintain a point-blank target. Personally, I'm still waiting for a dev post acknowledging hybrids need some unique, core benefit to make the weapon-type appealing. After that, THEN we can all play the number-juggling game. Until then, people will still choose projectiles and lasers over hybrids.
EXACTLY. I sympathize with CCP Tallest, he must have pissed someone off to get this job , but hope that I can once again bring out my many Gallente ships(other than the Zu) to wreak havoc instead of being OV fodder for quick primary calls.
TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:29:00 -
[403] - Quote
I'll keep this short.
But Battlecrusiers outshine cruisers, I will back up reasoning if asked. But there are no Blaster centric T2 Battlecruisers for Gallente/Caldari. Drake is missiles, while Myrm has no bonus so you tend to see it with autocannons.
Meanwhile the Hurricane is double bonused 6 turrets (9.3) , making an excellent gunboat. Blaster only get Brutix at 7 turrets (8.75), Ferrox 6 turrets, and both the Ferrox and Brutix also have 1 less module slot being T1 BCs.
I think this makes it harder to balance the Medium Blaster/Rails because of their platforms. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:32:00 -
[404] - Quote
Shoudn't rails be the fleet weapon of choice? I would ask this - are the proposed rails acceptable in fleets engagements? If not, why not?
Here's the issue IMO. If you buff Gallente speed so that blasters are effective in fleet fights, then they will omgwtfpwn every other short range weapon system in small gangs. This is what I think the devs have to try to balance (good luck!). If Gallente is faster than Minmatar, then Minmatar becomes irrelevant.
Using midslots for e-war such as tracking disruptors, remote sensor dampeners, webs is the key for blaster hulls to be effective in solo and gang situations - along with good (not insanely great like Minmatar) mobility to catch long range ships (Amarr and Caldari) with a decent tank.
Let Minmatar have over-the-top speed and agility to avoid getting hit. Give Gallente 2nd best speed and midslots to do the same..
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:40:00 -
[405] - Quote
Well the issue here is AC's and pulses both work in short, medium and in pulses's case long (45km) ranges. Blasters work only in short range.
To put it another way if you removed all 15km and below damage from AC's and Lasers, this would equate to what Blasters deal with. Becuase in all ranges 15km+ for meds and 30km+ for larges we cannot hit without severly gimping tank and or weapon DPS by fitting 2 TE's minimum.
What needs to heppen is Blasters become Better at short range and medoicre at medium range. projectiles then become medoicre at short and better at medium and long range. You can play with this by shifting stats on the ammo. Decrease DPS on null range ammo while adding more range. Then decrease tracking or damage on conflag and barrage range ammos for projectiles and lasers for decrease dps at those ranges. That ontop of what you have done should work out very well. This way in short range they are very attractive, while at medium ranges just meh. Other turrets system are just meh at short range and attractive at medium and long range.
As for railguns, simply need more DPS, right smack in the middle of Beams and Arty. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:43:00 -
[406] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Bubanni wrote: 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?)
minmatar ships having higher speed and still keeping their excellent agility, even if gall had higher agility, means that they will still kite effortlessly I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need
The suggesting for higher better agility is for those siturations where you can get a quick tackle on the guy before he gets to kiting distance, or if your starting off just a little outside that range, the be able to accelerate towards him, faster than he accelerates away, just for a few sec... that is the main idea...
I too believe blasters as they currently are, should be on the fastest ships, it would make sense, but I doubt ccp will ever make minimatar slower than gallente or gallente faster than minimatar...
Thats why the suggestion for agility is more viable, (unless CCP some day changed their mind)
After that has been changed, they need to change how plates, and armor rigs affect the ships speed, and we are on the right track...
Another possibility is slightly nerf the speed gap between minimatar and gallente, so the speeds of similar hulls are closer together, but still different |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:47:00 -
[407] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.
From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.
Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.
If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses. Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
I really like this. I would suggest one change though. Dont make our self or remote rep mods work on structure. That would overly complicate RR, logistics, etc. Just giving our big structure larger base resists and/or trimark-like rigs would allow more time for our armor reps (self or remote) to work. I suggested something similar before, but I like most of yours better because it helps Gallente and doesnt make Amarr OP.
Here is what I tried to suggest in another thread:
Anyway - its a complicated issue, and i dont claim to have the answers, but some simple-ish ideas For later:
We have to be faster, at least in a sprint. I dont see any way around that.
I also agree with the suggestion (for later) about increasing the mass/armor on gallente ships - but since im not really mathy, I just wanted to do it a simpler way - take some of our base shield points and move them into our base armor pool. The total defensive points would remain the same, but more would go into armor, where (presumably) our best resists and reps (self or remote) should be. It would also slow us down less than plates.
Also, buff the never used Regenerative Plating module (I think that is what it is called - the one that adds 8% armor) to a higher percentage. And because (if you make the change above) Gallente would have a higher base armor, it would help them more than the other races and get around resist stacking penalties. It would not be as good as a plate, but it wouldnt hurt our speed as much either. (I guess another way to do this would be to change some ship bonuses to: add X% of armor per level...). (I dont understand the mechanics well enough to know if adding just base armor slows us down much?)
Either that, or give gallente ships a base structure resist - not as much as a DC but something - like 30% across the board. That would give the option of freeing up a low from the obligatory DCU II for additonal armor tank mods - an EANM or Regenerative Plating, and/or make the DCU more beneficial to Gallente.
Well, that is what I could come up with. Its a hard problem and I dont envy the Devs. I DO look forward to the day that I dont have to put projectiles and/or shield mods on my Gallente ships though. ;)
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:50:00 -
[408] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Shoudn't rails be the fleet weapon of choice? I would ask this - are the proposed rails acceptable in fleets engagements? If not, why not?
Just from a logistical standpoint, I would prefer lasers: Amarr armor buffer EHP and instant crystal swapping. I don't think more reasons are needed.
X Gallentius wrote:Here's the issue IMO. If you buff Gallente speed so that blasters are effective in fleet fights, then they will omgwtfpwn every other short range weapon system in small gangs. This is what I think the devs have to try to balance (good luck!). If Gallente is faster than Minmatar, then Minmatar becomes irrelevant.
Yes but currently Minmatar ARE the guys omgwtfpwning everything else in short/medium range. At least if you gave Gallente ships the speed crown, Minmatar still have cap-free weapon systems, selectable damage type, and alpha capability.
|
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 20:33:00 -
[409] - Quote
Again, because nobody even replies - i think RUSH MODULE WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING with cooldown
1) - blasterships not able to get in range too slow - turn on rush module - get in range ( limited duration and high cooldown )
2) - blasterships have armor where mins have speed modules - wouldn't be fair for galente to be faster and with armor -no need to be faster, they are slower, but can rush time to time, after that min can run from range again, you can maybe make gal even slower - minmattars stays the fastest race, blasterships just got an ability to get close to them from time to time for some time.
3) - blasterships need armor, because they are in middle of battle - no problem they have it, they can buffertank, no need for such base speed they have rush. once they get in range, they will hold enemy ther for a while than enemy runs of again/ maybe not.
no need to make any more radical changes to blaster, blasterships, speeds over minmatars or whatever. As i said its like warrior vs archer in other games, where is no trouble in concept. sometimes war is victor sometime archer, depends on skill and equip - everyone is happy
WHERE is flaud in this concept ? Anyone sees one ?
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:01:00 -
[410] - Quote
sq0 wrote:Again, because nobody even replies - i think RUSH MODULE WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING with cooldown
1) - blasterships not able to get in range too slow - turn on rush module - get in range ( limited duration and high cooldown )
2) - blasterships have armor where mins have speed modules - wouldn't be fair for galente to be faster and with armor -no need to be faster, they are slower, but can rush time to time, after that min can run from range again, you can maybe make gal even slower - minmattars stays the fastest race, blasterships just got an ability to get close to them from time to time for some time.
3) - blasterships need armor, because they are in middle of battle - no problem they have it, they can buffertank, no need for such base speed they have rush. once they get in range, they will hold enemy ther for a while than enemy runs of again/ maybe not.
no need to make any more radical changes to blaster, blasterships, speeds over minmatars or whatever. As i said its like warrior vs archer in other games, where is no trouble in concept. sometimes war is victor sometime archer, depends on skill and equip - everyone is happy
WHERE is flaud in this concept ? Anyone sees one ?
You mean MWDs?
.... |
|
Zachis
TBC
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:04:00 -
[411] - Quote
There have been a lot of excellent suggestions in this post and others, let's hope CCP are actively following along and discussing amongst themselves what approach is best.
I'm not in favor of the Rush Module, unless it's going to be fit specifically on a blaster boat only. What's to prevent me from fitting it on a Minmatar ship. Sure, fitting requirements, cap usage, bonuses might be a way to tweak the effects, but I'd also not like to see a new module given to just one race's ships.
Once upon a time, when EWAR was un-nerfed, there were a ton of fits one could conceive of to make your ship perform the way you'd like. Gallente with their sensor damps, passively dictated range by changing the lock range of an engagement. Amarr mitigated this to some degree by tracking disruptors since they now had to go close, and Minmatar made your signature the size of a moon with their target painters. Caldari just made it impossible to lock at all for a certain time, and this fits with missile usage and time-of-flight to even out DPS from missiles and turrets.
The initial design philosophy was complex and fair. And, all the EWAR fit within the combat strategy of the races. The initial problems were that everyone could fit them to whichever ship they wanted. When these modules were nerfed, a large part of combat complexity went away. Now, it's just fit the guns that hit the best outside point/scram/neut range and be as fast as possible. Combat became one-dimensional.
I think we're seeing this now in an exaggerated form with the proposed hybrid fix. What we want are guns that perform on par to others, but also a way to make sure we can employ them in combat effectively.
To that end, I would suggest keeping the hybrid buffs that are proposed and bring back the racial EWAR. This time though, make it so only Gallente hulls can fit damps, Amarr hulls fit tracking disruptors, etc. Modify the stats and ensure stacking penalties for multiple mods active on a target, and bring some variety and effective options back to combat. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:06:00 -
[412] - Quote
Tallest, I think you need to explain from first principles how you see hybrids and hybrid-using ships fitting into the game. You'll have to compare and contrast them with lasers and projectiles, and their host vessels, in doing this. You should 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.
Once you've established your vision about how hybrids are supposed to work, relative to the other turrets, then we'll understand what you're trying to achieve. Because at the moment it kinda looks like you're just throwing changes around and hoping for the best... |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:28:00 -
[413] - Quote
Magosian wrote:sq0 wrote:Again, because nobody even replies - i think RUSH MODULE WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING with cooldown
1) - blasterships not able to get in range too slow - turn on rush module - get in range ( limited duration and high cooldown )
2) - blasterships have armor where mins have speed modules - wouldn't be fair for galente to be faster and with armor -no need to be faster, they are slower, but can rush time to time, after that min can run from range again, you can maybe make gal even slower - minmattars stays the fastest race, blasterships just got an ability to get close to them from time to time for some time.
3) - blasterships need armor, because they are in middle of battle - no problem they have it, they can buffertank, no need for such base speed they have rush. once they get in range, they will hold enemy ther for a while than enemy runs of again/ maybe not.
no need to make any more radical changes to blaster, blasterships, speeds over minmatars or whatever. As i said its like warrior vs archer in other games, where is no trouble in concept. sometimes war is victor sometime archer, depends on skill and equip - everyone is happy
WHERE is flaud in this concept ? Anyone sees one ?
You mean MWDs? ....
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
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:41:00 -
[414] - Quote
sq0 wrote:
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
My character would love it. I think it is a little OP personally.
I think there is a solution here without making new modules and such. We made the mess without reinventing the wheel. We can clean it up the same way. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:46:00 -
[415] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Shoudn't rails be the fleet weapon of choice? I would ask this - are the proposed rails acceptable in fleets engagements? If not, why not?
Rails are not the fleet weapon of choice for a plethora of reasons including (but not limited too): low DPS, low alpha, ammo size, tracking speeds, wasted range, and inability to efficiently select optimal ranges.
Low DPS and low alpha: Rails, due to their extreme range, have poor DPS. This is a simple fact of life that's been around for as long as I've been playing EVE. The crime here, however, isn't that rails have poor damage per second or poor alpha damage, it's that both artilleries and beams have strong DPS and strong alpha. While this may not be the most fair comparison as rails can be shot from much further, it is an issue, as I'll point out later on. Suffice to say that a weapon that has a strong alpha strike should probably have a slightly lower DPS for balance purposes (which artilleries would if they weren't always damage bonused); because if you get hit by 8 guns that deal 1/6 of your EHP each, it doesn't matter if the cycle time is two years, you lost.
Ammo size: Hybrid ammo is effectively the largest ammo type for turrets at .05m3 for the large variant (same size as cruise missiles). While crystals are technicly twice as large, there is no need to carry more than 1 T1 crystal and T2 crystals fit an average of 1000 shots (if I'm reading these stats correctly) per 1m3. This means that rails (and hybrids in general) can't shoot for as long as the other weapon types and that they have to reload more often. For any fleet that will be staging over a long time period, these are very important factors.
Tracking speeds: Have a hard time hitting stuff moving around up close. This doesn't matter until it does, and then it matters. If I'm reading the stats correctly, lasers have the best tracking (by a wide margin), with rails overtaking artilleries by a small amount. Not as large an issue other points, but worth mentioning.
Wasted range and inability to select for range: These are the kickers for rails, the final nails in the mediocre coffin, if you would. For all the stats that rails are either sub-optimal at this is how they are supposed to make up for it. Sheer range. Except once you've set up for shooting at a range, it takes 10 seconds (5 on Sisi currently) to change ranges. For a weapon system that's built around doing as much damage as possible as a target closes in, this is poor design, because you're faced with the choice of dealing a low amount of damage as the target closes or trying to change ammo several times and dealing even less damage due to ammo load times. Furthermore, fleet engagements happen at about 100km so those 150 extra km that rails can shoot through become useless, so the severe hits you took to DPS and alpha are all for naught. This is why both lasers and artilleries having an effectively higher DPS and alpha than rails is imbalanced; they all get used from the same ranges, regardless of their maximum ranges.
Rails do need some buffs to bring them in line, but they shouldn't be too hard to balance out. The biggest problem outside of wasted range (which can itself be fixed by making smart changes to ammo) is that people don't like the "middle of the road" approach, which most rail stats appear to fall into, assuming equivalent bonuses. That said, CCP needs to fix the hybrid boats with respect to blasters before trying to fix rails themselves because blaster ships do occasionally use rails and rail ships do occasionally use blasters. Hopefully CCP will remember that blasters can be fit to the Ferox and Rokh when they get around to improving the Megathron and Brutix.
X Gallentius wrote: Here's the issue IMO. If you buff Gallente speed so that blasters are effective in fleet fights, then they will omgwtfpwn every other short range weapon system in small gangs. This is what I think the devs have to try to balance (good luck!). If Gallente is faster than Minmatar, then Minmatar becomes irrelevant.
Using midslots for e-war such as tracking disruptors, remote sensor dampeners, webs is the key for blaster hulls to be effective in solo and gang situations - along with good (not insanely great like Minmatar) mobility to catch long range ships (Amarr and Caldari) with a decent tank.
Let Minmatar have over-the-top speed and agility to avoid getting hit. Give Gallente 2nd best speed and midslots to do the same..
Minmatar have a weapon system that deals better-than-blaster damage at blaster ranges and beyond. Allowing them to keep the ability to dictate range, even if blasters are made kings of DPS inside blaster range, means that Minmatar will almost always win or flee any given fight one on one. The problem is that if a Gallente and Minmatar have the same number of speed control mods and counters, the ship with the higher base speed can always choose to flee. A ship with a higher agility can also choose to flee, in some situations with crafty piloting. So it makes since to have one race be faster and the other be more agile, but not one be both at the same time. Since Gallente need speed to dictate the range their guns fire at, it makes the most since to have the Gallente be the faster of the two races. This will introduce other problems, but to deal damage Gallente either need the speed or a new module to allow them to dictate range. The latter is quite unlikely.
All of that said, you bring up a very valid point, it is hard to make blasters effective in such a way that doesn't marginalize projectiles; especially when ship speeds are brought into question. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:48:00 -
[416] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:sq0 wrote:
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
My character would love it. I think it is a little OP personally. I think there is a solution here without making new modules and such. We made the mess without reinventing the wheel. We can clean it up the same way.
well there is allways a way to not make things OP, it don't have to be 25km, mechanics could be different i dont know. BUT blasters need to be able to get in range. Either make blastership fastest - that will do a mess to mins or some sort of this microjumpdrive. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:58:00 -
[417] - Quote
Yes. We need to get into Optimal... end of story. |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 22:11:00 -
[418] - Quote
Most so called "blaster experts" STILL do not sees diferences between agility and speed. And they sugesting what to be done to fix hybrids.... |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 23:39:00 -
[419] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Most so called "blaster experts" STILL do not sees diferences between agility and speed. And they sugesting what to be done to fix hybrids....
Agility decreases align time and increases acceleration. Wow, I'm sm+ªrt.
Between fondling my multiple Pulitzer Prizes and shuffling my stack of doctorate degrees like a deck of cards, I found the time to locate this:
Shmekla:
Known ships of the last 3 months Ship Fittings kills with lost 2011-10 Capsule 1x, 0 1 Vagabond 1x, 1 1 Rapier Unknown 1 0 Hurricane Unknown 1 0 2011-09 Hurricane Unknown 1 0 2011-08 Hurricane 1x, 1 1
Am I to understand smart people overwhelmingly favor Minmatar because they know the difference between agility and speed? Because if that's the case, I'M FLYING MINMATAR BABY.
[/sarcasm] |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 00:04:00 -
[420] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Most so called "blaster experts" STILL do not sees diferences between agility and speed. And they sugesting what to be done to fix hybrids....
Please show me evidence that suggests a "blaster expert" doesn't understand the difference between agility and speed. |
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 00:31:00 -
[421] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:Bubanni wrote: 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?)
minmatar ships having higher speed and still keeping their excellent agility, even if gall had higher agility, means that they will still kite effortlessly I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need The suggesting for higher better agility is for those siturations where you can get a quick tackle on the guy before he gets to kiting distance, or if your starting off just a little outside that range, the be able to accelerate towards him, faster than he accelerates away, just for a few sec... that is the main idea...
I understand your concept however the main flaw is that you are completely reliant on always landing right on top of your target. Jumping through a gate you're probably gonna be about 20km away and will never get in range no matter how agile you are. This will be the situation almost everytime. Which is the same situation we have right now.
Remember that agility allows you to turn faster and tighter so if a blaster boat was faster but had lower agility the slower but more agile Minnie ship will be faster in the turns which is really important when kiting. Pilot skill becomes the key factor |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 02:36:00 -
[422] - Quote
I really feel like the changes being proposed for hybrids are a move in the right direction. I always found Gallente and Caldari boats just shy of impossible to fit. Now instead of a fitting mod you can put something else to make your ship faster, hit farther, hit farther, or just plain take more hits.
Most of the changes are tweaks. Some are significant. 20% better tracking here. 10% better damage there. Less cap useage. 5 second reload times. Some are much more..... subtle. 5% extra blaster damage, 10 or 5 more velocity. 5% better agility.
I really think ammo changes would be the way to go now. Short-medium-long - same as Minmatar. Give the long some actual reach. A vagabond used to have falloff of 23 km before the projectile buff with it's 220mm and Barrage. That got buffed to 25km. You throw on one TE and it becomes 32km. Two and you're up to 41km. The vagabond's range was almost doubled by the projectile buff. Everything should be relative. If a blaster cruiser could get to half the vagabond's range before - it's only fair that it should get to half it's range now. Either that or bring the vagbond's range back in line.
|
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 05:55:00 -
[423] - Quote
CCP Tallest, please take notes and see if what I'm going to say makes any sense. I've been cooking this idea after reading the feedback on the thread.
Let's start from the issues: - Blasters don't work basically because Gallente ships can't get in range - Rails fail because you have a fixed warp range of 100km so shooting past that means nothing
It's hard to proposed changes to the guns alone since the reason why they don't get used are on the actual game mechanics, thus I propose other possible changes:
For fixing blasters:
1. Buff the MWD bonuses on Gallente blaster boats, but penalyze on cap usage.
Say, give 15% more speed, but 30% increased cap usage. That would make Gallente ships superior at quickly closing in, while forcing it to be used just for a burst, not for perma-running. So they can still be kitted, just not forever, and are forced to find a balance between speed and cap left for shooting. That added with the improvements in damage output and tracking would make it the de facto close range platform, without taking the ability to dictate range out of the other races.
2. Bring sensor dampeners back
As I see it, sensor damps. are the racial EWAR module for Gallente. When a blaster boat can't burst towards its enemy, it should be able to sensor damp to avoid being kitted from too far, forcing the enemy to get closer to get a lock, thus allowing it to MWD towards the enemy again.
For fixing rails:
1. Make rail boats deal the same damage, but track better and shoot for longer
Rails are underutilized because the current warp mechanics make shooting above 100km completely useless, while the damage output inside this range is less than impressive. Giving rails more sheer damage would make it compete with the other gun systems, so it's not a solution. I suggest instead to give it significantly better tracking (more than the 5% proposed). That will force the enemy of a railboat to find the sweet spot between being too close and too far. A enemy too close should risk being outtracked and/or ECM jammed, while a enemy too far (but still under 100km) risks being outside of optimal. What this means is that railboats strategy should not be to outdamage in sheer numbers, but to have a chance to outlast the fight by doing less damage, but steadly, while the enemy is fighting to get a lock (ECM) or taking critical hits more than dishing out (tracking).
2. Un-nerf EWAR a little bit
Since there will be more EWAR drones, its possible this is already underway. Regardless, Caldari got nerfed pretty bad in the EWAR department and this made the rails strategy not be viable anymore. Just like the sensor dampener for Gallenete, ECM jammers are the modules that allow Caldari to outlast the fight by having a chance to disrupt locks and, in the long run, deal more damage than is taken. Only 2 non-niche ships get bonuses for ECM (Blackbird and Scorpion), and thats wrong. Ships like the Rokh, that are 100% rail platforms, are the ones that should get bonuses for ECM since it's instrumental to make rail tactics work. The Rokh for instance should get a ECM bonus (like ECM burst range/cycle, or a combination of ECM strenght bonus and range penalty) to force enemies away from point-blank, instead of a hybrid turret optimal, which is useless given its optimal can easily cover most of the useful range (100km).
Overall, I think it's less a matter of "fixing" hybrids, and more about going back to EVE roots and figuring out what Gallente and Caldari platforms are supposed to do well.
I would enjoy if someone from CCP can comment on those ideas, I've put a lot of effort on coming up with this rationale. |
Mack Rin
Main Frame Technologies Inc. Intergalactic Crap Coalition
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 06:13:00 -
[424] - Quote
Rather than shoehorn two incompatible elements, it's be easier to swap auto cannon and blaster stats. Minmatar being the fastest should be using the closest range weapon as it is best able to dictate range. Gallente should be a low-med range race.
This would also solve some of the caldari suckiness as it too could have a reasonable mid range weapon system that is compatible with its ship design while having more range less damage than gallente.
I suggest also to modify the new blaster stats to have a more hybrid weapon optimal to fall off ratio, and to make it a high alpha (but same dps) weapon as another mentioned before to differentiate from amarr.
Seriously all this ship stat changing and extra damage is never going to produce optimal results while Minmatar are philosophically optimized for close range. |
Captain Alcatraz
Muppet Ninja's Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 08:23:00 -
[425] - Quote
Mack Rin wrote:Rather than shoehorn two incompatible elements, it's be easier to swap auto cannon and blaster stats. Minmatar being the fastest should be using the closest range weapon as it is best able to dictate range. Gallente should be a low-med range race.
This would also solve some of the caldari suckiness as it too could have a reasonable mid range weapon system that is compatible with its ship design while having more range less damage than gallente.
I suggest also to modify the new blaster stats to have a more hybrid weapon optimal to fall off ratio, and to make it a high alpha (but same dps) weapon as another mentioned before to differentiate from amarr.
Seriously all this ship stat changing and extra damage is never going to produce optimal results while Minmatar are philosophically optimized for close range.
Minmatar do kiting, hit and run is their philosophy since 2003. Some people need to keep their opinions to themselves. |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 08:49:00 -
[426] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote: 1. Make rail boats deal the same damage, but track better and shoot for longer
Rails are underutilized because the current warp mechanics make shooting above 100km completely useless, while the damage output inside this range is less than impressive. Giving rails more sheer damage would make it compete with the other gun systems, so it's not a solution. I suggest instead to give it significantly better tracking (more than the 5% proposed). That will force the enemy of a railboat to find the sweet spot between being too close and too far. A enemy too close should risk being outtracked and/or ECM jammed, while a enemy too far (but still under 100km) risks being outside of optimal. What this means is that railboats strategy should not be to outdamage in sheer numbers, but to have a chance to outlast the fight by doing less damage, but steadly, while the enemy is fighting to get a lock (ECM) or taking critical hits more than dishing out (tracking).
2. Un-nerf EWAR a little bit
Well written post, and for that you get a cookie.
But all Caldari Hybrids boats need to sort them out is the same or better tank than Amarr, and gaining a mid slot for the loss of a low wouldn't hurt either, so they can do less damage but live longer. They don't need e-war to fix them, and giving so many ships ECM bonuses negates the point of the specialist ships being brought to a fight at all. ECM is already pretty good, remember the ECM fit Zealots? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 09:23:00 -
[427] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Bubanni wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:Bubanni wrote: 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?)
I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need The suggesting for higher better agility is for those siturations where you can get a quick tackle on the guy before he gets to kiting distance, or if your starting off just a little outside that range, the be able to accelerate towards him, faster than he accelerates away, just for a few sec... that is the main idea... I understand your concept however the main flaw is that you are completely reliant on always landing right on top of your target. Jumping through a gate you're probably gonna be about 20km away and will never get in range no matter how agile you are. This will be the situation almost every time. Which is the same situation we have right now. Remember that agility allows you to turn faster and tighter so if a blaster boat was faster but had lower agility the slower but more agile Minnie ship will be faster in the turns which is really important when kiting. Pilot skill becomes the key factor
I love this idea . . . kiting should not be as easy as "keep at range" or "align to" . . . the fastest ships should always be the shortest ranged. I do however like the idea of making them very unagile, so that the longer ranged ship can still kite, it would just take piloting skill to know when to change direction and turn to make those slower turning gallente ships follow.
I think this could be achieved by changing the armor rig penalty to agility, giving all gallente ships a base agility nerf and a large speed bonus.
|
B'atou
Projekt Erzengel Eternal Evocations
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 09:24:00 -
[428] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.
From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.
Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.
If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses. Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
That's a concept I really like! We should get the ability to try this in Sisi!
------------------------------------------- Every winner needs a looser, only idiots need a leader! |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
94
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 09:30:00 -
[429] - Quote
B'atou wrote:Nemesor wrote:My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.
From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.
Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.
If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses. Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
That's a concept I really like! We should get the ability to try this in Sisi!
It's a stupid idea. If you've decided that Gallente boats need to be faster with more EHP, then just give the hulls more speed and more EHP. Don't overcomplicate things by creating a silly gimmick that makes their ships incompatible with current logistics. |
Mack Rin
Main Frame Technologies Inc. Intergalactic Crap Coalition
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 09:34:00 -
[430] - Quote
Captain Alcatraz wrote:
Minmatar do kiting, hit and run is their philosophy since 2003. Some people need to keep their opinions to themselves.
Part of the point of the thread is to reassess whether the philosophy is compatible with a workable mechanic. Given that much has changed since 2003, this is not unreasonable.
I didn't even suggest Minmatar no longer have this role, so your emotional outburst was not necessary.
|
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 09:46:00 -
[431] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote: random negative input.
It was just a silly notion. It makes you think about problems in a different way. I only see you spitting on others ideas and not contributing anything of value except stating the obvious. Trust me. Most rational people agree with you. The easiest solution is speeding up Gallente and buffing damage. Tallest just seems unwilling to **** off the Matari masses... understandable... but it does nothing to advance true game balance.
A truly stupid idea is not thinking of every solution to a problem. The funny part of your post was pointing out that Gallente Logistics would be different than current logistic sets. I do not see it as a bad thing. Personally, I think Logi is a bit overpowered in the meta. Why else would CCP keep teams from fielding more than 1 logi ship during the tournaments? It is overpowered and makes combat rather drawn out and boring.
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 10:10:00 -
[432] - Quote
to the poster above me: CCP kept teams from fielding more than one logi in the tournament because it made for boring matches. They wanted the matches to be a spectator sport, and thus began nerfing the things that made the match more drawn out . . .
Now, on to the topic at hand.
I think the real fix for the blaster problem is the ammo. Blasters have nothing that makes them really stand out. Minmatar switch ammo to switch damage types and gain some more tracking; Amarr switch ammo to trade damage for range, and the gallente do that too but the amarr just does it way better.
I think if you made the gallente ammo unique in some way, it would really help set the gallente apart and perhaps provide a niche that only they fill.
What if, instead of trading range for damage, the same way the amarr do, they traded range for capacitor use? or tracking? IE, a megathron could still do antimatter damage at Iron range, but it would just take a massive (read worse than unbonused lasers) cap penalty. This would keep blasters the kings of short range damage while adding some utility and usefulness to the other types of ammo because, lets be honest, does anyone use anything other than antimatter?
Having the weapon that is supposed to do the most damage at close range take a damage penalty for additional range seems kinda silly unless it gets a LOT of extra range . . . |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 10:17:00 -
[433] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:It is overpowered and makes combat rather drawn out and boring.
To the poster above me. Read posts. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 10:52:00 -
[434] - Quote
Tallest,
At this point it is clear everyone with any sense knows what the problem is. A race with long and mid range DPS has the title of "The Speed Race". Over the years, CCP has morphed and twisted the roles of the races through various changes and because Gallente were so well balanced for so long (they were in 2005-2006) they were neglected and past Devs passed the buck to you to sort it all out when it reached critical mass. I sympathize. However...
Gallente need speed to close range and a bit extra DPS over what has been granted to overcome the approach. You know it. The Matari players know it (and deny it with no substantial evidence to prove otherwise) and the Gallente players know it (and provide example after example to back their claims). There is no getting around this by adding more agility or range to the weapons. ACs already have godly falloff and keeping their speed will always allow them to kite with impunity. Give the Matari the Agility buffs. Give the Gallente the speed buffs. Others say... "Railguns will become the new kiting AC." Even looking at railguns now, have you seen the tracking on SISI? Have you seen the Alpha? There is no danger of it threatening AC or Arty and its role of range dominance.
DO the right thing Tallest. Give Gallente a speed buff, remove the speed penalty for armor rigs and grant the Matari an Agility buff. It is the simplest and most sensible solution to the issues facing Gallente as a race. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 11:15:00 -
[435] - Quote
No to overpowered special prop modules.
Yes to Rig changes
Yes to Hybrid ammo rebalance, the longer range ammoGÇÖs should be useful, I have seen it a number of times so CCP must have seen it, a proposal to change the tracking and kin therm ratioGÇÖs to create ammo that slightly support rails and blasters better individually but can still be used in either if you choose.
Yes to larger drone bays, E-war drone rebalance and T2 E-war drones, a stasis web drone that reduces the targets speed by 25% could give us the temporary boost we need to get close and yet can still be countered by the enemy.
Does the reload timer change go far enough?
If it was zero would that be better?
Then you would have two weapon systems that have instant reloads and cap use and two weapon systems that have 10 second reloads and no cap use.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 11:27:00 -
[436] - Quote
Absolutely no reason to swap AC/Blaster stats... With all the tweaks going on, a revamp of Hybrid ammunition and a fall-off nerf to tracking enhancers everything should be fine and ready to balance the ships that are also a major contributor to this problem. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 12:16:00 -
[437] - Quote
Dear CCP Tallest
Changes that are on SiSi are not enough. I don't know if you ever try to fly gallente ships ? If yes you must saw that you are unable to Mess with target even in Scrambler range and this situation is the biggest issue in entire game. Imagine gallentian ships fight during any racial WAR they are unable to win anything. (Its from RPG Game :) ). Who cares ...
anyway..
I was chatting with many players almost everybody can agree with stats switch between blasters and AC. Even as Gal and Matar pilot I can agree that AC is overpowered. For now matter is most sophisticated race in entire game !! No cap for shoot, fast and agile ships (What is impossible in real word coz you cant be fast and agile in the same time...) ETC.. anyway. How they was able to get there ? Its stupid. With this patch you want to make Matar even better ! Javelin and Hail changes ...
Also many players see that Matar is DEV favorite coz many of you guys play this race. Tell us that is not true and your private favorites have nothing to this coz you want to make good product. ? If so gallente pilots are your clients and what I saw that they really loves their's race ..
The problem is that we (older players I am 2005 ) dont want to fly Matar only (How long more Vaga gangs ? ... ). There is so many ships that we want to play and we cant coz they are insta death... Its not only Gallente problem but also Caldari.. In fleets we can see almost only Arazu, Lachesis and taranis - thats all for now ...
Please make a revision of your ideas. Recent tweaks are not even half way..
Regards |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 12:28:00 -
[438] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Gypsio III wrote: random negative input. It was just a silly notion. It makes you think about problems in a different way. I only see you spitting on others ideas and not contributing anything of value except stating the obvious. Trust me. Most rational people agree with you. The easiest solution is speeding up Gallente and buffing damage. Tallest just seems unwilling to **** off the Matari masses... understandable... but it does nothing to advance true game balance. A truly stupid idea is not thinking of every solution to a problem. The funny part of your post was pointing out that Gallente Logistics would be different than current logistic sets. I do not see it as a bad thing. Personally, I think Logi is a bit overpowered in the meta. Why else would CCP keep teams from fielding more than 1 logi ship during the tournaments? It is overpowered and makes combat rather drawn out and boring.
Are you nuts? Logistics ships are one of the few things that make EvE so wonderful and tactical and make fights last longer than two minutes. I guess being in Rote Capelle, and living next door to Rooks and Kings you have come to hate them lol.
Moving on... |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 12:48:00 -
[439] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:I was chatting with many players almost everybody can agree with stats switch between blasters and AC. Even as Gal and Matar pilot I can agree that AC is overpowered.
I don't.
blaster ships need to be more mobile. damage projection on blasters needs to be done by the ships themselves. if the ships need to be more mobile than matari ships, then so be it.
as for the AC problem, only nerf I would allow would be the falloff bonus on ships that use it, which are, in fact, the really troublesome ones (vagabond, cynabal, machariel). IF said nerf happened on the time when the TE boosts happened, at the very least the forum rage wouldn't have been as high as it is now. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 13:21:00 -
[440] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Imrik86 wrote: 1. Make rail boats deal the same damage, but track better and shoot for longer
Rails are underutilized because the current warp mechanics make shooting above 100km completely useless, while the damage output inside this range is less than impressive. Giving rails more sheer damage would make it compete with the other gun systems, so it's not a solution. I suggest instead to give it significantly better tracking (more than the 5% proposed). That will force the enemy of a railboat to find the sweet spot between being too close and too far. A enemy too close should risk being outtracked and/or ECM jammed, while a enemy too far (but still under 100km) risks being outside of optimal. What this means is that railboats strategy should not be to outdamage in sheer numbers, but to have a chance to outlast the fight by doing less damage, but steadly, while the enemy is fighting to get a lock (ECM) or taking critical hits more than dishing out (tracking).
2. Un-nerf EWAR a little bit
Well written post, and for that you get a cookie. But all Caldari Hybrids boats need to sort them out is the same or better tank than Amarr, and gaining a mid slot for the loss of a low wouldn't hurt either, so they can do less damage but live longer. They don't need e-war to fix them, and giving so many ships ECM bonuses negates the point of the specialist ships being brought to a fight at all. ECM is already pretty good, remember the ECM fit Zealots?
Yes, but I believe that all Caldari dedicated rail platforms (think the Rokh) should get some sort of short-range ECM bonus, to negate point-blank from the enemy, thus making rails a viable tactic. The Rokh already has enough shields and mid slots to fit a good tank. It simply dies in a fight because anyone can close in and out damage it, and you can't maneuver that if you can't disrupt locks.
Bringing a specialized ECM ship in the fleet is okay, but for those rail ships ECM is central to make it work, in the same way that you are basically obligated to fit a webber on a AC boat. Sensor dampeners should work the same for Gallente, since it denies long-range from the enemies and force them into point-blank.
The status quo today is kinda link everybody fits a speed mod, web and scram. Racial EWAR like ECM and sensor damps. got nerfed so much that they are now limited only to niche-ships, when it shouldn't be like that. It should be integral part of Gallente and Caldari strategy, since they are the cherry that completes the hybrid cake. |
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 13:45:00 -
[441] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:I was chatting with many players almost everybody can agree with stats switch between blasters and AC. Even as Gal and Matar pilot I can agree that AC is overpowered. I don't. blaster ships need to be more mobile. damage projection on blasters needs to be done by the ships themselves. if the ships need to be more mobile than matari ships, then so be it. as for the AC problem, only nerf I would allow would be the falloff bonus on ships that use it, which are, in fact, the really troublesome ones (vagabond, cynabal, machariel). IF said nerf happened on the time when the TE boosts happened, at the very least the forum rage wouldn't have been as high as it is now.
Well Grimpak
I dont mind any changes to balance this broken game. So yes maybe your idea is OK. We both can agree that recent changes are just "cosmetics" right ?
I think that re balancing should be open for some time even when final patch is UP. Hybrids should be marked as Work in Progress. And i think that One Designer is not enough to make this job done. Problem is very complex. The worst for CCP is that players are really angry coz players invest lots of time in SP and now they are left alone. Im wonder how many ppl resign from playing Eve online coz their's favorite race was so broken.. |
Wolfman122
Galactic Shipyards Inc NEM3SIS.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 13:47:00 -
[442] - Quote
I've got a slightly crazy idea for adding an unique advantage to all types of hybrids that other weapons don't have, but is still reasonably balanced. Its something that won't fix the closing to range issue of blasters, but it would make it more interesting and might make people willing to fly more hybrid ships.
* Resistance Penetration *
Let me explain in more detail. When hybrid turrets deal damage to target ships, any resistances above a certain number are ignored. So for example, if this value was set at 70%, any ship that had resistances above 70% would get treated as having 70% when a hybrid weapon hit this ship. This value could change according to the meta level of the gun, and some ships could get bonuses. This could be applied to shields, armour or both.
This would bring in several interesting features to using hybrids. 1) Same effectiveness against T1 hulls in general. 2) More effective versus T2/T3 hulls. 3) Same effectiveness versus just buffer tanks. 4) More effective verses buffer/resist and active tanks.
People would be like "Oh look there is a HAC fleet, lets get in our hybrid ships now". It might make an interesting niche for using hybrid ships over the others without being massively powerful. Not sure how it would change PvE given that I have no idea what resists rats have. Perhaps it would make hybrids more useful in Incursions? It might also be used as the anti-logi niche?
Just an idea to get the creative juices flowing rather than the same-old-same-old ideas. And yes, I know its a crazy idea. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 13:52:00 -
[443] - Quote
Wolfman122 wrote:I've got a slightly crazy idea for adding an unique advantage to all types of hybrids that other weapons don't have, but is still reasonably balanced. Its something that won't fix the closing to range issue of blasters, but it would make it more interesting and might make people willing to fly more hybrid ships.
If is not fixing is doing nothing. Interesting ? Yeah maybe but we want blaster and rails to be fixed and balanced not invented.
|
Wolfman122
Galactic Shipyards Inc NEM3SIS.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 14:05:00 -
[444] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote: If is not fixing is doing nothing. Interesting ? Yeah maybe but we want blaster and rails to be fixed and balanced not invented.
I said it wouldn't fix the range issue of blasters. Its definitely not doing nothing. I would argue that giving hybrids (both blasters and rails) something additional will actually "fix" them whether the range issue is sorted or not. If I have a reason to fly a ship knowing that it can be kited I will, I won't just stop using them. I will fly in the knowledge that there is a good reason to use them. Currently there is no reason to fly blasters because they have no clear advantage that outweighs the disadvantages.
(Also if more people fly hybrid ships because of a unique advantage there are less mini ships kiting us to worry about!) |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 14:05:00 -
[445] - Quote
Let's get back to Aretha and Bolt.....
What can Aretha do to survive this fight ?
- Hide in fog - Get another Weapon - Get Inside a jeep with a mashine gun - lay out traps for Mr Bolt
Giving Aretha the ability to spin faster or the usage of nuclear powered charges for her Shotgun won't help ^^
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 14:11:00 -
[446] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote: Well Grimpak
I dont mind any changes to balance this broken game. So yes maybe your idea is OK. We both can agree that recent changes are just "cosmetics" right ?
I think that re balancing should be open for some time even when final patch is UP. Hybrids should be marked as Work in Progress. And i think that One Designer is not enough to make this job done. Problem is very complex. The worst for CCP is that players are really angry coz players invest lots of time in SP and now they are left alone. Im wonder how many ppl resign from playing Eve online coz their's favorite race was so broken..
test server changes on both blaster hulls and blaster themselves are just half-assed attempts in all honesty. with the new changes, blaster ships can still be outmaneuvered, and if they even manage to catch the target, they still don't do enough damage, altho granted that they might be able to apply said damage better, and with the recent 5% increase, the difference between the nearest competition will increase, altho barely.
granted that there might be some aprehension from CCP's part to not boost blaster hulls too much, but these tiny changes simply served to make the glaring issues less glaring. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Elrianmk2
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 14:41:00 -
[447] - Quote
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. I know it does work against FoF but i cant recall the last time i came across one of those used in PvP.
While this nicely assists the likelihood of a Gallente Blaster boat PvP fleet shipping out it does naf all for PvE'ers. I used to fly a Drake in level 4's as it outperforms my Mega... doesn't matter how you look at it that just isn't right! Currently out in 0.0, flying rifters and skill up for minnie command ships, Gal command ships, friggen useless atm since the Nerfbat **** a while ago. If i come back to high sec again, I will probably still not fly Gallente ships in level 4's, My mega has sat unused in months, we have the only ships where you can target one of our main weapon platforms (drones) to reduce the DPS you are taking. disco setups etc.if i cannot project damage in PvE, people will not fly that ship as much as one that will, (Minnie and Caldari), this means there will be more Minnie / Caldari specced pilots, which means wont have fleets with guys using those ships or weapon types, and then you end up in a loop, no one uses it cause it is perceived to be bad, which means no one trains for it, which means no one uses it...
Sometimes "Meh" is an acceptable response. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 15:53:00 -
[448] - Quote
Don't know why devs don't see this :
TODAY: blasters maybe win if the fight against AC starts <10km ( maybe and how many are those situactions? ) If it starts in greater range AC is allways winner because it will get to the point that AC can shoot and BS don't, and it wont change from that point. So AC will win vs BS with 99999dps and 99999999HP without loosing 1 hp if fight starts 30 or whatever km and more. (This isn't about exact numbers but the concept as whole) This is EVIDENTLY WRONG
BLASTERSHIPS SHOULD BE FASTEST. balance it something like:
CLOSEST ENGAGEMENT RANGE OF COMBAT START: blasters win, ofc they have bigger dmg, you can just run away in normal circumstances, - it is their territory
SOME MIDDLE GROUND: sometimes wins blasters sometimes other weapon systems. Sometimes the damage put on blaster ship until it gets in range will be enought to win fight sometimes it won't be and once blaster gets in range even damaged, it manages to kill the other one. Here victory will be decided by fitting, pilot skills, exact situation etc.
LONGER ENGAGEMENT RANGE OF COMBAT START: Here is the damage dealt to blastership until it gets in range too much for blastership to compensate with higher dmg, and longer range weaponsystem wins. Or blastship gets completely destroyed on the way.
(what are those ranges only devs kno WHATS WRONG WITH THAT ???? ANYONE ???? |
Gods Coldblood
The Ankou Raiden.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:02:00 -
[449] - Quote
I neeeeeed moooooooooore POWER captain My Youtube EVE Online PVP channel: BOOM |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:09:00 -
[450] - Quote
When something Caldari lands on grid, I heat prop mod and approach. When something Amarr lands on grid, I heat prop mod and orbit. When something Minmatar lands on grid, I spam warp, hope he lands in scram range next time, and repeat as needed.
My point is that in order for a Gallente pilot to fight a Minmatar one, he needs a lot of luck and/or patience. I'm hoping that by the end of this rebalancing I'll have a better weapon than luck in my arsenal. I don't think blaster and ac stats should be swapped, as they're both semi-balanced against the other weapon systems. I don't agree with the sensor damp idea, as Gallente ships rarely have extra mids for ewar. Blaster boats need: the ability to close range, the ability to deal some damage while approaching, and the ability to really out-muscle the other ship once they're in range. Mobility and T2 ammo are simple and effective fixes that could easily be included in this expansion. You gave us tracking and fast reload, now let us use them. |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:15:00 -
[451] - Quote
Elrianmk2 wrote: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.
This post points out another message to you devs. It says:
"Gallente! A race so messed up people don't know that it already has a bonus to using Damps!""
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:28:00 -
[452] - Quote
Well if the Ammo is getting reworked I'd like something like this: (as I've already posted before)
Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is High Thermal low Kinetic damage Lead (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal
Two short range hi damage ammo types focusing on one side of the two damage types. Something like a 75% - 25% split between the two. This would at least allow a choice of High Kinetic or Thermal damage.
Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -20% optimal -20% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking) : -20% optimal & falloff +10% tracking very low dmg
Two specialised short to medium ranged ammo types. One high RoF low damage and one high tracking low damage. Both would have uses depending on Hull bonuses
Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff Iridium (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal
Two Medium ranged ammo types specialising in falloff (Gallente) or optimal (Caldari).
Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF): +75% dmg -75% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +75% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off
Two long ranged ammo types. One extreme range for the beyond 150km sniping (hope that CCP increases warp to ranges to 250km though) and one specialised "Sniper" ammo. The "Sniper" ammo is designed to give Railgun boats that "Alpha" that is required in most sniper fleets however it won't outshine artillery volley damage. For example:
Sniper Muninn Volley: approx 1700 & Range:105 + 36 KM Sniper Deimos (with new Tungsten) Volley: approx 1300 & Range: 91 + 37 KM Sniper Eagle (with new Tungsten) Volley: approx 1100 & Range: 130 + 20 KM
If energy turrets got a similar ammo make over they would also compete in the alpha strike role. However, Artillery will still hold the crown. |
Elrianmk2
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:31:00 -
[453] - Quote
Lekgoa, i understand your concerns about the limited amount of ewar fitting, as my post suggested, this was about another approach to looking at the problem, An additional midslot on blaster-boats and the damp bonus would help dictate range.
My main point of my post though was that no matter what we do, for PvE, you know the making money part to do PVPing? Hybrids are firggen useless. Sometimes "Meh" is an acceptable response. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:33:00 -
[454] - Quote
Nemesor sits there watching Aretha Franklin flail about pumping ineffective round after ineffective round at the fast little man circling her distantly as he plugs her chubby form with rifle fire.
"This reminds me of something. Hmmm." , he says musing as he eats popcorn. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:03:00 -
[455] - Quote
Stats taken primarily from the database and added the changes. These stats are for 1 gun (T1 AM/MF/EMP) with maxed skills for dps and no skills added for range and tracking (sry)
Tachyon Beam Laser II - 40,99 dps (26,4+20 km) tracking 0,0139 Mega Beam Laser II - 37,95 dps (24+16 km) tracking 0,0153 New 425mm Railgun II - 36,01 dps (28,8+24 km) tracking 0,0101 New 350mm Railgun II - 34,25 dps (21,6+20 km) tracking 0,0123 Dual Heavy Beam Laser II - 31,63 dps (21+12 km) tracking 0,0175 New Dual 250mm Railgun II - 32,11 dps (14,4+12 km) tracking 0,0184 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II - 30,25 dps (24+35 km) tracking 0,0090 1200mm Howitzer Artillery II - 27,50 dps (19,3+35 km) tracking 0,0113
New Neutron Blaster Cannon II - 53,13 dps (3,6+10 km) tracking 0,0520 New Ion Blaster Cannon II - 49,81 dps (3+8 km) tracking 0,0552 New Electron Blaster Cannon II - 46,49 dps (2,4+6 km) tracking 0,0600 Mega Pulse Laser II - 43,37 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0338 800mm rep. artillery II - 38,96 dps (2,4+19 km) tracking 0,0432 Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II - 37,48 dps (10,8+6 km) tracking 0,0375 Dual 650mm rep. artillery II - 37,10 dps (2,2+18 km) tracking 0,0497 Dual 425mm Autocannon II - 34,79 dps (1,9+16 km) tracking 0,0571
Heavy Beam Laser II - 28,46 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0330 Quad light Beam Laser II - 27,11 dps (4,8+1 km) tracking 0,0810 New 250mm Railgun II - 27,01 dps (14,4+12 km) tracking 0,0242 New 200mm Railgun II - 25,69 dps (10,8+10 km) tracking 0,0294 New Dual 150mm Railgun II - 24,08 dps (7,2+6 km) tracking 0,0441 Focused Medium Beam Laser II - 23,72 dps (10,5+6 km) tracking 0,0420 720mm Howitzer Artillery II - 22,69 dps (12+18 km) tracking 0,0220 650mm Howitzer Artillery II - 20,63 dps (9,7+18 km) tracking 0,0275
New Heavy Neutron Blaster II - 79,70 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1200 New Heavy Ion Blaster II - 74,71 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1320 New Heavy Electron Blaster II - 69,73 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1440 Heavy Pulse Laser II - 65,06 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0813 425mm Autocannon II - 58,44 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1056 Focused Dual Pulse Laser II - 56,22 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0900 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II - 55,66 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1214 Dual 180mm Autocannon II - 52,18 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1397
When comparing these don't forget that most minmatar ships have a ROF bonus equal to 33% more damage when most other weapon systems only receive a DAMAGE bonus giving 25% more damage, And tbh except for a few perks and kinks here and there this doesn't look too bad.
What remains is the speed balance between Gallente and Minmatar ships need adressed as well as the caldari optimal bonuses should be replaced with damage bonus while the gallente should have a ROF bonus or obtain their increased damage from having more guns than caldari...
Pinky
PS. Please sort out the ammunition as well. It really deserves it while we're looking at hybrids already... |
Sir Fury
Valar Morghulis. Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:21:00 -
[456] - Quote
Blasters need a much larger damage buff to make up for their tiny range. I also support the idea that Gallente hulls (blaster platforms) should be the faster, but less agile than Minmatar. I think it works better than increasing range of blasters.
But I can understand why CCP Devs may have an issue with making Gallente hulls faster than Minmatar. After all, one of the Racial aspects of Minmatar is speed & range tanking. & in order to achieve this, they are generally much faster, agile & have smaller signature radii than the other races. Some specialized Hulls have speed bonuses. (The Minmatar Command & T3's have bonuses to skirmish links, which also include Rapid Deployment - though this doesn't have to mean anything)
Making Gallente the fastest race, although in my view, makes most sense to solve the issue of getting in range for Blaster platforms, may upset the lore aspects & the lead to changing the bonuses of many Minmatar hulls to be consistent with this philosophy.
So what else can we do, if we still want to keep Minmatar the fastest race (base speeds atleast)? The only other solution I see is a Propulsion Module Bonus ( for Afterburners & MWDs) to all Gallente (& probably Caldari) blaster ships. In this way, it won't upset the historic Minmatar Racial attributes, but still allow Gallente Blaster platforms to be effectively faster than Minmatar ships, dependent on Cap. Agility is also penalized with Propulsion modules on, so in effect, we do end up with Gallente ships being faster but less agile than Minmatar.
p.s. The idea of a special time dependent Speed boost ( kind of like a "nitro") on top of the usual propulsion modules has merit, but would involve additional modules & game mechanics which could complicate things, hence probably not advisable.
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:32:00 -
[457] - Quote
I spoke to a EvE friend today who suggested this:
Why not give Gallente (or certain Gallente ships) an Overload bonus, so they can overload for longer.
This gives them the ability to use the MWD overloaded ALLOWING Gallente ships to get in range without breaking the game mechanics AND limiting their usage of speed in combat so they are not permanently fast but have burst speed instead of permanent speed i.e.. don't break Minmitar AND therefore not having to make them the same speed as Minmitar to get inside of blaster range AND... it gives Hybrid Blasters the extra DPS when in Range that everyone claims they need - again - limiting it's use so it is fair
If you then give Caldari Hybrid ships the extra tank they need we can finally call the game balanced.
Hurray!
Stick a fork in it. I'm done.
|
Daedalus Arcova
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:34:00 -
[458] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: New Heavy Neutron Blaster II - 79,70 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1200 New Heavy Ion Blaster II - 74,71 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1320 New Heavy Electron Blaster II - 69,73 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1440 Heavy Pulse Laser II - 65,06 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0813 425mm Autocannon II - 58,44 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1056 Focused Dual Pulse Laser II - 56,22 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0900 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II - 55,66 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1214 Dual 180mm Autocannon II - 52,18 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1397
Medium close-range guns doing more damage then their battleship equivalents? Identical range and falloff? I don't think you've got that right. |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:41:00 -
[459] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Stats taken primarily from the database and added the changes. These stats are for 1 gun (T1 AM/MF/EMP) with maxed skills for dps and no skills added for range and tracking (sry)
Tachyon Beam Laser II - 40,99 dps (26,4+20 km) tracking 0,0139 Mega Beam Laser II - 37,95 dps (24+16 km) tracking 0,0153 New 425mm Railgun II - 36,01 dps (28,8+24 km) tracking 0,0101 New 350mm Railgun II - 34,25 dps (21,6+20 km) tracking 0,0123 Dual Heavy Beam Laser II - 31,63 dps (21+12 km) tracking 0,0175 New Dual 250mm Railgun II - 32,11 dps (14,4+12 km) tracking 0,0184 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II - 30,25 dps (24+35 km) tracking 0,0090 1200mm Howitzer Artillery II - 27,50 dps (19,3+35 km) tracking 0,0113
New Neutron Blaster Cannon II - 53,13 dps (3,6+10 km) tracking 0,0520 New Ion Blaster Cannon II - 49,81 dps (3+8 km) tracking 0,0552 New Electron Blaster Cannon II - 46,49 dps (2,4+6 km) tracking 0,0600 Mega Pulse Laser II - 43,37 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0338 800mm rep. artillery II - 38,96 dps (2,4+19 km) tracking 0,0432 Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II - 37,48 dps (10,8+6 km) tracking 0,0375 Dual 650mm rep. artillery II - 37,10 dps (2,2+18 km) tracking 0,0497 Dual 425mm Autocannon II - 34,79 dps (1,9+16 km) tracking 0,0571
Heavy Beam Laser II - 28,46 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0330 Quad light Beam Laser II - 27,11 dps (4,8+1 km) tracking 0,0810 New 250mm Railgun II - 27,01 dps (14,4+12 km) tracking 0,0242 New 200mm Railgun II - 25,69 dps (10,8+10 km) tracking 0,0294 New Dual 150mm Railgun II - 24,08 dps (7,2+6 km) tracking 0,0441 Focused Medium Beam Laser II - 23,72 dps (10,5+6 km) tracking 0,0420 720mm Howitzer Artillery II - 22,69 dps (12+18 km) tracking 0,0220 650mm Howitzer Artillery II - 20,63 dps (9,7+18 km) tracking 0,0275
New Heavy Neutron Blaster II - 79,70 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1200 New Heavy Ion Blaster II - 74,71 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1320 New Heavy Electron Blaster II - 69,73 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1440 Heavy Pulse Laser II - 65,06 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0813 425mm Autocannon II - 58,44 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1056 Focused Dual Pulse Laser II - 56,22 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,0900 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II - 55,66 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1214 Dual 180mm Autocannon II - 52,18 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1397
When comparing these don't forget that most minmatar ships have a ROF bonus equal to 33% more damage when most other weapon systems only receive a DAMAGE bonus giving 25% more damage, And tbh except for a few perks and kinks here and there this doesn't look too bad.
What remains is the speed balance between Gallente and Minmatar ships need adressed as well as the caldari optimal bonuses should be replaced with damage bonus while the gallente should have a ROF bonus or obtain their increased damage from having more guns than caldari...
Pinky
PS. Please sort out the ammunition as well. It really deserves it while we're looking at hybrids already...
These stats are wrong: 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II - 55,66 dps (12+8 km) tracking 0,1214<--wtf nice troll vs. New Neutron Blaster Cannon II - 53,13 dps (3,6+10 km) tracking 0,0520 TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:44:00 -
[460] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.
From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.
Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.
If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses. Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.
REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)
Nemesor wrote:Magosian wrote:[quote=Torei Dutalis]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.... There would be tweaks and such made if this ever was implemented. Why couldn't T2 resists be buffed on Hull a little? An additional benefit is that it would open up another option for the logistics ships. The Gallente logistics being remote hull repairers. This is just a basic proposal. Nothing specific. Obviously it would require a lot of adjustments.
Sorry, but this is just a terrible idea. Currently you have 4 races, 2 shield and 2 armor tanking. If you want to buff hull tanking to a true fully grown tanking mechanic for something other than just lulz you'd need to adjust SO MUCH. All of that is much more work and has much more devastating side effects than balancing blasters.
The above mentioned remote-hull-repairing logi idea is a perfect example. Currently there are 4 logistics, 1 per race. Consequently you have 2 for shield and 2 for armor. Then you'd be left with just 1 armor. You forget (or never knew in the first place) that the logi ships for armor (or shild) actually fill different roles. There is a self-sufficient ship (Oneiros / Scimitar) which is cap stable and can also provide tracking links, and there is the counterpart which is not generally cap stable by itself (Guardian / Basilisk) but also doesn't get a tracking link bonus. The later can provide (with logistics V) cap to fleet members who need it, as it only needs one "cap buddy". So depending on fleet size, composition and intended targets there are quire good reasons to use a specific ship. You would totally screw this equilibrium when switching Oneiros to hull tanking. Also, Remote Hull Repairers barely repair enough to heal up a ship over time, let alone to use it as an actual active tank...
Please stop it, this breaks so much stuff and creates a balancing nightmare (3 tanking mechanics instead of 2, which is already hard enough to keep fair). Just stop |
|
Daedalus Arcova
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:59:00 -
[461] - Quote
Giving a special ship bonus to an entire race of ships is a really bad solution. As a general rule, T1 hulls have two bonuses, and giving Gallente another one on top of that would be unbalanced.
What I've suggested a couple of times is to increase base speed and agility of Gallente ships but also dramatically increase their mass. This would make Gallente the fastest sub-MWD race (allowing them to keep on top of tackled targets while scrammed), 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 (within their own class - a Thorax should be able to easily catch a Hurricane, but a Brutix ordinarily shouldn't)
Plenty of people have said it, but it's worth repeating - the falloff modifier of TEs and TCs needs to be halved. That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content, but wouldn't be able to do decent damage at the stupid ranges they currently can with autocannons. Autocannons themselves need a tracking nerf so that they're less effective in blasters' turf.
Finally, blasters and railguns still need to do more damage at the ranges they already work in. Antimatter, Void and Javelin should do another 10% or so damage, making blasters do the kind of damage they really need to to make up for their range, and allowing railguns to compete with pulse lasers in that medium range wasteland between blaster optimal and railgun sniping. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:00:00 -
[462] - Quote
Cry more.
|
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:04:00 -
[463] - Quote
Ok so far we bave: 1) Give Blasters better damage-- done, but not done to a high enough degree that offsets the real problem---distance to target. 2) Give Blasters longer Range 3) Give Gallente ships highest speed to counter range issues 4) Give Gallente ships(not just the Arazu/Lachesis) boosts to Damps to(hopefully) counter range issues
2 & 3 are most likely not going to happen ,since that is the realm of the Minmatar.
#4 is viable, just add an Sensor Damp slot(much like we have turret/missle slots)
Another suggestion is to Up the # of drones Gallente can currently use. I've been told that in the days of old, Gallente ships were able to field up to 10 drones and this was nerfed due to lag in fleet fights.
Fine ok, here's a suggestion that may mitigate the lag in large fleet fights..
If X# ship are on the field then if ship Z has >5 drones then group alll their drones into 1 Unit(1 drone model in space)
Bye bye lag issue concerning drones. hello more dps. And for the drones..add some Med & Small web drones OR give the (large) web drones bonuses to effectiveness AND hp when fielded by Gallente ships.
I dunno, just trying to help out ..... TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:07:00 -
[464] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote: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
Minnies would still have the ability to kite to their hearts content, unless on the off chance the pilot is horrible and/or isn't paying attention.
Two pilots in ships of the same class starting at a fair distance from one another (something like 20km) should have an equal chance to win an engagement. How would a gallente pilot win in this very common circumstance if neither pilot made a mistake? Answer: He never would.
Is that balance?
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:08:00 -
[465] - Quote
I have a feeling I just reversed a few stats - dammit sorry...
I'll try get them switched around |
Sir Fury
Valar Morghulis. Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:16:00 -
[466] - Quote
As I mentioned in post #456,
an MWD/AB bonus to Gallente blaster platforms solves the issue of Gallente ships being faster than Minmatar ships, as long as they have cap to support it. This obviously ignores the tanking issues that are inherent, & more complicated.
Currently we have 2 races which generally tank in either Shield or Armour. Although Blaster platforms being in slower armour ships is counter intuitive, its probably too late in the day to change the racial tanking tendencies.
Its just an idea, but in order to keep the Gallente ships fast without the amour plate & trimark rig penalties, there are 2 options. One is to buff the armour rep bonus. The other is to give an Armour Resistance buff to the Gallente ships. Now this may upset some Amarr users, especially the Sacrilege pilots & their kin. A possible solution to this is to change the traditional Amarr bonus to an Armor HP boost instead of resistance (Though the Sacrilege could maintain its Resistance bonus since it plays much like a blaster boat due to its bonuses to a short range weapon system.) Also, Armor Resistance rigs could forgo the speed penalty for something else, like agility. Keeping it on the trimarks is probably fine.
Playing with Gallente Signature radii can also help. As in a reduced bloom when using a MWD.
Daedalus Arcova wrote: Gallente shouldn't be faster than Minmatar.
Why? Please explain. Not just state. I am in favour of giving Minmatar the fastest base speeds, but not necessarily effective speeds when using propulsion modules. This is the only way Blasters will work without increasing Blaster range (then it'll become similar to ACs - some distinction should remain) |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:18:00 -
[467] - Quote
Quote: Why? Please explain. Not just state. I am in favour of giving Minmatar the fastest base speeds, but not necessarily effective speeds when using propulsion modules. This is the only way Blasters will work without increasing Blaster range (then it'll become similar to ACs - some distinction should remain)
Because Minmitar don't have the tank, lower signature, drone bonuses and cool scram e-war or other cool features to let them be balanced if you ever did that. Making Gallente faster, basically is like giving Minmitar the finger and nerfing them. It is not the solution, sorry. Not sure anybody read my previous page post about allowing more overload for the MWD and other features... This thread seems to be on it's own trajectory now. |
Daedalus Arcova
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:25:00 -
[468] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote: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
Minnies would still have the ability to kite to their hearts content, unless on the off chance the pilot is horrible and/or isn't paying attention. Two pilots in ships of the same class starting at a fair distance from one another (something like 20km) should have an equal chance to win an engagement. How would a gallente pilot win in this very common circumstance if neither pilot made a mistake? Answer: He never would. Is that balance?
It's also not particularly balanced if the Gallente boat in that engagement can always catch the opponent and therefore always melt it with blasters. Also, as I said in the very next paragraph:
Quote:The falloff modifier of TEs and TCs needs to be halved. That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content, but wouldn't be able to do decent damage at the stupid ranges they currently can with autocannons. Autocannons themselves need a tracking nerf so that they're less effective in blasters' turf.
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. |
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:31:00 -
[469] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Quote: Why? Please explain. Not just state. I am in favour of giving Minmatar the fastest base speeds, but not necessarily effective speeds when using propulsion modules. This is the only way Blasters will work without increasing Blaster range (then it'll become similar to ACs - some distinction should remain)
Because Minmitar don't have the tank, lower signature, drone bonuses and cool scram e-war or other cool features to let them be balanced if you ever did that. Making Gallente faster, basically is like giving Minmitar the finger and nerfing them. It is not the solution, sorry. Not sure anybody read my previous page post about allowing more overload for the MWD and other features... This thread seems to be on it's own trajectory now.
How about they do ton of dmg until galente gets to them ? Simply because of longer engagement range ? blasters optimal and falloff is crazy low, until galente ships gets in range ( the speed difference wouldn't be that great ), it will get there with half HP... Or you just want to keep it like it is today ? Gal don't have a slightest chance of killing min,? because they will be flying around out of range smiling and shooting from thweir optimal ???? |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:36:00 -
[470] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Quote:The falloff modifier of TEs and TCs needs to be halved. That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content, but wouldn't be able to do decent damage at the stupid ranges they currently can with autocannons. Autocannons themselves need a tracking nerf so that they're less effective in blasters' turf. 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.
Once upon a time, Gallente used to be the second fastest race. I know you probably do not remember that, but it is a fact. Less damage at range would only mean it takes longer for the Mini to kill the Gallente pilot.
That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content
Read your statement and tell me that is balance. All control is on the Minimatar side of the table. They outrange and out pace any Gallente ship. That is not a fun experience for the one being kited until you get dizzy from circling him. Thats not even counting that Minmatar have STASIS WEB RANGE BONUSES. |
|
Sir Fury
Valar Morghulis. Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:37:00 -
[471] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Quote: Why? Please explain. Not just state. I am in favour of giving Minmatar the fastest base speeds, but not necessarily effective speeds when using propulsion modules. This is the only way Blasters will work without increasing Blaster range (then it'll become similar to ACs - some distinction should remain)
Because Minmatar don't have the tank, lower signature, drone bonuses and cool scram e-war or other cool features to let them be balanced if you ever did that. Making Gallente faster, basically is like giving Minmatar the finger and nerfing them. It is not the solution, sorry. Not sure anybody read my previous page post about allowing more overload for the MWD and other features... This thread seems to be on it's own trajectory now.
Dedicated Gallente blaster boats don't have drone bonuses & in practice, not so great tanks either. I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the Minmatar have the best (smallest) signature radii of all the races, in general. Even if shield tanking, its still a % increase of a small radii. Scram bonuses are only on specialized Ewar ships, so have no place in this discussion of Blaster boats vs AC boats. The idea is the Gallente blaster boat will be able to get in range of said Minmatar ship (which will only be slightly slower than the Gallente pursuer) in a straight(ish) line as long as it can keep its Prop module active. The Minmatar ship will obviously be hurting the Gallente ship with its not so awful DPS at decent range till the Gallente ship can get in range. And if the Minmatar pilot is good, can get out of blaster range again (since they'll have better acceleration due to better agility). & Minmatar tanks aren't that weak in practice, compared to these blaster boats. Scrams do complicate things, which may force Minmatar ships to dual prop (in Null space atleast), but thats another story.
Another point. I'm in favour of nerfing the drone bay sizes of Gallente blaster ships in line with the other races. Only ships with large Drone bays should be the Drone bonused Gallente (and Amarr) boats. I think the added drone dps has been always included in the CCP Devs calculations when considering the standard Gallente Blaster boats, hence the not so face melting damage output from blasters up till now. Without the presumed extra drone DPS, pure blaster DPS output can now be compared to ACs & Pulses without confusion. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:37:00 -
[472] - Quote
I don't mind minmatar being faster, however with much lower mass the gallente ships would accelerate faster and gain more from MWDs. I would suggest adding mass to minmatar ships and remove mass from gallente blasterships. Then give armor rigs a less critical penalty (like reduced sensor strength?)
This as well as reducing fall-off bonus on tracking enhancers and tracking computers with 25-50% should get the balance a very long way...
And then we can start looking at the caldari optimal bonus that could easily use a damage bonus whle replacing gallente bonus with rof bonus to keep gallente stronger...
Pinky
PS. Why dont Mr Tall open a forum where we can ask about changes for individual ships like the Prophecy, Apocalypse and other ships that are not hybrid ships and just have 1 or 2 easy things to change?
Also more effecient webifier drones as well as MEDIUM webifier drones would really benefit the gallente ships in catching other ships even if they will have to give up ecm or damage drones. |
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:43:00 -
[473] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Also more effecient webifier drones as well as MEDIUM webifier drones would really benefit the gallente ships in catching other ships even if they will have to give up ecm or damage drones.
tbh that is probably the first good idea that i've seen in this thread |
Daedalus Arcova
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:45:00 -
[474] - Quote
Nemesor wrote: Once upon a time, Gallente used to be the second fastest race. I know you probably do not remember that, but it is a fact. Less damage at range would only mean it takes longer for the Mini to kill the Gallente pilot.
That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content
Read your statement and tell me that is balance. All control is on the Minimatar side of the table. They outrange and out pace any Gallente ship. That is not a fun experience for the one being kited until you get dizzy from circling him. Thats not even counting that Minmatar have STASIS WEB RANGE BONUSES.
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. Same imbalance, different outcome.
My point was that kiting is pointless unless you're able to do decent damage from that range. If some future well-balanced incarnation of a Hurricane wanted to kite me in a future well-balanced iteration of a Brutix, his ****-poor kiting dps wouldn't necessarily be enough to kill me before my Hammerhead IIs kill him. But the way things are now, I probably wouldn't stand a chance.
Balance doesn't mean making Gallente the new Minmatar. It means making each races' strengths meaningful, while toning down the excesses. The reason we benchmark everything against Minmatar at the moment is because they're so hideously overpowered, in every scenario. But Gallente ships' inferior mobility to Minmatar wouldn't be so much of an issue if only 25% of the roaming ships you come across in space were of Minmatar origin, instead of the 70 or 80% it is now. For that to happen, Minmatar need bringing back into line as much as Gallente need boosting.
I want balance, not for Gallente to become the new Winmatar. Can you tell the difference? |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:46:00 -
[475] - Quote
Sir Fury wrote: p.s. the overload idea has merit & is kinda like the "nitro" idea without needing to change much of game mechanics. Though seems a little limited & non-sustainable in a prolonged encounter.
It would solve a lot of the common issues raised in this massive threadnaut. You'd get more damage from blaster on demand. You'd get more speed on demand. It would be up to the pilot to tactically decide how to use their overload ability, while not letting them become over powered, it should have drawbacks like any good system. I am just very wary of permanently making Gallente faster than minmitar, I don't see that ending well.
Gun fall off is also a factor, a massive factor to the damage they do and most of Minmitars stuff sits almost exclusively in fall off range.
I would implement it by giving the required Gallente Blaster boats the Overload heating bonus. Simple.
But CCP might have to make the Overload button a bit bigger... lol
Oh, and you're right about my statement about the extra bonuses being specific ships only. Knee jerk on my part. See I can play nice in the sandbox. ALL YOUR SANDCASTLE BELONG TO US.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:49:00 -
[476] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:[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.
Terrible example and one that has been attempted before. Rails can't track well enough to kite in the same fashion. They also do less DPS overall than Minmatar weapon systems. |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:50:00 -
[477] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:[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.
Terrible example and one that has been attempted before. Rails can't track well enough to kite in the same fashion. They also do less DPS overall than Minmatar weapon systems.
Which is why a bigger tank would help balance them. |
Daedalus Arcova
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:56:00 -
[478] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I don't mind minmatar being faster, however with much lower mass the gallente ships would accelerate faster and gain more from MWDs. I would suggest adding mass to minmatar ships and remove mass from gallente blasterships.
By increasing Minmatar ship mass and decreasing it for Gallente, you'd just make Gallente the new fast nano race. Then all that would happen is the Gallente boat would catch the Minmatar boat, each ship would scram and web the other, and the Minmatar ship would use its superior base speed to slowboat out of scram range. Repeat ad nauseum.
Do the opposite: Make Gallente the fastest race without MWD, but give them the mass to keep them a bit slower than Minmatar at MWD speeds. Plates (even as they are now, although they need fixing) would have less of an effect on top speeds, and Gallente boats would be able to hold their prey once they'd caught it, and still do reasonable speed while scrammed, neuted and webbed (as they are whenever they get into blaster range). |
Daedalus Arcova
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:02:00 -
[479] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:
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.
Terrible example and one that has been attempted before. Rails can't track well enough to kite in the same fashion. They also do less DPS overall than Minmatar weapon systems.
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. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:14:00 -
[480] - Quote
Excuse me, but if Minmatar still have the highest velocities how can buffing MWD speed in a balanced way using less mass on gallente ships be such a big threat to minmatar? Just make sure minmatar will be the fastest top speed but make the gallente accelerate and maneuver much faster unless using speed mods giving up dps/range/tracking?
Pink |
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
151
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:17:00 -
[481] - Quote
buffing prop mods, and ship speed (to what it's required in order to use blasters effectively) is a very bad idea imo. it will create more problems than solutions. |
Daedalus Arcova
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:19:00 -
[482] - Quote
Depends on whether Minmatar's superiority in speed is enough to keep them ahead when Gallente's better MWD performance is taken into account.
Regardless, I still think Gallente should be the fastest when not using MWD. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:31:00 -
[483] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:I don't mind minmatar being faster, however with much lower mass the gallente ships would accelerate faster and gain more from MWDs. I would suggest adding mass to minmatar ships and remove mass from gallente blasterships. Make Gallente the fastest race without MWD, but give them the mass to keep them a bit slower than Minmatar at MWD speeds. Plates (even as they are now, although they need fixing) would have less of an effect on top speeds, and Gallente boats would be able to hold their prey once they'd caught it, and still do reasonable speed while scrammed, neuted and webbed (as they are whenever they get into blaster range).
Not sure this will really do much for BC and smaller hulls unless you make the base speed significantly higher. 19km webs and 16km scrams still leave blaster boats in the position of being raped before they get into range. |
Daedalus Arcova
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:34:00 -
[484] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:[quote=Daedalus Arcova]19km webs and 16km scrams still leave blaster boats in the position of being raped before they get into range.
Quite. But those ranges are not the norm, and getting caught by an Arazu or a Rapier is usually game over for anyone. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 20:52:00 -
[485] - Quote
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. |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:05:00 -
[486] - Quote
This thread has reached epic proportions. I'm not sure what more can be said that hasn't be said lol.
I feel sorry for CCP Tallest... and this is how I imagine this thread has made him feel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-eCX8guIVM |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:08:00 -
[487] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:[quote=Daedalus Arcova]19km webs and 16km scrams still leave blaster boats in the position of being raped before they get into range. Quite. But those ranges are not the norm, and getting caught by an Arazu or a Rapier is usually game over for anyone.
No Arazu/ rapier needed. Using t2 scrams and webs with gang booster. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:11:00 -
[488] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Nemesor wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:
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.
Terrible example and one that has been attempted before. Rails can't track well enough to kite in the same fashion. They also do less DPS overall than Minmatar weapon systems. 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.
I am talking with the changes. I guess you missed the part where railguns are still fairly terrible.
I still think you just want to have the comfort of controlling range and whether you want to fight or not. It's understandable though. It is quite an advantage to have. |
Elrianmk2
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:13:00 -
[489] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Elrianmk2 wrote: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.
This post points out another message to you devs. It says: "Gallente! A race so messed up people don't know that it already has a bonus to using Damps!""
Blasterboat bonus in particular, Buff the bonus, so you know the Mega bonus:
Quote:
Gallente Battleship Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage and 7.5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret tracking speed per level.
yeah where is there a damping bonus there? or maybe the Thorax?
Quote:Gallente Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage per level and 5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus per level.
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. Sometimes "Meh" is an acceptable response. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:16:00 -
[490] - Quote
Imawuss wrote: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.
You can't fix a problem that is a combination of past ship nerfs and ammo and weapons buffs with only a Hybrid weapon buff.
|
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:17:00 -
[491] - Quote
Elrianmk2 wrote:Nemesor wrote:Elrianmk2 wrote: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.
This post points out another message to you devs. It says: "Gallente! A race so messed up people don't know that it already has a bonus to using Damps!"" Blasterboat bonus in particular, Buff the bonus, so you know the Mega bonus: Quote:
Gallente Battleship Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage and 7.5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret tracking speed per level.
yeah where is there a damping bonus there? or maybe the Thorax? Quote:Gallente Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage per level and 5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus per level. 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.
So you want to add another bonus to the every blaster boat in addition to the ones they have now? Hurrrr.
|
Elrianmk2
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:28:00 -
[492] - Quote
Nope Nem, i stated remove Elrianmk2 wrote:, 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.
Granted at this point i am not sure if my troll detector has gone offline i suspect it has... Sometimes "Meh" is an acceptable response. |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:29:00 -
[493] - Quote
Rails are not going to be used as a kiting weapon because they a) have terrible tracking and b) have terrible dps.
Not to mention that everyone proposing a speed buff to Gallente says keep Minmatar agility the best. Guess what? You can easily change direction and overheat MWD (probably wouldn't even have to do that) and warp away from the Gall boat that's still trying to turn. Jesus kids, think these things through. |
Daedalus Arcova
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:36:00 -
[494] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:I still think you just want to have the comfort of controlling range and whether you want to fight or not. It's understandable though. It is quite an advantage to have.
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. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:36:00 -
[495] - Quote
I've been seriously thinking about the Galente being the fastest and how that makes rail kitting with anti matter the new Minmatar.
And I've realized this is Totally incorrect.
Yes anti matter kitting on the fastest ship is powerful, but only against kitting AC fits. It does you no good against Lasers. You're playing right into there hands, you have to keep you're traversal low, and they are still in there optimal.
Its terrible against missiles. You would have to orbit to keep you're speed up so you're not taking full damage, seriously crippling you're tracking.
And Minmatar have a counter to it. Arti.
Now yes you're going to see a lot of rail AM kitters initially. But people will realize pretty quick they can go back to there other ships and really own rails.
So you then push Blaster boats back to blasters, the more flexible system. And then everything evens out. AC's have falloff and can get dps going before blasters can open up. Lasers still have there crystal switches and better tanks.
Missiles are still missiles. And no this doesn't help Caldari. But it may be time to accept that balancing hybrids between two different races doing two totally different things just isn't going to work.
Now unless someone can tell me why rails (in jam ranges because 1v1 you still need a point) on the fastest ships, considering all the other variables not just AC would be over powered then fine.
And if you can think of it that would be great. Because I cant at the moment. |
Kvaser Rand
Nite Ryder Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:37:00 -
[496] - Quote
A question:
The changes that was announced on the devblog: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012 Are they still in effect, meaning, will they still be implemented alongside the changes that CCP Tallest mentions in teh first page of this thread?
Or, are the changes mentioned in the devblog scrapped?
|
sq0
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:40:00 -
[497] - Quote
Imawuss wrote: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.
BLASTERSHIPS SHOULD BE FASTEST. balance it something like:
CLOSEST ENGAGEMENT RANGE OF COMBAT START: blasters win, ofc they have bigger dmg, you can just run away in normal circumstances, - it is their territory
SOME MIDDLE GROUND: sometimes wins blasters sometimes other weapon systems. Sometimes the damage put on blaster ship until it gets in range will be enought to win fight sometimes it won't be and once blaster gets in range even damaged, it manages to kill the other one. Here victory will be decided by fitting, pilot skills, exact situation etc.
LONGER ENGAGEMENT RANGE OF COMBAT START: Here is the damage dealt to blastership until it gets in range too much for blastership to compensate with higher dmg, and longer range weaponsystem wins. Or blastship gets completely destroyed on the way.
WHAT IS OP about that? that sometimes wins blasters sometimes autocannons? depends on whos territory you are on ? But everyone have a chance of winnin |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:51:00 -
[498] - Quote
Monger Man wrote: Its terrible against missiles. You would have to orbit to keep you're speed up so you're not taking full damage, seriously crippling you're tracking.
Just fyi: to mitigate against missiles it's better going in a straight line with an AB on. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:53:00 -
[499] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Nemesor wrote: Once upon a time, Gallente used to be the second fastest race. I know you probably do not remember that, but it is a fact. Less damage at range would only mean it takes longer for the Mini to kill the Gallente pilot.
That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content That would mean that Minmatar could use their superior speed to kite 'till their heart's content
Read your statement and tell me that is balance. All control is on the Minimatar side of the table. They outrange and out pace any Gallente ship. That is not a fun experience for the one being kited until you get dizzy from circling him. Thats not even counting that Minmatar have STASIS WEB RANGE BONUSES.
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. Same imbalance, different outcome. My point was that kiting is pointless unless you're able to do decent damage from that range. If some future well-balanced incarnation of a Hurricane wanted to kite me in a future well-balanced iteration of a Brutix, his ****-poor kiting dps wouldn't necessarily be enough to kill me before my Hammerhead IIs kill him. But the way things are now, I probably wouldn't stand a chance. Balance doesn't mean making Gallente the new Minmatar. It means making each races' strengths meaningful, while toning down the excesses. The reason we benchmark everything against Minmatar at the moment is because they're so hideously overpowered, in every scenario. But Gallente ships' inferior mobility to Minmatar wouldn't be so much of an issue if only 25% of the roaming ships you come across in space were of Minmatar origin, instead of the 70 or 80% it is now. For that to happen, Minmatar need bringing back into line as much as Gallente need boosting. I want balance, not for Gallente to become the new Winmatar. Can you tell the difference?
The problem with this is that by nerfing minmatar range, you would either eliminate kiting altogether or you would simply make it less effective, so instead of taking 5 minutes to kill me with me having no chance, it takes 10 minutes to kill me with me having no chance. See the problem?
I suppose if you made gallente the faster ships while the matari were more maneuverable you could fit railguns, but the fitting on rails should make fitting a tank, MWD and rails impossible.
I really dont think this problem can be solved by damage . . . you could add +100% damage to all blasters, and they would still be relegated to station camping and shooting at caps because they simply cannot get into range to apply their damage. Ill take 500 DPS pretty much always over 2000 DPS pretty much never, and thats what you get with the gallente . . . a lot of DPS pretty much never. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:53:00 -
[500] - Quote
Gecko O'Bac wrote:Monger Man wrote: Its terrible against missiles. You would have to orbit to keep you're speed up so you're not taking full damage, seriously crippling you're tracking.
Just fyi: to mitigate against missiles it's better going in a straight line with an AB on.
Ok got me there. But you're not going to find any AB fit Brutix in lowsec. Probably not in Null. And if you where AB fit you wouldn't make a great kitter.
But I will keep that in mind. |
|
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:01:00 -
[501] - Quote
Kvaser Rand wrote:A question: The changes that was announced on the devblog: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012 Are they still in effect, meaning, will they still be implemented alongside the changes that CCP Tallest mentions in teh first page of this thread? Or, are the changes mentioned in the devblog scrapped?
As I read correctly, the changes mentioned in the first post of this thread alongside the changes mentioned in the devblog are still going up-to-date. Nothing is set in stone of course. |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:03:00 -
[502] - Quote
I just had a crazy idea:
Unify blasters and hybrid turrets!
Consider this carefully. Unify the turrets. Create separate ammunition for hybrid turrets. Blaster ammunition, which is close range, and rail ammunition which is long range. Blaster ammo gives the turret a huge penalty to fall-off and optimal range, but increases tracking speed and has a high ammunition damage base. Rail ammunition provides a massive bonus to optimal range and fall-off but gives a major penalty to tracking speed and has lower damage numbers. When the ammunition type, (Meaning blaster and rail ammunition), changes the turret visibly changes shape as well, (To demonstrate the change in ability.)
The five second change to loading hybrid ammunition assists this idea. This way a Rokh battleship, (For example), can snipe at long range because if they warp to you at zero you change your ammunition to blaster ammunition and use that on them.
This solves all the issues. You can use your medium damage-per-second low tracking rail-gun ammo as you approach them. When you are in range you switch to blaster ammunition in your turrets and use that on them. If you want to do this you should carry twice the amount of ammo in your cargo hold so this presents a penalty as well.
What do you think about this presentation? |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:06:00 -
[503] - Quote
Shadow Lord77 wrote:I just had a crazy idea:
Unify blasters and hybrid turrets!
Consider this carefully. Unify the turrets. Create separate ammunition for hybrid turrets. Blaster ammunition, which is close range, and rail ammunition which is long range. Blaster ammo gives the turret a huge penalty to fall-off and optimal range, but increases tracking speed and has a high ammunition damage base. Rail ammunition provides a massive bonus to optimal range and fall-off but gives a major penalty to tracking speed and has lower damage numbers. When the ammunition type, (Meaning blaster and rail ammunition), changes the turret visibly changes shape as well, (To demonstrate the change in ability.)
The five second change to loading hybrid ammunition assists this idea. This way a Rokh battleship, (For example), can snipe at long range because if they warp to you at zero you change your ammunition to blaster ammunition and use that on them.
This solves all the issues. You can use your medium damage-per-second low tracking rail-gun ammo as you approach them. When you are in range you switch to blaster ammunition in your turrets and use that on them. If you want to do this you should carry twice the amount of ammo in your cargo hold so this presents a penalty as well.
What do you think about this presentation?
A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.
First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game. So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.
You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.
The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime. But its an interesting idea still.
|
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:09:00 -
[504] - Quote
Elrianmk2 wrote:Lekgoa, i understand your concerns about the limited amount of ewar fitting, as my post suggested, this was about another approach to looking at the problem, An additional midslot on blaster-boats and the damp bonus would help dictate range.
My main point of my post though was that no matter what we do, for PvE, you know the making money part to do PVPing? Hybrids are firggen useless.
Bonused damps might work on blaster boats with an extra mid, but I still think that solution is too complicated. Some nice, simple buffs to T2 ammo and Gallente mobility (speed, agility, mwd bonuses, overload bonuses, take your pick) would go a long way towards making blaster boats viable.
As for PvE...dominix. I don't care if it looks like a potato. It kicks ass. And it has a chubby little man drawn on the bottom. |
Moana Pozzi
Partito dell' Amore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:28:00 -
[505] - Quote
I like the idea of some kind MWD bonus but only on the first cycle... something like:
activate MWD... for first cycle your linear speed is increased by 100%... after the first cycle the MWD works normally.
The idea like said in many previous posts, is to "jump" on the victim, scram, web it and show the power of the blasters....
i also agree that blasters needs more than only a 5% dps buff. i dunno exactly how much more, but more...
blasters at short range must be scary... but real scary... 5% is not so scary...
all imho.
Thanks in advance to everybody for reading my post. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:43:00 -
[506] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:Elrianmk2 wrote:Lekgoa, i understand your concerns about the limited amount of ewar fitting, as my post suggested, this was about another approach to looking at the problem, An additional midslot on blaster-boats and the damp bonus would help dictate range.
My main point of my post though was that no matter what we do, for PvE, you know the making money part to do PVPing? Hybrids are firggen useless. Bonused damps might work on blaster boats with an extra mid, but I still think that solution is too complicated. Some nice, simple buffs to T2 ammo and Gallente mobility (speed, agility, mwd bonuses, overload bonuses, take your pick) would go a long way towards making blaster boats viable. As for PvE...dominix. I don't care if it looks like a potato. It kicks ass. And it has a chubby little man drawn on the bottom. well the problem is that even 3 damps cant dampen someone enough to make them come in web range. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:54:00 -
[507] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Nemesor wrote:I still think you just want to have the comfort of controlling range and whether you want to fight or not. It's understandable though. It is quite an advantage to have. 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.
Then take it from a pilot who is maxed skill in all four races in every ship BS and below. I fly predominantly AC and Arty ships. The Loki, Vaga and hurricane are the ones I use most. Matari need to be the most agile not the fastest. I only started as a Gallente pilot. |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:06:00 -
[508] - Quote
Monger Man wrote: A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.
First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game. So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.
You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.
The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime. But its an interesting idea still.
Thanks for your post.
To paraphrase someone else who excellently put it: Laser weapons systems have an advantage as they have excellent EMP and thermal damage-per-second. With scorch they have excellent range. They also have superior ammo logistics.
Projectile weapon platforms require no cap, and have an advantage in close-range damage-per-second values, and superior long-range artillery alpha numbers.
What advantage do hybrid weapons have?
With CCP's proposed buff they have a five second reload. And closer damage numbers. But there are still fundamental issues with ship speeds. If you close in on someone who has a rail-gun they lose their advantage. |
Jazz Styles
Sileo In Pacis
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:08:00 -
[509] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102Some other things: - The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres. A few things about ammo: - Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters. - Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo. - Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20.
Listen to this guy, he knows what he's talking about. Make it happen! |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:18:00 -
[510] - Quote
Monger Man wrote: A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.
First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game. So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.
You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.
The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime. But its an interesting idea still.
Laser weapons have an advantage as they have excellent EMP and thermal damage values and consume no ammo. Scorch allows for fair damage at range. Projectile weapon require no capacitor and they are numerically superior at close range and long-range alpha sniping. What advantage do hybrid weapons have over these?
|
|
Monger Man
D.S.A.
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:31:00 -
[511] - Quote
Shadow Lord77 wrote:Monger Man wrote: A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.
First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game. So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.
You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.
The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime. But its an interesting idea still.
Laser weapons have an advantage as they have excellent EMP and thermal damage values and consume no ammo. Scorch allows for fair damage at range. Projectile weapon require no capacitor and they are numerically superior at close range and long-range alpha sniping. What advantage do hybrid weapons have over these?
I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.
But that aside.
Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.
Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.
But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.
|
Insane Randomness
Among the Shadows Takahashi Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:32:00 -
[512] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102Some other things: - The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres. A few things about ammo: - Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters. - Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo. - Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20. Listen to this guy, he knows what he's talking about. Make it happen!
What they said. Make it so. Maybe the Rohk will be usefull then. Reduction too cap needs was in the right direction. So was most of the changes, but they all just need to be MOAR. MOAR of it all. |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:36:00 -
[513] - Quote
Monger Man wrote: I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.
But that aside.
Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.
Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.
But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.
I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to?
Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite you. Armor-tanked Gallente and slow-by-design Caldari ships use blasters and blasters have terrible range. Having switchable ammunition causing your turret to function as a rail-gun and blaster solves that problem for hybrid weapons. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 23:59:00 -
[514] - Quote
Shadow Lord77 wrote:Monger Man wrote: I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.
But that aside.
Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.
Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.
But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.
I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to? Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite you. Armor-tanked Gallente and slow-by-design Caldari ships use blasters and blasters have terrible range. Having switchable ammunition causing your turret to function as a rail-gun and blaster solves that problem for hybrid weapons.
Sorry having issues editing my last post for some reason.
I do like the idea very much, but only two outcomes can be really expected from such a massive change.
1. Every body ends up flying hybrid boats. They do everything as well as any other ship, using only one gun.
Or
2. They still suck, because even though they can hit any range there no good at it.
How can you balance them so you don't have 1 or 2? |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 00:34:00 -
[515] - Quote
Monger Man wrote:Shadow Lord77 wrote:Monger Man wrote: I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.
But that aside.
Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.
Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.
But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.
I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to? Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite blaster systems either by being quick or stasis-webbing the ship. The ships by design which use blasters are slow. This idea is simply another niche and solution to the issues with hybrid turrets and an interesting one at that. Sorry having issues editing my last post for some reason. I do like the idea very much, but only two outcomes can be really expected from such a massive change. 1. Every body ends up flying hybrid boats. They do everything as well as any other ship, using only one gun. Or 2. They still suck, because even though they can hit any range there no good at it. How can you balance them so you don't have 1 or 2?
Simple: Decrease the range on blaster weapons even more than they are. Make it so the enemy needs to be within 6-12km or so to be able to be hit with 50% accuracy in Large blaster turrets. CCP wants rail guns to do moderate damage at long-distances. Right now you are able to scan down the enemy shooting you at 150km and warp directly on top him. If you do so in these circumstances they can hit you with blasters if they are using a hybrid system. If they warp within 10km or so you can close in and hit them with blasters. It'll be in their best interest to engage you at range when they have an advantage by using artillery or beam lasers, or if they can use autocannons at 24km, (The falloff+optimal of a 800mm repeating cannon). If they drop on top of you you can engage them on your own terms. It creates a niche. You're not superior at long range, (38-70km), you're superior at an extremely long range, (70-150km), and you're superior at a very close range if you can get to it. Not everyone wants to play by those rules. Therefore I solved the issue of your #1. |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 01:12:00 -
[516] - Quote
Shadow Lord77 wrote:Monger Man wrote:Shadow Lord77 wrote:
I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to?
Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite blaster systems either by being quick or stasis-webbing their ship. The ships by design which use blasters are slow. This idea is simply another niche and solution to the issues with hybrid turrets and an interesting one at that.
Sorry having issues editing my last post for some reason. I do like the idea very much, but only two outcomes can be really expected from such a massive change. 1. Every body ends up flying hybrid boats. They do everything as well as any other ship, using only one gun. Or 2. They still suck, because even though they can hit any range there no good at it. How can you balance them so you don't have 1 or 2? Simple: Decrease the range on blaster weapons even more than they are. Make it so the enemy needs to be at 7-14 kilometers to be able to be hit by the optimal+falloff of all large blasters. (As of now the optimal+falloff of the large blaster cannon that can shoot the farthest is 17.2km; 7.2 being the optimal). The staff at crowd control productions want rail guns to do moderate damage at long-distances. Right now you are able to scan down the enemy shooting you at 150km and warp directly on top him. If you do so in these circumstances you may be hit with blasters if they are using a hybrid system with blaster ammunition. If they warp within 10km or so you can close in and hit them with blasters. It'll be in their best interest to engage you at range when they have an advantage by using artillery or beam lasers, or near 24km if they are using a large pulse laser auto-cannon system. If they drop on top of you you can engage them on your own terms. It creates a niche. You're not superior at long range, (38-70km), you're superior at an extremely long range, (70-150km), and you're superior at a very close range if you can get to it. Not everyone wants to play by those rules. The issue is solved. What about gate camping and other close-range combat? Hybrid weapons with blaster ammo would be good at those ranges, but so are other other weapons like torpedoes, short-range lasers, and auto-cannons. It's nothing big. Hybrids would be balanced finally. Hybrids use capacitor and ammunition and to fit one requires attention to that. Neutralize the capacitor of a close-range blaster ship and he simply cannot fire.
Well you have certainly solved problem number 1.
But as far as I can tell, you put us squarely in problem number 2.
|
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 01:15:00 -
[517] - Quote
I'm always confused about why the Railguns don't have the highest alpha damage, while having lowest DPs. Thinkabout it...
A railgun works by expending electrical energy (cap) to boost a charge to incredible speeds.
It would make sense the weapon had to cool down for a bit due to friction (if at all present) / electrical circuit cooldown, making it a supposedly great alpha weapon but with little DPS.
Somethign that would...
I don't know, make Sniper-duty (for a ship) sensical and logical.
Instead we have artilery doing the highest alpha when this should be the highest DPS weapon, given that its just a big bullet inside a barrel, with no cap drainage, that supposedly is reloaded very quickly. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 01:40:00 -
[518] - Quote
Morgan North wrote:artilery
Quote: that supposedly is reloaded very quickly.
Dont use arty much do you. |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 02:20:00 -
[519] - Quote
Morgan North wrote:I'm always confused about why the Railguns don't have the highest alpha damage, while having lowest DPs. Thinkabout it...
A railgun works by expending electrical energy (cap) to boost a charge to incredible speeds.
It would make sense the weapon had to cool down for a bit due to friction (if at all present) / electrical circuit cooldown, making it a supposedly great alpha weapon but with little DPS.
Somethign that would...
I don't know, make Sniper-duty (for a ship) sensical and logical.
Instead we have artilery doing the highest alpha when this should be the highest DPS weapon, given that its just a big bullet inside a barrel, with no cap drainage, that supposedly is reloaded very quickly.
It's a game.
Monger Man wrote:Well you have certainly solved problem number 1.
But as far as I can tell, you put us squarely in problem number 2.
I didn't put us squarely in problem number two. Crowd control productions did. They designed rail guns to use capacitor, take ammunition, and fire at long ranges but have low tracking and lower damage per second. The issue as I hear it, is that fleets can warp on top of you, and this makes the range bonus negligible. While nano-fits traveling +2000m/s were viable once long ago they aren't any longer. You can't kite. You're a sitting duck. They can warp on top of you. Simply put hybrid aren't good at range and when they warp right near you it's often the case that you can't track them and when you do, you do inferior damage per second.
If there was blaster ammunition, (and conversely rail gun ammunition); which made a hybrid turret into either a blaster turret shooting at blaster ranges or a rail gun turret shooting at rail gun ranges you wouldn't have to be worried about engaging at long distance with hybrid weapons. Even though you don't do as much damage. |
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 03:00:00 -
[520] - Quote
Insane Randomness wrote:Jazz Styles wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102Some other things: - The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres. A few things about ammo: - Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters. - Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo. - Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20. Listen to this guy, he knows what he's talking about. Make it happen! What they said. Make it so. Maybe the Rohk will be usefull then. Reduction too cap needs was in the right direction. So was most of the changes, but they all just need to be MOAR. MOAR of it all.
the 20/80 50/50 and 80/20 damage solution is quite nice, allows to you somewhat swap some of your damage around atleast, not sure about boosting antimatter damage, but rails don't have any benefits at all over the other turrets(apart from a tiny range boost) give them another 5% or so damage buff and they'll atleast do decent/good dps.
|
|
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 03:05:00 -
[521] - Quote
Continuing from post above, about the antimatter damage boost thing, if rails could do abit more damage at close range(antimatter damage buff) they'd actually have some sort of benefit over the other turrets in some situations atleast.
Not sure how it'd balance out in the big picture, but it'd be pretty cool if rails got a unique trait (lasers insta swap, do silly good damage, no reload, good tracking) Arty got silly good Alpha, one solution would be for rails to do abit more damage at short/mid range, this would also make the Caldari optimal range bonus somewhat decent aswell I guess. |
Jazz Styles
Sileo In Pacis
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 03:17:00 -
[522] - Quote
Been thinking about this some more, and am reposting this from a separate topic:
The bottom line is that if Gallente ships are supposed to be faster than Caldari and Amarr ships (but not as fast as Minmatar) then their weapons should have better range than Minimatar ships. The idea that blasters must be super short range seems to be locked into your heads, and perhaps you should disabuse yourself of that notion and extend their range considerably - make them function in-between AC's and pulse lasers in terms of damage and range.
Don't mess with armour plates and agility/mass penalties when the problem lies with the weapons. The same goes for Gallente ships; they're basically fine, its the blasters themselves that are at issue. Increase their optimal a lot and their falloff a little, reduce tracking and damage a bit and see how the numbers add up. Blaster boats won't need to be as fast as Minmatar if they have better range, and I think that works better for Caldari ships too, if they want to use blasters for a change (blaster ferox is pretty decent) since they're usually slower than Gallente ships, but finally their hybrid range bonus will make up that difference.
Improving tech 2 like Null and Void is fine, but the tech 1 ammo and guns need to be useable as well; you can't decide to play Gallente ships and then have to wait until you've got tech 2 guns to use them properly. |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
80
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 04:27:00 -
[523] - Quote
What about drones? Specifically Ewar drones and combat utility drones? Buff the hell out of their ewar strength. Buff their speed and hit points. Add a light and medium webber drone. Add drones with warp disruptor points but not scramblers.
Revisit Gallente ships and make sure their drone bays are sufficient to take advantage of this. There's more then one way to skin a cat. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 05:03:00 -
[524] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote: 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.
|
Jazz Styles
Sileo In Pacis
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 05:25:00 -
[525] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Jazz Styles wrote: 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.
Agility and mass were added to enhance the game, removing them would be a step backwards; devolution as it were. This topic is about updating hybrids, and that's what should be happening given the current statistics on armour. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 05:35:00 -
[526] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:[quote=Jazz Styles] 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.
|
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 05:46:00 -
[527] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Nemesor wrote:[quote=Jazz Styles] 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. Why not just make some gallente ships shield tankers?
If Armor + Blasters doesn't work I would think trying Shield + Blasters should be tried before you fundamentally alter game mechanics. |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 06:00:00 -
[528] - Quote
Excuse typos its on an Ipad, and I had a drink or 3. So, just to try to summarize many of these ideas into a simple form that wont involve too much tinkering. These arent my ideas, just a summary of other folks. just tring to put them in a simple format. It will go: 1. Most Common Suggestion (Options for that same suggestion)
All of the below assume the current aggregation of changes listed in the devblog and this thread will go live (speed, tracking, damage, etc). I am also assuming that there will remain only two 'ship level' bonuses per ship (as opposed to a tweak to a base stat). I think it is agreed that ships should be preferred to change over mods, because everyon can use mods and that can introduce additional balance issues.
So, with that said, here is an attempt at summarizing most of the suggestions.
1. A. Gallente need to be fastest, B. OR fastest in a sprint, but not top speed (fastest accellaration) 2. A. MOAR DAMAGE or B. Make them more like lazors/projectiles 3. A. Give all gal boats a Damp bonus, or B. Unnerf Damp modules at least some, in general. 4. Armor tanking: A. Remove/reduce speed penalties for some armor mods, (rigs and plates mostly) B. Change various Plate stats to give meaningful choices, C. Change underused modules to be more useful to Gallente (e.g. Regenarative Platin and Reinforced Bulkheads) 5. Structure issues: Take advantage of the larger Gallente Structures by increasing them further or giving them a small (20%ish?) base resist. DCU would be more beneficial to Gallente and wouldnt make Amarr OP. This would give more structure buffer to allow for active tanking and/or RR to heal up armor, but would require a separate 'remote structure repair' component in fleets. 6. Overheat endurance bonus to base stat of Gallente Ships. There is already an existing base stat for this apparantly called 'heatCapacity' https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=32225&find=unread (This is a newish idea by someone, but i love it - it is a base stat change, but indirectly would help damage, speed, and tanking by allowing us to overload those mods for longer: even 20-30% would be beneficial. It would be a defining racial trait of 'blaze of glory' and endurance combat. And would not require changes to any 'ship level' bonuses already in place). 7. Various forms of tackle projection. A. Web amount or range bonus, B. scram range bonus C. extra 'utility' drone storage space on gal boats for WORKING and/or FASTER web or scram drones.
So, those are most of the variations of ideas. Discuss.
If it were me, and If i wanted to keep it simple, without wonking up the already well established ship level bonuses and mods taht everyone can use and perhaps causing other balance issues, I would start slowly. I would implement items #5 and # 6, and see how they go. They are simple, gallente specific changes that can be more easily evaluated and they dont mess with the already existing ship level bonuses. Those two base stat changes would also indirectly influence items #1B, 2A, 4A, 4C, and 7, without having to make lots of other changes. in other words, just doing #5 and 6 kills many birds with two stones, for the least amount of work.
I am certain people will disagree. Discuss. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 06:21:00 -
[529] - Quote
Instead of changing armor plates / rigs, would it be possible to give gallente ships a role bonus that negates the penalties? EG 100% reduction in mass modifier (or whatever) for armor plates, 100% reduction in armor rig penalty? I don't know that this alone would fix Gallente (I think the better solution is to make them the second fastest ships-- somewhere between minmatar and *other*, and make them the most agile) but it might be a start. |
Jazz Styles
Sileo In Pacis
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 06:31:00 -
[530] - Quote
Voith wrote:Nemesor wrote:Nemesor wrote:[quote=Jazz Styles] 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. Why not just make some gallente ships shield tankers? If Armor + Blasters doesn't work I would think trying Shield + Blasters should be tried before you fundamentally alter game mechanics. There's a certain symmetry at the moment with Amarr and Gallente being primarily armour, and Minmatar and Caldari being shield focused (obviously matari ships are much more flexible). I think CCP are reluctant to change this dynamic, but its probably worth talking about at least.
Here's the thing tho: If we're talking big fleet battles? In order to make blasters useful at point-blank range, the ships are going to have to be ridiculously fast, since all three other races can engage at range with ease, and even then it throws fleet formations completely out the window.
I just don't see why blasters have to be so short on range when it clearly isn't working. I suspect that nothing short of a substantial range increase on blasters is going to make Gallente attractive outside of empire space.
Here's an idea, just double the optimal range across the board for blasters, maybe add a 25% falloff increase, lower damage and tracking by 10%-15% and see how it goes. It's a test server; let's test it out. |
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 07:06:00 -
[531] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:What about drones? Specifically Ewar drones and combat utility drones? Buff the hell out of their ewar strength. Buff their speed and hit points. Add a light and medium webber drone. Add drones with warp disruptor points but not scramblers.
Revisit Gallente ships and make sure their drone bays are sufficient to take advantage of this. There's more then one way to skin a cat.
As much as I love this ideal and it should be implemented. That boost omost every ship in the game. There are very few ships in this game with out a drone bay and most of them make up for this in other ways too. |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
193
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 07:12:00 -
[532] - Quote
Many have said it already, but I'll echo it again, reduce the granularity in hybrid range ammo, more like projectiles (which they were modelled after if you believe the item text). If CCP has a developer in charge of Factional Warfare, please come forward and show yourself.
CCP admiting you don't have a plan for FW would be better then keeping up believing in the FW fairy. |
Delphineas Fumimasa
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 08:28:00 -
[533] - Quote
What if hybrids got a RF increase per shot? Lorewise, the rails retain more charge the more they are fired in a certain timeframe?
This could cap out at 50%, and lose half on reload? |
Delphineas Fumimasa
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 08:43:00 -
[534] - Quote
One last thought I had before bed is another passive. What about a skill/ ship bonus where hybrid cap usage is recycled into shield boosting? Or per shot, since cap usage would be counter productive for some skill. Obviously this would benefit caldari more, but maybe they get a speed boost out of it?
Caldari: Recycle energy per shot into shields. Like 1% or thereabout, maybe scale on turret size. Gallenete: Recycle hybrid shot energy into engines for a short seed boost. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 11:04:00 -
[535] - Quote
- Add a mod that gives , in t1 form from 5 to 10% increase on structure resist and in T2 form 12% increase in structure resists. Make it so that it only works with a DCU fitted. While anyone can fit one, it boosts Gallente more than anyone else.
- Improve remote hull repper performance so that it becomes comparable to armour reppers.
- Improve local hull reppers
- give the Brutix/astarte an optimal range bonus
- give the oneiros a remote hull repper bonus
|
Sir Fury
Valar Morghulis. Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 13:12:00 -
[536] - Quote
Emily Poast wrote: 1. A. Gallente need to be fastest, B. OR fastest in a sprint, but not top speed (fastest accellaration)
Your first point is not entirely accurate, rather incomplete hence open to misinterpretation. More like 3 options here: 1. A. Make Gallente hulls have the fastest Base speeds (resulting they are the fastest race with & without propulsion modules) 1. B. Make Gallente hulls have the best Agility (hence accelerate, turn, align fastest) 1. C. Give Gallente hulls a MWD/AB speed bonus so that as long as these modules are running, Gallente ships are faster than comparable Minmatar ships. If agility/mass are not touched, Gallente will accelerate slower than Minmatar, but be faster at top propulsion boosted speeds)
I personally favour 1. C here.
Regarding armour modules, since hardeners don't have speed penalties, maybe the speed penalty of Resistance rigs could be removed. Maybe replaced with agility, or shield amount penalties. This will benefit in 2 ways. For those willing to forgo pure buffer tanks, can opt for resistance tanks which also work better with the Gallente Armour Rep bonus. this bonus could also do with a bit of a boost.
& ofc, buff blaster damage further. |
carmelos53
OMG totally awesome corp of one Burning Spear.
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 13:14:00 -
[537] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest.
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
No complaints to those changes ccp.
Idealy I'd recommend changes to blaster boats themselves in this case for gallente and caldari but many people in this thread seem to want to buff the mods or drones which will only back fire with other race balancing issues.
My simple changes to the gallente SHIPS(I have 0 exp with caldari so I won't go there): Proteus & brutix need some more power grid love. Mrym needs to have a reason not to use projectiles a honestly I'm clueless as to how to make this happen.
Blaster boat specific ships need to stay armor tanked. Gallente was never meant to be shield tanked and frankly some of the shield fits gallente boats out there have to many advantages over their armor fight twins. Example: the vindi.
Maybe lower the shield hit point and increase either hull up or armor hp.
This brings me^ to my last point. Blasters need a role in larger fleet battles. To accomplish this they need survivability . Even if they have this changes are they still won't be so common in null sec sub cap battles. Still it doesn't hurt to try. ONE of the following needs to be done:
A) major speed or acceleration buff (only if you follow the ARMOR buff above with a shield nerd otherwise I can see this getting to overpowered). --->or<---- b) blasters would still need MORE damage. 5% doesn't justify the range issues surrounding the platform.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 13:21:00 -
[538] - Quote
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 :-) |
Dark Voynix
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 13:26:00 -
[539] - Quote
from all ideas to fix blasters i continue to like the one i suggested. Blaster ships simply lack the ability to keep close enough the target to make blaster effective. They just go in "deep falloff" to close to be a batch against projectiles, so the increased DPS is negleted too easilly. The idea i had to give hybrids the ability to effect enemy speed will simply make blaster ships that if they succed to come close they can really keep the opponent close and with low transversal making him able to use the DPS difference.
I understand that we must avoid that any ship to fit 1 blaster just to "web". For this reason make webbing effect mass sized and stack for any blaster weapon. So you need to have a full rack to make them realy effective and you need a proper size weapon to noy make just small guns effective on BS sized ships.
There are some difficulties to design and implement it pro pertly, but we will finally see a reson to use this weapons. they would not be just unusable or a close and we will have something unique. Even different ammo can have different effect giving a reason to use something else that antimaters ( t1 speaking). |
Jazz Styles
Sileo In Pacis
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 14:00:00 -
[540] - Quote
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, because their weapons have the shortest range, or b) Have the engagement range of blasters extended so they don't need that speed. |
|
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.jpgThere 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
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 |
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 09:20:00 -
[571] - Quote
Sigras wrote: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 . . .
Never Happen. Why.... Becuase that Alpha would be so freakin huge. It would take like 6 talos to suicide gank a freighter, arties alpha is tempered with poor DPS, which is why its not OP. But a blaster with 4-5x the dps of arties with an arty sized alpha would lead to too much high sec ganking. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 10:29:00 -
[572] - Quote
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.
A blaster ship will always loose one med slot becouse it needs AB or MWD. 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.
Think about it and the combinations you could use on different ships, it is a very simple idea but it will change a lot of fittings and ship setups. At the moment every pvp ship has a wscrambler and a web but that way you will need a disruptor, web and scrambler to fight a blaster boat. Or a MWD on your side but you will always have to spend an additional med slot, same as the blaster guy, he always needs one additional med slot for AB/MWD.
There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.
If you play Rock, Paper, Scissors you also don't have one 4th element that will win over 2 others.
Edit: oops sorry, I forgott may sentence:
LISTEN TO YOUR COMMUNITY AND FIX HYBRIDS PROPERLY. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 10:29:00 -
[573] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Sigras wrote: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 . . . Never Happen. Why.... Becuase that Alpha would be so freakin huge. It would take like 6 talos to suicide gank a freighter, arties alpha is tempered with poor DPS, which is why its not OP. But a blaster with 4-5x the dps of arties with an arty sized alpha would lead to too much high sec ganking. Interesting . . . I never thought of that . . . ummm . . . what else could it be?
I still have to think the way to set them apart is by their ammo, so maybe trade . . . cap usage for . . . range? tracking? trade tracking or signature radius for extra damage?
what do you think? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 10:36:00 -
[574] - Quote
Hamox wrote: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.
A blaster ship will always loose one med slot becouse it needs AB or MWD. 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.
Think about it and the combinations you could use on different ships, it is a very simple idea but it will change a lot of fittings and ship setups. At the moment every pvp ship has a wscrambler and a web but that way you will need a disruptor, web and scrambler to fight a blaster boat. Or a MWD on your side but you will always have to spend an additional med slot, same as the blaster guy, he always needs one additional med slot for AB/MWD.
There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.
If you play Rock, Paper, Scissors you also don't have one 4th element that will win over 2 others. this changes nothing, hurricanes, cynabals, drakes et all only ever use warp disruptors anyway and they kite at 20 km, and everyone . . . seriously everyone uses a MWD. so the hurricane will still fly at 1500 m/s and the thorax will still be slower at 1200 m/s and never catch up to do any damage. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 11:04:00 -
[575] - Quote
Hamox wrote: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.
Scrams are pretty much one of a blaster ships prime weapons, being in close and needing to slow down an enemy to keep them in read. This is a relatively bad idea in my opinion.
Hamox wrote: 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.
Have you flown a megathron or Hyp? You need a web at point blank.
Hamox wrote: There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.
It was buffed because no one used it when it didn't shut down an mwd.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 11:06:00 -
[576] - Quote
I have to say, I am a bit disappointed in the lack of feedback from Tallest regarding our feedback. A "Hey... working on the changes... thanks for the input... " would have been nice. Just to know we are being heard. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
98
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 12:11:00 -
[577] - 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.
Tracking doesn't work like that. Decreasing a turret's signature resolution by 10% has eactly the same effect as increasing its tracking speed by 10%. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
288
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 12:52:00 -
[578] - Quote
The game's pretty boring for me right now, because we always have to fly the same ships (Amarr and Minmatar) If you guys fix this I might get back into it. |
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 14:46:00 -
[579] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote: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. Tracking doesn't work like that. Decreasing a turret's signature resolution by 10% has eactly the same effect as increasing its tracking speed by 10%.
Decreasing it by 50% = increasing tracking by 100%. drecreasing it by 90% = increasing tracking by 1000% Decreasing by sig by 10% = increasing tracking by 11.111(Repeating) % |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
283
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 15:59:00 -
[580] - Quote
AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
That is the last sound we would like to hear from by our targets as they experiance the full force that will be the new Hybrids...
At the moment, with the changes on SISI it sounds like this...
What's that scratching soun.... oh.
Clearly, this is the most objective way to game balance. Take note CCP Tallest. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 16:12:00 -
[581] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
Still not seeing this change on SiSi - any idea when it'll be there? |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 16:32:00 -
[582] - Quote
Nikuno wrote: Still not seeing this change on SiSi - any idea when it'll be there?
I hope it is okay if I qoute myself
Hamox wrote: Patience, give them two or three more years, they just started to work on it.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 16:42:00 -
[583] - Quote
Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers. |
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 20:38:00 -
[584] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote:Voith wrote:Nemesor wrote:Nemesor wrote:[quote=Jazz Styles] 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. Why not just make some gallente ships shield tankers? If Armor + Blasters doesn't work I would think trying Shield + Blasters should be tried before you fundamentally alter game mechanics. There's a certain symmetry at the moment with Amarr and Gallente being primarily armour, and Minmatar and Caldari being shield focused (obviously matari ships are much more flexible). I think CCP are reluctant to change this dynamic, but its probably worth talking about at least. Here's the thing tho: If we're talking big fleet battles? In order to make blasters useful at point-blank range, the ships are going to have to be ridiculously fast, since all three other races can engage at range with ease, and even then it throws fleet formations completely out the window. I just don't see why blasters have to be so short on range when it clearly isn't working. I suspect that nothing short of a substantial range increase on blasters is going to make Gallente attractive outside of empire space. Here's an idea, just double the optimal range across the board for blasters, maybe add a 25% falloff increase, lower damage and tracking by 10%-15% and see how it goes. It's a test server; let's test it out. Some Amarr ships shield tank, hell some of them use Drones and some use HAMs.
Plenty of Minmatar ships can armor tank.
I agree that the symmetry (Active vs Passive; Shield vs Armor; etc)between the empires is good on paper, but I would prefer ship designs that succeed in Eve "as-is" vs "As was theorycrafted 8 years ago".
A few blasterboat with shield equivalent of Augoror HP bonus would could make gallente able to fill a role with out trying to regression test the balance changes to armor plates.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
191
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 21:04:00 -
[585] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers.
this is why I was saying remove mass increase from metal plates altogether, replace it with a senor strength hit. |
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 21:18:00 -
[586] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:Nemesor wrote:Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers. this is why I was saying remove mass increase from metal plates altogether, replace it with a senor strength hit. Problem: Armor HACs. |
Moana Pozzi
Partito dell' Amore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 00:06:00 -
[587] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers.
100% agree. Give gallente some "sprinting" to jump on the victim for showing what short-range power mean. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 00:54:00 -
[588] - Quote
Moana Pozzi wrote:Nemesor wrote:Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers. 100% agree. Give gallente some "sprinting" to jump on the victim for showing what short-range power mean.
I proposed a way to implement this idea some pages back, I'll repeat it here since everybody seems to agree blasters don't work because you lack "sprinting" ability, as opposed to just increasing Gallente base speed (which would clash with Minmatar proposal).
Give Gallente blaster boats both a MWD bonus (like 15% more speed) and a penalty (30% increased capacitor usage). This way the MWD can be activated for a short period of time to rush to your target, without making Gallente OP since they won't be able to kite forever.
For the other boats that lean more towards drones, I would give either a good hybrid falloff bonus (like 15-20%) or drone damage bonus in exchange of less useful bonuses we currently see.
This way Gallente would have:
- Close-range boats that can dash towards an enemy and output damage at it's optimal without dying in the way - More careful, carrier-like boats that can use their already huge armors and structure hit points without resorting to moving fast, where the blasters work more to deny close-range from enemies. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 01:47:00 -
[589] - Quote
interesting |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 02:32:00 -
[590] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:Moana Pozzi wrote:Nemesor wrote:Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers. 100% agree. Give gallente some "sprinting" to jump on the victim for showing what short-range power mean. I proposed a way to implement this idea some pages back, I'll repeat it here since everybody seems to agree blasters don't work because you lack "sprinting" ability, as opposed to just increasing Gallente base speed (which would clash with Minmatar proposal). Give Gallente blaster boats both a MWD bonus (like 15% more speed) and a penalty (30% increased capacitor usage). This way the MWD can be activated for a short period of time to rush to your target, without making Gallente OP since they won't be able to kite forever. For the other boats that lean more towards drones, I would give either a good hybrid falloff bonus (like 15-20%) or drone damage bonus in exchange of less useful bonuses we currently see. This way Gallente would have: - Close-range boats that can dash towards an enemy and output damage at it's optimal without dying in the way - More careful, carrier-like boats that can use their already huge armors and structure hit points without resorting to moving fast, where the blasters work more to deny close-range from enemies.
It's just too complicated.
Dial back minnie speed a little Buff blaster boat speed Nerf blaster boat agility BISH BASH BOSH
|
|
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 03:00:00 -
[591] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Imrik86 wrote:Moana Pozzi wrote:Nemesor wrote:Gameplay now as a blaster boat pilot is like being the fish and the Minmatar the fisherman. The Fish decides to commit. The fisherman can decide to keep it or let it go.
Make our ships faster. Make our guns hit like hammers. 100% agree. Give gallente some "sprinting" to jump on the victim for showing what short-range power mean. I proposed a way to implement this idea some pages back, I'll repeat it here since everybody seems to agree blasters don't work because you lack "sprinting" ability, as opposed to just increasing Gallente base speed (which would clash with Minmatar proposal). Give Gallente blaster boats both a MWD bonus (like 15% more speed) and a penalty (30% increased capacitor usage). This way the MWD can be activated for a short period of time to rush to your target, without making Gallente OP since they won't be able to kite forever. For the other boats that lean more towards drones, I would give either a good hybrid falloff bonus (like 15-20%) or drone damage bonus in exchange of less useful bonuses we currently see. This way Gallente would have: - Close-range boats that can dash towards an enemy and output damage at it's optimal without dying in the way - More careful, carrier-like boats that can use their already huge armors and structure hit points without resorting to moving fast, where the blasters work more to deny close-range from enemies. It's just too complicated. Dial back minnie speed a little Buff blaster boat speed Nerf blaster boat agility BISH BASH BOSH
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 actually 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. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 04:03:00 -
[592] - Quote
what if they put in medium and small web drones into the game at 10% and 5% speed reduction respectively and just gave all blaster ships a slight buff to drone bay
and while you're at it, get rid of large web drones . . . really, theyre just taking up database space cause theyre not able to catch up to anything fast enough that you'd want to web anyway |
To mare
Advanced Technology
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 04:22:00 -
[593] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote: 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.
do you know you can overload your mwd?
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 04:49:00 -
[594] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:
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.
First, some gallente ships already fit ACs because they are OP. Ishtars and Myrms.
Secondly, any solution that gives another bonus to a ship is not the solution. No one is going to add on another MWD bonus onto blaster boats.
Ok... we get a cap usage penalty for closing range. Thats cool. Minmatar in exchange should have cap usage on their guns and have a cap usage penalty for shooting in falloff, ya know... so they can't kite all day and won't be OP.
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 06:56:00 -
[595] - Quote
It seems like everyone agrees that blaster-equipped ships need some sort of significant tactical advantage over AC-equipped ships, but damage, range and speed buffs all have serious pros and cons - some which make blasters too much llike ACs and others which make Gallente ships too much like Minmatar ships. So, here's another suggestion for the fire:
How about making projectile ammo take up more space? Say, 400% larger. And reduce cargo space on Minmatar ships by about 50%?
Minmatar ships would be logically faster, due to smaller cargo holds (ie. less mass), and have good weapons to match their speed, but cannot carry nearly as much ammo as a blaster boat.
This would put a stricter limit on how long an AC ship can kite in a battle, before running out of ammo. And, it would put a tighter limit on the ability of Minnie pilots to simultaneously carry all damage types, which makes it more likely that a Minnie pilot could be caught without the optimal ammo for every encounter and range, or even run out of ammo completely. Ammo vs. cap charges would also become more of an issue - which is fair since Minmatar ships are a lot less cap hungry.
Now, this change still allows the solo Minmatar AC ship to keep a reasonable advantage in most one-on-one encounters with blaster boats, and leaves the Minmatar arty alpha strike capability intact, too, but gives the Minmatar projectile ships a larger disadvantage in extended or multi-ship combat, due to the greater possiblility of running out of ammo faster than the other racial ships or weapon types. It makes overall logistics more fun, too, since a Minmatar fleet/gang would need to bring along more ammo haulers, which would make for vulnerable targets of opportunity.
BTW - I got the basic idea for this suggestion from watching Clear Skies 3 (again).... :)
An alternative ammo-related suggestion (but requiring more coding work) would be to add mass to the ammo, with projectile ammo as the heaviest type. So, more ammo means a slower, less manueverable ship. As you use up ammo, your ship would be lighter - ie. faster and more manueverable.
An empty Minmatar AC ship would be faster than an empty Gallente blaster boat, but a fully loaded Minmatar AC ship would be slower than a fully loaded Gallente blaster boat, since projectile ammo would have greater mass than hybrid ammo. Somewhere in between, the ships would have the same speed. As a nice side effect, laser ships would have an added advantage of no speed/agility penalty, since they don't need to carry tons of ammo.
This change would force pilots to consider how much ammo to load, too, since it would compromise the speed/agility characteristics of the ship. It also makes ejecting your ammo into a viable combat tactic, if you need to kick up your speed/agility to catch someone, or to GTFO.
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 10:35:00 -
[596] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:
It's just too complicated.
Dial back minnie speed a little Buff blaster boat speed Nerf blaster boat agility BISH BASH BOSH
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.
If you don't have agility but you do have high speed you can't really kite as you can't keep the speed in a turn or an orbit. Blaster boats aren't supposed to signature tank at close range they are simply supposed to utterly out damage anything else at close range. Remember, blaster boats tend to have a very fat arse (sig radius). Like I've said before. Agility is more important than speed when kiting. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 10:44:00 -
[597] - Quote
To mare wrote:Imrik86 wrote: 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.
do you know you can overload your mwd? What if you got a bonus to MWD overloading on blaster ships? IE 15% bonus to overload effect of MWDs per level, that way blaster boats would be able to close that distance, but would be completely unable to rely on that effect long term, you could even make it 15% bonus to overload effect and heat production of MWDs per level, so they'd overheat faster but overload better.
Thoughts? |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 12:33:00 -
[598] - Quote
I just want to quote the 2 best replies on the other thread becouse they hit the nail right on the head
Celebris Nexterra wrote:Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.
You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!
And you tell me this is fair?
thoth rothschild wrote:Let's get back to Aretha Franklin with her shotgun and Usain Bolt and his M16
What can Aretha do to survive this fight ?
- Hide in fog (if not toxic) - Get another Weapon (a walther ppk is not an option!) - Get Inside a jeep with a mashine gun - lay out traps for Mr Bolt (remind that this is not allowed inside a shopping mall!)
Giving Aretha the ability to spin faster and removing the need to reload her shotgun won't help ^^
P.S.: Watching Bolt orbiting a spinning Aretha looks pretty silly! |
Tertius Caedes
V0LTA VOLTA Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 13:25:00 -
[599] - Quote
If you fight with a blasterboat you need to be in scram range. This is a big Problem, especially when you get baited. What about to make Gallente Ships imun against scrams ? Then they have a good role in my view.
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 13:49:00 -
[600] - Quote
Since we do not know if anybody from the devs is reading this thread how about that: We all rename our Gallente Boats to Aretha Franklin as a Protest? Maybe one day they will ask why there are so many boats with this name? |
|
Cyvhiros
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 13:53:00 -
[601] - Quote
"give my ship a sprint module which only I'll be able o use (as a gallente) and that I'm gona use to close in on my targets to use my blasters"
So the solution on blasters will be making the whole kiting strategy useless? Sry that doesnt sound like a solution for the blaster problem to me, but rather like a "give me a buff with which ill be able to nullify my enemys advantages and play a scenario where I have the advantage".
"make my blasters have longer range and more falloff"
Sounds for me like "make my blasters be AC's", doesnt solve the blaster problem either, just makes them AC's.
Blasters have actually the highest DPS and tracking by far, in exchange for the shortest range, thats what they are all about. If u dont like the short range, you shouldnt have chosen gallente as your main faction.
Now to the blaster problem:
I like the Idea of implementing new webdrones as some1 said before (mid and small size), thats just what blaster ships need. Gallente ships have huge drone bays, that would give them some additional space to fit in those drones, while other factions wouldnt be able to do so, or at least wouldnt have it that easy. In addition, that goes in communion with "moddern gallentean warfare phylosophy" which relies on blasters and drones to beat their foes, rather than on extreme speed or long ranges. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 14:03:00 -
[602] - Quote
Cyvhiros wrote:If u dont like the short range, you shouldnt have chosen gallente as your main faction.
When I started to play EVE I was told by ingame people and game masters who helped new players that all faction have their strenght and weak points and that all factions are equal. Now I know better and I know that some game masters talk bullshit to new players.
Fine, I shouldn't have chosen Gallente, I'm good with that, just reimburse my SP for Hybrids and Gallente ships and I'm fine with that!
Try to play PVE with Gallente, try to do missions and compare it with Caldari, go do some PVP and compare it with Minmatar. I do not want Gallente to be the best, its fine when Caldari has better PVE ships and Minmatar better PVP and Amarr better buffer tanked ships. But I ask myself why a Tengu needs 30 minutes for a mission and a proteus more than an hour (I fly both and I have compared it several times)? Why is the Tengu able to do great damage on PVE at more than 100km where a Proteus has 5 km with blasters and the other known problems with rails??? Why Minmatar has strategies where you just can not win with a blaster boat becouse you will never come into range? And why CCP needs years to see this problems and propably will need more years to fix it? And why game masters don't tell new players "Hey, Gallente have crap weapons so only choose them if you really like the philolophy..."
Just reimburse my SP and I'm fine! |
Cyvhiros
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 14:31:00 -
[603] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Cyvhiros wrote:If u dont like the short range, you shouldnt have chosen gallente as your main faction. When I started to play EVE I was told by ingame people and game masters who helped new players that all faction have their strenght and weak points and that all factions are equal.
All factions are actually "similar" (not equal but similar), or should I ask for a SP reinbursement for playing caldari and being useless in PVP with 9 of 10 of my ships? All factions have their handicaps and strengths. Gallente have biggest drone bay space, strongest weapons, wepons with the highest tracking, they can also use the weapons with the longest range (RG) they are the second fastest ships... those are plenty of bonuses. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 15:19:00 -
[604] - Quote
Cyvhiros wrote: All factions are actually "similar" (not equal but similar), or should I ask for a SP reinbursement for playing caldari and being useless in PVP with 9 of 10 of my ships? All factions have their handicaps and strengths. Gallente have biggest drone bay space, strongest weapons, wepons with the highest tracking, they can also use the weapons with the longest range (RG) they are the second fastest ships... those are plenty of bonuses.
Blasters have huge damage but you loose all the time with flying to your targets. In dead space where you can not use your MWD and you have on the first wave 2 groups that are 80 km from each other what benetit do you have from your damage? Even if you try to clear one group you will spend most of the time with flying after your targets. You loose minutes to fly to the targets just to make 10% more damage?
Ok, you might say, hey use the weapons with the great range? OK, lets equip rails and loose hours trying to hit a frigate that is orbiting me?
Still my main argument is the Tengu, I kill targets on 100km distance without problems and I kill targets at close dinstance without any problems. On long distance im still faster than rails and on close I'm still faster than blasters. Why? Becouse targets never stay in optimal range of my blasters, and after I have killed the first target with blasters my second target is 20 km away from me. So again I need to fly to the target... ... in the meantime the Tengu has killed 2 targets until I reach it.
And btw, you are right about Caldari and being unable to PVP properly and you should complain about it. Every faction should be able to PVE and PVP properly with some strenght and weaknesses but the reality looks a lot different. We are both paying clients and we deserve more than just a dev starting a thread and never again giving an answer... We waste our time here in this thread and we even do not know if somebody of them is reading it. The only thing we see is some useless changes on Sisi and everybody askes himself if the dev has ever played the game with Gallente and Hybrids or if he is just pulling out some numbers out of a excel sheet of EFT.
So whats the point of all this? Nothing. Well, even worse than nothing. A CEO who talkes about that they will listen more to the community and a dev that doesn't answer in his thread will only leave pissed players behind who will leave EVE if THEY do not improve situation.
As I mentioned before, we are all paying clients and if EVE seems very cheap to you just check out how much you pay per year. |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 15:42:00 -
[605] - Quote
I like the idea of fixing blaster ships with web drones, but then please be sure that all gallente blaster boats have spare droneBAY for said web drones, besides the drones they already can use. For example, 75m^3 space on thorax and deimos at least, assuming that there are going to be light web drones.
It would also mean that there is a point in using dones on ships which have very small drone bays, like the enyo. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 17:32:00 -
[606] - Quote
If CCP give us small and medium web drones I will use them to dictate range more while using lasers and ACs. I like the idea of more web drones but it just gives other ships more tools to kite blasters. |
Cyvhiros
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 17:58:00 -
[607] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:If CCP give us small and medium web drones I will use them to dictate range more while using lasers and ACs. I like the idea of more web drones but it just gives other ships more tools to kite blasters.
Not really, as the drone bays of most minnie and amarr ships are way smaller, compared to the ones of gallentean ships
eka:
rupture 30m^3 vs throax 50m^3
Tempest 75m^3 vs megathron125m^3
Cyclone40m^3 vs brutix 50m^3
etc...
Considdering that they could just give gallentean ships a small boost to drone bay (maybe 10-20/25m^3 more so they have additional space for dps/web combinations), they would be able to put on the map a higher number of bigger drones. (for example a hurricane could only use 3 medweb, while a brutix would put out 5, thats kinda 40% movement reduction, versus the hurricane only 27% speed reduction, which is 13% more. so it'll be like a 13% movement increase for the gallente ship.
Same for amarr, just in some cases even more notable (abbadon 75m^3, omen 15m^3, maller 0m^3,...)
Plus the fact that if you equip stasis drones ur dps goes down, giving the persecuting gallente ship more time to catch up.
Hamox:
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. As EvE players, its also our duty to try to find a reasonable solution, which wont alter the game ballance. There4 I agreed with the drone idea, because it would bring in more versatility to the game, while gallentean ships are generally bennefitted of drone improvements. This thread, is full of good ideas, but also of a lot of cry and nosense, such as a 25% range and dps bonus for blasters, or stuff like that. Of course CCP is not paying attention to this, lets be reasonable and propose productive stuff and those things will also get the attention they deserve. |
Roger Soros
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 17:59:00 -
[608] - Quote
Rail 1) Hyperion and Mega still cannot fit a full rack of 425-II and a decent armor tank they need more powergrid and cpu given tha fact that you need a cap booster+mwd on every decent rail fit for fleets 2) 425 damage still to low compared to projectile turrets of the same caliber + capacitor usage and tracking make them whorse on every aspect 3) T2 ammo still remain useless compared to factions 4) ammo type granularity still overkill, lessen them pls
|
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 18:11:00 -
[609] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Cyvhiros wrote:If u dont like the short range, you shouldnt have chosen gallente as your main faction. But I ask myself why a Tengu needs 30 minutes for a mission and a proteus more than an hour (I fly both and I have compared it several times)? Why is the Tengu able to do great damage on PVE at more than 100km where a Proteus has 5 km with blasters and the other known problems with rails??? Just reimburse my SP and I'm fine!
WTF are you doing in a Proteus for PvE? Domi for missions, Ishtar for exploration, problem solved.
Web drones: we need mediums, not smalls, and they need to have a decent bit of hp (on par with medium combat drones). Also, I think a lot of non-Gallente ships need to have their drone bandwidth reduced considerably, and some Gallente ships should get a bit more drone bay. Gallente is supposed to be THE dominant drone race after all, and those changes would help make up for hybrids' suckiness. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 18:18:00 -
[610] - Quote
Cyvhiros wrote: Hamox:
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. As EvE players, its also our duty to try to find a reasonable solution, which wont alter the game ballance. There4 I agreed with the drone idea, because it would bring in more versatility to the game, while gallentean ships are generally bennefitted of drone improvements. This thread, is full of good ideas, but also of a lot of cry and nosense, such as a 25% range and dps bonus for blasters, or stuff like that. Of course CCP is not paying attention to this, lets be reasonable and propose productive stuff and those things will also get the attention they deserve.
I don't want Gallente to be OP and I never asked for more range, dps and so on. I'm just disappointed becouse when this thread started I had the dream that they are going to address the problems seriously. Now I woke up and I'm afraid that thise little changes on Sisi will stay there for a few more months before they do little more few changes.
Roger Soros wrote:Rail 1) Hyperion and Mega still cannot fit a full rack of 425-II and a decent armor tank they need more powergrid and cpu given tha fact that you need a cap booster+mwd on every decent rail fit for fleets 2) 425 damage still to low compared to projectile turrets of the same caliber + capacitor usage and tracking make them whorse on every aspect 3) T2 ammo still remain useless compared to factions 4) ammo type granularity still overkill, lessen them pls
I would go the other way, I would increase the damage a lot but also the power grid usage a little bit. That way you would equip 350mm with a decent tank and still good damage or 425mm for great damage when you have logistics in background that keep you alive becouse you dont have PG left for a great tank. If you just give the ship more power grid then why should I use smaller weapons like the 350mm? Pilots should have the choice, otherwise everything will end up with a FOTM. |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 18:36:00 -
[611] - Quote
[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.
Anyone can use drones. Fixing a ship is not done by fixing drones.
Blasters don't need a range bonus. Just damage and speed.
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 18:37:00 -
[612] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:Hamox wrote:Cyvhiros wrote:If u dont like the short range, you shouldnt have chosen gallente as your main faction. But I ask myself why a Tengu needs 30 minutes for a mission and a proteus more than an hour (I fly both and I have compared it several times)? Why is the Tengu able to do great damage on PVE at more than 100km where a Proteus has 5 km with blasters and the other known problems with rails??? Just reimburse my SP and I'm fine! WTF are you doing in a Proteus for PvE? Domi for missions, Ishtar for exploration, problem solved. Web drones: we need mediums, not smalls, and they need to have a decent bit of hp (on par with medium combat drones). Also, I think a lot of non-Gallente ships need to have their drone bandwidth reduced considerably, and some Gallente ships should get a bit more drone bay. Gallente is supposed to be THE dominant drone race after all, and those changes would help make up for hybrids' suckiness.
Nothing worng with using the Proteus for missions, but it should not take an hour to do a mission that a tengu can do in half, what mission? how is it fit? Maybe Worlds Collide might take 50minutes an hour tops and thats to backtrack and kill everything |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 18:40:00 -
[613] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:[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.
Anyone can use drones. Fixing a ship is not done by fixing drones.
Blasters don't need a range bonus. Just damage and speed. |
Cyvhiros
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 18:51:00 -
[614] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:
Anyone can use drones. Fixing a ship is not done by fixing drones.
Blasters don't need a range bonus. Just damage and speed.
The point is we are not fixing ships, this is not a thread about it, nor are we speaking about this, we are trying to fix a "phylosophy", meaning the way gallente fight, because there is where something is wrong.
Besides every1 can use drones but not everyone can use drones as good as gallente can, they are suposed to be a vital piece in gallentean warfare, WHY NOT MAKE THAT TRUE!!.
Besides I agree in that gallente need a push up in their drone bays, and others a small nerf, especially minmatars should get a few less drones, having the drone space on tempest, hurricane, mael nerfed a bit. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 19:19:00 -
[615] - Quote
I support new webifier drones and increased drone bays for Gallente ships. However it is not without issues.
As stated previously all ships can use these and although Gallente would be able to carry more and switch between combat drones and these it may be that some of the stats would need to be looked at.
Perhaps increasing the volume of the dones but keeping the bandwidth would allow other races to carry only a few. For example a Rupy can throw out three medium drones and a Thorax five however the difference between the speed losses is only 3.9% as three is the optimal number due to stacking penalties. If a medium webifier drone was 15m3 and the Thorax drone bay was 75m3 than perhaps that would change.
Light Drone 5% x1 5% x2 9.3% x3 12.2% x4 13.6% x5 14.1%
Medium Drone 10 % x1 10% x2 18.7% x3 24.4% x4 27.2% x5 28.3%
Heavy Drone 20% x1 20% x2 37.4% x3 48.8% x4 54.5% x5 56.6%
Regardless Blaster DPS might need improving as the Gallente ships need combat drones for a third damage type and to bring them on par with Minmatar.
Or perhaps if there was no stacking penalty but they did not stack with normal webs and there was a limit to the reduction then the difference between the 3 and 5 drone max would be larger.
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 20:04:00 -
[616] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:Hamox wrote:Cyvhiros wrote:If u dont like the short range, you shouldnt have chosen gallente as your main faction. But I ask myself why a Tengu needs 30 minutes for a mission and a proteus more than an hour (I fly both and I have compared it several times)? Why is the Tengu able to do great damage on PVE at more than 100km where a Proteus has 5 km with blasters and the other known problems with rails??? Just reimburse my SP and I'm fine! WTF are you doing in a Proteus for PvE? Domi for missions, Ishtar for exploration, problem solved.
It is just an example... Compare T3 vs T3, and HAC vs HAC and so on.
A T3 costs me more than 800 M ISK, what wrong about comparing a Proteus with a Tengu for PVE? The main difference in their usability is the weapon system they use. Why should a Proteus with Hybrids not be able to do PVE properly? Why has it always to be the Ishtar? Btw, you wrote already the problem: Domi missions and Ishtar exploration, both Drone Boats. We are only talking about PVP, but PVP is not all in this game, is it? This thread is about hybrids and comparing Hybrids vs other weapon systems in a T3 cruiser is what I have done. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 20:19:00 -
[617] - Quote
Sigras wrote:To mare wrote:Imrik86 wrote: 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.
do you know you can overload your mwd? What if you got a bonus to MWD overloading on blaster ships? IE 15% bonus to overload effect of MWDs per level, that way blaster boats would be able to close that distance, but would be completely unable to rely on that effect long term, you could even make it 15% bonus to overload effect and heat production of MWDs per level, so they'd overheat faster but overload better. Thoughts?
That's a good idea too. It keeps people from abusing the increased speed by fitting ACs and kitting forever.
What people doesn't seem to get is that you can't mess with base speed and agility, since that doesn't make blasters useful. It has to be something that gives extreme advantage to quickly get into blaster range, so Gallente boats can survive the dash before the first shot, but can out damage everyone once they get into their optimal range (which blasters will do most of times, specially with the current 5% damage increase).
One big issue that was already mentioned is that you can't rely on MWD since it's so easy to just scram. This is a problem introduced during the speed nerf, which then rendered MWD useless for most ships, and in special for all Gallente blaster boats.
This should be revisited, it shouldn't be so easy to shut a MWD off, or maybe sensor dampeners can make a comeback so Gallente can avoid getting scrammed from too far away (getting scrammed after they are already on blaster range is a non-issue, since they can just web the opponent and level the fight). |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 20:45:00 -
[618] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:I support new webifier drones and increased drone bays for Gallente ships. However it is not without issues.
As stated previously all ships can use these and although Gallente would be able to carry more and switch between combat drones and these it may be that some of the stats would need to be looked at.
Perhaps increasing the volume of the dones but keeping the bandwidth would allow other races to carry only a few. For example a Rupy can throw out three medium drones and a Thorax five however the difference between the speed losses is only 3.9% as three is the optimal number due to stacking penalties. If a medium webifier drone was 15m3 and the Thorax drone bay was 75m3 than perhaps that would change.
Light Drone 5% x1 5% x2 9.3% x3 12.2% x4 13.6% x5 14.1%
Medium Drone 10 % x1 10% x2 18.7% x3 24.4% x4 27.2% x5 28.3%
Heavy Drone 20% x1 20% x2 37.4% x3 48.8% x4 54.5% x5 56.6%
Regardless Blaster DPS might need improving as the Gallente ships need combat drones for a third damage type and to bring them on par with Minmatar.
Or perhaps if there was no stacking penalty but they did not stack with normal webs and there was a limit to the reduction then the difference between the 3 and 5 drone max would be larger.
Your stats are a bit wrong, thats not exactly how the effects are applied because each effect is applied to the ship on the already pro-rated stat. for example, the heavy web drone with the stacking nerf penalty: 20.00% 17.38% 11.41% 5.66% 2.12% but if you put this on a ship that goes say 100 m/s the first one applies a 20% web and slows it down to 80 m/s, the second one applies a 17.38% web to the 80 m/s and slows it down to 66.09 m/s the third one applies an 11.41% web to the 66.09 m/s and slows it down to 58.55 m/s The fourth one applies a 5.66% web to the 58.55 m/s and slows it down to 55.24 m/s the fifth one applies a 2.12% web to the 55.24 m/s and slows it down to 54.07 m/s
The total effect applied is only 45.93%
I say all that to say this, I believe that large web drones should be buffed to 30% each (which is really only equivalent to a 62% web because of the stacking penalty) but really they could just be taken out as any ship slow enough to be caught by these drones doesnt really need to be webbed.
Medium drones would be 20% which ends up being a 46% web after stack nerf, and small drones would be 10% which ends up being a 25.5% web after stack nerf.
If they added an extra 25 or 50 drone bay to all of the blaster boats, this would allow them to deploy a flight of these drones allowing it to get in range and then pull them in and put out damage drones.
This seems like a very gallente answer to a very gallente problem |
Cyvhiros
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 20:52:00 -
[619] - Quote
Sigras wrote:
I say all that to say this, I believe that large web drones should be buffed to 30% each (which is really only equivalent to a 62% web because of the stacking penalty) but really they could just be taken out as any ship slow enough to be caught by these drones doesnt really need to be webbed.
Medium drones would be 20% which ends up being a 46% web after stack nerf, and small drones would be 10% which ends up being a 25.5% web after stack nerf.
If they added an extra 25 or 50 drone bay to all of the blaster boats, this would allow them to deploy a flight of these drones allowing it to get in range and then pull them in and put out damage drones.
This seems like a very gallente answer to a very gallente problem
Agree with most of that, med drones should be improved to 15-20% web while heavy ones to ~30%, that'll give you a neat 30-40% reduction bonus on med drones wich is quite a punch, and could leave small ones with something like 7,5% wich would be pretty nice webb considdering the small space they take.
Als agree with the increase in the gallente drone bay, but I think I'll rather prefer a small increase and a small decrease on the other factions, than a big increase on gallente and no reduction in the other factions. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 21:37:00 -
[620] - Quote
Ah. Thought my values looked better than I expected.
Perhaps T2 versions with your stats would be a good option.
All the e-war drones could do with looking at, perhaps two sets of T2 sensor damp drones one bonused for scan res and the other for range damping with extended control range could help rail ships.
|
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 22:10:00 -
[621] - Quote
Cyvhiros wrote:Nemesor wrote:
Anyone can use drones. Fixing a ship is not done by fixing drones.
Blasters don't need a range bonus. Just damage and speed.
The point is we are not fixing ships, this is not a thread about it, nor are we speaking about this, we are trying to fix a "phylosophy", meaning the way gallente fight, because there is where something is wrong. Besides every1 can use drones but not everyone can use drones as good as gallente can, they are suposed to be a vital piece in gallentean warfare, WHY NOT MAKE THAT TRUE!!. Besides I agree in that gallente need a push up in their drone bays, and others a small nerf, especially minmatars should get a few less drones, having the drone space on tempest, hurricane, mael nerfed a bit.
upgrade drone AI from "amoeba" to "insect" first. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 22:20:00 -
[622] - Quote
Cyvhiros wrote:[quote=Sigras]
Als agree with the increase in the gallente drone bay, but I think I'll rather prefer a small increase and a small decrease on the other factions, than a big increase on gallente and no reduction in the other factions.
This would be the optimal way to go, but they are not going to do this, since it requires a lot of work. I think ALL gallente ships should have bigger dronebays than their counterparts from other races, except stuff like heavy dictors, where none of thoose have any drone bay.
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 22:20:00 -
[623] - Quote
Lets think "out of the box" once more: Why not have drones that increase the speed of my ship or give me energy? Of course this drones would have high bandwidth so mostly Gallente with high bandwidth will benefit from it? Just a thought. |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 22:24:00 -
[624] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Lets think "out of the box" once more: Why not have drones that increase the speed of my ship or give me energy? Of course this drones would have high bandwidth so mostly Gallente with high bandwidth will benefit from it? Just a thought.
You would need to target yourself to use them, which would mean you could use other drones on yourself too. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 22:30:00 -
[625] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Lets think "out of the box" once more: Why not have drones that increase the speed of my ship or give me energy? Of course this drones would have high bandwidth so mostly Gallente with high bandwidth will benefit from it? Just a thought.
WTF people. Stop thinking CCP will code up something magical and introduce in the game.
Propose something by just tweaking the current game mechanics and you might get something. Propose a pony and you won't get any this christmas. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 23:44:00 -
[626] - Quote
You don't fix hybrids by buffing drones. You are mentally challenged and/or play Caldari if you believe otherwise. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 23:47:00 -
[627] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:Hamox wrote:Lets think "out of the box" once more: Why not have drones that increase the speed of my ship or give me energy? Of course this drones would have high bandwidth so mostly Gallente with high bandwidth will benefit from it? Just a thought. WTF people. Stop thinking CCP will code up something magical and introduce in the game. Propose something by just tweaking the current game mechanics and you might get something. Propose a pony and you won't get any this christmas.
Exactly my thought. KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID!!!! (KISS)
The current buff that Tallest is putting on the guns may be enough (with a bit of an ammo overhaul too). However the ships themselves need to be balanced to the new weapons too. These balances should be BASE STATS balances only. Not new features/new untested bonuses/new crazy wish list stuff.
>Short range guns means you need speed to get into range. If you do not get into range you basically do not have guns. It is that simple. >Minmatar are the MOBILITY race. That means AGILITY, NOT SPEED (AND AGILITY). To that end, in order for Mimatar to keep their current tactics and combat philosophy, blaster boats need to have STRAIGHT LINE speed but not agility. Blaster boats will still be kited by a skilled pilot but a skilled blaster boat pilot will also be very dangerous. A blaster boat with high speed but low agility will not be able to fight like a Minmatar ship does as it will have no speed in the turns. >Blaster boats are brawlers so they need a decent tank but not a stupid tank as tanking is the Amarr way.
RANT MODE OFF
Apologies for the rant. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 00:02:00 -
[628] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:Hamox wrote:Lets think "out of the box" once more: Why not have drones that increase the speed of my ship or give me energy? Of course this drones would have high bandwidth so mostly Gallente with high bandwidth will benefit from it? Just a thought. WTF people. Stop thinking CCP will code up something magical and introduce in the game. Propose something by just tweaking the current game mechanics and you might get something. Propose a pony and you won't get any this christmas.
Hey cool down... Do you really think CCP is reading this thread? btw, this thread has shown one problem: If you want to keep blasters in their current role as a short range weapon you will need to enable gallente ships to get in range fast enough to drop some damage before they get popped. So you have to fly through scram, neut, nos, web and all the other stuff your opponend is throwing at you. This might be a difficult task, especially if you try to catch a Minmatar ship that is faster than you. With this circumstances I do not believe they will fix it by changing the reload time of your weapons or the tracking. They need to change the way how Gallente ships work, make them faster or give them an other way to get in range fast enough...
This thread is already full of diferent ideas and thoughts, concerns, suggestions and so on. The only thing this thread really is missing is a reply from a CCP dev. As long as there is no official reply nobody here doesn't know exactly what the next steps will be and even if there are any next steps. This thread is 10 days old and have we seen any reaction from CCP? Maybe I missed something? |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 00:54:00 -
[629] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Imrik86 wrote:Hamox wrote:Lets think "out of the box" once more: Why not have drones that increase the speed of my ship or give me energy? Of course this drones would have high bandwidth so mostly Gallente with high bandwidth will benefit from it? Just a thought. WTF people. Stop thinking CCP will code up something magical and introduce in the game. Propose something by just tweaking the current game mechanics and you might get something. Propose a pony and you won't get any this christmas. Hey cool down... Do you really think CCP is reading this thread? btw, this thread has shown one problem: If you want to keep blasters in their current role as a short range weapon you will need to enable gallente ships to get in range fast enough to drop some damage before they get popped. So you have to fly through scram, neut, nos, web and all the other stuff your opponend is throwing at you. This might be a difficult task, especially if you try to catch a Minmatar ship that is faster than you. With this circumstances I do not believe they will fix it by changing the reload time of your weapons or the tracking. They need to change the way how Gallente ships work, make them faster or give them an other way to get in range fast enough... This thread is already full of diferent ideas and thoughts, concerns, suggestions and so on. The only thing this thread really is missing is a reply from a CCP dev. As long as there is no official reply nobody here doesn't know exactly what the next steps will be and even if there are any next steps. This thread is 10 days old and have we seen any reaction from CCP? Maybe I missed something?
I'm pretty sure Tallest and others will go over the thread and look for any useful feedback they can use. They aren't exactly in a position to ignore their user base. They did this once, and the result was a mass unsub. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 01:41:00 -
[630] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Cyvhiros wrote:Nemesor wrote:
Anyone can use drones. Fixing a ship is not done by fixing drones.
Blasters don't need a range bonus. Just damage and speed.
The point is we are not fixing ships, this is not a thread about it, nor are we speaking about this, we are trying to fix a "phylosophy", meaning the way gallente fight, because there is where something is wrong. Besides every1 can use drones but not everyone can use drones as good as gallente can, they are suposed to be a vital piece in gallentean warfare, WHY NOT MAKE THAT TRUE!!. Besides I agree in that gallente need a push up in their drone bays, and others a small nerf, especially minmatars should get a few less drones, having the drone space on tempest, hurricane, mael nerfed a bit. upgrade drone AI from "amoeba" to "insect" first.
|
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 01:42:00 -
[631] - Quote
For the love of god CCP, i just wrote a 2000 word essay of feedback and forum ate my post. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
107
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 03:27:00 -
[632] - Quote
maxzim either get chrome or learn to control C... |
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 05:22:00 -
[633] - Quote
People need to stop thinking up random ass fixes to ****.
CCP will not add a ton of code for handful of ship for one archetype of one race.
Period.
If you can't make the change in a spreadsheet (adjust existing values) it will not happen. People need to stop posting pipe dreams. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
58
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 06:08:00 -
[634] - Quote
Dawwww. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 07:41:00 -
[635] - Quote
My thinking "out of the box" idea is to change one of the bonuses of all of the blaster ships to this:
+15% overload effect and heat of MicroWarpdrives per level.
This would allow them to overheat their MWDs for some extreme speed, but not allow them to abuse that additional speed long term. |
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 08:28:00 -
[636] - Quote
i also agree that for fixing blaster issues the old doctrine that minmattar ships should be fastest either must be changed to "blasterboats are fastest ships" or you have to give the boats such bonsuses they're able to get in combat range.
because of the first, switching ac and blaster stats would only be logical...(fast ships->close range weapons, slow ships->long range weapons). u may like the fact or not - but this is how it is atm on tq.
introducing new (propulsion) modules just to fix blasterboat issues is not a viable solution. it will just mess up the gamemechanics even more.
i agree that the effectivness of sensor dampeners should be increased since they were nerfed to death last time, but that's another story and also won't make blasterboats competitive in the end. it would but then you'll have to boost damps WAY more than just to bring them in line with other ewar mods. lowering s'ones locking range from lets say 100km to 50km still won't make that much of a difference since even large blasters can hardly hit targets at 20k or more.. (it's a pitty you have to fit 2-3 damps in the precious arazu/lachesis medslots for damps to actually have an noticable impact on a target - and those are ships with dampener bonuses!!)
the other thing i agree on is that ccp will have to rethink the racial strengths and weakneses without being too tied to "the old eve way"...
|
Roger Soros
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 10:22:00 -
[637] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Roger Soros wrote:Rail 1) Hyperion and Mega still cannot fit a full rack of 425-II and a decent armor tank they need more powergrid and cpu given tha fact that you need a cap booster+mwd on every decent rail fit for fleets 2) 425 damage still to low compared to projectile turrets of the same caliber + capacitor usage and tracking make them whorse on every aspect 3) T2 ammo still remain useless compared to factions 4) ammo type granularity still overkill, lessen them pls
I would go the other way, I would increase the damage a lot but also the power grid usage a little bit. That way you would equip 350mm with a decent tank and still good damage or 425mm for great damage when you have logistics in background that keep you alive becouse you dont have PG left for a great tank. If you just give the ship more power grid then why should I use smaller weapons like the 350mm? Pilots should have the choice, otherwise everything will end up with a FOTM.
Sacrificing 425-II for 350 just to fit a decent tank will create a subpar ship, basically a useless ship, no serious FC will take a 350mega over an abbadon with 200k+ ehp and 1400; i think if you want a race to be the most effective in a role is ok but the other 3 need to remain competitive; today you're being told "take an abbadon or gtfo" this is not acceptable anymore. |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 10:28:00 -
[638] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:For the love of god CCP, i just wrote a 2000 word essay of feedback and forum ate my post. Hit the back button and it should be there... at least thats how I've managed it before now. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
300
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 10:45:00 -
[639] - Quote
Nah that doesn't work. For Firefox at least.
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. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
286
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 10:46:00 -
[640] - Quote
Voith wrote:People need to stop thinking up random ass fixes to ****.
CCP will not add a ton of code for handful of ship for one archetype of one race.
Period.
If you can't make the change in a spreadsheet (adjust existing values) it will not happen. People need to stop posting pipe dreams. So much this! Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
|
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 11:20:00 -
[641] - Quote
Quote:over an abbadon with 200k+ ehp and 1400
just out of interrest...don't u ppl think that there is sth fundamentaly broken with projectiles when people start to fit them on all ships? or on generaly on hulls from races never intended to fit projectiles...?? |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
289
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 11:58:00 -
[642] - Quote
Would anyone else like to see the Eos become the field commandship?
Drones have a better synergy with small gang warfare (because of falcon) whilst a rails focused astarte would excel way more than a mixed up drone ship ever could in the land where insta-damage is king and drones/sentries struggle to be anything more than a nuisance for the pilots.
Either way, the Eos has always been the solo/small gang ship of choice, it would be great if this was recognised by making it a field commandship with full drone facilities (including damage bonus). This, along with more ammo fixes, a change to the HYPERION, EGALE, MOA, FEROX, VULTURE, MYRMIDON, TALOS, ROKH and DEIMOS and some additional grid to a few other ships (phobos, ishtar) along with the already proposed changes would make me feel somewhat satisfied. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Patrice Macmahon
The Lost Minmatar Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 11:58:00 -
[643] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest.
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
*SNUGGLE*
OMG! Reasonable effective changes.... o.O
Tallest, I want you to have my child....
....seriously... I don't want it anymore... You can name it Bob...
\o/ -á"Much of this is crystallised in our philosophy, or as others call it "the Intaki Faith". We simply call it Ida - the literal translation is "to consider", and is a good description of the Intaki."-á |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 12:10:00 -
[644] - Quote
Anything new for rails? or they still will be neglected due to op arties ? |
Roger Soros
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 13:37:00 -
[645] - Quote
tika te wrote:Quote:over an abbadon with 200k+ ehp and 1400 just out of interrest...don't u ppl think that there is sth fundamentaly broken with projectiles when people start to fit them on all ships? or on generaly on hulls from races never intended to fit projectiles...??
there is not such a limitation in this game every hull can be fitted with everything, you are only limited by fitting requirement like cpu and powergrid, by cap usage, by how many turret or missile slot the hull have and in the end by the hull bonus; ship like the abbadon don't have a very good bonus on the firepower so you can fit projectile turret easly with a gain in efficiency due to the lack of cap usage, good damage, and thanks to the bonus on the resistances a very good tank. But it's ok if a ship is very good the problem is that currently this ship is 100 time more efficent thant the others except the pest probably. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
289
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 13:51:00 -
[646] - Quote
Maybe they should tripple the alpha of Torps and give the megathron 7 launcher hardpoints ftw? Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
58
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 14:09:00 -
[647] - Quote
Railgun tracking is still too low. If you want to shoot at range I should be enhancing optimal and not tracking when over 70km.
DPS is still crap, If I traded volleys (adjusting for RoF) with a Tornado even standing still I'll still be out-DPS's at range. Rails should do fantastic at range, crap up close. If you want to keep tracking like it is, then boost optimal and damage more. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
289
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 14:19:00 -
[648] - Quote
Whats the point of fantastic range if your only giving them a scratch? Rails really need to hurt at range, if at 130km, rails did antimatter or uranium damage where other long range weapons systems had to use in mid range or t2 long range ammo - that would be a REAL significant advantage - one I think you could base a fleet around as an alternative to lolALPHA or Amarr Online. Sure, you'd get out damaged and out tracked by Beams at short range, and out alpha at all ranges, but at long ranges "Not only will you hit... You will Hurt "with rails.
Then you could focus on the caldari problem by just buffing the tank/slots/speed of the hybrid boats to make them tougher, and/or a bit more mobile trading the damage, for projection and durability.
At the moment, I feel CCP Tallest and the balance team is still in 2% mode, looking probably at DPS charts whilst ignoring the various MASSIVE advantages other races have like alpha, speed, tank, etc etc when looking at the ships as a whole. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
58
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 14:35:00 -
[649] - Quote
Pattern you're hitting it dead on that many of these changes have to do with damage at extreme range and the types of ships.
If a Rokh is to be used as a sniper ship, give it the agility to warp out faster. Reduce the sig penalty of shield extenders (making sniping ships harder to hit for full damage) or give them a tracking bonus so that they can hit while moving themselves.
BUT, that being said there is an issue with the ammo.
No matter what, here's what you have with projectiles:
3 range modifiers- 50%, 0, -50% EM bonused Proton ammo (if Caldari are shield tankers, you make them easiest to hit at long range) tracking speed multiplier
Rails you're running either a range penalty of -60% to -12% with only 3 range bonuses and 1... ONE at range. All the rest reduce the range.
Longest range hybrid ammo does least damage, and antimatter most but with penalty. These should be reversed in essence. |
LordBison
Serenus Legion LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:08:00 -
[650] - Quote
I am a heavy sniper boat user and i think that Rails should do high damage at max range. This is to compensate against artys taking the sniping role.
What i have experienced using the hybrid gun is that at long range you can reach and touch them, but not do anything in terms of damage.
I propose a feature (I know, I know for you whiners)
Railgun Charging Logically Railguns use a capacitor, and you should hold a button down to charge the hybrid gun in order to increase volley damage sacrificing a boring, passive rate of fire at extreme ranges.
Or better yet, Overheating should increase volley damage instead of rof, making the gun not kill itself over pointless shooting.
Maneuverability as a sniper boat is satisfactory but not the best. One has to bookmark locations in the scouting run before the big day which is a real pain in the ass, but rewarding. On the other hand, roaming with a sniper boat is an issue, where snipers instantly become useless. At least give an ammo type that gives good tracking bonuses to compensate, |
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
161
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:28:00 -
[651] - Quote
dont wanna sound like a broken record here, but a lot of people's subs depend on these balancing changes. anything happening over there? |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
60
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:30:00 -
[652] - Quote
Honestly if you buff damage to rails it will go a long way. I see the Naga has a 5% bonus, this should go to all rail ships. At range Arties just flat out overpower rails in terms of DPS. Even in the 150-200 range. This should not be.
Let Arties flourish 60-100km. Anything more and they should scratch just like rails do at 130, and rails at that range should HURT. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
290
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:36:00 -
[653] - Quote
If only there was a way of keeping the tanking bonus too... Or maybe just add midslots in return for the lost resist bonus... Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 18:20:00 -
[654] - Quote
May you please give us some direction in which we might help you think about new ideas. Talk to us and tell us naaah that's quite hard to get it working or yes, some more of that. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 18:21:00 -
[655] - Quote
It pains me to see the last 100 posts. I see a lot of players darting around the issue entirely. It pains me even more to see we've gone on for about a week and not a peep from CCP. There are a significant amount of players making some rather absurd suggestions, suggestions which, if implemented, would effectively obsolete MWDs, or require damps be fit on all blaster boats to get the most out them (WHAT???). Please PLEASE stop trying to the fix the problem with other modules or other passive "Gallente-only" bonuses. All you're doing is letting hybrids remain the stagnant and stale weapon systems they already are. You've contributed nothing. You've fixed nothing. Please stop.
This also goes for CCP. Please remove the notion increasing damage, tracking, and ship speeds is the end-all-beat-all answer to hybrid shortcomings. Yes, they need these things, but even with these changes, no one is going to choose hybrids because there is no native benefit to them. Hybrids need to provide something to the pilot simply for being fitted, something realized and applied BEFORE a shot is fired. Hybrids must appeal to the pilot because of some native benefit. This was very plainly conveyed in post #548, citing numerous players who agree hybrids are simply lacking. Hybrids absolutely need something to contend with the following:
- Projectiles: alpha, cap free use, relies only on falloff to become viable , choose damage type, on the fastest ships in the game
- Lasers: instant ammo swap and effective range, no reload, dominant optimal range further magnified by scorch, highest EHP ships in the game
The above traits of lasers and projectiles are, and always will be, the selling points and it is why they are chosen over hybrids. Hybrids MUST be given something to compete with the above; something in addition to and beyond improving hybrid turret stats. They must provide the pilot with a passive benefit, a role, a niche, a concept. Call it whatever you want. Many players have stated repeatedly hybrids are missing this. Without this, there is no reason to use hybrids, in spite of the proposed changes, and in spite of the effort by CCP to address the overwhelming amount of complaints stating hybrids are weak.
Just as much, I think it is equally accurate to say hybrid turrets lack personality!!!
Please CCP/Tallest/devs, whoever is listening, please state you understand there is a fundamental shortcoming of hybrids and something will be done to address this. It's something beneath damage increases, beyond tracking increases, and much simpler than modifications to Gallente/Caldari ships. Hybrids need to give the pilot some inherent advantage just for being used, and if it does, then it WILL be used. Failure to recognize this will mean hybrids remain unpopular and unused. This is not rocket surgery....
To give you an idea, hybrids could:
- be the only weapon system to apply true omni damage, even all of its total volley to each em/thr/kin/exp damage type
- operate with instant ammo swapping AND no cap requirements, while retaining most or all of their currently deplorable statistics
- drain the receiving end's capacitor by one-to-five percent of the volley damage
- have ammo types exceeding competitive projectile/laser turret stats; imagine all t2 rail and blaster ammo as impactful/effective as scorch
Each of these four suggestions don't actually change anything beyond the turrets. They give hybrids a unique and APPLICABLE personality. These are the kinds of fundamental changes hybrids need for a pilot to ask himself "Hrm, hybrids would be PERFECT for XYZ!" Sure, blasters are top notch in the DPS world, but realistically, that damage never gets applied because Gallente ships are armor tanked and are simply too slow (yes, even after considering the proposed changes). Sure, railguns can reach some pretty incredible ranges with Caldari bonuses, but because of warp-to range limitations and pathetic railgun damage, the approach is impossible to realize.
Put your thinking caps on. These suggestions are the kind which could bring life back to the hybrid platform. It goes beyond turret stat increases. It goes beyond ship stat increases. It's even beyond ammo in most cases. Hybrids must appeal to the pilot for providing passive benefits. Hybrids must do something which cannot be done by projectiles or lasers!!! Hybrids must fill a role. Hybrids need an applicable personality, a niche. I am stating the same thing several different ways. The lacking of the yet-to-be-determined traits is the biggest difference between hybrids and projectiles/lasers. Failure to give hybrids some real flair will result in no change; a continuation of hybrids residing in a sub-par league of its own.
Again, the player community has stated this many times, and a summary of such can be found here. Read it, understand it, and please do something about it. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 18:30:00 -
[656] - Quote
... and please do communicate with us, so we can together find a solution or that we can at least stop careing and go back to daily business. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 18:56:00 -
[657] - Quote
Having hybrids reduce a target's capacitor instead of a damage buff would be interesting. It's a really good idea and nice twist to the game but it would require a lot of :effort: that CCP can't put forth. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 19:07:00 -
[658] - Quote
Why is this so hard...
Just make blasters far more similar to lasers than they currently are.
Give them more range, and similar DPS. Yes, it makes them less unique....
But anything else is simply broken/unfair/stupid/silly.
You are smart people.. why is this so hard?
Gameplay > silly background story Nerfing supers is not going to help the N+1/Blob problem. It will just mean that superpilots will be even more likely to want to blob. Think more creatively. Support the idea of a subcap "assault bomber." |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 19:10:00 -
[659] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Why is this so hard...
Maybe Tallest is not working full time on this problem? I think, it's not about if someone is smart or not, it's all about resources...
Just my 2 cents. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 19:16:00 -
[660] - Quote
xxxak wrote:Why is this so hard...
Just make blasters far more similar to lasers than they currently are.
Give them more range, and similar DPS. Yes, it makes them less unique....
But anything else is simply broken/unfair/stupid/silly.
You are smart people.. why is this so hard?
Gameplay > silly background story
And do what with rails? Forget they exist? |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 19:56:00 -
[661] - Quote
So the expansion is feature complete?
One intro message and one update that addressed no one? Is that the sort of improved customer relations we should expect? |
Jojo Jackson
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 19:57:00 -
[662] - Quote
tika te wrote:Quote:over an abbadon with 200k+ ehp and 1400 just out of interrest...don't u ppl think that there is sth fundamentaly broken with projectiles when people start to fit them on all ships? or on generaly on hulls from races never intended to fit projectiles...??
Old problem with many Amarr ships :(.
Punisher Maller Navy Augoror Legion with Drone offens system (works MUCH better then with Laser!!)
Some more with this anti-bonus "x% less cap use to fire your raceial weapons".
Abbadon is a bit speziel becouse of the insane Alpha from 1400 Artis.
It's realy time to remove this anti-bonus, add flat 25% better cap recharge to all this ships/hulls and give them a real BONUS! |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:02:00 -
[663] - Quote
You need to at least give a reach around Tallest, what with the way you insist on Shagging us.
Seriously? That was your process? No one was happy with the results of your "Fixing Hybrids". Yet you are going to toss it out there like you have accomplished something.
You have not fixed a thing. Nothing is going to change. |
Mapets
Combinatul Chimic ROMANIAN-LEGION
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:12:00 -
[664] - Quote
from a tehnological point of view hybrid turets are a mix of projectile and energy weps, and as soposed to are using both ammunition and capacitor to fire - the problem with them is that they do to low dps at whatever range one tries to shoot at, considering the costs (ammo, cap, reload time, the nead to change ammo type)- the blasters witch are soposed to be meanest close range wep can atm do lower dps at say 10 km then both projectile and lazors, and that is becose of the range not becose of tracking... Maby a good fix for tem would be indeed the boost to dmg but in the form of adding maby 20-25 % dmg to ammo charges in the form of em and posibily explosion dmg to (adding some logic behind the cap usage) and posibily a boost of 10%to range of the guns and not to tracking. Ps.main is not gallente, i am caldary with all caldary, amarr and gallente subcapital ships at 5 with T2 guns ofc ,... trying to bring a constructive feedback from my experience :p |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:15:00 -
[665] - Quote
Mapets wrote: Blah blah blah. Thats what our input sounds like to Tallest.
Why are you still talking? Nothing has changed with Hybrids. Nothing has changed with CCP. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:17:00 -
[666] - Quote
Mekhana wrote: 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.
QFT |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:22:00 -
[667] - Quote
Mekhana wrote: 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.
What can he possibly "pull off". The feature list for the expansion is finalized. The final build is on SiSi. The best Tallest can do futher is say, "Hybrids will get looked at further in the Future". Yeah right. Same Old CCP. Same old BS.
|
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:42:00 -
[668] - Quote
Where is the buff? |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:19:00 -
[669] - Quote
Total and complete failure on what was my most anticipated change. Sigh. CCP Tallest worst Tallest. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
301
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:25:00 -
[670] - Quote
I just died a little inside. |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:33:00 -
[671] - Quote
You should have never promised to fix hybrids. I was at least USED to them being worthless.
This time you guys raised my hopes and dashed their squishy infant heads on the rocks.
No feedback. No listening. Just a minor tweak.
Thanks for nothing Tallest. Thanks for nothing CCP. |
Jean Louie
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:43:00 -
[672] - Quote
Ironically I received a SWTOR beta invite a day ago. |
EMPRA
Trident RMBK
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:51:00 -
[673] - Quote
Just as usual.
CCP won't fix hybrids because nobody plays with them anymore, hence the lack of negative response. Everyone either cross trained or avoided them all together and are living happily ever after in hurricane, abaddon and drake land.
Same goes for factional warfare. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
162
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:53:00 -
[674] - Quote
Jean Louie wrote:Ironically I received a SWTOR beta invite a day ago.
me too, played for 8 hours, got bored. it's WoW in space quite literally.
thats ok, off to Skyrim and BF3 till GW2 comes out. these graphical updates are just sugarcoating over a cake made of ****. this has been the truth about EVE for 3 years now. hope CCP enjoys a brief increase in subs until people realize (once again) what theyre dealing with. this will probably be the last time. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
107
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:56:00 -
[675] - Quote
ok so looking at the new blasters all i have to say is 5% more dps is needed plus a big alpha boost 50% to keep dps the same slow down rate of fire...
now null needs to be boosted give it an optimal range bonus of 30% and a falloff bonus of 50%...
as for railguns... they still need more base tracking and better dps... i would suggest reduce cap activation cost and increase rate of fire... plus i would reduce optimal range and replace with falloff...
i saw what you did with the naga and like it but i would have prefered a rate of fire bonus with the optimal range bonus...
what this does is make is so gallente are better at blasters (high alpha due to damage bonus) and caldari dps from rails will be really high due to rate of fire bonus... this will keep racial flavour in the game...
plus spike needs a damage boost and void needs more damage... |
Fraa Bjorn
Cell 317
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:13:00 -
[676] - Quote
Uhm.. What happened? We're promised reduction in CPU/PG/CAP (superuseful, makes me giddy) aswell as damage/tracking boost, and changes to T2 ammo...
Now all we're getting is 5% dps? ffs ccp.... It would be better if you just removed gallente from the game, so us fairly new players don't accidentally create gallentes, train accordingly, then realize we're useless and all that SP was just a scam, or if you will; tax on the stupid. |
Cunane Jeran
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:13:00 -
[677] - Quote
I don't see what more you guys could want, beyond a power creep.
Firstly lets ACTUALLY look at the important change.
Fitting Requirements and Cap usage. If you have actually bothered to go and try some new fits out, use your noggin a bit, you'll see that we can pull of some rather good fits now, which previously weren't possible, even at the low skilled level. Not only in PvE but also in PvP.
PvE: No longer a struggle to get a prop mod on ships like the Thorax and the Mega with Rails, or with Cap being just low enough that I can drop both a Cap Recharger II AND a Cap Rig or most of my fits (all of them I can drop 1 though, and no, I don't fly cap stable) that gives me an extra tracking computer or web and a hybrid damage rig. That right there alone is a huge gain in my ships hybrid performance.
Not much to say on PvE, generally its a case of "guns, cap and tank" fitting wise. But the other changes also influence PvE. Firstly the 5 second reload means we can use the highest damage ammo possible at whatever range we find ourselves at. Tracking and Damage boost? Lovely. Large rails already track fine. Using my Hyperion for example with a single TCII on it, I can hit frigs fine at 21km and crusiers at 12km with 425mm. These bonuses got it down to 17km and 10km in my case, with extra damage to boot. More than enough. The fitting requirements also now let you get a 100mn Afterburner on there. Problem solved entirely.
PvP Rails are now viable. Nano fit or Plated up, they do enough damage to warrant an airing, and with the Javelin change, they pack a good punch with decent tracking. Each fight I've had using them I've been impressed with their performance at both short AND long range. They get the job done, and generally you have enough grid now to fit a decent buffer with prop with the rails, further improving them in my eyes it'll take some getting use to, but I'm sure we'll be seeing more Rails appearing in PvP.
Blasters. The range is short, and compared to both Pulses and Auto's they are the weaker link. But they aren't bad once again they benefit from the fitting change. Dual Rep Brutix is a lot stronger, being able to finally fit a full rack of Ions without a problem. while ships such as the Deimos can finally sort themselves out with a decent buffer, something that they have been lacking for a long time. Extra speed is nice
But in all seriousness what can you do? Adding more damage is good for when you get into range, tracking is now fine, I've been able to fit frigs with medium Ions with a single web. But if you start pushing falloff, they are just becoming Auto's and pushing optimal is going to improve the Caldari hybrid boats a bit too much.
If I was going to hazard anything give them 1-2km optimal depending on size.
Or another option would be to drop the RoF right down, make them short range Arties.
|
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:22:00 -
[678] - Quote
No amount of tweaking damage and tracking will make up for the fundamental flaw of a close combat philosophy where your ship can never actually get in range. Guess what? Your new brutix with dual reppers and ions is still slow as **** and has crap range, not to mention the dps is far under a comparable AC ship because you can't use any MFS or your tank will be worthless. If the ships required to go into the optimal range of every nasty weapon and ewar known to the eve universe, just to deal damage, can't actually control range by themselves, then they're fail ships. Always.
And btw, even if you increase the speed so that Gallente ships are the fastest in a straight line, 5% more damage is not nearly enough to make up for getting pummeled the whole way there. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
162
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:25:00 -
[679] - Quote
blasters are ******, fine. but rails can easily be fixed. i think with the best possible loadout, the Deimos hits for like 330 dps at 30km, which is pathetic |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
107
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:26:00 -
[680] - Quote
Fraa Bjorn wrote:Uhm.. What happened? We're promised reduction in CPU/PG/CAP (superuseful, makes me giddy) aswell as damage/tracking boost, and changes to T2 ammo...
Now all we're getting is 5% dps? ffs ccp.... It would be better if you just removed gallente from the game, so us fairly new players don't accidentally create gallentes, train accordingly, then realize we're useless and all that SP was just a scam, or if you will; tax on the stupid.
you sir are stupid... the changes are on top of the dev blog... ffs |
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:28:00 -
[681] - Quote
I quote myself once more :)
Hamox wrote: Patience, give them two or three more years, they just started to work on it.
Seriously, a feedback from Tallest or CCP would be very welcome. I thought they want to improve their relationship with their customers? |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:30:00 -
[682] - Quote
A Sleipnir rips a dual rep brutix apart without rising one eyebrow :p 1100 dps and 1k+ dps tank at 35km range combined with superior speed and a neutralizer ....... now let's have a look at that brutix.............
There is a reason why the sleipnir is the most used ship in alliance tournament and the brutix not :p |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:39:00 -
[683] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:Firstly lets ACTUALLY look at the important change....Fitting Requirements and Cap usage I don't ever recall making the complaint I couldn't fit a hybrid ship properly. How is this the most important change?
Again, hybrids were passable in PvE, and again, I don't recall making this complaint. Have you actually read this thread?
Cunane Jeran wrote:PvP Rails are now viable....I'm sure we'll be seeing more Rails appearing in PvP.
I'm not about to make any claim I am clairvoyant, but I can tell you this: current changes to hybrids are not enough to make ME want to use them. If I don't want to use them, my money is on many other pilots not wanting to use them either. This has been stated again and again here. Please read it.
Cunane Jeran wrote:But in all seriousness what can you do? How about:
- pay attention to this thread?
- break the antiquated notion that minmatar no longer need to be the fastest ships?
- revamp hybrid ammo in the same manner projectile ammo was?
- give hybrids a REASON to be used? Let them compete with lasers/projectiles at a fundamental level?
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:45:00 -
[684] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:A Sleipnir rips a dual rep Astarte apart without rising one eyebrow :p 1100 dps and 1k+ dps tank at 35km range combined with superior speed and a neutralizer ....... now let's have a look at that Astarte.............
There is a reason why the sleipnir is the most used ship in alliance tournament and the Astarte not :p
Fixed. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:49:00 -
[685] - Quote
Magosian wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:A Sleipnir rips a dual rep Astarte apart without rising one eyebrow :p 1100 dps and 1k+ dps tank at 35km range combined with superior speed and a neutralizer ....... now let's have a look at that Astarte.............
There is a reason why the sleipnir is the most used ship in alliance tournament and the Astarte not :p Fixed.
ty! My friend "edit" fixed that for me :) I'm getting old :p
If i want the Astarte pilot to no more use gallente shps i would kill it with a hugin :p long painfull death |
Cunane Jeran
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:53:00 -
[686] - Quote
Magosian wrote:I don't ever recall making the complaint I couldn't fit a hybrid ship properly. How is this the most important change?
Because it offers a huge boost to tracking/damage/survival
Magosian wrote: Again, hybrids were passable in PvE, and again, I don't recall making this complaint. Have you actually read this thread?
You didn't others have. This isn't all about you princess.
Magosian wrote:I'm not about to make any claim I am clairvoyant, but I can tell you this: current changes to hybrids are not enough to make ME want to use them. If I don't want to use them, my money is on many other pilots not wanting to use them either. This has been stated again and again here. Please read it.
Gallente now have more options than Blasters and Drone boats with projectiles, while Caldari rail boats have been lacking, they have now become a ton more viable.
Magosian wrote:How about:
- pay attention to this thread?
- break the antiquated notion that minmatar no longer need to be the fastest ships?
- revamp hybrid ammo in the same manner projectile ammo was?
- give hybrids a REASON to be used? Let them compete with lasers/projectiles at a fundamental level?
1) I have been and more so than you, as apparently you can only see the negative whining posts 2) Minmatar don't have to be but is it practical to change and nerf stats of Minmatar ships to make them slower? Or are you suggesting we make all Gallente faster. A Deimos with more speed and agility than a Vaga? Pro Balance. You also have neglected Caldari boats with that idea. 3) Does it really need to be changed? The damage is decent as it is for Antimatter, while we are locked into Thermal/Kin if you look at BOTH armour and shields at the same time, Thermal is the biggest joint hole. 4) Awesome ranged potential, Awesome short range potential, work fantastically well in small gangs. Plenty of reasons to use them. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:58:00 -
[687] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:Magosian wrote:I don't ever recall making the complaint I couldn't fit a hybrid ship properly. How is this the most important change? ...... .
In all honest, you want to troll us ? Last time i've seen a gallente ship in a small gang is 300 millenia ago.
Currently there are only 2 ships used in small gangs
a) hurricane b) drake
some fillers like hugin, claymore, dictor
|
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:07:00 -
[688] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote: 2) Minmatar don't have to be but is it practical to change and nerf stats of Minmatar ships to make them slower? Or are you suggesting we make all Gallente faster. A Deimos with more speed and agility than a Vaga? Pro Balance. You also have neglected Caldari boats with that idea.
Who said anything about making the Deimos faster than a vaga? It should definitely be faster than a Hurricane though, even if its armor tanked, otherwise wtf is the point of it. Fact is without speed blaster ships are at the mercy of everything else. Claiming otherwise means you haven't flown one in a long time.
Quote: 4) Awesome ranged potential, Awesome short range potential, work fantastically well in small gangs. Plenty of reasons to use them.
And awesome short range potential? Maybe if you ever actually get in range after burning your MWD for 3 min and hoping you don't get blown out of the sky or the other guy (probably in a minmatar ship) loses tackle. If you're by yourself, good luck applying that "awesome short range potential." I won't even go into the small gang comment, all I'll say is that you should go into low sec and count how many gangs you see that have majority or even a significant portion of Gallente dps dealers. The changes have not fundamentally altered the balance of the guns and for those of you who can't see it now, it will become very clear when these changes go live. Then we'll have to lobby another 3 or 4 years to get CCP to even look at them.
Edit: did some EFT checking for rails, dps wise they actually fare pretty well versus the other gun types here, at least on paper. We'll have to see how they perform later. Everything about blasters is still true though. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:15:00 -
[689] - Quote
From the perspective of a small gang, small ship, T1/empire faction Gallente pilot:
Gallente frigs are going to do very well in the next update. The comet is going to look very ugly to the naked eye, but it will perform extremely well in the field. These ships were already well balanced versus other empire faction frigs, now they get a little extra something that will put them over the top.
Armor tanked Exeqeror Navy Issue(ENI) at 2k m/s with boosts to hybrids is going to be really fun to fly. VNI will be fun too.
Catalyst vs. Thrasher: 266 vs 268 m/s baseline speed? Damn near even. Good enough for me. One prop mod in the low and Cat is faster. After years of getting kited and nueted by Thrasher pilots, now I'm only going to get nueted. :D
Proposed Thorax (180) vs Rupture(192): Two overdrive injectors on a Thorax makes it go about as fast as two nanofibers on a Rupture. With the other turret boosts... this is good enough for me for now. I think I'm going to enjoy flying the Thorax again.
Brutix (155) vs. Cyclone(165): Same deal. Two overdrive injectors on a Brutix is about as fast as two nanofibers on a Cyclone. This class of ship is largely obsolete, however.
Megathron(115) vs Tempest(120): Same deal.
Note: Myrm and Hyperion speed should have been boosted as well, but whatever...
Gallente hulls progressively get worse as size increases, but the "break even" point with Minmatar is now at about Tier 1 BC where before it was at the Velator.
Hoping CCP fixes range bonus to Null (which any persom pasing 7th grade algebra can figure out), until then I'm waiting for a chance to do "live fire" tests on Tranquility.
BTW, I completely understand the frustration of armor tanked blaster pilots wanting to travel long distances to get kills... it ain't gonna happen.... |
Cunane Jeran
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:16:00 -
[690] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:In all honest, you want to troll us ? Last time i've seen a gallente ship in a small gang is 300 millenia ago. Currently there are only 2 ships used in small gangs a) hurricane b) drake some fillers like hugin, claymore, dictor for proof: http://pure-madness.eu/0os827nq/
A sample size of 214 ships. Pro proof. Your proof also shows no one uses Amarr either.
Yes they aren't hugely popular, but they work and they work well in unison with other ships in a mixed gang.
The Drake and Cane are more popular I'd put that down to BC's being to go to ship for roaming/small gangs, and the Myrm not doing well in gangs, mainly due to its bonuses and its heavy drone use while the Brutix suffers from being a tier 1. You don't see many Ferox/Cyclones/Prophecys in gangs either.
Deimos has always had the issue of survivability compared to the Vaga and Zealot mainly due to a lack of grid, while the Ishtar again, doesn't make for a good gang ship. The Thorax is a excellent cheap ship and I've not seen many mixed gangs without one.
the Enyo/Ishkur make a decent showing, the Taranis is deadly and sees a lot of use.
Granted the Commandships are utter crap and aren't seen at all in gangs around my area.
|
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:18:00 -
[691] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:From the perspective of a small gang, small ship, T1/empire faction Gallente pilot:
Gallente frigs are going to do very well in the next update. The comet is going to look very ugly to the naked eye, but it will perform extremely well in the field. These ships were already well balanced versus other empire faction frigs, now they get a little extra something that will put them over the top.
Armor tanked Exeqeror Navy Issue(ENI) at 2k m/s with boosts to hybrids is going to be really fun to fly. VNI will be fun too.
Catalyst vs. Thrasher: 266 vs 268 m/s baseline speed? Damn near even. Good enough for me. One prop mod in the low and Cat is faster. After years of getting kited and nueted by Thrasher pilots, now I'm only going to get nueted. :D
Proposed Thorax (180) vs Rupture(192): Two overdrive injectors on a Thorax makes it go about as fast as two nanofibers on a Rupture. With the other turret boosts... this is good enough for me for now. I think I'm going to enjoy flying the Thorax again.
Brutix (155) vs. Cyclone(165): Same deal. Two overdrive injectors on a Brutix is about as fast as two nanofibers on a Cyclone. This class of ship is largely obsolete, however.
Megathron(115) vs Tempest(120): Same deal.
Note: Myrm and Hyperion speed should have been boosted as well, but whatever...
Gallente hulls progressively get worse as size increases, but the "break even" point with Minmatar is now at about Tier 1 BC where before it was at the Velator.
Hoping CCP fixes range bonus to Null (which any persom pasing 7th grade algebra can figure out), until then I'm waiting for a chance to do "live fire" tests on Tranquility.
BTW, I completely understand the frustration of armor tanked blaster pilots wanting to travel long distances to get kills... it ain't gonna happen....
Yes you are correct! Frigates will perform great! bc and larger size i still got my concerns because of neutralizers |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
162
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:23:00 -
[692] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:
A sample size of 214 ships. Pro proof. Your proof also shows no one uses Amarr either.
Yes they aren't hugely popular, but they work and they work well in unison with other ships in a mixed gang.
The Drake and Cane are more popular I'd put that down to BC's being to go to ship for roaming/small gangs, and the Myrm not doing well in gangs, mainly due to its bonuses and its heavy drone use while the Brutix suffers from being a tier 1. You don't see many Ferox/Cyclones/Prophecys in gangs either.
Deimos has always had the issue of survivability compared to the Vaga and Zealot mainly due to a lack of grid, while the Ishtar again, doesn't make for a good gang ship. The Thorax is a excellent cheap ship and I've not seen many mixed gangs without one.
the Enyo/Ishkur make a decent showing, the Taranis is deadly and sees a lot of use.
Granted the Commandships are utter crap and aren't seen at all in gangs around my area.
stop talking. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:32:00 -
[693] - Quote
I think the winter expansion might hurt the gallente faction more than it helps. ishkur, enyo, ares, taranis will have a really hart time to compete the new destroyers, but that might bring a new star to the sky.... the catalyst. Well we all bring a hughe pile emotions to this discussion :> I better stay out of here and be happy about what i get. i love the engine trails, the nebula, the tech 2 ganglinks, my ship spinning :D thank ccp that makes me feel good :) brb polishing my stack of thrashers :> |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:36:00 -
[694] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:Because it offers a huge boost to tracking\damage\survival How does 5% tracking, 10% damage and ?% "survival" increases compete with a kiting minmatar ship that will always be faster than you? How? I don't even know what "survival" means in this case but I'll draw a rather weak conclusion you're talking about speed and agility buffs.
Before the change, I could fit a dual rep Brut with electrons. After the change, I can do the same thing except with ions. You understand the dps change is in the teens, right...? ANd in EITHER case, I am slower than a cyclone/cane/proph/harb, and I still can't complete with a buffered drake. So I can kill a Ferox, unless he's got autos and a neut (which anyone with half a brain is going to do), so bascially I am still in last place.
Cunane Jeran wrote:You didn't others have. This isn't all about you princess. Show me one person in this thread, ONE, who complained about hybrid ineffectiveness in PVE.
Cunane Jeran wrote:Gallente now have more options than Blasters and Drone boats with projectiles What does this have to do with fixing hybrids? What does this have to do with anything?
1) I have been and more so than you, as apparently you can only see the negative whining posts
Yes, you clearly have voiced your opinion in here lots of times, if by "lots of times," I really mean "not at all." I have been quite supportive of Tallest's announcement and evidence of CCP willing to do something. All I'm saying is that it's not enough. There's nothing you can say to change that disposition, so I'm not even sure why you bother, especially with such rude demeanor.
2) Minmatar don't have to be but is it practical to change and nerf stats of Minmatar ships to make them slower? Or are you suggesting we make all Gallente faster.
To a large degree. One or the other.
A Deimos with more speed and agility than a Vaga?
No. Don't put words in my mouth; I never said that. Besides, that's not even a fair comparison, nor would it be conventionally "possible," since Vagas get a ship bonus to speed. But back to the question, more in line and appropriate with the thread at hand: should a Deimos be faster than a Muninn? ABSOLUTELY!
You also have neglected Caldari boats with that idea.
Yes I did. You may not have noticed, but this is a Hybrid Turret Balancing Feedback thread, not a Caldari Ships Need Some Serious Help thread. If a Caldari-favoring pilot wants to voice his opinion on how to improve his hybrid game, that's his perogative, not mine.
3) Does it really need to be changed? The damage is decent as it is for Antimatter, while we are locked into Thermal/Kin if you look at BOTH armour and shields at the same time, Thermal is the biggest joint hole.
"decent" isn't good enough when "range" is "crap" and "speed" is "slower." So hybrids do good thermal. So what? So do autos with RF phased plasma. So do lasers with scorch/conflag. So why exactly would I want to use a blaster when I can get more range with pulses and autos? Having just said this, are you still not understanding the complaint???
4) Awesome ranged potential, Awesome short range potential, work fantastically well in small gangs. Plenty of reasons to use them.
Again, a rather bold statement without the ability to predict the future. All I can say is, hybrids are still lackluster. Plenty of other people agree; again, it's all in post #548. And if I were to discount what I believe to be the generally-accepted opinion of an overwhelming majority of hybrid users, all I really need to do is ask myself is if the current changes intice me to use hybrids on a regular basis. Right now, the answer is no, which in my eyes, makes these changes a failure. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
202
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:44:00 -
[695] - Quote
Talos can't fit more than 4x 425mm RG II - excellent downgrade for 350's if you want to fit 8 ...
Blasters: full rack of neutrons no fitting issues with shield tank, armor tank = useless
If you want it to spit something interesting: 1 or 2 te's everything else in lows is 3 or 4 mfs
Blasters on mega (regular) armor tank/buffer 2mfs: better dmg but not enough, again to make those spit something interesting is shield fit and full lows of dmg mods and then becomes serious business (for logis too) |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 23:53:00 -
[696] - Quote
I know I'm replying myself but I wonder if we ever will get an answer from CCP or Tallest in this thread? I'm feeling a bit ignored and many players have concernes about the changes. Just one sentence from CCP like "Hey, we know about your concerns, lets try this changes and if they are not good enough we will continue our work, we promise!"
With no answer from Tallest or CCP in this thread they just make the whole topic ridiculous and they leave diapointed customers behind. Is this the sort of improved cooperation with your user base?
Come on, give us an answer, we deserved it after more than 700 posts in this thread! |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
292
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:01:00 -
[697] - Quote
Add's Cunane Jeran to the ignore list.
The active tanking blaster boats are still made of fail. Eos/Myrmidon still lacking drones. *sigh* Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Cunane Jeran
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:04:00 -
[698] - Quote
I'm including the ships instead of just the "pure" hybrid stats because at the end of the day without the ships included all you have is a gun, and last time I checked a gun can't fly. There is no point in holding them separate to the ships and bonuses they'll never ever be a situation where they'll be apart.
The ships, and bonuses need to be considered in ALL arguments about balance. Hence why all comments include them.
Personally I've been using hybrids for the last 3 years with no complaints, and yes I can also use t2 projectiles and lasers. I've always preferred hybrids and so that's what I use, going from how they perform on Tranq right now, these changes in my eyes have gone beyond what was needed to bring them into line.
Yes they can go further but then your pushing into Power creep territory, Lasers would then need looking at and the cycle begins anew.
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:10:00 -
[699] - Quote
I must resist.... I must not hit reply...... argl |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:13:00 -
[700] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:Personally I've been using hybrids for the last 3 years with no complaints, and yes I can also use t2 projectiles and lasers. I've always preferred hybrids and so that's what I use...
Would you please share the secret with me? Why do you prefer Hybrids over AC when AC has more range and most of the time by far more damage, no cap usage and are flexible regarding damage type? Please explain it to me so I do understand. I then will stop complaining about hybrids and start using it. I will also stop to complain about the idea to have the short range guy be slower than the long range guy... |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
202
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:25:00 -
[701] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:Clueless blah blah blah
You clearly don't have a clue about hybrids, hybrid ships, and of course about gallente.
They were total crap from frigs to bs, now they're total crap from cruisers to bs, nice step.
By the way CCP thx for these awesome trails, warp, stars.
About gallente improvements and hybrids? -you clearly failed to understand or do the right thing. I have good news for you, I'll still be flying Minmatar/Angel over My toon first race and use projectiles over hybrids when I have a lot more skills in hybrids than projectiles.
Thx for this 1st April joke that is "hybrids rebalancing" stuff.
|
Cunane Jeran
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:26:00 -
[702] - Quote
I'll admit most of my fighting happens on gates, in small gangs, so the speed thing has never been an issue, I've never had to close vast distances and I'm very rarely solo.
Personal preference, AC's are good there is no denying that but they aren't for me, I just prefer blasters and gallente ships, and I love using active armour tanking. Though thinking about it, I don't really have a good reason why blasters should be used over AC's.
How to buff blasters to be on par with AC's without making them AC's, while taking into account Gallente's damage bonus AND Caldari's range bonus. Only real option I can think of is giving them a lot higher Alpha.
I'll man up and say that you guys have made some damn good points here, and I'll admit I've jumped into answers without fully considering all aspects beyond my own limited play experience and thinking how I'd personally use them. I'm wrong on some counts, but I still do believe the Rail changes have gone far enough. Blasters on the other hand yes they need a lot more work.
At the end of the day though I don't want to see a power creep with another FotM until something else gets buffed higher.
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:35:00 -
[703] - Quote
Cunane Jeran wrote:Personally I've been using hybrids for the last 3 years with no complaints, and yes I can also use t2 projectiles and lasers. I've always preferred hybrids and so that's what I use, going from how they perform on Tranq right now, these changes in my eyes have gone beyond what was needed to bring them into line.
Wait a minute....
You either used hybrids for 3 years with no complaints OR you consider the changes well-received because they needed to be fixed in the first place.
In other words, you contradicted yourself.
Please stop posting here if you're going to continue to be an agitator and not provide any sort of meaningful feedback. We are trying to fix hybrids. That's what this entire thread is about. If you don't think they need more fixing, then there's really no point for you to post here. |
Cunane Jeran
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:49:00 -
[704] - Quote
Ha you have caught me out there. Who doesn't want a bit extra to whatever they are using.
As for feedback, I was providing my insights and view on the current changes, it provoked discussion most of it negative yes, but it has further pointed out weaknesses and flaws, and has presented a clear case on more needing to done.
I'll happily admit you folks have got me thinking, and have pointed out many aspects I'd not considered fully and that my point of view when it came to blasters is flawed, and more importantly that I was wrong.
Now lets put flaming the hell out of me to one side (though I'm sure it's fun)
So what can be done? without making them AC clones. Again only thing I can think of is ramping up the alpha. Unless you wanted to rework all the Caldari/Gallente ship bonuses and take a look at the Minmatar as well.
And I'll maintain that fitting they are now fine, and open up a lot of new options and that ammo never really being a problem expect for the tech two stuff.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:52:00 -
[705] - Quote
There is nothing left to say. Tallest made his tweak. He provided no explanations or feedback. Discussing Hybrids is no longer worthwhile. |
Maksim Cammeren
The Tuskers
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 00:52:00 -
[706] - Quote
Ok, you can't say this:
Tanya Powers wrote:Cunane Jeran wrote:Clueless blah blah blah You clearly don't have a clue about hybrids, hybrid ships, and of course about gallente.
if you follow it by:
Tanya Powers wrote: They were total crap from frigs to bs, now they're total crap from cruisers to bs, nice step.
Hybrids were highly competitive in the frig arena before this patch and don't need more boosts. This includes the Gallente, Caldari, as well as the pirate hybrid platforms.
However, as a Caldari hybrid user, I can confirm that for cruiser and above they were mostly limited to the PvE arena. I am not sure whether the current buffs are sufficient to make them a good weapon for existing ships, it will take a lot more than cursory testing to know for sure, maybe they will find a niche role in fleet engagements. At least it looks like the Naga will turn out to be a viable weapons platform.
There have been many interesting (at varying levels of practicality) suggestions in this thread on how to improve the ability of blaster ships to catch up to their targets. I hope that the devs seriously think through some of them and decide if they would be desirable/practical to implement. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
163
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 01:09:00 -
[707] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:There is nothing left to say. Tallest made his tweak. He provided no explanations or feedback. Discussing Hybrids is no longer worthwhile.
more like Failest. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 02:06:00 -
[708] - Quote
Maksim Cammeren wrote:I hope that the devs seriously think through some of them and decide if they would be desirable/practical to implement.
Tell you what, you can keep your hope in your left hand... and stick the right out the window and wait for the birds to fill it with droppings and see which one is filled first. I'm betting on the right.
|
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 02:15:00 -
[709] - Quote
Reading this thread has been a daily source of deja vu. I couldn't put my finger on why until just now: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1184365
First 15 posts pretty much sum up the first 50 pages.... but things really start to get good between pg 80 and 85. lol
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. :)) |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
58
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 03:01:00 -
[710] - Quote
Not really. The boost is not near what it should be. Does not make it worth it at all to use blasters still. |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 03:01:00 -
[711] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote: 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. :))
The difference being that their changes actually put them in range of the target. We are hindered by previous nerfs and changes starting with and not limited to, Webber nerfs, Armor rigging changes, speed nerfs, agility nerfs, the projectile buff and the laser buff, and the EANM nerf. All of them make us slower, less survivable and less able to project damage. 5 percent here 10 ms there is doing jack all to help the core issue. GET US IN RANGE Tallest or your changes mean nothing.
|
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:08:00 -
[712] - Quote
Current fix won't cut it.
Here are my solutions:
The problem stems from the fastest, most agile race ALSO having the best ability to maintain a variety of range and keep DPS on a target.
There are two ways to correct this, and they must be followed closely: 1) Make Gallente the fastest race, with Minmatar being the most agile. This makes Gallente terrifying when they are sprinting at you, and the Minmatar must use their manueverability to their advantage, while the Gallente ships are sprinting like a bull at a matador.
-or-
2) Make Gallente the falloff race, with a small buff to optimal. Projectiles will have to be retooled to having almost non-existent falloff. This makes it so the Gallente will remain slower than the Minmatar AND less agile, but their falloff will still hit into the Minmatar ships regardless. For example: Heavy Neutron Blaster II should hit 6km optimal with 8km falloff. 425mm Auto cannons should have 10km optimal with 1km falloff. This would force them into a very narrow gap to maintain damage on target, but since they are fast and agile, they are better equipped for this purpose.
With Gallente now having the closest range weapons by optimal, they will still be terrifying to get close to, as it should be, with Minmatar remaining the quick, agile race with a specific range they must maintain to be effective, and Amarr remaining the longest overall range.
In addition, these changes would also have to be brought into being, for the sake of tank balance: Armor Rigs must only affect agility, not both agility AND speed. Plates must follow these same rules. Hybrid reload should be 5s, as it is a hybrid between laser and auto-cannons, it should have a mix between 10s and no reload. Astronautic Rigs should affect shield HP, as no speed tank should have both speed and any form of HP as a "tank," and speed/agility modifiers already take up low slots, compromising armor tanking. It shouldn't be "speed and shield tank" it should be "speed or HP tank" We have a blog, it is terrible. How to fix Bounty Hunting |
Dro Nee
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:22:00 -
[713] - Quote
Nemesor wrote: The difference being that their changes actually put them in range of the target. We are hindered by previous nerfs and changes starting with and not limited to, Webber nerfs, Armor rigging changes, speed nerfs, agility nerfs, the projectile buff and the laser buff, and the EANM nerf. All of them make us slower, less survivable and less able to project damage. 5 percent here 10 ms there is doing jack all to help the core issue. GET US IN RANGE Tallest or your changes mean nothing.
The problem with your "too many nerfs" argument is that you could undo all those nerfs (web, speed, etc) and blaster boats would still not be the go-to ship for anything.
-- Blaster boats were never that wonderful during the nano-age. Sure nano-Ishtars were passable, and a good ranis pilot could nab an average crow pilot, but they were never kings of the hill. Diemost was the die-most even then.
-- The fitting saavy of players is much higher now. Undoing the nerfs you mention would not result in a 'rax being nearly as viable as it once was because people wouldnt necessarily go back to fitting plate ruppies with d180's. There has been a fundamental shift in the way people approach fights.
-- There has also been an uptick in the use of performance enhancing items/alts. What was an inconsequential difference back in the day, is commonly magnified to significant in todays fights. Yes, gang-links/implants/drugs have been around for a long time, but "average joe" players use them much much more.
The problem is not in the nerfs that have come about, but rather the fact that really short range and really long range fighting is not considered common or viable. The vast majority of fights now take place in a compressed band, and anything that doesnt fight there is not optimal (and if it isnt optimal it isnt used).
Your "GET US IN RANGE" plea might put a band-aid on blasters, but it doesnt fix the underlying issue of homogenization of the battlefield. If CCP actually addresses the things that are causing that, then the boost you ask for only serves to make hybrid boats the only boats worth flying later.
IMO the changes in place on SISare decent (not exactly what I would have chosen but meh). Do I think they will make blasterboats common? No. But I would rather take a smaller buff now then have to get nerfed (or keep up the power creep ideology) once CCP actually gets around to fixing those mechanics which are truely the problem? Yes. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:32:00 -
[714] - Quote
Dro Nee wrote:Do I think they will make blasterboats common? No.
If the answer to your question is no, aren't you really just saying you believe these changes will not be successful?
I'm not asking for hybrids to dominate the battlefield, but it would be nice if hybrids presented enough usability to compose roughly a quarter of ships from any random pvp engagement. I think you and I can both realistically say it's well below 10%, maybe even below 5%. That's pathetic. |
Dro Nee
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 05:31:00 -
[715] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Dro Nee wrote:Do I think they will make blasterboats common? No. If the answer to your question is no, aren't you really just saying you believe these changes will not be successful? I'm not asking for hybrids to dominate the battlefield, but it would be nice if hybrids presented enough usability to compose roughly a quarter of ships from any random pvp engagement. I think you and I can both realistically say it's well below 10%, maybe even below 5%. That's pathetic.
I think the changes will be successful at putting blaster boats back onto solid footing in the engagements and ranges they are supposed to shine in. Something that they have lacked.
Usage statistics are a pretty ****-poor method of evaluating the quality of a product, so I will not even bother with the rest of your post. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 05:56:00 -
[716] - Quote
Dro Nee wrote:Magosian wrote:Dro Nee wrote:Do I think they will make blasterboats common? No. If the answer to your question is no, aren't you really just saying you believe these changes will not be successful? I'm not asking for hybrids to dominate the battlefield, but it would be nice if hybrids presented enough usability to compose roughly a quarter of ships from any random pvp engagement. I think you and I can both realistically say it's well below 10%, maybe even below 5%. That's pathetic. I think the changes will be successful at putting blaster boats back onto solid footing in the engagements and ranges they are supposed to shine in. Something that they have lacked. Usage statistics are a pretty ****-poor method of evaluating the quality of a product, so I will not even bother with the rest of your post.
Heh, I'm not trying to make it personal. I think the popularity of canes in skirmish PvP and Sleipnirs in the last alliance tournament speaks for itself. I guess we just have to agree to disagree.
EDIT: Jesus, how could I forget rifters and vagabonds....? |
Dro Nee
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 06:21:00 -
[717] - Quote
Yeah it sounded snottier than I meant. Fixed. |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 06:44:00 -
[718] - Quote
I dont know why people are so pissed. The chages so far, while not the ultimate solution, are pretty damn good.
Clearly they arent looking to chage hybrids roles and/or make them mimic lasers/projectiles. These chages going live are a boost to their current roles. Ill take it - given that he said gallente ship tweaks are next. That is where the big canges will come from - the ship bonuses.
This is the right way to do it. Change guns first, see how they play. Once you have an idea on where the failures are, fix those holes with ship tweaks and bonuses. Doing it any other way will introduce too many variables that cant be evaluated properly.
Said another way -given these changes are slight, it suggests to me that we are going to get some pretty significant ship changes soon.
My predictioms for simple change we might see:
Most gal ships get larger utility space fo an extra flight of drones Myrm and Eos get boosted bandwidth. Active tavking cycles will be tweaked. Gallente in general will get some kind of tweak so we use our armor and structure better. Perhaps the return of thr long web for certain ships. I also think blaster ships at least should get some kind of overheat bonus for durqation andor module done. That wouls indirectly boost many things:damage, speed, tank, tackle, etc. That is a sship bonus that would be easy to fix,
Regardless, the changes need to ship-specific, and SIMPLE to code. The treatises here are mostly unrealistic because of their length.
Just my opinion. |
Torei Dutalis
Enigmatic Goat Herders
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 06:51:00 -
[719] - Quote
At this point we're just beating a dead (insert animal of choice). Just eat the nice carrot and be happy (it's not drugged). |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 06:54:00 -
[720] - Quote
Emily Poast wrote:Clearly they arent looking to chage hybrids roles and/or make them mimic lasers/projectiles. These chages going live are a boost to their current roles. Ill take it - given that he said gallente ship tweaks are next. That is where the big canges will come from - the ship bonuses.
Hrm, got a link where he said this? I suppose I just saw the agi/spd increases and figured that was it. If this is really true, maybe I should lay off a bit. |
|
AspiB'elt
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 07:32:00 -
[721] - Quote
The blaster don't have problem
The problem again is not the blaster but the possibility to go in close range with your ship. If you have the possibility to go in close range the blaster are already very good. Don't try to modify the range or falloff.
They are only two thing to do and the blaster will be very popular again.
For the plate remove the mass (new mass 1kg) and put some malus on the shield - 15% Same for the trimark remove the malus on the agility and put a malus on the shield also.
What happend with this two modifications. The gallente become the second race in term of speed and agility (minmatar first).
Now it's possible to rush you target and use your blaster
That all. Pls CCP try simply this modification and the blaster will be fine |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
209
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 08:16:00 -
[722] - Quote
The Hook Harbus show ( ) has been cancelled, and I have a bad feeling about this change.
Let me explain.
What happens if you modify armor plates and trimarks ? What will happen to Minmatar Armor tanked ships ? What will happen to Amarr ships ?
Basically, if you want to cut off some mass on Gallente ships, do it on the ship's hull, not on the plates (Or else it will break the balance with other races who had no problems in the first place).
Same goes for armor rigs. Change their penalties on Gallente ships maybe ? I think "per-race" penalties for rigs would definetly help balancing stuff. You could armor fit a Hurricane, but since armor rigs are supposed to be for another race, you would suffer a little bit more than the other race when it comes to the penalties, for exemple. |
AspiB'elt
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 08:33:00 -
[723] - Quote
SMT008 wrote:The Hook Harbus show ( ) has been cancelled, and I have a bad feeling about this change. Let me explain. What happens if you modify armor plates and trimarks ? What will happen to Minmatar Armor tanked ships ? What will happen to Amarr ships ? Basically, if you want to cut off some mass on Gallente ships, do it on the ship's hull, not on the plates (Or else it will break the balance with other races who had no problems in the first place). Same goes for armor rigs. Change their penalties on Gallente ships maybe ? I think "per-race" penalties for rigs would definetly help balancing stuff. You could armor fit a Hurricane, but since armor rigs are supposed to be for another race, you would suffer a little bit more than the other race when it comes to the penalties, for exemple.
For minmatar amor tanking you decrease the size of the shield and you increase the buffer of the armor ... And where is the problem ? It's a good thing you don't have the double tanking ...
The minmatar are rush team not heavy tanker team.
You need to make a choice and when you are matar you have this choice ?. But matar prefere to keep the low slot for DPS and medium for tanking, is it? |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
209
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 08:49:00 -
[724] - Quote
Oh, well sorry I though the "shield -15%" meant "put a mass penalty on the shield rigs".
Agreed with this idea then. Armor rigs reduce (It needs to DRASTICALLY REDUCE though, like -20% with a stacking penalty) Shield capacity. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 09:09:00 -
[725] - Quote
Imho rails still need buffing,especially tracking. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 10:18:00 -
[726] - Quote
Emily Poast wrote:I dont know why people are so pissed.
Because we are not wearing the same rose colored glasses you are. How long have Hybrids been broken? How long has it taken them to admit and change things? Now those changes are what we get and what we should be happy with because thats it for at least another year or two. Where did he say he was tweaking ships further? I'm pretty sure I would remember that bit of fluff. That 10ms he gave most gallente boats was it. Long story short... the message (lack of) from CCP Tallest tells me that as far as CCP is concerned, Hybrids and the ships that use them are fixed. |
Raven Ether
Republic University Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:50:00 -
[727] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Imho rails still need buffing,especially tracking.
Yeah I think that a tiny boost to tracking is needed to bring them more in line.
- Slight tracking boost to Railguns
|
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:27:00 -
[728] - Quote
Quote:For the plate remove the mass (new mass 1kg) and put some malus on the shield - 15% Same for the trimark remove the malus on the agility and put a malus on the shield also.
What happend with this two modifications. The gallente become the second race in term of speed and agility (minmatar first).
Now it's possible to rush you target and use your blaster
i highly doubt this would help. making changes on plates/rigs would influence all the races in the same way - basicly ignoring the problem with hybrids. since all weapon platforms using plates would get the same effect out of this..
the truth is quite simple here:
Quote:The gallente become the second race in term of speed and agility (minmatar first).
either forget about this so wrong doctrine and make gallente blasterboat fastest OR give blasters better range ability than autocannons. all other options just mess with the game machanics without solving the problem. u may like it or not but the logic commands: fast ships -> short weapon range, slow ships -> long weapon range.
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:42:00 -
[729] - Quote
wow this thread is growing like hell... hard to keep up. but after scanning the new posts, hybrids and their users still need some love. especially some kind of inherent benefit. so i came up with a wild idea (and i apologize if somebody already posted a similar idea)
how about blaster (or hybrids) don't use cap but actually give back cap for every shot fired (because they use highly charged ammo or whatever-lore). let's say a full rack of blasters, about 4 for small ones, 6 for medium/large give back the amount of cap which an armor repair module of the same size needs to be activated. combined with a hybrid ammo revamp for more distinguishable ammo and some more love for armortanking(-bonuses on gallente blaster boats), for example armor repair amount and cycletime (which should be around the time of the blaster rof) this should give a nice reason for using blasters (or hybrids if you do the same for rails) through gaining enough cap for using you tank in neut range and having not to worry about your cap while approaching with mwd or afterburner, blaster and gallente boats which give bonuses to blasters should gain some more attention, especially in small groups and solo-pvp.
your opinions? |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:47:00 -
[730] - Quote
Heh I was on SiSi and testing. All what I can say is "L.O.L"
So called Hybrid re-balancing its just cosmetic if its the last version of hybrids re-balance.
Its SO LOL hahaha Unplayable as it was good that I didn't switched skill training to large hybrids.
Someone is making us idiots.
CCP. Do not dare to add "HYBRID RE-BALANCING" in your marketing materials for upcoming patch coz you will be punish dont ask for that !! Even more players will quit the game !! Really... So many threads about hybrids ppl really want to play Gallente and you CANT ? What sort of company are you ? Its unbelievable. As a game developer in real life I CANT understand what are you doing ! unbelievable .... |
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:50:00 -
[731] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:wow this thread is growing like hell... hard to keep up. but after scanning the new posts, hybrids and their users still need some love. especially some kind of inherent benefit. so i came up with a wild idea (and i apologize if somebody already posted a similar idea)
how about blaster (or hybrids) don't use cap but actually give back cap for every shot fired (because they use highly charged ammo or whatever-lore). let's say a full rack of blasters, about 4 for small ones, 6 for medium/large give back the amount of cap which an armor repair module of the same size needs to be activated. combined with a hybrid ammo revamp for more distinguishable ammo and some more love for armortanking(-bonuses on gallente blaster boats), for example armor repair amount and cycletime (which should be around the time of the blaster rof) this should give a nice reason for using blasters (or hybrids if you do the same for rails) through gaining enough cap for using you tank in neut range and having not to worry about your cap while approaching with mwd or afterburner, blaster and gallente boats which give bonuses to blasters should gain some more attention, especially in small groups and solo-pvp.
your opinions?
Dear Man or Woman :)
Please log in to sisi and check what they done.. Its just little bit of tracking , reloading time and some dmg its minor change. Everything that we wrote was useless... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:58:00 -
[732] - Quote
Yes - CCP is about 2/3 done with the first part of the hybrid balancing
Once they have looked into a unique role, ammo tweak and as someone mentioned remaining tracking issues on railguns they will havfe to start on the last part = speed balance bwtween gallente/minmatar and armor/shield and how to make caldari hybrid ships usefull and work for pvp with their non existing dps and rarely worthwhile optimal bonus.
Pinky |
Allfa
Borealis Mining Concern IMPERIAL LEGI0N
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:59:00 -
[733] - Quote
As many, many people have said. (including me) ...
Just give Blaster a damage bonus (10% ? ) and put medium webing drones in game (BTW, make sure that gallente are the best able to use them), and done, baster ships can (maybe ) get in range
Give Rails best ROF and tracking, with small/medium dps, and done, a new role, better at fighting smaller ships at range
Simple, and Gallente specific
And to al posters who think that fastest ships + best DPS weapon sistem is a good ideea...why do you all think that blasters boats SHOULD pound they're natural counter, kiters????
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:05:00 -
[734] - Quote
Well SiSi is a depressing place to go if you want to check anything to do with gallente improvements, it really is like pissing in the wind so far. The changes are so minimal that in game play terms they go unnoticed except for frigates and they weren't the thing that needed improving.
It does look very pretty now, and warping through planets is a huge improvement for immersion. The stargates seem to be shooting a bit to the left of the star they aim at, but that's a minor irritation.
So CCP, thank you for the eye candy, and no thank you for what you've done to gallente. Unless you pull some miracle alteration to the ammo out of the bag the way you did with projectile ammo then you've completely missed the point about making gallente workable in Eve as it is today. How you could miss that point with all this feedback is beyond me, but CCP Tallest so far is not up to the task. It's a massive shame, you'd built our hopes up, but we're getting no interaction with you at all. After the way the CSM sang your praises I had expected more. Silly me. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:16:00 -
[735] - Quote
Yeah I can't believe the hybrid rebalance had such a good start with ccp feedback to us players and now it appears to be a dead thread where players yell suggestions to the moon... Obviously CCP Tallest and crew are busy but patch is coming closer and hybrids is a real emotional subject that deserves a lot of respect and attention to get as fully reworked as possible before patch.
This will enable CCP to complement themself on a good achievement and finally start looking at ship balancing to fully make eve the diverse game it shold be. Ship balancing is so much easier when the weapon systems makes sense.
Pinky |
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:19:00 -
[736] - Quote
You just still won't see them outside of gates and undocks in high sec still. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:23:00 -
[737] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:wow this thread is growing like hell... hard to keep up. but after scanning the new posts, hybrids and their users still need some love. especially some kind of inherent benefit. so i came up with a wild idea (and i apologize if somebody already posted a similar idea)
how about blaster (or hybrids) don't use cap but actually give back cap for every shot fired (because they use highly charged ammo or whatever-lore). let's say a full rack of blasters, about 4 for small ones, 6 for medium/large give back the amount of cap which an armor repair module of the same size needs to be activated. combined with a hybrid ammo revamp for more distinguishable ammo and some more love for armortanking(-bonuses on gallente blaster boats), for example armor repair amount and cycletime (which should be around the time of the blaster rof) this should give a nice reason for using blasters (or hybrids if you do the same for rails) through gaining enough cap for using you tank in neut range and having not to worry about your cap while approaching with mwd or afterburner, blaster and gallente boats which give bonuses to blasters should gain some more attention, especially in small groups and solo-pvp.
your opinions? Dear Man or Woman :) Please log in to sisi and check what they done.. Its just little bit of tracking , reloading time and some dmg its minor change. Everything that we wrote was useless...
i do not have the skills to properly test the new changes, usually people try to shoot me with them ... i wanted to hear some opinions about my idea, which (combined with some of the other good ideas in this thread) should give blasters/hybrids something that is worth using. what if we figure out something good for fixing the hybrids and push it right into ccp tallest hands, like an email or whatever? devs usually don't linger around in forums anyway...
|
Crucis Cassiopeiae
EvE-COM
714
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:28:00 -
[738] - Quote
Please give at least little more boost to hybrids... Or speed to all hybrid ships... Please??? |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:07:00 -
[739] - Quote
Allfa wrote: As many, many people have said. (including me) ...
Just give Blaster a damage bonus (10% ? ) and put medium webing drones in game (BTW, make sure that gallente are the best able to use them), and done, baster ships can (maybe ) get in range
Give Rails best ROF and tracking, with small/medium dps, and done, a new role, better at fighting smaller ships at range
Simple, and Gallente specific
And to al posters who think that fastest ships + best DPS weapon sistem is a good ideea...why do you all think that blasters boats SHOULD pound they're natural counter, kiters????
Doesn't help much when the drones get popped and you're up **** creek without a paddle, meanwhile you're getting pounded by every laser/barrage fitted ship in the fight while you can't do anything but plod along helplessly. Ewar drone changes are not going to save anyone. If anything, they'll just help kiters even more.
And kiters would be their natural counter, except that it's retardedly easy to kite these days. You don't even have to put speed mods on a Hurricane to kite a Brutix (even a shield one). There doesn't have to be any compromise for the kiting ship, it gets range, damage, and speed with a workable tank, while the blaster ship has to choose between one of the three. It's bad game design and it should have been corrected by now. |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:11:00 -
[740] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Emily Poast wrote:I dont know why people are so pissed. Because we are not wearing the same rose colored glasses you are. How long have Hybrids been broken? How long has it taken them to admit and change things? Now those changes are what we get and what we should be happy with because thats it for at least another year or two. Where did he say he was tweaking ships further? I'm pretty sure I would remember that bit of fluff. That 10ms he gave most gallente boats was it. Long story short... the message (lack of) from CCP Tallest tells me that as far as CCP is concerned, Hybrids and the ships that use them are fixed.
To answer you and Magosian about possible ship changes, I got it from the dev blog. I am on my ipad and cant be bothered to quote the individual parts, but read the first 3 paragraphs and the paragraph underthe 'hybrid turret ships' title. I am reading between the lines, but its pretty clear to me that the turret changes were the first step. If that doesnt fix them, then they are looking at ship fixes (armor tanking issues and other ship bonuses to make hybrids perform better were specific possibilities mentioned). There is just no way (and even if there was, it would have been a bad idea) to change both guns and ships in time for the winter patch.
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012
Look, you are right about the delays,all MMOs are guilty of similar issues, but I honestly believe CCP felt the Incarna 'wallet vote' by the players, and it stung them. Look at the massive amount of changes since that release in a short amount of time. The video blogs, many fixes to ancient annoyances, new ships, etc. I 100% promise you that CEOs dont write letters like the one written by CCP unless some bad juju has gone down. Now, by the spring, if there isnt light at the end of the tunnel for the Gallente players, vote with your wallet again.
So, given his statements in the dev blog and CCP new commitment to 'get back to the ships,' I think the gallente ships are next. I suspect Tallest just didnt come out and say it because he wanted to see how the minor speed and turret changes worked first. He probably also didnt want another threadnaught like this until later. ;) |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:34:00 -
[741] - Quote
AspiB'elt wrote:The blaster don't have problem Absolutely cannot agree here. All you have to do is ask yourself what do hybrids give the pilot before a shot is fired. Hybrids still give nothing in this respect, thus will always be a distant third or fourth choice in weapon systems. Ineffective ranges, cap use, and fixed damage type is just icing on the poop-cake.
I don't know how people don't see this. Cap free guns is so amazingly powerful! Dictating effective range via instant ammo swap is so amazingly powerful! Why is this so hard to understand??
Emily Poast wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012 Well I appreciate the link. Unfortunately this is what I expected. He does say "I am hesitant to boost individual ships right now," but then proceeds to mention his belief that increasing speed and agility slightly is what he thought was needed. This is, consequently, exactly what was done to the ships, so I'm having a hard time believing more is going to be done.
Emily Poast wrote:CCP new commitment to 'get back to the ships,' I think the gallente ships are next. I wish I could share your optimism. I really do.
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:38:00 -
[742] - Quote
Yes it is plausbile. Some more ommunication would make this very very difficult process easier. If we can be sure ships like the eos / deimos will be looked after i would say. ok in that case the additional 5% buff to blasters is to much.
More Information helps us focus and judge the changes. If nothing is comming in addition some ships would starve; if there will be hull changes it might have been to much already.
Let me play the if case:
If there will be hull changes: Changes to blasters for smaller ships like frigates, ceptors and destroyers are to much.
If there won't be changes to modeules and hulls: BC's, command ships and HAC need a web range bonus and maybe and additional slot in high or med.
Thinks i would keep an eye on is: - active armor repair bonus is no good in a time of big alpha Eoa, Astrate, Deimos, Eris, Hyperion are strange ships....
talk to us plz :D in some way, someone |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:01:00 -
[743] - Quote
CCP, we need confirmation there will be no further changes to the current hybrid list added to Crucible.
Might as well make people angry now instead of at launch, if not.
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
81
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:03:00 -
[744] - Quote
Magosian wrote: I don't know how people don't see this. Cap free guns is so amazingly powerful! Dictating effective range via instant ammo swap is so amazingly powerful! Why is this so hard to understand??
Commuting to work, this thought really kept popping into my head. Maybe hybrids aren't so bad but just laser and projectiles are too OP?
Projectiles have no cap use, omni damage, and are good both at LR and CR. ACs have a good RoF and Arties have lolAwesomeAlpha.
Lasers have instant crystal/range change, unlimited ammo (room for cap boosters), and armor tank freeing up a slot fo said booster, not to mention a non-sig radius penalized tank
Hybrids use cap, use cargo, and either excel at very CR or very LR, with the LR severely lacking DPS. Rails need Alpha, Blasters need DPS and speed (not agility)
no cap use is a huge advantage as you now have the ability to perma run an MWD regardless of any situation. |
AspiB'elt
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:05:00 -
[745] - Quote
Magosian wrote:AspiB'elt wrote:The blaster don't have problem Absolutely cannot agree here. All you have to do is ask yourself what do hybrids give the pilot before a shot is fired. Hybrids still give nothing in this respect, thus will always be a distant third or fourth choice in weapon systems. Ineffective ranges, cap use, and fixed damage type is just icing on the poop-cake. I don't know how people don't see this. Cap free guns is so amazingly powerful! Dictating effective range via instant ammo swap is so amazingly powerful! Why is this so hard to understand?? Emily Poast wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012 Well I appreciate the link. Unfortunately this is what I expected. He does say "I am hesitant to boost individual ships right now," but then proceeds to mention his belief that increasing speed and agility slightly is what he thought was needed. This is, consequently, exactly what was done to the ships, so I'm having a hard time believing more is going to be done. Emily Poast wrote:CCP new commitment to 'get back to the ships,' I think the gallente ships are next. I wish I could share your optimism. I really do.
Perhaps because you don't have read the text after this comment |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
166
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:17:00 -
[746] - Quote
Tallest, you wanna go over some of the upcoming ship changes with us? there are upcoming ship changes, right? we're dying here. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:34:00 -
[747] - Quote
AspiB'elt wrote:Magosian wrote:AspiB'elt wrote:The blaster don't have problem Absolutely cannot agree here. Perhaps because you don't have read the text after this comment
I read it, and I think it is wrong. Modifying armor plates to reduce/remove speed penalities does not change the inherent advantage of Minmatar base speed being higher than Gallente base speed. Another way to look at it is, armor-tanked Minmatar ships would receive the same "bonus" that Gallente ships do, thus it addresses nothing.
Frankly, I don't think armor plates and rigs should modify speed to any degree and I would love to see the penalties removed entirely. But I'm not under any illusion that removing them is going to magically make hybrids a pliable weapon system.
As I've stated several times in this thread already, until CCP gives hybrids an ability that projectiles and lasers do not already provide, there will never be an incentive or reason to switch. You can make blasters do 5000 dps (which would actually make them THE choice for cap killers) but skirmish pilots would still laugh at hybrid pilots as they fly circles around them, outside of their effective [blaster] ranges. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:53:00 -
[748] - Quote
All this silence is terrible. I'm bracing for the worse at this point. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:24:00 -
[749] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:All this silence is terrible. I'm bracing for the worse at this point.
I think it is indicative of how much CCP's attitude has (not) changed.
If they had really learned their lesson after the Pay to Win scandal, they would have read the thread and responded to it by now. Tallest doen't care what you think Blasters needs. He is going to do what he is going to do and feedback be damned. Any attempt to listen and respond now is damage control only. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:24:00 -
[750] - Quote
making noise for blasters, hopes ccp tallest does as well soon..... |
|
Onictus
Legendary Knights Vorpal's Edge
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:42:00 -
[751] - Quote
Magosian wrote:
As I've stated several times in this thread already, until CCP gives hybrids an ability that projectiles and lasers do not already provide, there will never be an incentive or reason to switch. You can make blasters do 5000 dps (which would actually make them THE choice for cap killers) but skirmish pilots would still laugh at hybrid pilots as they fly circles around them, outside of their effective [blaster] ranges.
Very much this.
Blasters. Less optimal than lazers Less fall off than AC
Disadvatages of both (short optimal, cap consumption, fixed ammo type)
For a tracking and dps advantage....neither of which make up for the fact that you have to scram yourself with medium weapons....larges....we'll see I didn't get in an good knockdown drag outs with a BS on SiSi
Rails Alpha......hahahahahahahahahahaa DPS rails only catch arties on the LAST cycle between 1400 vollies cap consumpion, ammo consumption, fixed ammo type. ....but hey, rails can do sub-par damage at useless ranges.
Oh yeah....friggin Tachyons track better
OH and while we are at....really? 8 range bands? 8? Who wants to try to keep up with that.
....and that isn't even getting into the hulls.
As it stands I fly Gallente and Matar with equal skill, I'm still no looking at my Gallente ships for anything but messing around and the occasion gimick fleet, the changes to the Naga make it a better all around hybrid boat then Talos neither of which hold a candle to Oracle ....and the Tornado is an entirely different zip code. For general roaming the matar ships are still going to be my go to ships. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:52:00 -
[752] - Quote
The only way I could get my brutix to kill anything was to fill my head with snakes. And then it would only get up to 2000m/s overheated. That should tell you something. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 18:12:00 -
[753] - Quote
Emily Poast wrote:I dont know why people are so pissed. The chages so far, while not the ultimate solution, are pretty damn good.
Clearly they arent looking to chage hybrids roles and/or make them mimic lasers/projectiles. These chages going live are a boost to their current roles. Ill take it - given that he said gallente ship tweaks are next. That is where the big canges will come from - the ship bonuses.
This is the right way to do it. Change guns first, see how they play. Once you have an idea on where the failures are, fix those holes with ship tweaks and bonuses. Doing it any other way will introduce too many variables that cant be evaluated properly.
Said another way -given these changes are slight, it suggests to me that we are going to get some pretty significant ship changes soon.
My predictioms for simple change we might see:
Most gal ships get larger utility space fo an extra flight of drones Myrm and Eos get boosted bandwidth. Active tavking cycles will be tweaked. Gallente in general will get some kind of tweak so we use our armor and structure better. Perhaps the return of thr long web for certain ships. I also think blaster ships at least should get some kind of overheat bonus for durqation andor module done. That wouls indirectly boost many things:damage, speed, tank, tackle, etc. That is a sship bonus that would be easy to fix,
Regardless, the changes need to ship-specific, and SIMPLE to code. The treatises here are mostly unrealistic because of their length.
Just my opinion.
Why are people so pissed? Becouse there is no answer from CCP or Talest, people feel ignored and CCP's behaviour is like a 14 year old amateur. This is so LOL, I can't believe a company works so hard on annoying its paying customers instead of improving the product.
About your ship changes: All speculation at this time. Maybe it will take several month, maybe years, until those issues are addressed? Nobody really knows, but many fear from their experience...
I have never seen a company that has such a fail communication, especialy after promising improvement... But it seems that that was just marketing-blah-blah. Don't they know that marketing-blah-blah will lead to angry customers who will leave the sinking ship?
Sorry for being so negative, but the whole thread is rediculous, not becouse of the hybrid changes, no, it's becouse of they way this company communicates and reactes to their player base. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 18:15:00 -
[754] - Quote
After playing on SiSi with some fittings, (specially with the new Naga) I see where they are going with the proposed changes. Some notes:
* Hybrids as a whole are basically fine now * Decreased reload time increases DPS on the long run and make changing charges to dictate range a more viable tactic. This puts hybrids mid-way between Amarr (instant damage/range change) and Minmatar (slow damage/range change). * Decreased ammo size means more cap boosters on cargo, increasing endurance. Again, mid-way between Amarr (crystals take no space) and Minmatar (chews a lot of ammo) * The 5% damage increase to blasters give some welcome edge to an already high damage weapon
What's left to do: * They need to look into Gallente ships bonuses to make blasters viable. The players ideas about giving MWD speed or overheat bonuses are good ideas. This together with the already proposed changes to blasters will make it more competitive. * Caldari boats are fine. On the other hand, railguns still feel too short on tracking, specially on the smaller guns. They could use a 10/7.5% increase instead of 5%, since tracking computers compromise shield tanking by filling precious mid-slots, specially on smaller ships. Also, hybrids rigs are useless on the already powergrid-nerfed Caldari ships since they penalize power grid usage and that scales with the number of guns (and you are always fitting a full rack).
I feel there's some iteration left to be done still, but they are going the right path I believe. Go play around at SiSi a bit instead of crying for a major buff on the forums so CCP can have useful feedback. |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
89
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 18:45:00 -
[755] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Emily Poast wrote:I dont know why people are so pissed. The chages so far, while not the ultimate solution, are pretty damn good.
Clearly they arent looking to chage hybrids roles and/or make them mimic lasers/projectiles. These chages going live are a boost to their current roles. Ill take it - given that he said gallente ship tweaks are next. That is where the big canges will come from - the ship bonuses.
This is the right way to do it. Change guns first, see how they play. Once you have an idea on where the failures are, fix those holes with ship tweaks and bonuses. Doing it any other way will introduce too many variables that cant be evaluated properly.
Said another way -given these changes are slight, it suggests to me that we are going to get some pretty significant ship changes soon.
My predictioms for simple change we might see:
Most gal ships get larger utility space fo an extra flight of drones Myrm and Eos get boosted bandwidth. Active tavking cycles will be tweaked. Gallente in general will get some kind of tweak so we use our armor and structure better. Perhaps the return of thr long web for certain ships. I also think blaster ships at least should get some kind of overheat bonus for durqation andor module done. That wouls indirectly boost many things:damage, speed, tank, tackle, etc. That is a sship bonus that would be easy to fix,
Regardless, the changes need to ship-specific, and SIMPLE to code. The treatises here are mostly unrealistic because of their length.
Just my opinion. Why are people so pissed? Becouse there is no answer from CCP or Talest, people feel ignored and CCP's behaviour is like a 14 year old amateur. This is so LOL, I can't believe a company works so hard on annoying its paying customers instead of improving the product. About your ship changes: All speculation at this time. Maybe it will take several month, maybe years, until those issues are addressed? Nobody really knows, but many fear from their experience... I have never seen a company that has such a fail communication, especialy after promising improvement... But it seems that that was just marketing-blah-blah. Don't they know that marketing-blah-blah will lead to angry customers who will leave the sinking ship? Sorry for being so negative, but the whole thread is rediculous, not becouse of the hybrid changes, no, it's becouse of they way this company communicates and reactes to their player base.
I believe the Amarr buff worked the way he proposes. They boosted pulse tracking and nerfed some armour modules. Two to three months later EM resistances across the board were nerfed and quite a few ships got their fitting adusted, extra turret slots, etc. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 18:46:00 -
[756] - Quote
After playing on SiSi with some fittings, (specially with the new Naga) I see where they are going with the proposed changes.
I don't. Could you explain this?
* Hybrids as a whole are basically fine now
What? In which scenario are hybrids better than projectiles or lasers?
* Decreased reload time increases DPS on the long run and make changing charges to dictate range a more viable tactic. This puts hybrids mid-way between Amarr (instant damage/range change) and Minmatar (slow damage/range change).
All you're doing is reinforcing the concept that lasers do something better than hybrids. In other words, you just admitted to hybrid shortcomings and didn't even realize it. This IS the hybrid handicap by the way: they do nothing better than lasers or projectiles.
* Decreased ammo size means more cap boosters on cargo, increasing endurance. Again, mid-way between Amarr (crystals take no space) and Minmatar (chews a lot of ammo)
Great, so I get to carry one more cap booster 800? One? Or are you suggesting I should start arbitrarily carrying 10000-20000 hybrid charges so this change is more noticable?
* The 5% damage increase to blasters give some welcome edge to an already high damage weapon
There is nothing "welcome" about this. Ineffective range without any way to close the gap, nor any desire to increase their range, results in an unchanged effectiveness of blasters. In other words, the same problems remain.
What's left to do: * They need to look into Gallente ships bonuses to make blasters viable. The players ideas about giving MWD speed or overheat bonuses are good ideas. This together with the already proposed changes to blasters will make it more competitive.
They are absolutely horrid ideas. Fix hybrids. This is a thread to fix hybrids, not a thread to buff MWDs or change the mechanics of overheat. Supplimenting other variables to compensate for the ineffectiveness of hybrids is already one of the many problems plaguing hybrid turrets in the first place. Doing this would only serve to exasperate current shortcomings and problems.
* Caldari boats are fine.
Eh, I think this is largely debatable, but again, this thread is for fixing hybrids.
I feel there's some iteration left to be done still, but they are going the right path I believe. Go play around at SiSi a bit instead of crying for a major buff on the forums so CCP can have useful feedback.
You're the second person in this thread to contradict himself regarding this topic.
Hybrids as a whole are basically fine now or I feel there's some iteration left to be done still
It can't be both. Which is it? |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:15:00 -
[757] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Tallest, you wanna go over some of the upcoming ship changes with us? there are upcoming ship changes, right? we're dying here.
Like he is reading this thread or something. Come on... he has a thick neck beard. Don't you know you can't trust a man with a neck beard? |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:16:00 -
[758] - Quote
Hamox wrote:
Why are people so pissed? Becouse there is no answer from CCP or Talest, people feel ignored and CCP's behaviour is like a 14 year old amateur. This is so LOL, I can't believe a company works so hard on annoying its paying customers instead of improving the product.
About your ship changes: All speculation at this time. Maybe it will take several month, maybe years, until those issues are addressed? Nobody really knows, but many fear from their experience...
I have never seen a company that has such a fail communication, especialy after promising improvement... But it seems that that was just marketing-blah-blah. Don't they know that marketing-blah-blah will lead to angry customers who will leave the sinking ship?
Sorry for being so negative, but the whole thread is rediculous, not becouse of the hybrid changes, no, it's becouse of they way this company communicates and reactes to their player base.
Sorry, but the very fact that there is an entire forum dedicated to user feedback, is awash with blue posts, and contains actual resultant changes from some of the feedback proves they are better than the vast majority of software companies when it comes to communication.
I am no CCP fanboi - this is my third extended stint with eve - but they are pretty high on the scale of communication. It may not always be snappy, and it may not always be what we want, but it is pretty good.
They cant just bow to all gallente pilot demands immediately - the other 75% of races and ships must be considered. They said they were working on it - time will tell if that is true - but the changes we have seen over the last two weeks are encouraging.
Again, just my opinion.
|
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:18:00 -
[759] - Quote
Magosian wrote:After playing on SiSi with some fittings, (specially with the new Naga) I see where they are going with the proposed changes.I don't. Could you explain this? * Hybrids as a whole are basically fine nowWhat? In which scenario are hybrids better than projectiles or lasers? * Decreased reload time increases DPS on the long run and make changing charges to dictate range a more viable tactic. This puts hybrids mid-way between Amarr (instant damage/range change) and Minmatar (slow damage/range change).All you're doing is reinforcing the concept that lasers do something better than hybrids. In other words, you just admitted to hybrid shortcomings and didn't even realize it. This IS the hybrid handicap by the way: they do nothing better than lasers or projectiles. * Decreased ammo size means more cap boosters on cargo, increasing endurance. Again, mid-way between Amarr (crystals take no space) and Minmatar (chews a lot of ammo)Great, so I get to carry one more cap booster 800? One? Or are you suggesting I should start arbitrarily carrying 10000-20000 hybrid charges so this change is more noticable? * The 5% damage increase to blasters give some welcome edge to an already high damage weaponThere is nothing "welcome" about this. Ineffective range without any way to close the gap, nor any desire to increase their range, results in an unchanged effectiveness of blasters. In other words, the same problems remain. What's left to do: * They need to look into Gallente ships bonuses to make blasters viable. The players ideas about giving MWD speed or overheat bonuses are good ideas. This together with the already proposed changes to blasters will make it more competitive.They are absolutely horrid ideas. Fix hybrids. This is a thread to fix hybrids, not a thread to buff MWDs or change the mechanics of overheat. Supplimenting other variables to compensate for the ineffectiveness of hybrids is already one of the many problems plaguing hybrid turrets in the first place. Doing this would only serve to exasperate current shortcomings and problems. * Caldari boats are fine.Eh, I think this is largely debatable, but again, this thread is for fixing hybrids. I feel there's some iteration left to be done still, but they are going the right path I believe. Go play around at SiSi a bit instead of crying for a major buff on the forums so CCP can have useful feedback.You're the second person in this thread to contradict himself regarding this topic. Hybrids as a whole are basically fine nowor I feel there's some iteration left to be done stillIt can't be both. Which is it?
You want an I win button and don't want to think. Go away. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:25:00 -
[760] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:You want an I win button and don't want to think. Go away.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I can fly t2 Minmatar fully. I already have the " I Win" button.
Care to try again?
|
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
90
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:53:00 -
[761] - Quote
Emily Poast wrote:They cant just bow to all gallente pilot demands immediately - the other 75% of races and ships must be considered. They said they were working on it - time will tell if that is true - but the changes we have seen over the last two weeks are encouraging.
Again, just my opinion.
Shame they didn't do that when buffing projectiles.
any range, any damage type, no cap usage, no choosing between dmg mods and tank.... |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 19:59:00 -
[762] - Quote
Not everybody who complains about Gallente or Hybrids wants an iwin button ;)
My opinion is that the right ballancing is most importand to a game like this and much more importand than nice looking shader effects. The shaders won't motivate you over years, but a nice and balanced game concept will. And this is the point in the end, at the moment there are many things that are not well balanced and many EVE players consider this "unchangeable". Some of them just have cros-trained to the FotM and are happy now. The good thing about this strategy is that in EVE you don't have a FotM, you have a FotY ;) So everybody here can go the easy way, but will this bring EVE forward to the next level? I don't think so. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 20:05:00 -
[763] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Not everybody who complains about Gallente or Hybrids wants an iwin button ;)
My opinion is that the right ballancing is most importand to a game like this and much more importand than nice looking shader effects. The shaders won't motivate you over years, but a nice and balanced game concept will. And this is the point in the end, at the moment there are many things that are not well balanced and many EVE players consider this "unchangeable". Some of them just have cros-trained to the FotM and are happy now. The good thing about this strategy is that in EVE you don't have a FotM, you have a FotY ;) So everybody here can go the easy way, but will this bring EVE forward to the next level? I don't think so.
I just like to fly somethin' new. many years of minmatar usage made me a little tired ^^ I'd like to get back to some ships i do not use because there are others which are just more fitting in their role. Only having two options right now is boring. a) hurricane b) logi is not a big variety using a myrm in a hurricane fleet makes you primary :D |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 20:16:00 -
[764] - Quote
I can fly anything. I can use every weapon system in the game to its fullest potential.
Think on this for a moment. If you total up all the crap PVP platforms in the game... you are looking at about 1/3 of all ships being downright useless. At least another 1/3 are situational. Thats 2/3s of the ships available to fly that are suboptimal or downright deathtraps.
That is not variety. That is not balance.
I want to fly spaceships. I want variety. I want to pew.
You can take that "I win" button you think I want and stick it somewhere uncomfortable. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 20:19:00 -
[765] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Not everybody who complains about Gallente or Hybrids wants an iwin button ;)
My opinion is that the right ballancing is most importand to a game like this and much more importand than nice looking shader effects. The shaders won't motivate you over years, but a nice and balanced game concept will. And this is the point in the end, at the moment there are many things that are not well balanced and many EVE players consider this "unchangeable". Some of them just have cros-trained to the FotM and are happy now. The good thing about this strategy is that in EVE you don't have a FotM, you have a FotY ;) So everybody here can go the easy way, but will this bring EVE forward to the next level? I don't think so.
Not disagreeing with anything you say here; you make some wonderful points.
Specifically, there is only one reason why I would like to see hybrids appropriately buffed:
- Circle of [EVE] Life: more options -> more interest -> more fights -> stronger economy -> more isk -> more options -> ... (repeat)
It is not a stretch by any means to conclude putting more hybrids on the battlefield will strengthen EVE as a whole. It will cause their demand to go up. It would cause prices of hybrid weapons and ships to go up. Incidentally, have you compared the price of an Astarte to a Sleipnir? Remember the base "cost" of materials (i.e. amounts and efforts to obtain them, not price) is virtually the same, and it becomes quite hilarious...
PvPers want more options. Manufacturers want more options. EVERYONE wants a stronger economy. It only makes sense to do this right.
EDIT:
Nemesor wrote:I want to fly spaceships. I want variety. I want to pew. BINGO!
Have a seat Imrik86. Men are talking. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 21:14:00 -
[766] - Quote
The problem, as I see is it, is:
* They introduced the speed nerf * They rendered Gallente and Minmatar useless * They buffed projectiles, and that compensated the speed nerf making Minmatar OP * They did nothing to Gallente, which stayed with a broken concept
Anyone agrees?
That's why I say hybrids, as a whole, are fine after the proposed changes. They are trying to put hybrids more midway of lasers and projectiles. The changes in reload time, ammo size, blaster damage increase and rails tracking increase point at that direction.
The original vision they had for them (blaster as high-damage, close range weapons) is okay. What they have to iterate more on and fix are the game mechanics, and they won't be able to do that changing weapon stats alone. That requires looking at the ships and the modules that collaborate to using blasters.
That means figuring out how to enable Gallente to actually get in range so blasters can be used. If you simply give more optimal / fall-off, they will just be worse ACs - still using cap and not selecting damage, mounted in less agile boats. If you just give (even more) damage, they will exploited for gate camping and useless everywhere else since the boats can't get in range. That's not fixing, that's just throwing the original concept out of the window.
Proposing any of the above means one just wants Gallente to be Minmatar. That's the same as crying for Gallente to be the new FOTM, to also have an I win button, instead of fixing what's wrong with the game mechanics in the first place.
PS: I could care less if you can fly Minmatar and can already pwn everybody. That's not the point here. |
Delphineas Fumimasa
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 21:20:00 -
[767] - Quote
Just wondering, the buffs are to BASE turrets, right? So they will be affected by skill and bonuses?
Or do hybrid just lag so far beind that a ~15% buff isn't enough. |
carmelos53
OMG totally awesome corp of one
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 21:27:00 -
[768] - Quote
So with the new sisi winter expansion being fully released on sisi I guess the hybrid balancing is put on hold??? Um what the **** ? |
Red Teufel
Blackened Skies
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 21:36:00 -
[769] - Quote
carmelos53 wrote:So with the new sisi winter expansion being fully released on sisi I guess the hybrid balancing is put on hold??? Um what the **** ?
the hybrid balancing is still a work in progress. they want to see how the new buffs will work out to gather some more data on how to tweak them some more ect. possibly nerf projectile turrets even i hope ;) |
Einar Matveinen
Familia Oscura
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 21:39:00 -
[770] - Quote
Projectile and laser systems are effective in pvp, hybrid and missile systems not.
Gallente blasters need more optimal range. I like the improvement in tracking speed. Caldari missiles need great speed i think, the great problem with missiles is their incapacity to do inmediate damage.
I have not tried railguns on Sisi yet, but in TQ their main problem is lack of damage. |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:03:00 -
[771] - Quote
^ Never heard about a Drake before?
Caracal is likely the second best cruiser in the game too. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:11:00 -
[772] - Quote
Drake Fleet with high alpha can be .... devastating :) |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:17:00 -
[773] - Quote
The problem, as I see is it, is:
* They introduced the speed nerf * They rendered Gallente and Minmatar useless * They buffed projectiles, and that compensated the speed nerf making Minmatar OP * They did nothing to Gallente, which stayed with a broken concept
Anyone agrees?
No, I do not agree. Your perception of the problem only indicates how much you really don't know. How long have you been playing? How often do you pvp?
That's why I say hybrids, as a whole, are fine after the proposed changes. They are trying to put hybrids more midway of lasers and projectiles. The changes in reload time, ammo size, blaster damage increase and rails tracking increase point at that direction.
No, they absolutely do not point in that direction. Just because 5 seconds is between 10 seconds and 0 seconds doesn't mean hybrids are "between" lasers and projectiles. What does it even mean to be "between" them anyway? You're not making sense; again, you're just showing your ignorance (don't take that personally).
There are quite a few complaints about hybrids, some of which are:
- hybrids don't provide any native benefits to the pilot
- blasters don't have enough range
- hybrids don't do enough damage
- conventional ammo blows
- t2 ammo blows
- gallente ships are too slow to execute the "blaster" philosohpy
- caldari ship bonuses to hybrid range are not enough for blasters and, unrealistically, too much for rails (warp to 150)
- blaster philosophy contradicts armor tanking
- hybrid cap use contradicts active tanking bonuses
Take your pick. There are many more, and most of them should be addressed, namely the first one, if for no other reason than to put hybrids back on the popularity map.
The original vision they had for them (blaster as high-damage, close range weapons) is okay. What they have to iterate more on and fix are the game mechanics, and they won't be able to do that changing weapon stats alone. That requires looking at the ships and the modules that collaborate to using blasters.
That's not entirely true, but for the sake of argument I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. So they decided to buff Gallente ship speed and agility, although Minmatar ships remain faster.....you don't see a problem with this? Also, you need to look up "iterate."
That's not fixing, that's just throwing the original concept out of the window.
The original concept is fundamentally flawed as long as you put shortest range weapons on slower ships!!! Screw the original concept!
Proposing any of the above means one just wants Gallente to be Minmatar. That's the same as crying for Gallente to be the new FOTM, to also have an I win button, instead of fixing what's wrong with the game mechanics in the first place.
As long as projectiles have alpha capability, allow the user to choose damage type, and are cap-free, they will NEVER lose appeal. And I HIGHLY doubt these three things will ever make it to the hybrid platform, so really, there is NO way for "Gallente to be Minmatar," as you so eloquently put it.
Besides, how do you propose hybrids get fixed? You're awfully quick to say "you don't know what you're talking about" yet have yet to provide a single constructive statement. Now's the time....
PS: I could care less if you can fly Minmatar and can already pwn everybody. That's not the point here.
So long as you keep derailing this thread with your "i win button" statements, YOU are missing the point. No one feels that way, no one is asking for it, and no post in this entire thread even remotely implies anyone believes that crap but you. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:24:00 -
[774] - Quote
Everybody knows why Minmatar ships are overpowered in some kind and everyone is scared to whisper it.
Minmatar Ships can operate outside of webber and scrambler range and easily escape a warp disruptor or warp bubble because of their speed. Small tacklers will be killed while aproaching...HAHA neutralized. Still they are also number 1 choice in close combat. They outperform blasters in their natural habitat, namely extreme close range, even if they forget to fit an neutralizer :p
That will never ever be the case with gallente no matter what buffs , changes and so on you put on the ships, ammo and guns. Only drone boats can afford to use and do have the space to fit neutralizers. That is an I Win button :p |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:34:00 -
[775] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:Everybody knows why Minmatar ships are overpowered in some kind and everyone is scared to whisper it.
Minmatar Ships can operate outside of webber and scrambler range and easily escape a warp disruptor or warp bubble because of their speed. Small tacklers will be killed while aproaching...HAHA neutralized. Still they are also number 1 choice in close combat. They outperform blasters in their natural habitat, namely extreme close range, even if they forget to fit an neutralizer :p
That will never ever be the case with gallente no matter what buffs , changes and so on you put on the ships, ammo and guns. Only drone boats can afford to use and do have the space to fit neutralizers. That is an I Win button :p
Not sure this is the ONLY reason but this is definitely true. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:39:00 -
[776] - Quote
oh forgot to mention :D minmatar do have an natural enemy :) the DRAKE of DOOM they still warp off.... |
Gods Coldblood
The Ankou Raiden.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:39:00 -
[777] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest.
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
I really like the what you're doing with the ammo size and fast reload time, i feel this should have been implemented a long time ago!
As for the extra damage, well i fly with hardwiring implants close to theses changes and i fail to see how this tackles or even closely tackles the issues we have with Gallente today. By design you, CCP, have made gallente armor tankers and thus gallente ships are rarely seen with some sort of tracking enhancers modules.. Have you ever flown a Gallente battleship without a web? Its so bad that if you have access to any other race, just pick them from now on,
As of right now i see no real solution to even tackle the problem, all i see are just cosmetic stats that don't actually help anything.
Gallente's problems have always been acceration and tracking - End of! My Youtube EVE Online PVP channel: BOOM |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:45:00 -
[778] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:I can fly anything. I can use every weapon system in the game to its fullest potential.
Think on this for a moment. If you total up all the crap PVP platforms in the game... you are looking at about 1/3 of all ships being downright useless. At least another 1/3 are situational. Thats 2/3s of the ships available to fly that are suboptimal or downright deathtraps.
That is not variety. That is not balance.
I want to fly spaceships. I want variety. I want to pew.
You can take that "I win" button you think I want and stick it somewhere uncomfortable.
So 1/3 of ships are fine generally, 1/3 of ships are fine situationally.
So 2/3 of ships are worth flying depending on the situations you find yourself in?
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:51:00 -
[779] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Nemesor wrote:I can fly anything. I can use every weapon system in the game to its fullest potential.
Think on this for a moment. If you total up all the crap PVP platforms in the game... you are looking at about 1/3 of all ships being downright useless. At least another 1/3 are situational. Thats 2/3s of the ships available to fly that are suboptimal or downright deathtraps.
That is not variety. That is not balance.
I want to fly spaceships. I want variety. I want to pew.
You can take that "I win" button you think I want and stick it somewhere uncomfortable. So 1/3 of ships are fine generally, 1/3 of ships are fine situationally. So 2/3 of ships are worth flying depending on the situations you find yourself in?
I think the point still has merit. For a game which is largely based on PvP, roughly one third of their ships not providing any real PvP use is a pretty staggering statistic. Most of that third is Caldari/Gallente, too, I would add. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:57:00 -
[780] - Quote
Let's make another approach.
I try to start a list of ships of each race which only a small minority of pilots would fly, because of style or balls of steel reasons.
Gallente: Eris Eos Astarte Hyperion Deimos Catalyst Enyo Sin Keres
Amarr: Retribution Coercer Sentinel Sacrilege
Caldari: Eagle Raptor harpy Ferox
Minmatar: Claw Hyena maybe
T1 Versions of frigs and cruiser are happily used by new players or alts, so they are not listed. |
|
Zirse
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
142
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:58:00 -
[781] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:Nemesor wrote:I can fly anything. I can use every weapon system in the game to its fullest potential.
Think on this for a moment. If you total up all the crap PVP platforms in the game... you are looking at about 1/3 of all ships being downright useless. At least another 1/3 are situational. Thats 2/3s of the ships available to fly that are suboptimal or downright deathtraps.
That is not variety. That is not balance.
I want to fly spaceships. I want variety. I want to pew.
You can take that "I win" button you think I want and stick it somewhere uncomfortable. So 1/3 of ships are fine generally, 1/3 of ships are fine situationally. So 2/3 of ships are worth flying depending on the situations you find yourself in? I think the point still has merit. For a game which is largely based on PvP, roughly one third of their ships not providing any real PvP use is a pretty staggering statistic. Most of that third is Caldari/Gallente, too, I would add.
All the more reason for tiericide. There's really only one, or in some cases two, T1 frigates that are viable for each race. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:58:00 -
[782] - Quote
Caldari frigates are actually very good. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:04:00 -
[783] - Quote
I found a funny quote
Quote:"There are 3 good dictors...... and the Eris" taken from a howto manual about interdictors |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:09:00 -
[784] - Quote
Magosian wrote: That's why I say hybrids, as a whole, are fine after the proposed changes. They are trying to put hybrids more midway of lasers and projectiles. The changes in reload time, ammo size, blaster damage increase and rails tracking increase point at that direction.
No, they absolutely do not point in that direction. Just because 5 seconds is between 10 seconds and 0 seconds doesn't mean hybrids are "between" lasers and projectiles. What does it even mean to be "between" them anyway?
What I meant by between is: * By dropping the reload time, changing ammo is a more viable tactic than with projectiles, but it's still not instantaneous as crystals. While I see how this works for rails, won't affect blasters. * By dropping the reload time you also increase the DPS in long engagements. Again, this affects more rails than blasters since blaster boats are less prone to survive enough for this to matter. * By decreasing ammo size, you are less limited in ammo in long engagements than projectiles or leave more space for cap boosters like crystals. Again, won't matter much for blaster boats since you die before you need more ammo or booster charges.
That's why I feel they fixed rails much more than blasters with the proposed changes, since blasters will still have no inherent advantage, neither the boats give useful bonuses to allow blasters to be fully used. But I don't think that's fixable just giving blasters more damage or optimal better than rethinking Gallente ship bonuses.
Magosian wrote: Besides, how do you propose hybrids get fixed? You're awfully quick to say "you don't know what you're talking about" yet have yet to provide a single constructive statement. Now's the time....
I won't use the word hybrids as a whole. Just because they use the same ammo doesn't mean blasters and rails suck the same way, so there isn't one big solution that addresses everything.
I believe it's more a matter of fixing the ships that use blasters to fix blasters, and the mechanics of long-range combat to fix rails. The fact they suck today is a just a reflex of most encounters happening at the more comfortable ranges of projectiles and lasers, while extremely close range and extremely long range are inexistent for a variety of reasons (propulsion jammers, slow blaster boats, warp to 0, fixed warp range of 150km, etc.).
Effectively, game mechanics are broken, not hybrids stats. Either they fix the game mechanics, or they level hybrids stats to be closer to projectiles and lasers. I think the latter is a pretty boring solution, and I doubt CCP will adopt it since it clashes with the original concepts. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:12:00 -
[785] - Quote
Zirse wrote:Magosian wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:Nemesor wrote:I can fly anything. I can use every weapon system in the game to its fullest potential.
Think on this for a moment. If you total up all the crap PVP platforms in the game... you are looking at about 1/3 of all ships being downright useless. At least another 1/3 are situational. Thats 2/3s of the ships available to fly that are suboptimal or downright deathtraps.
That is not variety. That is not balance.
I want to fly spaceships. I want variety. I want to pew.
You can take that "I win" button you think I want and stick it somewhere uncomfortable. So 1/3 of ships are fine generally, 1/3 of ships are fine situationally. So 2/3 of ships are worth flying depending on the situations you find yourself in? I think the point still has merit. For a game which is largely based on PvP, roughly one third of their ships not providing any real PvP use is a pretty staggering statistic. Most of that third is Caldari/Gallente, too, I would add. All the more reason for tiericide. There's really only one, or in some cases two, T1 frigates that are viable for each race.
Not too mention the cruisers, indys, and barges |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:17:00 -
[786] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:Caldari frigates are actually very good.
Shush you.
The revolution is not supposed to be televised. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:19:00 -
[787] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote: Minmatar ships outperform blasters in their natural habitat, This is the problem. I find this most insulting to me as a Gallentean. After al lthe trouble with limited range, ammo, fitting and cap, when I have the target pinned I am not performing any better than the guy that didn;t bother in the first place. Tallest added 5% to blaster damage. 5% is not going to change a game. We quite simply ned more than that. Smae goes for bonus to rail tracking.
Quote:Think on this for a moment. If you total up all the crap PVP platforms in the game... you are looking at about 1/3 of all ships being downright useless. At least another 1/3 are situational. Thats 2/3s of the ships available to fly that are suboptimal or downright deathtraps. That is a valid point, but many ships have uces outside of pvp, namely missions. That is still a combat ship but it's geared towards a different area of the game.
With current changes on TQ, most gallente ships became more workable, but i till feel disadvantaged sompared to most other races.
Thank CCP for de-facto buffing drone-ships (even if only so little) by intorducing t2 drone modules. Droneships are the only ships in gallente lineup that currently present a rael threat on the field to just about everything.
So currently: blasters require more damage and some more tracking. They also need some help getting in range.
One way would be to acieve this make gallente dualtank race most of its problems would-be solved: Blasterships shieldtanked and droneships armourtanked. If minmatar can have two tanks, so can we.
Second way to do this is to introduce actually usefull webbing and sensor dampening drones. javascript:__doPostBack('forum$ctl00$PostReply','') Third way to do this is to give gallente a reduction to the mass penalty applied by plates and change the penalty of trimarks to reduction in shield or something.
Fourth way to do this is to give us a bonus to MWD and AB overload or an overpowered prop module.
Fifth way to achieve this is to give Gallente so much fitting room that they can negate these disadvantages by fitting a lot of extra supportive modules (tracking enhancers, e-war, tank, cap, you name it)to compensate for these handycaps
Choose your poison. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:32:00 -
[788] - Quote
One problem get's bigger and bigger each day.
Why do i fight for better Gallentean ships and why do i hurt myself so much to discuss it in endless threats without any blue response. I could life with a negative response but this is really exhausting. Why don't i polish my beloved legion. My motivation to fight for this cause is decreasing really fast.
Just a last word. Change the Eris, Eos and Deimos. Plz! They are the symbol of this fight and why we fight. They are , strange. Eos a droneboat not able to fit drones. Eris, see my quote some posts above. Deimos, paperthin without speed and damage and power and utility and a role.
Best gallentean ships you ever designed were phobos, taranis and adrestia. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:32:00 -
[789] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote: Fourth way to do this is to give us a bonus to MWD and AB overload or an overpowered prop module.
I really think that's the most viable solution, since it doesn't disfigures Gallente as armor tankers, neither gives an advantage to the drone boats (which aren't broken at the same level now).
I also think a webber/scram nerf should be considered. Those are the easiest modules to fit and are basically obligatory in today mechanics. In the other hand, racial EWAR like Sensor Damps. and ECMs are either hard to fit (not enough mid slots on Gallente) or useless without bonuses (ECM nerf). The result is that Gallente and Caldari have no smart ways to negate locks (except the niche EWAR boats, of course, but all races get those in the same number), while anyone else can negate them speed. |
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 00:13:00 -
[790] - Quote
Just found the list of changes going into Crucible, posting here since it's different than the ones mentioned on Tallest first post:
http://www.eveonline.com/en/crucible/article/3033/hybrid-weapons-and-tech-ii-ammo-balancing
Quote: Hybrid Turrets
Reduce CPU usage: XL Turrets: -5 CPU L Turrets: -3 CPU M Turrets: -2 CPU S Turrets: -1 CPU
** Exception: 75mm Railguns (they already have very low CPU requirements.)
All hybrid turrets: -12% Powergrid usage. Rounded to nearest whole number. ** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.)
All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good tracking when compared to other XL turrets)
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good damage when compared to other XL turrets)
|
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 00:19:00 -
[791] - Quote
Phobos kinda sucks. Would be better if it had more grid, could fit 200mm rails with dual 1600mm plates or something. Right now it's in last place interns of stats.
Also, did no one else see the irony of the 4th mid on a cruiser thorax hull going to the ship with high slot point... Potentially the worst dev troll in the games history IMO. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 01:09:00 -
[792] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:Just found the list of changes going into Crucible, posting here since it's different than the ones mentioned on Tallest first post: http://www.eveonline.com/en/crucible/article/3033/hybrid-weapons-and-tech-ii-ammo-balancingQuote: Hybrid Turrets
Reduce CPU usage: XL Turrets: -5 CPU L Turrets: -3 CPU M Turrets: -2 CPU S Turrets: -1 CPU
** Exception: 75mm Railguns (they already have very low CPU requirements.)
All hybrid turrets: -12% Powergrid usage. Rounded to nearest whole number. ** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.)
All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good tracking when compared to other XL turrets)
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good damage when compared to other XL turrets)
If you dont count sniper BS from my 0.0 days, about 80% of my fleet are gallente blaster ships. They all just got a bit better. Its not a solution, but its a start. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 01:16:00 -
[793] - Quote
Emily Poast wrote:Imrik86 wrote:Just found the list of changes going into Crucible, posting here since it's different than the ones mentioned on Tallest first post: http://www.eveonline.com/en/crucible/article/3033/hybrid-weapons-and-tech-ii-ammo-balancingQuote: Hybrid Turrets
Reduce CPU usage: XL Turrets: -5 CPU L Turrets: -3 CPU M Turrets: -2 CPU S Turrets: -1 CPU
** Exception: 75mm Railguns (they already have very low CPU requirements.)
All hybrid turrets: -12% Powergrid usage. Rounded to nearest whole number. ** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.)
All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good tracking when compared to other XL turrets)
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good damage when compared to other XL turrets)
If you dont count sniper BS from my 0.0 days, about 80% of my fleet are gallente blaster ships. They all just got a bit better. Its not a solution, but its a start. That's the problem, however. CCP starts things but seldom finishes them. (Incarna, Soverignty, FW, etc.) |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 01:46:00 -
[794] - Quote
RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI? Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 02:40:00 -
[795] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:I found a funny quote Quote:"There are 3 good dictors...... and the Eris" taken from a howto manual about interdictors
HAHA !!! LOL :) Yeah this is good :) And sooo true :) LOL good one :) |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 02:48:00 -
[796] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI?
Such incontrovertable statistics are PROOF that Gurrrrrrrr-ista, Gallente, Blood Raiders, Serpentis, ORE, Angel, Caldari and Amarr need serious buffs. Variety is the spice of life.
THE SPICE MUST FLOW! |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 02:53:00 -
[797] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI?
No :) Gallente is so passe. I was on SiSi and testing fits for over 3 hours and its better for sure but in Large blasters and rails. You can see the difference coz now rails and blaster can DO any DMG what is nice. but Middle level is not so "great". And middle level is FUN that's why we should cry. My Ally is not using Gallente ships just Lachesis and arazu and maybe taranis and thats all. And of coz CAPS thany and nyx.
But I think that PVE guys will be really happy with this patch. Better tracking and fitting "stable" megathron etc. For sure Gallente are better for ratting now.. thats for sure. and for sure we will see some Vindicators on Tournament :)
I think that game mechanics NOT WORKS with gallente and wont be. Speed is everything in EVE so there is only one winner. Gallente as Armor race is too slow... if you want to play Gallente go to CAPS lvl. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
303
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 03:04:00 -
[798] - Quote
It's not so much speed, but survival. 2 out of the top 3 are build not around being really fast, but around having a great tank, and then again you have the cane with all its power grid capable of fitting a really decent dual plate fit or lse with neuts.
There is 0 viable survival stratergy for Gallente these days, and that's a problem. The EHP disadvantage many gallente ships have isn't evened out by many advantages that realistically work in the game. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
303
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 03:11:00 -
[799] - Quote
CCP Tallest, I know your busy but it would be great if you could answer a few questions:
What have you ruled out? Had a look at implementing but have decided, no, that can't work (eg common player ideas)
Are you satisfied with what you have proposed so far?
Still considering laying down the law on projectiles and lasers (with massive tracking reductions)?
Do you feel that the existential problems surrounding gallente (active tanking, medium > short range, armour vs shield tanking) are fixible? And if so, are they priorities or even many something we'd see in acted upon during winter? Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
erfta
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 03:22:00 -
[800] - Quote
Imrik86 wrote:Just found the list of changes going into Crucible, posting here since it's different than the ones mentioned on Tallest first post:
.... blah ...blah... first wave changes did you quote the dev blog about the original changes in the thread about supplemental changes. my eye might just roll out of my skull. no one reads the TOS not even the guy that writes it. this is sig worthy http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/11/09/mortal-online-plagiarizes-eve-onlines-terms-of-service/1#c35015206 |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 04:41:00 -
[801] - Quote
erfta wrote:Imrik86 wrote:Just found the list of changes going into Crucible, posting here since it's different than the ones mentioned on Tallest first post:
.... blah ...blah... first wave changes did you quote the dev blog about the original changes in the thread about supplemental changes. my eye might just roll out of my skull.
Yes, he did. Ignorance is bliss. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 04:50:00 -
[802] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365 Today in the top twenty we have:
- 11 Projectile
- 4 Laser
- 3 Missile
- 0 Hybrid
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI?
Fixed.
(Capsules and Scims don't count, obviously)
And no, I don't. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 04:53:00 -
[803] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:CCP Tallest, I know your busy but it would be great if you could answer a few questions:
I don't think he is listening. It has been awhile since his last update with the final changes being posted for the release already. Obviously he either:
a) Isn't listening. b) Doesn't want to listen to the shitestorm we are likely the thrust at him. c) Has had a personal issue of some sort that keeps him from computers.
I get busy. Busy doesn't stop one from shooting out a "Sorry. I am busy working on "X". " If you are listening Tallest. Sorry about the neckbeard thing. I was emo-raging. :-D
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 04:57:00 -
[804] - Quote
Where's the current list of changes for Crucible? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 05:03:00 -
[805] - Quote
LOL. Seems you beat me to it. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 07:29:00 -
[806] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI?
Ahh Ya I would not bet your paycheck or hold your breath if your waiting for Gallente ships to hit the top 20's. And if by some freak changes they do it would proble be a Drone boat do to the new Tech 2 Drone Modules not becouse of Hybirds. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 09:50:00 -
[807] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:One problem get's bigger and bigger each day.
Why do i fight for better Gallentean ships and why do i hurt myself so much to discuss it in endless threats without any blue response. I could life with a negative response but this is really exhausting. Why don't i polish my beloved legion. My motivation to fight for this cause is decreasing really fast.
Just a last word. Change the Eris, Eos and Deimos. Plz! They are the symbol of this fight and why we fight. They are , strange. Eos a droneboat not able to fit drones. Eris, see my quote some posts above. Deimos, paperthin without speed and damage and power and utility and a role.
Best gallentean ships you ever designed were phobos, taranis and adrestia.
" lost the will to make suggestions. |
Fix Hybrids
University of Caille Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 10:59:00 -
[808] - Quote
CCP Tallest,
You asked us for feedback on your changes to hybrids. We've given you feedback. Lots of it.
This thread, which you started yourself, is overflowing with feedback. But it's now more than a week since we last heard from you, and our enthusiasm to engage is rapidly turning into frustration.
Communication is a two-way thing. Players need answers.
- Are hybrids still being worked on, or will the changes on Sisi be the ones that go live on the 29th? - If hybrid rebalancing is still WIP, what is still being considered, what has been ruled out? - Are the changes to Gallente and Caldari hybrid ships final? Again, what is being considered, what has been ruled out? - What is the timescale for further changes if you realise that your adjustments in the Crucible release are not enough? - How do you plan to measure the impact of the changes? What is your definition of success?
Answers to these questions are the bare minimum that we expect. There are plenty more questions, suggestions and constructive criticisms in this thread.
Hybrid users are desperate for answers. Will you respond? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 11:07:00 -
[809] - Quote
*drumroll*
I hope he's looking at ammunition...
*more drumroll* *even more drumroll* *breaks a drumstick* |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:00:00 -
[810] - Quote
Hey guys
Tallest will be out of the office for the next week. He should be back to replying to the thread at the end of next week. |
|
|
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
106
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:00:00 -
[811] - Quote
In case anyone missed the post from CCP Tallest:
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
Balancing is an ongoing project that we hope to continue beyond the Crucible expansion and we are reading and appreciate all the feedback. The above changes are based on the feedback Tallest received up to that point and will make it into Crucible. CCP Affinity | Quality Assurance | Team BFF |
|
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:04:00 -
[812] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:In case anyone missed the post from CCP Tallest:
update (08/11/11): ...
That is 8 days old :-)
CCP Affinity wrote: Balancing is an ongoing project that we hope to continue beyond the Crucible expansion and we are reading and appreciate all the feedback.
That is a good answer. And if you change "hope to" into "will" that would be a great answer!
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:09:00 -
[813] - Quote
Neo Agricola wrote:CCP Affinity wrote:In case anyone missed the post from CCP Tallest:
update (08/11/11): ...
That is 8 days old :-) CCP Affinity wrote: Balancing is an ongoing project that we hope to continue beyond the Crucible expansion and we are reading and appreciate all the feedback.
That is a good answer. And if you change "hope to" into "will" that would be a great answer!
I can do so. We're not going to stop balancing. It will be a part of every major release we do. |
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:12:00 -
[814] - Quote
Thanks for the update CCP Soundwave, CCP Affinity. As ever, it is easy to forget you guys are humans too. I still think of you as sort of programming cyborgs. It helps me get to sleep at least. |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:15:00 -
[815] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote: Balancing is an ongoing project that we hope to continue beyond the Crucible expansion and we are reading and appreciate all the feedback. The above changes are based on the feedback Tallest received up to that point and will make it into Crucible.
Ongoing indeed sounds good. I hope to see some more changes in the near future. Lets than see how the current changes work out on TQ. |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:15:00 -
[816] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
I can do so. We're not going to stop balancing. It will be a part of every major release we do.
Thank you very much! DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
96
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:17:00 -
[817] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:In case anyone missed the post from CCP Tallest:
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
Balancing is an ongoing project that we hope to continue beyond the Crucible expansion and we are reading and appreciate all the feedback. The above changes are based on the feedback Tallest received up to that point and will make it into Crucible.
That's great but for were the spike/jav penalties removed yet?
Rails still can't track, even if I'm 100km away and both are standing still I get glancing shots at most. I max out at 400 or so per volley with 425s and T1 ammo. Spike is just as bad when fitted on 250s when shooting against cruisers and I still couldn't hit MWDing frigs coming in with no transversal. Tracking is just abysmal, and as such it's impossible to tell if there's enough damage. |
Raivi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:17:00 -
[818] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Thanks for the update CCP Soundwave, CCP Affinity. As ever, it is easy to forget you guys are humans too. I still think of you as sort of programming cyborgs. It helps me get to sleep at least.
I'm still convinced Soundwave is a robot sent from the future to defeat us in foosball, but he pulls off a pretty convincing human impression. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:19:00 -
[819] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
I can do so. We're not going to stop balancing. It will be a part of every major release we do.
So, no more hybrid adjustments for 6 months?
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:25:00 -
[820] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
I can do so. We're not going to stop balancing. It will be a part of every major release we do.
Thank you. At least someone is reading this.
I would like to ask if having 1/3 of the ships in the game dry docked an acceptable situation? These buffs alone are unlikely to change this.
Regards,
Nem.
|
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:32:00 -
[821] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI?
It may be worth noting that the majority of those Abaddons are likely running projectiles. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:38:00 -
[822] - Quote
No. This isn't enough. This is not acceptable.
Forget the new effects. Forget the new ships. Forget the new T2 modules. Forget gimmicky things like trails, nebulae.
None of it matters because a THIRD of eve's ships are UNUSABLE, While a single race's weapon type is now used even on unbonused ships with better results!
Hybrids encompass TWO races. The are the majority of Gallente's fixed weapons, and half of Caldari's.
Every single rail and blaster platform will continue to be drydocked, not enough has been done.
CCP you promised to fix this, now FOCUS AND JUST FIX THE DAMN THINGS. Your ADHD is coming out again and with your terrible track record of not finishing things don't you dare give a ******* halfass promise that you will look into it.
Get to work, almost half of your game is BROKEN.
FIX THIS. |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:40:00 -
[823] - Quote
So basicly you just saying that the guy responsible for this project is not working on it for at least a week more, while the expansion is out in 2 weeks.
I guess theese changes are final then. |
Alara IonStorm
RvB - BLUE Republic
424
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:41:00 -
[824] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:In case anyone missed the post from CCP Tallest:
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
Balancing is an ongoing project that we hope to continue beyond the Crucible expansion and we are reading and appreciate all the feedback. The above changes are based on the feedback Tallest received up to that point and will make it into Crucible. Are these changes the Final ones. In the Tier 3 Battlecruisers Thread CCP Yitterbium made what is only post I have seen where someone from CCP discusses the actual problems with Hybrids whilst speaking on the Talos.
CCP Ytterbium wrote:TALOSGeneral efficiency: we do realize it suffers from some problems next to the other hulls. Unfortunately, as some of you pointed it, the real issue here comes from blasters, and how they compete against similarly close ranged weapons like autocannons and pulse lasers. Thus, this is little more that can be done by tweaking the hull itself, since the problems mainly come from:
- Damage projection: blasters have issues projecting damage, especially considering Tech2 ammunition like Scorch and Barrage, which greatly empowers pulse lasers and autocannons and leave hybrids far behind for little increased damage to compensate. The issue is also widened because blasters benefit less from tracking enhancers and falloff related bonuses than their Minmatar close weapon counterpart.
- Mobility and armor tanking conflicts with each other: no surprise here, fitting plates into your Gallente armor oriented slot layout decreases its mobility, which is a direct contradiction with how blasters are supposed to work. This leaves little to no choice but to fit shield extenders on Gallente ships (I'm looking at you, Mr. Brutix and Hyperion ) to keep some mobility and actually try to apply the blaster damage output. Also let's not forget Minmatar ships are usually faster than Gallente by design, while Gallente traditionally use the shortest weapon system available.
- Lack of usefulness in gang/fleet engagements: thus, because of blaster low damage projection and Gallente poor mobility when armor tanked, blaster ships are found lacking in gang warfare, as either your target or yourself are long dead before you can reach it. Besides, having blaster ships moving all around the battlefield to engage its target leads to coordination issues with the rest of the fleet, especially if logistics are implied.
So yes, we are aware of all of that and CCP Tallest and myself, among others, keep discussing of possible ways to fix the issue blasters face at the moment. However, what you must understand here, is that there is no magic trick we can pull out of our hats to fix all these issues instantly, as they require looking into massively complex tasks that have a lot of repercussions themselves. For instance, let us give you a quick insight of the indirect problems we have to face regarding blaster balancing:
- Do we want to nerf Barrage and Scorch? If yes, by how? Wouldn't that kill their usefulness as a whole? If no, can we add even more falloff to blasters, knowing it may be over-inflating the balance of power again?
- Don't we need to have a look at shield extenders/armor plates as well? If we nerf them, are we confident with possible changes to passive tanking? Can't we make active tanking more useful on PvP setups, so that passive tanking is less used for blaster platforms and more on Amarr platforms, designed to be more static than Gallente? Doesn't that require looking into NOS/Neuts as well? How about Cap boosters? Overheating?
- Can we make Gallente ships faster than Minmatar knowing they also use railguns? Wouldn't that be defeating the original design goals for Minmatar ships?
He states that you are all aware of this but the numbers you present seem to only kick the tires on Hybrids but not fix the issues.
Will we see any of this addressed in the Nov 29th release of Crucible? Will there be real Hybrid Balance?
|
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:45:00 -
[825] - Quote
So in short Hybrids have been buffed, it may not be enough, but we'll look at it again when we have time?
Repair Drones should be able to repair anyone ... really, they should. -áThink of them as the first targetable subsystem if you're worried about PvP and for missions if someone wants Rep drones over a flight of Hobs, who cares. -áThere is no reasonable objection here other than it's always been that way (so was RR until recently). |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:50:00 -
[826] - Quote
Hentes Zsemle wrote:So basicly you just saying that the guy responsible for this project is not working on it for at least a week more, while the expansion is out in 2 weeks.
I guess theese changes are final then.
All expansions have a cut off point for continuing changes... this allows for it to be tested ;) As Soundwave said.. balancing WILL continue but the changes mentioned are the ones that will make it into this release CCP Affinity | Quality Assurance | Team BFF |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:53:00 -
[827] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:RAGE
Mate, I understand how you feel... and i believe I was the one originally pointing out that a third of our ships are drydocked.
Let Soundwave answer. At least we know someone is listening now.
More flies with honey and all that. |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:57:00 -
[828] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:All expansions have a cut off point for continuing changes... this allows for it to be tested ;)
That is a Standard procedure for Software Developing. And it is good that you are working that way, otherwise there were more Bugs. Now all you have to do is to listen to those testers who give you feedback from a Sisi Point of View. But with the recent changes in CCPs behaviour I do not have any doubts about that.
IMHO: You (CCP) made a big step in the right direction!
CCP Affinity wrote: As Soundwave said.. balancing WILL continue but the changes mentioned are the ones that will make it into this release
Great! And I guess, we are not talking about: We will look into Hybrids in 2 years again, but you mean: we are still looking into Hybrids. (perhaps you should point that out, so everyone is seeing that point.)
Best regards and keep up your good work!
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
274
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:58:00 -
[829] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:No. This isn't enough. This is not acceptable.
Forget the new effects. Forget the new ships. Forget the new T2 modules. Forget gimmicky things like trails, nebulae.
None of it matters because a THIRD of eve's ships are UNUSABLE, While a single race's weapon type is now used even on unbonused ships with better results!
Hybrids encompass TWO races. The are the majority of Gallente's fixed weapons, and half of Caldari's.
Every single rail and blaster platform will continue to be drydocked, not enough has been done.
CCP you promised to fix this, now FOCUS AND JUST FIX THE DAMN THINGS. Your ADHD is coming out again and with your terrible track record of not finishing things don't you dare give a ******* halfass promise that you will look into it.
Get to work, almost half of your game is BROKEN.
FIX THIS.
Jeezus, speaking of temper tantrums. Why not see what all the buffs on hybrids and rails have for effect on Tranq. before doing even more changes.
The combination of more room for fitting more speed, more ammo, more fall-off, more tracking, more damage and more basicly everything is a good start one should think.
I for one would not be happy if the only thing they did was hybrid changes. It would be quite the crappy expansion. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 14:59:00 -
[830] - 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. |
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
99
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:02:00 -
[831] - Quote
Ciar Meara wrote: Jeezus, speaking of temper tantrums. Why not see what all the buffs on hybrids and rails have for effect on Tranq. before doing even more changes.
The combination of more room for fitting more speed, more ammo, more fall-off, more tracking, more damage and more basicly everything is a good start one should think.
I for one would not be happy if the only thing they did was hybrid changes. It would be quite the crappy expansion.
After 3 years of ignoring the problem, we get approx. 4 weeks of looking into it.
They've admitted that there is more to the issue and that they are not close yet.
It's not so much freezing current changes for release, what I take offense to is Soundwave saying no changes from now on until the next major release, i.e. the summer expansion. |
|
CCP Affinity
C C P C C P Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:05:00 -
[832] - Quote
All I can say right now is that balancing is an on-going project and yes.. by that we don't mean, we will drop this and pick it up in 2 years... we mean we are still working on it but every release has a cut off point for what makes it in :)
When Tallest returns he will check this thread out and reply with more details, I just wanted to let everyone know what is making it into Crucible. CCP Affinity | Quality Assurance | Team BFF |
|
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
92
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:06:00 -
[833] - Quote
Archare wrote: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? We had to live with that 3+ years. Now they are starting to work on those Problems and all you can do is complaining how slow they are?
Good things need time and if by end of 2012 those hybrids are as good as Projectile / Lazors/ Missils without "1 Weaponsystem is better than all others" and without "they are all the same" it is great.
So for the love of Blasters: Give them some time to make it right! DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:16:00 -
[834] - Quote
Hi,
i want to thank you for giving us a response. Keeping up communication is more important for me than receiving an answer i do not like. |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:21:00 -
[835] - Quote
Thanks for the replies CCP. I kinda wish we could get a little more this patch, but at least by quoting that post you guys show you understand the underlying problems with hybrids, so I'll take a delay if it means that they'll be fixed properly. That said, please please please do not mess with blaster range. The last thing we need is more medium ranged weapons that turn this game into RvB. There are ways to fix the guns without making them like ACs or pulse with scorch. |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
63
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:21:00 -
[836] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:All I can say right now is that balancing is an on-going project and yes.. by that we don't mean, we will drop this and pick it up in 2 years... we mean we are still working on it but every release has a cut off point for what makes it in :)
When Tallest returns he will check this thread out and reply with more details, I just wanted to let everyone know what is making it into Crucible.
Could we get some rough ETA on when you are going to adress two of the biggest balance issues of Sub-BS warfare?
- 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.
If pvp is dominated by minmatar, there is a reason. And it will always be like that as long as you ignore those two points. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:38:00 -
[837] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote:[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.
I agree completely with the first point. It is the reason the Hurricane is so good.
LSEs not so much. You would gimp Caldari and some Gallente fits.
|
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
211
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:38:00 -
[838] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote: - 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.
Autocannons have no fitting issue. However AC ranges is a bit too much.
Large shield extenders don't need to be harder to fit. They need a real drawback. The plates agility drawback is a real drawback. A Loki with 2x1600mms will be FAT AS FSCK.
The signature radius buff on LSEs isn't really a drawback.
A good drawback would be reducing capacitor max amount by 15% per LSE on top of the signature radius buff. Another thing would be reduced scan resolution (Because of shields interferences, if you want a RP explanation). |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
167
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:48:00 -
[839] - Quote
CCP Affinity wrote:All I can say right now is that balancing is an on-going project and yes.. by that we don't mean, we will drop this and pick it up in 2 years... we mean we are still working on it but every release has a cut off point for what makes it in :)
When Tallest returns he will check this thread out and reply with more details, I just wanted to let everyone know what is making it into Crucible.
let me just chime in here before my sub expires. you might as well have not done any of this "balancing". really, it makes zero difference because we're at square one: this is still Minmatar and Drake Online; Cynabals, Canes, Machs will be the ships of choice for serious PVP'ers. it baffles me how you can allow this. when you see these metrics change, that's when you'll know you're on the right track. in the end im left wondering if you guys even seriously tested any of this. cuz if you did, these changes would not be considered changes.
this was supposed to be a "hybrid balancing patch", and bluntly put, this was not done. Gallente ships are still in the exact same spot. Tallest was told by dozens that he's not even scratching the surface with the little buffs he made. the funniest part is that Gallente pilots ended up with the shittiest BC. the Naga ended up being a more useful hybrid platform.
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:48:00 -
[840] - Quote
CCP Soundwave and Affinity, many thanks for the update.
I know Tallest has his plate full, as I'm sure you all do judging by the sweeping changes on test, but as a company, PLEASE do not overlook this thread. There are enough people here citing their lack of satisfaction on these changes. In the end we all want a better, more successful EVE Universe. This will not be realized if one of the four primary weapons of EVE is left to rot. This will not be realized when a huge chunk of combat vessels collect dust in player hangars due to those aforementioned, ineffective weapons.
There's pletny of great feedback here. Please make use of it. |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 15:54:00 -
[841] - Quote
Sadly, I too have to let my sub expire until I see real change. I said I would and empty promises are not my thing. |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:02:00 -
[842] - Quote
HA HA HAHA! Minmatar WIN! You losers are stuck with your gar gar turret... THE SLAVES HAVE TAKEN OVA! HAHAHAHA.
Anyways, good job CCP. Alot of setups have been improved. Certain frigate setups with regard to rail-guns have seen significant increases in viablity.
Dominix, with large blasters is looking a little better too. BLASTA-SHIELD-SIN is pretty ganky. The capacitor reduciton use is pretty good too. That will help alot with active setups. Pretty well rounded boost. Also, you will never be able to make gallente viable until gallente ships and close range ships in general are given range. Most of the player base dont like the fact they shun away from range increase, but wont use ships for that reason. Very funny and r3tard3d @ the same time. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:07:00 -
[843] - Quote
We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them. |
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:10:00 -
[844] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Certain frigate setups with regard to rail-guns have seen significant increases in viablity.
Dominix, with large blasters is looking a little better too. BLASTA-SHIELD-SIN is pretty ganky. The capacitor reduciton use is pretty good too. That will help alot with active setups. Pretty well rounded boost. Also, you will never be able to make gallente viable until gallente ships and close range ships in general are given range. Most of the player base dont like the fact they shun away from range increase, but wont use ships for that reason. Very funny and r3tard3d @ the same time.
Yeah. But people don't like the idea of giving blasters extra range because it's a form of homogenisation. The problem is that they won't like the only alternative either, of reducing Pulse and AC applied damage at close range...
As you mention, the biggest beneficiaries of the current hybrid changes are the ships that don't actually need any help - the frigates and the Dominix, for example. The ships that actually need help haven't been helped. A bit sad really. |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
92
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:12:00 -
[845] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them. Thank you for clarification! DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Chorgat
Trojan Trolls Controlled Chaos
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:18:00 -
[846] - Quote
This is a joke right? RIGHT?
You promise to change things and all we get in return is a bag of dogs**t thrown at us.
But hey atleast we got 4 new ships (2 that will be used), engine effects and shiny new implants if we all resub and log on to see this s**t patch come live!
This is just sad ccp... really.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
330
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:22:00 -
[847] - Quote
Is there anyway that guns installed can effect other performances (nerf or boost) on the ship? Using the guns to effect the ship performance may be an avenue for resolving the problems that ships that are supposed to use them suffer from as well as preventing possible overbuffing of ships.
Theme would be long range defensive short range offensive examples
Equipping Pulse Lasers improves mass Equipping Blasters improves speed Equipping Autocannosn improves agility Equipping Dumbfire missiels improves cpu
Equipping Railguns improves shields. Equipping Beam Lasers improves capacitor Equipping Artillery improves armor Equipping Smartfire missiles improves Powergrid
However I feel that in order to balance these should dig into bonsues that might be appealing to other races and decrease performance.
To help balance things they should be a flat rate across all modules so that way you wont wind up with some very obscure setup. I also feel that raw number and not precentile is a way to go as well to prevent over buffing of ships with 8 weapon ports.
However I feel this may require an entire expansion to plan for and there simply isnt enough time for this release. Or the alternative approaches and the sorts. However I feel that boosting/nerfing ship performance with weapons based installed would further devide the weapons.
Either way food for thought.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
330
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:22:00 -
[848] - Quote
Chorgat wrote:This is a joke right? RIGHT?
You promise to change things and all we get in return is a bag of dogs**t thrown at us.
But hey atleast we got 4 new ships (2 that will be used), engine effects and shiny new implants if we all resub and log on to see this s**t patch come live!
This is just sad ccp... really.
Well they buffed it a bit instead of entirely doing nothing.
|
Imrik86
Gypsy Kings Wiki Conglomerates
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:39:00 -
[849] - Quote
SMT008 wrote: Large shield extenders don't need to be harder to fit. They need a real drawback. The plates agility drawback is a real drawback. A Loki with 2x1600mms will be FAT AS FSCK.
The signature radius buff on LSEs isn't really a drawback.
A good drawback would be reducing capacitor max amount by 15% per LSE on top of the signature radius buff. Another thing would be reduced scan resolution (Because of shields interferences, if you want a RP explanation).
WTF? Are you trying to nerf Minmatar or Caldari with this? |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
302
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:45:00 -
[850] - Quote
Hopefully the next wave of changes are coming soon. I expect at most a spike in frigate usage. |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:50:00 -
[851] - Quote
What a shame - CCP insisting on doing half a job, just because it "might" be enough... Why don't you guys adress the concerns we have about ammo and unique role of railguns? |
Count NULL
Bad Balance
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:53:00 -
[852] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest.
update (08/11/11): based on player feedback, the following changes will be made to hybrid balancing (and T2 ammo balancing).
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) * Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
So, none of the fitting or cap usage reductions will be made? Is that correct? Or are things mentioned in blog still going to be in upcoming expansion?
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
106
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 16:58:00 -
[853] - Quote
Count NULL wrote:So, none of the fitting or cap usage reductions will be made? Is that correct? Or are things mentioned in blog still going to be in upcoming expansion?
The current build has cap and fitting changes in place.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
168
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:17:00 -
[854] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them.
i lol'd. u serious? you're gonna watch Gallente ships not get used for months? after all the feedback and people telling you guys these changes mean nothing? |
Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:23:00 -
[855] - Quote
SMT008 wrote:[quote=Shadowsword] - Autocanons being too easy to fit, having too much range with some ships/fits.
Have you ever put together a fit, and then said "Damn, I need to take dual 650 instead of 800 for this optimal MWD+buffer tank to fit"? Like, say, an Armageddon having to use dual heavy pulse because MWD + 2*1600mm plate + mega pulse are too much?
I haven't, and that's because you have no compromise to make to always include the biggest AC. And if it were balanced properly, you should.
As for LSE fitting requirements, a few numbers (all skills to V):
LSE II requirement: 0.0472 powergrid per shield HP given
1600mm rolled: 0.119 powergrid per shield HP
Since the main bottleneck in cruiser/BC sized fits is powergrid, it translate into paying about 2.5 times more for an armor buffer tank than for a shield buffer. AND you get the worst (by far) drawback. A bigger sig may make you take a bit more damage, but it's the lack of agility that actually get you killed. |
Fix Hybrids
University of Caille Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:25:00 -
[856] - Quote
Thank you for your responses, Affinity and Soundwave. It's good to finally hear something on this important issue.
I'm disappointed that further improvements to hybrids will not be made before Crucible goes live, but I'm glad CCP doesn't regard the hybrid problem as being fixed now.
Can you be more specific about the timescale for future adjustments to hybrids, and the ships that use them? Are we going to have to wait until the summer expansion for further adjustments, or will needed tweaks be identified, developed and released in between expansions? |
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
57
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:26:00 -
[857] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them.
How about CCP employees are restricted to only flying Gallente ships for the next 6 months? I'm sure 'wait and monitor and maybe fix' will change to 'LETS FIX THIS NOW' very quickly ;-) |
Kahz Niverrah
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming Moar Tears
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:28:00 -
[858] - Quote
Having not really flown blaster boats for any extended period of time, let me pose a question to you blaster aficionados:
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? I'd imagine getting into range on Amarr and Caldari ships is much less of an issue, especially after Crucible.
Am I way off here or does this make sense? I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:29:00 -
[859] - Quote
Shadowsword wrote: LSE II requirement: 0.0472 powergrid per shield HP given
1600mm rolled: 0.119 powergrid per shield HP
Maybe moving the PG down for plates instead of nerfing.
I agree with the armor penalty. It needs to be lessened a lot or replaced on rigs and mods. Same with the Sig radius. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:38:00 -
[860] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote: 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?
Getting into range while having enough DPS for a CHANCE to overcome the time it took to catch the kiting ship. It is a twofold issue. Yes the falloff on projectiles and the optimal on lasers are redonkulous but both pump out enough damage that they at least rival blasters. By the time a blasterboat through some miracle of God actually reaches a Laser or projectile platform, they have lost a insurmountable amount of HP. People seem to forget that ACs and Pulse lasers are the SHORT range versions of their respective weapon types while both hit out to ranges that in engagements qualify as MID range. The problems don't ONLY rely on falloff though. It is the ability for them to literally run circles around a blasterboat while having no risk of being caught. In any engagement between like skilled pilots in the same class of Minmatar and Gallente ship, the Minmatar pilot is the one that controls the engagement completely. They can decide to point and kill or just warp off with literally no risk to themselves. I will ask the RP crowd to step in for a moment and answer this: With the **** poor showing Gallente ships have, how the hell can the Federation POSSIBLY maintain an Empire? It would be like Apollo astronauts vs Xwings.
This is what irks me. No one can say that I am stating anything inaccurate. Even CCP Devs. They know the problem. They know the extent. I know that they really do not expect these minor changes to have any real impact on the balance of flown vessels. |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
303
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 17:59:00 -
[861] - Quote
A quick way to get Gallente boats back on the map is to put the Hyperion on par with the Abaddon for fleet engagements.
Then look closely: "what have we done right here?"
Then slowly apply these changes across the board as necessary.
And yes, CCP devs. I want to make a little dare.
I want you try solo PVP in Thoraxes and Brutixes. Fit them as you like. No alts, no intel no nothing. Do some roams. You'll see the light very quickly.
3 weeks later then fly them in fleets. See if that is any better.
If you fly anything else than a blasterboat then you broke the rules. |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 18:02:00 -
[862] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them.
Since the community has already told you these changes are underwhelming and fleet compositions won't change since hybrids/ Gallente/Caldari plateform are not good enough or don't have a niche. Can you today, using Rally or whatever project racking tool, commit and have the throughput to have them revisited in 6 months? |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 18:10:00 -
[863] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them.
Thanks for update. Its good news.
Be in touch :)
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
169
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 18:13:00 -
[864] - Quote
lol 6 months...it's funny, but thats probably what we're looking at.
you guys have had 3 years to look at metrics for use of Gallente ships in "serious" PVP situations. you added a slight buff in damage and ROF, you've slightly decreased fitting requirements, making them subpar (a step up from horrible). you've slightly increased agility and speed of blaster boats. you've done nothing to actually make hybrids and their ships desirable, or at least somewhat equal to lasers and projectiles.
see if you guys had proper internal testing, you wouldnt have to do waste months and years doing metrics. you'd have your evidence right there in the office. i think the issue is you guys either dont play the game regularly, or none of you pvp. if this is the case you simply have to trust what players tell you. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
104
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 18:31:00 -
[865] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:A quick way to get Gallente boats back on the map is to put the Hyperion on par with the Abaddon for fleet engagements.
Then look closely: "what have we done right here?"
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.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 18:46:00 -
[866] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Mekhana wrote:A quick way to get Gallente boats back on the map is to put the Hyperion on par with the Abaddon for fleet engagements.
Then look closely: "what have we done right here?"
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.
Lets think on a more broad scale gai's. :-D
|
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:00:00 -
[867] - Quote
I'll only start thinking Hybrids are balanced when I can triple plate my Vigilant with a full neutron rack and a 1600. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:05:00 -
[868] - Quote
Morgan North wrote:I'll only start thinking Hybrids are balanced when I can triple plate my Vigilant with a full neutron rack and a 1600. crap post is crap.
|
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:11:00 -
[869] - Quote
the devs should ask themselves one or two question:
-is there any reason (apart from ship's bonuses i'm fyling) to use hybrids instead (or on same level as) of lasers and projectiles? (especially in fleets) -apparently projectiles are very popular in fleet AND small scale warfare - what's so special about them and how can we use that to bring hybrids on par with other weapon systems?
|
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:14:00 -
[870] - Quote
Quote:The Hyperion should be focused on smaller fights, which means that it needs much more mobility.
i haven't seen battleships in SMALL scane fights for ages; and if, hyperion is the last tier3 bs i would field there...actually hyperion is the worst of all tier3 bs... |
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:23:00 -
[871] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Morgan North wrote:I'll only start thinking Hybrids are balanced when I can triple plate my Vigilant with a full neutron rack and a 1600. crap post is crap.
funny post is funny.
your crap post is crap.
at least he has a sense of humor |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:27:00 -
[872] - Quote
I tried out the changes on sis prior to the added 5% damage and i was satisfied with how fast i could close space on a target in a vigilant and fit the ship.
when i gave them a try in spring i had to make too many compromises to get the neutron rack i wanted and this is now not the case.
alot of you are complaining that the gallente will not have a niche but, i can tell you from a great deal of time spent out here in unknown space that their niche will be wormhole combat |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:39:00 -
[873] - Quote
post wasn't productive, removed it. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:40:00 -
[874] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:I tried out the changes on sis prior to the added 5% damage and i was satisfied with how fast i could close space on a target in a vigilant and fit the ship.
Congratulations for being fast enough to use blasters when you fly a bling faction cruiser. Now try again in a Thorax, or a Brutix, or a Deimos, Megathron, Hyperion, or Astarte. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:44:00 -
[875] - Quote
qq
its not ccp's nor my fault that people are too lazy to get money. changes are good
+1 tallest |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:47:00 -
[876] - Quote
Sry but may i ask for 125 bandwidth on the kronos back ? Don't ask me what i'm going to do with it :p |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:51:00 -
[877] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:I tried out the changes on sis prior to the added 5% damage and i was satisfied with how fast i could close space on a target in a vigilant and fit the ship. Congratulations for being fast enough to use blasters when you fly a bling faction cruiser. Now try again in a Thorax, or a Brutix, or a Deimos, Megathron, Hyperion, or Astarte.
i guess you didnt even try any of these out on sisi or even bother to look at them on EFT at all. Deimos can tank better than the vig and has the same agi, asarte gets even more tank and the same agi buff as the diemost and vig.
not to mention the proteus. oh my goodness the proteus. 150k ehp and moves like the vig.
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:53:00 -
[878] - Quote
NVM. Going to ignore obvious troll... because it is obvious. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:55:00 -
[879] - Quote
lol!
Go do your own homework sonny boy. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:58:00 -
[880] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:lol!
Go do your own homework sonny boy.
Productive. Informative. Not at all ignorant.
|
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:58:00 -
[881] - Quote
Well i'm out for some brawling today :D
Dude. You are dumb. I can not imagine a single person out in space not able to see and understand the principles of damage projection and kiting :) Astarte *mad giggles* Deja Vu ^^ |
Morn Hyland
Amnion Partners
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:58:00 -
[882] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them.
Far to complicated - I'm sure your economist is constantly telling you that you have a really good market at work in EvE.
You should be able to tell if you've got the buff right by just logging in to Jita 4/4 a couple of week time after the patch has bedded in.
Rails - especially the 350mm and 425mm have been "selling" in Jita at less than their build cost for a very long time - only the hybrid blog has made a small difference recently. Dual 150mm and 200mm are still being priced at below manufactured cost - hardly a vote of confidence.
If volumes have ticked up and it is worth inventing at the Jita sale price you've been successful. You may have overdone it the price spikes up to autocannon profit levels (and above) and stays high with increasing volumes.
Personally I expect to see Eagles still on the market at around 90 million i.e. less than their build cost...but I would like to be wrong.
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:02:00 -
[883] - Quote
Morn Hyland wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them. Far to complicated - I'm sure your economist is constantly telling you that you have a really good market at work in EvE. You should be able to tell if you've got the buff right by just logging in to Jita 4/4 a couple of week time after the patch has bedded in. Rails - especially the 350mm and 425mm have been "selling" in Jita at less than their build cost for a very long time - only the hybrid blog has made a small difference recently. Dual 150mm and 200mm are still being priced at below manufactured cost - hardly a vote of confidence. If volumes have ticked up and it is worth inventing at the Jita sale price you've been successful. You may have overdone it the price spikes up to autocannon profit levels (and above) and stays high with increasing volumes. Personally I expect to see Eagles still on the market at around 90 million i.e. less than their build cost...but I would like to be wrong. Correct. easiest way to judge adjustments is not listening to words but looking at the market :D Not only prices but also number of ships sold and number of ships destroyed :D
Best argument i've seen in a long time +1 from me. that post can not be trolled at all. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:09:00 -
[884] - Quote
Looking at market and fleet composition is a good way to follow the impact of hybrid changes, however only looking into some of the issues with hybrids in the first place seems blasphemic to balance...
Pinky |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:10:00 -
[885] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:lol!
Go do your own homework sonny boy. Productive. Informative. Not at all ignorant.
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 |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
304
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:17:00 -
[886] - Quote
Morn Hyland wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:We'll look into hybrids again after this goes out on a basis of what's needed.
We've made the first round of changes, once these go live we'll monitor usage, fleet composition etc. If these changes yield an underwhelming results, we'll continue to tweak them. Far to complicated - I'm sure your economist is constantly telling you that you have a really good market at work in EvE. You should be able to tell if you've got the buff right by just logging in to Jita 4/4 a couple of week time after the patch has bedded in. Rails - especially the 350mm and 425mm have been "selling" in Jita at less than their build cost for a very long time - only the hybrid blog has made a small difference recently. Dual 150mm and 200mm are still being priced at below manufactured cost - hardly a vote of confidence. If volumes have ticked up and it is worth inventing at the Jita sale price you've been successful. You may have overdone it the price spikes up to autocannon profit levels (and above) and stays high with increasing volumes. Personally I expect to see Eagles still on the market at around 90 million i.e. less than their build cost...but I would like to be wrong.
Worthy of praise. |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:18:00 -
[887] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:Nemesor wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:lol!
Go do your own homework sonny boy. Productive. Informative. Not at all ignorant. 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
Says the idiot from 2008. I don't think I disputed your fits or said they were not possible. Are you confusing me with someone else? |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:21:00 -
[888] - Quote
pot calling the kettle black on the ignorance jive.
you so funny mister. heres a nickel for your empty cofee cup |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:22:00 -
[889] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: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 attempt to be productive or jibber on like some sort of inbred mongrel. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:24:00 -
[890] - Quote
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? |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:27:00 -
[891] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: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?
First. I have tested extensively.
Second, I read back and in your blind need to try and troll this forum, you confused me with another poster. Like a desperate 12 year old eager for the attention your parents never gave you, you latched onto me hoping to have someone speak to you.
Third. Your posts provide nothing constructive, nothing productive and nothing informative. They are therefore ignored. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:29:00 -
[892] - Quote
lol you are mad
again ccp you have done a good job here. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:29:00 -
[893] - Quote
May i ask why you prefer the Sleipnir zarak and not the astarte :) |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:30:00 -
[894] - Quote
guys, seriously what do you want?
If they make wide sweeping changes everyone screams that theyre changing too much too fast if they change incrementally everyone screams that theyre doing nothing!
Personally I'd rather have this than them buffing blaster damage and range by 500% and giving gallente 90% webs back.
Ill be the first one upset if they dont continue to tweak blasters, but really, which would you rather have; a new FOTM or them slowly turn up the heat on blasters until theyre right? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:48:00 -
[895] - Quote
Sigras wrote:guys, seriously what do you want?
If they make wide sweeping changes everyone screams that theyre changing too much too fast if they change incrementally everyone screams that theyre doing nothing!
Personally I'd rather have this than them buffing blaster damage and range by 500% and giving gallente 90% webs back.
Ill be the first one upset if they dont continue to tweak blasters, but really, which would you rather have; a new FOTM or them slowly turn up the heat on blasters until theyre right?
Honestly? I want hybrids to do something better than lasers and projectiles. Hybrids need appeal. THAT would be a good start. No doubt tweaking of stats would be needed after the fact. A fundamental change needs to happen first. Modifying stats on a fundamentally broken turret just means you're making the weapon further excel at being broken. I honestly don't see Crucible hybrid changes fixing anything.
It's one change, maybe two, and I doubt it would be sweeping. Something like omni-damage hybrid ammo and a slight boost to range would be a good start. CCP can keep all the Crucible stuff. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:53:00 -
[896] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:May i ask why you prefer the Sleipnir zarak and not the astarte and why you have never flown or lost a single gallente ship? :)
C'mon now, don't lie. He's lost a few Gallente shuttles. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 21:02:00 -
[897] - Quote
I would never lie ! I really like mozzarella and tokajer and Sleipnirs :p
He would not have lost those shuttles if the gate campers would have used eagles with rails instead of hurricanes. |
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 21:13:00 -
[898] - Quote
What's really funny about all this is the Talos, its like the flag ship of this whole discussion. Not only is it nearly pointless and out performed by the Naga, even if fit with blasters....but even funnier is that the Talos will be the most expensive of the ships and have the highest material requirements to build. Never understood why Gallente ships, the ones that must always commit 100% to each fight and have little GTFO ability are always the most expensive.... oh wait, because Minimatar get that plus also. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
173
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 21:15:00 -
[899] - Quote
Sigras wrote:guys, seriously what do you want?
If they make wide sweeping changes everyone screams that theyre changing too much too fast if they change incrementally everyone screams that theyre doing nothing!
Personally I'd rather have this than them buffing blaster damage and range by 500% and giving gallente 90% webs back.
Ill be the first one upset if they dont continue to tweak blasters, but really, which would you rather have; a new FOTM or them slowly turn up the heat on blasters until theyre right?
sure, let them do it incrementally. as long as people realize this thing will drag out for an entire year. theyre just not getting my money until balance is established, simple as that. to me, this "expansion" is really garbage, gameplay-wise, because im not getting anything that was on that original list. maybe in 6 months, there will be something to see here.
CCP:
- hybrid/Gallente balancing - FW - nullsec - AF's
do it. until then, please dont call graphical updates "expansions." jesus. move along people, just another CCP moment.
and i want my 4.95 back. seriously. |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 21:33:00 -
[900] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
Anyone see that changing with the current set of fixes on SISI?
1) May I ask where you get this info? Is there a general all EVE kill board?
2) If this is accurate then this is by far the best stat I've seen proving the case of not just Hybrids sucking but Gallente as a whole. |
|
Alara IonStorm
RvB - BLUE Republic
430
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 21:35:00 -
[901] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote: 1) May I ask where you get this info? Is there a general all EVE kill board?
2) If this is accurate then this is by far the best stat I've seen proving the case of not just Hybrids sucking but Gallente as a whole.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20
|
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:03:00 -
[902] - Quote
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 |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:07:00 -
[903] - 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
That would make a difference ! It makes vindicators a little scary |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:13:00 -
[904] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Honestly? I want hybrids to do something better than lasers and projectiles. Hybrids need appeal. THAT would be a good start. No doubt tweaking of stats would be needed after the fact. A fundamental change needs to happen first. Modifying stats on a fundamentally broken turret just means you're making the weapon further excel at being broken. I honestly don't see Crucible hybrid changes fixing anything.
It's one change, maybe two, and I doubt it would be sweeping. Something like omni-damage hybrid ammo and a slight boost to range would be a good start. CCP can keep all the Crucible stuff. honestly, I dont think your proposed changes do anything more than CCPs changes . . . now instead of doing a ton of kinetic thermal damage pretty much never, blasters would do a ton of all types of damage pretty much never. unless by "slight boost to range" you mean > 200% medium sized blaster ships never get closer than 15 km . . .
Hungry Eyes wrote:sure, let them do it incrementally. as long as people realize this thing will drag out for an entire year. theyre just not getting my money until balance is established, simple as that. to me, this "expansion" is really garbage, gameplay-wise, because im not getting anything that was on that original list. maybe in 6 months, there will be something to see here.
CCP:
- hybrid/Gallente balancing - FW - nullsec - AF's
do it. until then, please dont call graphical updates "expansions." jesus. move along people, just another CCP moment.
and i want my 4.95 back. seriously. wow . . . you really havent been playing this game very long have you? or really any game . . . balance is something that takes small tweaks over a long period of time. How long after the release of starcraft were they tweaking balance changes? and they only had 3 groups to deal with, in eve the possible combinations are an order of magnitude greater than starcraft at least.
Also, way to skip over the changes they did make rail balancing (not sure how this is going to go yet) customs offices BPCs as a buff to FW (I imagine this is going to be a large FW LP sink) Supercap balancing (a HUGE nullsec change) POS Fuel changes Tier 3 battlecruisers 0.0 anomalies rebalance (another nullsec change) etc |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:16:00 -
[905] - 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
Eh.
Ok, another step in the right direction, and probably the FIRST of steps to change hybrids at a fundamental level. So far so good....
BUT
My ammo options are faction antimatter, dog poop, cat poop, horse poop, and cow poop. Which one doesn't stink?
No point in swapping ammo instantly when I only have one ammo type worth using. More cowbell, please.
EDIT: Hrm, come to think of it, I was on test about 12 hours ago. Is there a new client download then? I'm curious if the change is server-side or client-side. Either way, it was definitely a 5 second reload about 12 hours ago. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:20:00 -
[906] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Magosian wrote:Honestly? I want hybrids to do something better than lasers and projectiles. Hybrids need appeal. THAT would be a good start. No doubt tweaking of stats would be needed after the fact. A fundamental change needs to happen first. Modifying stats on a fundamentally broken turret just means you're making the weapon further excel at being broken. I honestly don't see Crucible hybrid changes fixing anything.
It's one change, maybe two, and I doubt it would be sweeping. Something like omni-damage hybrid ammo and a slight boost to range would be a good start. CCP can keep all the Crucible stuff. honestly, I dont think your proposed changes do anything more than CCPs changes . . . now instead of doing a ton of kinetic thermal damage pretty much never, blasters would do a ton of all types of damage pretty much never. unless by "slight boost to range" you mean > 200% medium sized blaster ships never get closer than 15 km . . .
START is the keyword. I think we're in full agreement that "slight" increases to blaster range isn't enough on its own.
Frankly, hybrids still need character. We can worry about range after that.
|
OT Smithers
Buccaneer's Den
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:46:00 -
[907] - Quote
Sigras wrote:guys, seriously what do you want?
If they make wide sweeping changes everyone screams that theyre changing too much too fast if they change incrementally everyone screams that theyre doing nothing!
Personally I'd rather have this than them buffing blaster damage and range by 500% and giving gallente 90% webs back.
Ill be the first one upset if they dont continue to tweak blasters, but really, which would you rather have; a new FOTM or them slowly turn up the heat on blasters until theyre right?
People want this and the other issues important to them fixed. Whatever CCP might say, no matter their "promises," whatever goes live now -- no matter how poorly balanced it might be -- is what we will be looking at for the forseeable future, and likely until they pull the plug on the game.
Nor is there ANY reason to believe that CCP has any intention of following through on this new direction. Already they have failed to deliver a good number of their promised features in this winter expansion. |
OT Smithers
Buccaneer's Den
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:48:00 -
[908] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Sigras wrote:guys, seriously what do you want?
If they make wide sweeping changes everyone screams that theyre changing too much too fast if they change incrementally everyone screams that theyre doing nothing!
Personally I'd rather have this than them buffing blaster damage and range by 500% and giving gallente 90% webs back.
Ill be the first one upset if they dont continue to tweak blasters, but really, which would you rather have; a new FOTM or them slowly turn up the heat on blasters until theyre right? sure, let them do it incrementally. as long as people realize this thing will drag out for an entire year. theyre just not getting my money until balance is established, simple as that. to me, this "expansion" is really garbage, gameplay-wise, because im not getting anything that was on that original list. maybe in 6 months, there will be something to see here. CCP: - hybrid/Gallente balancing - FW - nullsec - AF's do it. until then, please dont call graphical updates "expansions." jesus. move along people, just another CCP moment. and i want my 4.95 back. seriously.
+ >9000 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 23:09:00 -
[909] - 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 |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 23:09:00 -
[910] - Quote
Really it comes down to this: Would you stay with a Girlfriend that broke as many promises to you as CCP has in the last 4 years? |
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 00:15:00 -
[911] - Quote
I like the idea that they are going to change things slowly to prevent the creation of the next FotM. But the changes need to be done constantly and on a regular basis. If we need to wait 6 month for the next little step and than again 6 month for the next step... ... well why should we wait so long and trust you to get the job done? And what if you need 4 or 5 steps? Will we have to wait 2.5 years then? That can't be serious! Where is the hidden camera?
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 00:20:00 -
[912] - Quote
Nemesor wrote:Really it comes down to this: Would you stay with a Girlfriend that broke as many promises to you as CCP has in the last 4 years?
lol, dont let the door hit you on the way out nemmy |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 00:25:00 -
[913] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote: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 That would make a difference ! It makes vindicators a little scary
Its a bug. They had to change time in the code from s to ms, it just hasnt transferred over into the text. I believe its the same for missiles launchers aswell. They will update it and reload is still being changed to 5 s
edit
beat me to it. Links and all lol |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
310
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 00:26:00 -
[914] - Quote
FYI, gallente speed boost is about 5-8% MWD speed increase with the greatest speed increase on the megathron... Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
148
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 00:40:00 -
[915] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:FYI, gallente speed boost is about 5-8% MWD speed increase with the greatest speed increase on the megathron...
soo... still going slow... [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 01:00:00 -
[916] - 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
Hush, you.
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 01:54:00 -
[917] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Mariner6 wrote: 1) May I ask where you get this info? Is there a general all EVE kill board?
2) If this is accurate then this is by far the best stat I've seen proving the case of not just Hybrids sucking but Gallente as a whole.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20
Thank you. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 02:09:00 -
[918] - Quote
OT Smithers wrote:Sigras wrote:guys, seriously what do you want?
If they make wide sweeping changes everyone screams that theyre changing too much too fast if they change incrementally everyone screams that theyre doing nothing!
Personally I'd rather have this than them buffing blaster damage and range by 500% and giving gallente 90% webs back.
Ill be the first one upset if they dont continue to tweak blasters, but really, which would you rather have; a new FOTM or them slowly turn up the heat on blasters until theyre right? People want this and the other issues important to them fixed. Whatever CCP might say, no matter their "promises," whatever goes live now -- no matter how poorly balanced it might be -- is what we will be looking at for the forseeable future, and likely until they pull the plug on the game. Nor is there ANY reason to believe that CCP has any intention of following through on this new direction. Already they have failed to deliver a good number of their promised features in this winter expansion. dude, if youre not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on an MMO i dont know what to tell you . . . After seeing the complete 180 they've done in the last few weeks i think you should cut them some slack. |
Alara IonStorm
RvB - BLUE Republic
434
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 03:42:00 -
[919] - Quote
Sigras wrote: dude, if youre not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on an MMO i dont know what to tell you . . . After seeing the complete 180 they've done in the last few weeks i think you should cut them some slack.
I know these Whiners just don't see the hard work CCP has done. They think it is a few token changes and back to ignoring old features for new shinnies. But they don't understand this is a new direction.
So sure Tyrannis is terrible but the upcoming Incursions expansion which is full of player requested Content, Fixes and Balance Changes is the new direction. CCP finally gets it. We never have to worry about another colossal failure like Tyrannis again.
It's Gonna be a Bright Future. |
draconothese
Independant Celestial Enterprises Pink Fluffy Pussycats
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 05:05:00 -
[920] - Quote
anyone have the updated hybride changes ? |
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 05:11:00 -
[921] - Quote
Hybrid Turrets
Reduce CPU usage:
XL Turrets: -5 CPU L Turrets: -3 CPU M Turrets: -2 CPU S Turrets: -1 CPU
** Exception: 75mm Railguns (they already have very low CPU requirements.)
Reduce Powergrid usage:
All hybrid turrets: -12% Powergrid usage. Rounded to nearest whole number.
** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.)
Reduced Capacitor usage:
All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Tracking Speed Increase:
All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed
** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good tracking when compared to other XL turrets)
Railguns
Damage Increase:
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good damage when compared to other XL turrets)
Hybrid turret ships
While I am hesitant to boost individual ships right now, I do think that a small speed boost to hybrid turret ships in general is needed. You will notice that a few hybrid turret ships are not mentioned here. The ones that are not listed are either fast enough already or they have range bonuses to hybrid turrets, which means that they are meant for longer range combat and as such should not need a velocity boost as much as other hybrid turret ships.
Max Velocity +10 on the following ships:
Arazu, Astarte, Brutix, Catalyst, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Enyo, Eos, Falcon, Guardian-Vexor, Helios, Incursus, Ishtar, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant
Max Velocity +5 on the following ships: Cormorant, Federation Navy Comet, Hyperion, Kronos, Sin, Vindicator
Inertia Modifier -5% on the following ships:
Adrestia, Arazu, Ares, Astarte, Atron, Brutix, Catalyst, Celestis, Cormorant, Daredevil, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Eagle, Enyo, Eos, Eris, Exequror Navy Issue, Falcon, Federation Navy Comet, Ferox, Guardian-Vexor, Harpy, Helios, Hyperion, Incursus, Ishkur, Ishtar, Kronos, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Merlin, Moa, Phobos, Raptor, Rokh, Sin, Taranis, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant, Vindicator, Vulture
Tech II Ammo
I did some comparison between the tech II ammo types and found that one hybrid ammo type did indeed need some work. I also found that the other turret types had some very underwhelming ammo. Rather than limit myself to only boosting the hybrid ammo, I will also be making some changes to other tech II ammo types. Javelin is quite obviously underpowered. The correlating laser and projectile ammo, Gleam and Quake, are equally underwhelming and they all need some change. Additionally, Hail sticks out as terribly underpowered.
Javelin (all sizes): Removed cap penalty Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus Hail (all sizes): -25% falloff from -50% Also added this in the OP of this thread recently
* Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) |
erfta
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 05:44:00 -
[922] - Quote
>.< just spent 20 minutes reading the last 5 pages twice, this thread is full of circular arguments no one reads the TOS not even the guy that writes it. this is sig worthy http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/11/09/mortal-online-plagiarizes-eve-onlines-terms-of-service/1#c35015206 |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 10:13:00 -
[923] - Quote
Although I agree with CCP's tentative approach to the rebalancing of the game I also at the same time feel they (only just) haven't done enough to make a difference. In a few months time I have a feeling CCP won't have any real data on what their changes to hybrids have achieved as still no one will be using them.
I few months ago Company of Heroes was getting a major rebalance update and one of the Devs made some comments on the balance process. They mentioned that it was far better, as in more efficient, to make something that was currently very underpowered completely overpowered. Then dial it back gradually until it was where they wanted it to be. This way they found that the balance process was incredibly quick to complete as something that is OMGWTFBBQPWNEDMYASSROFL is very clear and easy to gradually draw back until balance is achieved. Instead we have a buff that is very conservative and everyone on the most part feels that blasters and the hulls designed to fit them are still very "meh".
Now I'm not suggesting that CCP make blasters and their respective ships stupidly OP and FOTM on TQ or even SISI. However if they first made them OP on their internal test server, played with them, nerfed them back down near to balanced status but still a little OP for TQ. It would be far easier for us to test them and say that "A,B and C are too good but X,Y,Z are nearly spot on". This would get us to the Balanced solution far far quicker.
Also. CCP. PLEASE!!! Look at ammo and make it more gooderer. Projectiles have fantastic choice where as Energy and Hybrids have two choices (soon to be 4 but all T2 eurrrgh) I would love something like:
Multifrequency (short range EM) : Remains as is except high EM low Thermal Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) : As MF but with hi thermal damage Gamma (short range hi RoF) : +50% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) : -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg) : +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) : +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal +15% Cap use Radio (Extreme long range) : +60% optimal
Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is with High Thermal low Kinetic damage (75% Therm 25% Kin) Lead (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal (75% Kin 25% Therm) Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking) : -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff (Mid range ammo that is ship specific [Gallente]) Iridium (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal (Mid range ammo that is ship specific [Caldari]) Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +15% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
215
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 11:13:00 -
[924] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote: Multifrequency (short range EM) : Remains as is except high EM low Thermal Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) : As MF but with hi thermal damage Gamma (short range hi RoF) : +50% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) : -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg) : +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) : +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal +15% Cap use Radio (Extreme long range) : +60% optimal
Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is with High Thermal low Kinetic damage (75% Therm 25% Kin) Lead (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal (75% Kin 25% Therm) Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking) : -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff (Mid range ammo that is ship specific [Gallente]) Iridium (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal (Mid range ammo that is ship specific [Caldari]) Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +15% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off
/Signed ! It looks great. |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 12:00:00 -
[925] - Quote
What if Hybrid ammo gave different bonuses based on the weapon being loaded was either Blaster or Railguns?
I'm talking specifically about range bonuses, allowing -some- ammo types to increase the optimal of blasters by a scale of 200% to 500%, and thusly hit at the usual "kiting" ranges.
If we left Anti-matter as it is, and instead buffed Iron, Tungsten and Lead optimal ranges to the usual kiting ranges (Around 10, 15 and 20 Km), but applied that change only to Blasters, you could see that speed wasn't necessary, merely time to swap ammonition based on the engagement range. However, these bonuses would be tied to Blasters specifically, not to Railguns. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 12:06:00 -
[926] - Quote
I fully agree - This will not buff hybrids statwise but it will give it some edge and it's a chance to straighten out the weird cap bonuses on the ammo.
Apart from that all we need is something to make the rails unique - the blasters has the massive dps and sweet tracking buff but look at long range weapons... Artillery : no cap, select damage type, 3-4x alpha Beams : best dps, tachyons, instant reload, best tracking Railguns : average/good dps, average reload time, not the worst tracking anymore, best range
Well it might be enough - but only if all the ships gets special attention.
Gallente mass/agility boosts to compensate for armor use and gets blasters into range? A look into why caldari railgun ships don't get used (bonus and for Rokh maybe a medslot)? Active tanking. Rarely used for anything but PvE. (make crystal implants for hitpoints and boost active reps 50%)?
Pinky |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
113
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 13:29:00 -
[927] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:A look into why caldari railgun ships don't get used (bonus and for Rokh maybe a medslot)?
When I would use an Eagle or Rokh (usually out of boredom) my frustration would be simple. I'd get range, easily. I'd hit, and often hit well. But damage was crap. DPS is low and Alpha is low.
See, Arties have great Alpha but lower DPS. Beams have meh alpha but nice DPS. Either way I see the damage I'm doing because after I hit and all modifiers taken into account, there is still a net amount of damage.
I really wish I had EFT or pyfit (whatever it's called) so I can compare DPS/Alpha at range.. Eagle vs. Zealot vs. Muninn |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 13:56:00 -
[928] - Quote
eagle doesnt get used because it has a double optimal bonus instead of buff to both ROF and damage unlike all the other sniper platforms. that ship simply cannot perform comparably in sniper hac fleets |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
149
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 13:59:00 -
[929] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:eagle doesnt get used because it has a double optimal bonus instead of buff to both ROF and damage unlike all the other sniper platforms. that ship simply cannot perform comparably in sniper hac fleets
you also max out the fittings by just slamming 5 250mm rails in it.
altho this will be solved on this patch. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 14:02:00 -
[930] - Quote
i'll check it out when i'm not on my linux machine but, if the 250's do push it into mid 300's or higher then the problem is solved |
|
Zizeria
Globaltech Industries Sanctuary Pact
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 14:46:00 -
[931] - Quote
In the real world the US navy is developing rail guns to replace standard ship based deck guns because of there greater range, and damage. The ammount of kinetic energy a rail gun can impart is stagering when compaired to more traditional weapon systems, to the point where the shell has no need for an explosive payload. In reality rails should have superior damage and range to any naval gun that uses a chemical propellant. The curent disadvantages are power requirements and ROF due to the cap charge time, as well as increced maintenance requirements from magnitic forces inflicting high amounts of stress on the rails.
So in short I guess I want to say rails should hands down out DMG arty, with greater range at the expence of powergrid and ROF.
-Z |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
203
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 15:28:00 -
[932] - Quote
I can fit full rack of 1400 Arty on my Tornado but I can't fit more than 4 425mm Rail Gun II on my Talos...
So? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 15:29:00 -
[933] - Quote
Zizeria wrote:In the real world the US navy is developing rail guns to replace standard ship based deck guns because of there greater range, and damage. The ammount of kinetic energy a rail gun can impart is stagering when compaired to more traditional weapon systems, to the point where the shell has no need for an explosive payload. In reality rails should have superior damage and range to any naval gun that uses a chemical propellant. The curent disadvantages are power requirements and ROF due to the cap charge time, as well as increced maintenance requirements from magnitic forces inflicting high amounts of stress on the rails.
So in short I guess I want to say rails should hands down out DMG arty, with greater range at the expence of powergrid and ROF.
-Z
Heh,
If you expected this game to reflect any sort of realism, you're several years late.
"21st century" railguns are getting outmatched by a weapons platform that is several centuries old in addition to another weapons platform which was invented in 1960. Mankind hasn't even invented the "blaster" yet, but rest assured it's getting its ass kicked in EVE by antiquated technologies, too.
Kinda humorous, no? |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 15:39:00 -
[934] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Heh, If you expected this game to reflect any sort of realism, you're several years late. "21st century" railguns are getting outmatched by a weapons platform that is several centuries old in addition to another weapons platform which was invented in 1960. Mankind hasn't even invented the "blaster" yet, but rest assured it's getting its ass kicked in EVE by antiquated technologies, too. Kinda humorous, no?
oh so my Trireme with 20 archers fitted will be able to beat supercarriers?
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:05:00 -
[935] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Magosian wrote:Heh, If you expected this game to reflect any sort of realism, you're several years late. "21st century" railguns are getting outmatched by a weapons platform that is several centuries old in addition to another weapons platform which was invented in 1960. Mankind hasn't even invented the "blaster" yet, but rest assured it's getting its ass kicked in EVE by antiquated technologies, too. Kinda humorous, no? oh so my Trireme with 20 archers fitted will be able to beat supercarriers?
So long as the arbitrary power creep exists, coupled with a slow counter-balancing process, I'd say it's possible. |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:14:00 -
[936] - Quote
I'm finding it pretty funny that CCP didn't go overboard with this boost. Blasters dont have their "TE's". Speed and damge will not be the answer and I'll go into why that is later because I cant be arsed now. |
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:50:00 -
[937] - Quote
Atleast make Null 50% optimal/falloff bonus before this patch goes live? |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:50:00 -
[938] - Quote
Please don't, we don't want to hear some drake/minmatar pilot tell us how to fix blasters by making them a poor mans version of AC canes. |
mate teahupoo
Sudden Buggery
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:54:00 -
[939] - Quote
I have not been following up with this that much, so this might have been asked already. If you are going to do this"
Tracking Speed Increase: All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed"
Then will you buff up TD's to account for the extra 20% we have unaccounted for? |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:58:00 -
[940] - Quote
why would they? the reasoning for the improvement was that their tracking was shite for the range they are doing damage at anyways.
tracking disruptors still work as intended and two of these on a blasterboat will still put its tracking way below where it was pre buff |
|
mate teahupoo
Sudden Buggery
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:04:00 -
[941] - Quote
that is true if I were in a ship using two TD's... but if I am not, then what? |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:04:00 -
[942] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Please don't, we don't want to hear some drake/minmatar pilot tell us how to fix blasters by making them a poor mans version of AC canes.
Did you just!? Oh HELLZ NO!
Clearly you french are pretty rude! |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:07:00 -
[943] - Quote
Not sure where the scare mongering came from about Blasters having too good tracking.
Just tried engaging a Dramiel in a Talos Got level 5 BC so max tracking from the ship, fitted an extra tracking enhanser, also had Web, Scram and Painter fitted. Still couldn't scratch the thing. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:07:00 -
[944] - Quote
then its tracking is back to the pre buff stats approx and all you have to do is orbit them. problem solved |
mate teahupoo
Sudden Buggery
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:14:00 -
[945] - Quote
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. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:18:00 -
[946] - Quote
I kind of think AC as a concept is flawed, because of all the weapons in the game they have the shortest optiman so they have good tracking. This makes it so you can not get inside their guns. They also have stupid fall off giving them longer maximum range. I think someone has had their cake and been eating it for soo long that Mini ships should be slowed down a fair bit due to their fat pilots.
Still not seeing anything that will make me use my galle toon for any combat. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:39:00 -
[947] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Please don't, we don't want to hear some drake/minmatar pilot tell us how to fix blasters by making them a poor mans version of AC canes.
Eh, please do if you ask me. I don't much care about them. They still get cap-free turrets and faster ships. The least a hybrid pilot should get is a fighting chance. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:52:00 -
[948] - 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.
|
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:53:00 -
[949] - Quote
I still say they need a mwd bonus to enable Gallente ships to get into engagement range... |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:01:00 -
[950] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:I still say they need a mwd bonus to enable Gallente ships to get into engagement range...
I would rather not give up other ship bonuses for this one to be applied. Cap becomes an indomitable nightmare for active-tanking Gallente ships who also need cap for everything else, especially guns. This also doesn't do anything for railguns.
Hybrids need to be fixed. This is a hybrid balancing thread, not a MWD buff thread. |
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:21:00 -
[951] - Quote
RankWeaponsKills 1425mm AutoCannon II17151 2Heavy Missile Launcher II15148 3200mm AutoCannon II8269 4220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II7542 5150mm Light AutoCannon II7447 61400mm Howitzer Artillery II7137 7Mega Pulse Laser II6446 8Heavy Pulse Laser II6307 9720mm Howitzer Artillery II6252 10125mm Gatling AutoCannon II4791 11'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher4363 12800mm Repeating Artillery II3156 13Focused Medium Pulse Laser II1831 14Light Neutron Blaster II1763 15Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1703 161400mm Prototype I Siege Cannon1703 17Heavy Neutron Blaster II1661 18650mm Artillery Cannon II1522 191400mm 'Scout' Artillery I1497 20Dual 180mm AutoCannon II1374
Not sure why this hasn't been posted earlier, we had the ship version so we might as well have the weapon version too.
So hybrids do make it into the top 20 based on this data - but it's a very poor showing and includes not a single large weapon system. Projectiles are dominant in every imaginable way making up 63% of all kills; lasers are evenly represented but for a much smaller 15% of kills; missiles are absent as the small versions (which prove ineffective despite rocket fixes previously added) but still manage to make up 18% of the kills from torpedoes - almost certainly from stealth bomber kills- and the heavy missiles from drakes; Railguns make no appearance with blasters totalling a whopping 3% from small and mediums to account for hybrids; Drones are entirely absent.
Yet again, another fine example of the lacking nature of hybrids and the limited nature of missiles whilst clearly illustrating the ridiculous dominance of projectiles in every possible arena of PvP. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:26:00 -
[952] - Quote
Dont be silly projectiles are not op it just looks that way. Yeah from every possible angle:P |
Luc Aideron
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:09:00 -
[953] - Quote
I think that this is an amazing and well considered thread! CCP is lucky to have so much good advice to draw from. I don't usually engage the forums but I just want to put my vote toward CCP take this discussion seriously. Rebalancing hybrids is a start and your recent move back towards internet spaceships is why I came back. I canceled my eve subscription several months ago because I felt like eve was half-finished and the development of so many other products made me feel like eve was going to ever get the treatment that it really deserved.
As soon as heard about hybrids getting worked on my ears perked up and I signed back up. That one thing alone! Now that I'm back and I've managed to consider the changes you've made, I don't think it's enough. I know some of the devs posted that they going to continue looking at what needs to be done and this is a good start. I wouldn't want you to go and do something you didn't consider well. Several people posting on this thread have thought up whole entire ways of re-think hybrids; I don't think I could re-explain or contribute anything better.
Every race has a role please help us by figuring out what that is supposed to be. For instance, when some one posted about having the ewar compliment the tanking and the tanking compliment the range and the optimal and the strategy for fitting a ship matches ship's bonus. They got some great ideas. Make us work for eve, don't just give a away gank, but make our work have a great reward which is being able to do well the thing that were supposed to do!
Every other race just seems so well defined and interesting. (Many of which have been brought up in this tread) Amarr, Caldari, and Minmatar all have such distinct roles and have so many well-thought out parts to playing them. I just want Galliente to be that interesting. I thought that we were drone boats and blasters, but the pay off for that is a bit more fractured than you realize. To really succeed in eve all you need autocannons and a nano shield fit. I want it to be more interesting than that.
Gallente has such beautiful ships, that's what made me fall in love with them. Some one at CCP obviously really cared about what they were doing with them, but some where along the line that was lost. I'll give you one example: I love the Myrmidon, but it's a fool's battlecruiser. You can trick it out like hurricane, sure. But it's nothing when compared to the Eve-kill numbers of the Drake and the Hurricane, even the Harby breaks into the top twenty sometimes, but not the Myrmidon. I realize not everyone can be on top of the list, but why can't it be balanced?
Eve is hard work. I mean really hard, but in a good way. Training all these skills, learning all these mechanics, making spreadsheets, teaching myself pvp, throwing away piles of isk on ship after ship is amazingly hard work. There so many talented pilots with nearly infinite creativity and intelligence and it just sucks when things don't come together with the mechanism your using whether it's ship fitting, faction warfare or whatever.
I mean I get it eve's a big game and you've got a lot to do. All I want is to be the pilot that you promised me I could be. I'll pay for it, I'll wait for it, but please just let me know that it will be there. |
Cheekything
Black Lance Executive Outcomes
73
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:10:00 -
[954] - Quote
CCP your still missing out one of the most important problems range.
Currently the close range blasters are still terrible compared to their counterparts.
(using max skills)
Heavy Pulse + Close Range T2 Ammo = 7.5/5 Heavy Pulse + Long Range T2 Ammo = 23/5
Best Optimal Ok falloff
425MM Autocannons + Close Range T2 Ammo = 1.5/6 425MM Autocannons + Long Range T2 Ammo = 3/18
Best Falloff low optimal (however note many minmatar ships get a falloff bonus)
Heavy Neutron Blaster + Close Range T2 Ammo = 3.4/3.1 Heavy Neutron Blaster + Long Range T2 Ammo = 5.6/7.8
Low in both.
They need to be brought in line with their counterparts and given a -25% below their average not 25% of their average.
I feel the average ranges should be more like:
Heavy Neutron Blaster + Close Range T2 Ammo = 3.5/3.5 Heavy Neutron Blaster + Long Range T2 Ammo = 10/10
50:50 optimal and falloff and a slightly lower range than it's counterparts so that caldari gunboats have a reason to be use.
The damage issue has finally been address but we need more range.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:21:00 -
[955] - Quote
mate teahupoo wrote:that is true if I were in a ship using two TD's... but if I am not, then what? I'll give you a hint: 'tracking' disrupters have dual purpose...
Crack on.
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:30:00 -
[956] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:mate teahupoo wrote:that is true if I were in a ship using two TD's... but if I am not, then what? I'll give you a hint: 'tracking' disrupters have dual purpose... Crack on.
also tracking = speed signature = area
My condolences about the phisics education in your neighbourhood.
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 19:46:00 -
[957] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Not sure where the scare mongering came from about Blasters having too good tracking.
Just tried engaging a Dramiel in a Talos Got level 5 BC so max tracking from the ship, fitted an extra tracking enhanser, also had Web, Scram and Painter fitted. Still couldn't scratch the thing.
lol |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:08:00 -
[958] - Quote
Hentes Zsemle wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:mate teahupoo wrote:that is true if I were in a ship using two TD's... but if I am not, then what? I'll give you a hint: 'tracking' disrupters have dual purpose... Crack on. also tracking = speed signature = area My condolences about the phisics education in your neighbourhood. Come again?
Also, flaming attempts look much cooler when they've been proof read...
Edit: No seriously, I have no idea why you posted that - I was pointing out the range disruption feature of tracking disrupters to the other chap...
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:12:00 -
[959] - Quote
Would I earn the ill will of fellow forum users if I posted several long posts in this thread regarding the topic? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:28:00 -
[960] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:RankWeaponsKills 1425mm AutoCannon II17151 2Heavy Missile Launcher II15148 3200mm AutoCannon II8269 4220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II7542 5150mm Light AutoCannon II7447 61400mm Howitzer Artillery II7137 7Mega Pulse Laser II6446 8Heavy Pulse Laser II6307 9720mm Howitzer Artillery II6252 10125mm Gatling AutoCannon II4791 11'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher4363 12800mm Repeating Artillery II3156 13Focused Medium Pulse Laser II1831 14Light Neutron Blaster II1763 15Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1703 161400mm Prototype I Siege Cannon1703 17Heavy Neutron Blaster II1661 18650mm Artillery Cannon II1522 191400mm 'Scout' Artillery I1497 20Dual 180mm AutoCannon II1374
Not sure why this hasn't been posted earlier, we had the ship version so we might as well have the weapon version too.
So hybrids do make it into the top 20 based on this data - but it's a very poor showing and includes not a single large weapon system. Projectiles are dominant in every imaginable way making up 63% of all kills; lasers are evenly represented but for a much smaller 15% of kills; missiles are absent as the small versions (which prove ineffective despite rocket fixes previously added) but still manage to make up 18% of the kills from torpedoes - almost certainly from stealth bomber kills- and the heavy missiles from drakes; Railguns make no appearance with blasters totalling a whopping 3% from small and mediums to account for hybrids; Drones are entirely absent.
Yet again, another fine example of the lacking nature of hybrids and the limited nature of missiles whilst clearly illustrating the ridiculous dominance of projectiles in every possible arena of PvP.
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 . . . |
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:36:00 -
[961] - Quote
It takes the data from all ships involved in a kill I believe, so that is about as comprehensive as you can get. |
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 21:37:00 -
[962] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Hentes Zsemle wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:mate teahupoo wrote:that is true if I were in a ship using two TD's... but if I am not, then what? I'll give you a hint: 'tracking' disrupters have dual purpose... Crack on. also tracking = speed signature = area My condolences about the phisics education in your neighbourhood. Come again? Also, flaming attempts look much cooler when they've been proof read... Edit: No seriously, I have no idea why you posted that - I was pointing out the range disruption feature of tracking disrupters to the other chap...
I wanted to reply to the guy you replied to, and just add the thing i wanted to say to the thing you said.
Anyway, signature is an area, signature radius is its radius, target painters increase that radius. Tracking is angular velocity, it has a different dimension than signature. So what Gabriel Karade said makes just as much sense as comparing an apple to a truck. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:15:00 -
[963] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:It takes the data from all ships involved in a kill I believe, so that is about as comprehensive as you can get. Interesting, but I wish I could see a damage done statistic instead because I can shoot at something with blasters to get on the KM that doesnt mean I applied any damage. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:57:00 -
[964] - Quote
Hentes Zsemle wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Hentes Zsemle wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:mate teahupoo wrote:that is true if I were in a ship using two TD's... but if I am not, then what? I'll give you a hint: 'tracking' disrupters have dual purpose... Crack on. also tracking = speed signature = area My condolences about the phisics education in your neighbourhood. Come again? Also, flaming attempts look much cooler when they've been proof read... Edit: No seriously, I have no idea why you posted that - I was pointing out the range disruption feature of tracking disrupters to the other chap... I wanted to reply to the guy you replied to, and just add the thing i wanted to say to the thing you said. Anyway, signature is an area, signature radius is its radius, target painters increase that radius. Tracking is angular velocity, it has a different dimension than signature. So what Gabriel Karade said makes just as much sense as comparing an apple to a truck. I don't think you're reading my post correctly..... but carry on being special if you wish...
I was not talking about signature radius, I was talking about tracking disrupters being used to disrupt optimal and falloff ranges. Where you've got the idea I'm referring to signature radius from I have no idea, but hey ho.
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Cheekything
Black Lance Executive Outcomes
73
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 23:09:00 -
[965] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Nikuno wrote:It takes the data from all ships involved in a kill I believe, so that is about as comprehensive as you can get. Interesting, but I wish I could see a damage done statistic instead because I can shoot at something with blasters to get on the KM that doesnt mean I applied any damage.
True but the reality is that it would be hard to fudge the results in such a large number.
I'm sure CCP could do their own check but the fact still remains hybrids currently lack the range and DPS of all weapons in eve.
DPS needs to be added to Rails and range to Blasters. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 01:08:00 -
[966] - Quote
What CCP should check is how many hybrid boats that enter a fight are still flying after the fight ends. I'm willing to bet it's less than half, post-patch... |
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 01:14:00 -
[967] - Quote
Quote: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 . . .
If you take the ship statistics and stand it next to the weapons statistics, it adds up. The only inconsistency I can spot is the heavy neutron blasters, which can be explained by multiple different hulls using it but not making it on the top 20. (Vigilants and whatnot)
RankShipsKills 1Drake54822 2Hurricane47905 3Abaddon34259 4Armageddon 21631 5Zealot15305 6Tempest13981 7Maelstrom13797 8Dramiel13186 9Rifter10627 10Cynabal9963 11Sabre9563 12Rapier8719 13Scimitar8496 14Tengu8312 15Hound8265 16Vagabond7737 17Manticore7276 18Loki 7110 19Harbinger6001 20Capsule 5365
Today in the top twenty we have: 3 Caldari 10 Minmatar 4 Amarr 2 Angel
0 Gallente
RankWeaponsKills 1425mm AutoCannon II17151 2Heavy Missile Launcher II15148 3200mm AutoCannon II8269 4220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II7542 5150mm Light AutoCannon II7447 61400mm Howitzer Artillery II7137 7Mega Pulse Laser II6446 8Heavy Pulse Laser II6307 9720mm Howitzer Artillery II6252 10125mm Gatling AutoCannon II4791 11'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher4363 12800mm Repeating Artillery II3156 13Focused Medium Pulse Laser II1831 14Light Neutron Blaster II1763 15Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1703 161400mm Prototype I Siege Cannon1703 17Heavy Neutron Blaster II1661 18650mm Artillery Cannon II1522 191400mm 'Scout' Artillery I1497 20Dual 180mm AutoCannon II1374 |
Cheekything
Black Lance Executive Outcomes
75
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 09:34:00 -
[968] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:What CCP should check is how many hybrid boats that enter a fight are still flying after the fight ends. I'm willing to bet it's less than half, post-patch...
I do not think I'm aware of any FC who wont primary a Hybrid ship in battle since most of them will die before they get in range.
They are now a bit more of a threat but they still lack the range needed to be useful. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 10:02:00 -
[969] - Quote
Cheekything wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:What CCP should check is how many hybrid boats that enter a fight are still flying after the fight ends. I'm willing to bet it's less than half, post-patch... I do not think I'm aware of any FC who wont primary a Hybrid ship in battle since most of them will die before they get in range. They are now a bit more of a threat but they still lack the range needed to be useful.
Sometimes they are ignored because they are no threat |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 14:06:00 -
[970] - Quote
Quote: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. |
|
Nemesor
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 14:46:00 -
[971] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Quote: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.
Cynabal was FOTM about 7-8 months ago. Its now fairly standard. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
125
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 15:03:00 -
[972] - Quote
Nemesor wrote: Cynabal was FOTM about 7-8 months ago. Its now fairly standard.
I was deployed, missed it
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 19:58:00 -
[973] - Quote
Just a small insight : A railfit Ferox will now be better than a AutoCannon Ferox and with blasters actually bite stuff unfortunate to be within range Woohoo. That is 1 ship that I personally will consider a healthy choice for caldari pilots in the future.
Most likely the Moa might be viable too but I haven't done any comparisons on it. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:09:00 -
[974] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Just a small insight : A railfit Ferox will now be better than a AutoCannon Ferox and with blasters actually bite stuff unfortunate to be within range Woohoo. That is 1 ship that I personally will consider a healthy choice for caldari pilots in the future. Most likely the Moa might be viable too but I haven't done any comparisons on it.
You're probably just looking at the damage numbers in the 20-25km range. There's no way medium rails are not going to be able to track a skirmish cruiser/BC who is MWD-orbiting you at said range....MAYBE dual 150mms with LOLdps...... |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 22:12:00 -
[975] - Quote
The big fail is that people are building hybrid fits in EFT and are happy about the numbers that look pretty good. But EFT just doesn't take into account that you never will deploy your theoretical maximum damage becouse of range, tracking, sig radius and so on. The only way to find out what will make more damage in this case (ferox rail or ferox AC) is to fit the ship and do some pvp tests vs a friend or corp mate. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 22:59:00 -
[976] - Quote
What ammo to use inorder to snipe using Rails with near 400-500 DPS from 150 KM (using 425 MM T2)?
Thanks |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 23:30:00 -
[977] - Quote
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... |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 23:44:00 -
[978] - 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. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 04:28:00 -
[979] - Quote
if you want to use hybrids so badly. move to wormhole space where every wh aka gate spawns your target with in wb/scram range of you.
lotsa QQ in this thread. keep using AC's if you hate the range so badly |
Cap Tyrian
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 04:41:00 -
[980] - Quote
I'll put my opinion to a point !
I'll gladly take what i can get but...
Really Fixing Blasters you have the options three:
- lower ROF same DPS proportional cap use- Artillery close range counterpart
- Ad allot of DPS best threw big OVERHEATING bonus
- E-Wear Amo - versatility in its own way and would fit to Caldari
(in order of my preference)
My word has bin spoken !
|
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 05:07:00 -
[981] - Quote
ok, CCP, you still have not fixed the fact that all the ships with armor tanking bonuces cannot usethe bonus you gave them, because they cannot fit a full rack of guns, reppers, MWD, and boosters, unless you are fitting electron blaster on them (which is pathertic). So atm hyperion and britux cannot be fitted with 2 reps and 2 boosters even with maximum fitting skills, meaning they cannot possibly under any circumstance utilize their bonuces. It just is impossible. Thus the ship is useless. That is wihtout even begining to look into effectiveness of their fitting or active vs buffer tank or getting in range or anything like that . THey simply cannot be fit. That is stupid. CHange their bonuces, or change their fitting.
Secondly, remove speed penalty from active armor tank rigs. I liked flying active armour ships, but atm it is just silly. Leave penalty on trimarks, so buffertanks and amarr stay slow.
Thirdly pelase consider giving some gal ships a shield-tank. I seriously think it would massively improve the situation. Minmatar use two tanks, so can we. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 05:25:00 -
[982] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:ok, CCP, you still have not fixed the fact that all the ships with armor tanking bonuces cannot usethe bonus you gave them, because they cannot fit a full rack of guns, reppers, MWD, and boosters, unless you are fitting electron blaster on them (which is pathertic). So atm hyperion and britux cannot be fitted with 2 reps and 2 boosters and a rack of ions even with maximum fitting skills, meaning they cannot possibly under any circumstance utilize their bonuces. It just is impossible. Thus the ship is not for-filling it's purpose, it is virtually unusable. That is without even looking into effectiveness of their fitting or active vs buffer tank or getting in range or anything like that . They simply cannot be fit. That is stupid. Change their bounces, or change their fitting. Maelstrom and Abbadon have enourmous amounts of fitting room, especially in powergrid, whereas gallente are restricted on powergid insanely, and it's not like we hae spare cpu either.
Secondly, remove speed penalty from active armor tank rigs. I liked flying active armour ships, but atm it is just silly. Leave penalty on trimarks, so buffertanks and amarr stay slow.
Thirdly pelase consider giving some gal ships a shield-tank. I seriously think it would massively improve the situation. Minmatar use two tanks, so can we.
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 05:53:00 -
[983] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Maxsim Goratiev wrote: eye aym protisting speelcherk
|
Atuesuel
ELITE BR Vera Cruz Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 05:56:00 -
[984] - Quote
dont care how good you make the guns tracking if the target ship get close to a gall ship there going to get webed down, so the tracking is not so much the problem, its the range and falloff, witch is ok as well as i like being up in peoples faces, more damage would be nice or more speed to the ships as armor tank is slow , and our bass speed is to slow , like min ships have the highest and they can orbit out of webs and scrams and our falloff, we may as well fit mining lazzors to our ships and get some ore as we are getting killed. let the flaming begin. |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
252
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 09:40:00 -
[985] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:ok, CCP, you still have not fixed the fact that all the ships with armor tanking bonuces cannot usethe bonus you gave them, because they cannot fit a full rack of guns, reppers, MWD, and boosters, unless you are fitting electron blaster on them (which is pathertic). So atm hyperion and britux cannot be fitted with 2 reps and 2 boosters even with maximum fitting skills, meaning they cannot possibly under any circumstance utilize their bonuces. It just is impossible.
Might want to check this out :
Active Tanking |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 09:46:00 -
[986] - Quote
Atuesuel wrote:dont care how good you make the guns tracking if the target ship get close to a gall ship there going to get webed down, so the tracking is not so much the problem, its the range and falloff, witch is ok as well as i like being up in peoples faces, more damage would be nice or more speed to the ships as armor tank is slow , and our bass speed is to slow , like min ships have the highest and they can orbit out of webs and scrams and our falloff, we may as well fit mining lazzors to our ships and get some ore as we are getting killed. let the flaming begin.
You will get no flaming from me that more or less covers most blaster ships ranging from battle ships to cruisers. Med and Large hybirds suck. Small and Capital are fine.
|
Takeshi Yamato
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 10:15:00 -
[987] - Quote
1) Speed penalties imposed by armor plates and rigs are a significant factor in the hybrid problem. I would suggest changing them from a speed reduction to signature radius increase to mirror shield extenders and rigs.
2) Ships using small blasters don't need buffs of this magnitude. In particular the Taranis needs looking at. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 14:04:00 -
[988] - Quote
Ferox:
As the Ferox is a supportship mostly I fit it up for a roaming BC fleet. The Ferox is great because you rarely get primaried first due to the relative strong tank, mediocre speed and low damage. These numbers are using 3 damage mods even if I would normally fit a few TEs. I am also comparing with the shortest range T1 ammunition and have no drones on the ship. EHP is measured undocked and with overheated inv. fields.
425mm Autocannons : 67,6k EHP, 316,2 DPS (1,5km+12km) Tracking 0,132 Heavy Neutron Blasters : 69,7k EHP, 452,7 DPS (3,4km+6,3km) Tracking 0,15 250mm Railguns (Need 1 ACR rig) : 62,9k EHP, 306,9 DPS (27km+15km) Tracking 0,03
The AC Ferox has an obvious advantage in using no cap and being able to select its damage type. The fitting is also much easier and you should be able to fiddle a medium neutralizer in with a few tweaks. Also the fall-off suits the Ferox fine as it isn't very agile and this allows it to hit targets while travelling towards them. This setup will also benefit most from fleet bonus and implants because it has powergrid to fit 2 extenders and 1 inv. field.
The Blaster Ferox needs to get closer before being able to hit the targets well, but the tracking is a little better and and the damage will punish anyone getting caught. I personally consider 400 dps with a cruiser/battlecruiser very sufficient with a good buffer/tank.
Rail Ferox Now fitting into the support role I attempted to fit 250mm railguns. I'm sure 200mm will do fine as well but I might as well go all-out hehe. I did need a ACR rig compromising the tank a little but as you see not much. Tracking will always be a huge thing for railguns, but as a supportship I wouldn't mind. It still hits cruisers+ fine as long they don't get too close. As you can see it does nearly the same max dps as autcannons but it does 100% damage all the way upto 27km and switching to long range ammo it is capable of hitting recons very easily.
This ship won't knock the socks off hurricanes and a Brutix likely does twice the damage. But for a cheap tier 1 battlecruiser I really like these stats. In fleets likely being ignored able to sneak up on targets with blasters or sit at range with rails easily hitting any targets called by the FC dealing a solid amount of dps.
Don't forget you can add 100 DPS from drones... |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 15:00:00 -
[989] - Quote
they are not going to give you whiners the god like capabilities you will not stop going on and on about. if you cant figure out a way to factor in the cons of each hybrid platform into your play style then, train something else. there is no gun to anyones head here saying you must use hybrids. a 1000 dps proteus 800 dps vig and 1500 vindi show that the changes are reasonable and balanced.
again fly something else if you can't get into situations where you can get on top of your opponent and tickle him from the inside.
good day sirs
CCP, changes are great +2000 |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 15:19:00 -
[990] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:they are not going to give you whiners the god like capabilities...
Why this offense? Is everybody a whiner who wants to improve gameplay and balancing? Is everybody a whiner who asks why a AC has so many advantages over other weapon systems? Is everybody a whiner who doesn't share your opinion? Is everybody a whiner who asks why a die-most or bruttix are useless hybrid plattforms?
Please bring something constructive and stop offending other people. |
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 15:29:00 -
[991] - Quote
the buffs are plenty enough for the platforms to do what they need to do now.
you and the others in this thread whining are just reinforcing the old adage "give a man an inch and he will take a yard"
minmatar have little else asides from their awesome weapons. most t1 platforms for the race cant tank nearly as well as the other three races, guess what? the other three races each have weapons systems that have serious drawback when certain conditions are met.
these balances that have been posted by ccp are great and will make the ship capable of doing alot more with the same ammount of slots.
if you dont like the tracking issues of rails. get a friend in gang that can slow things down at range.
if you dont like the range of blasters, fly ac's or a drone boat.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 15:59:00 -
[992] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: most t1 platforms for the race cant tank nearly as well as the other three races
Maelstrom has the most powerful tank of all t1 subcaps. Of all races.
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 16:18:00 -
[993] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: you and the others in this thread whining are just reinforcing the old adage "give a man an inch and he will take a yard"
See thats exactly your problem. I'm not whining at all but you keep offending people. Your contribution is worthless to this topic and you are a distraction in this thread. Others would call you propably a troll.
In my opinion the balancing is finished when all races have equal chances to win a battle with equal ship types (for example cruiser vs cruiser) and equal weapons (short vs short or range vs range).
So lets do this test, lets put a AC Hurricane vs a Blaster Bruttix, both T1 BC with short range weapons, both T2 fitted. Lets run 10 tests and see what comes out. Ouch, the Hurricane won 9 of 10 fights... ... but yeah, the Bruttix-Pilot was a whiner.
As long as one weapon system dominates the entire game it is not fixed. But guys like you offending people and tell them they are whiners just want to stay in their comfortable seat named Hurricane with AC. Btw, I'm not a Gallente Fanboy and I also fly other ships and it doesn't take too much time to cross train to T2 medium ACs (if I feel the need for that) but a crap balanced game is a crap balanced game. And EVE isn't only crap balanced, it also has some fundamentaly broken aspects by design. For example making the short range guy slow and armor tanked and making Rails work on a distance where you simply can use warp to zero.
"give a man an inch and he will take a yard"? How about to put it that way: Ignore your paying player base for 3 years and they will be happy after that 3 years even if you only give them some bullshit to eat? |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 16:18:00 -
[994] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: minmatar have little else asides from their awesome weapons. most t1 platforms for the race cant tank nearly as well as the other three races, guess what? the other three races each have weapons systems that have serious drawback when certain conditions are met.
I lol'ed at this part. Yeah they have nothing else besides their awesome weapons, besides the best speed, best slot layout, tons of extra fitting space to fit everything they want and tons of utility slots. Go troll somewhere else you easy moder. Fact is I use almost nothing but blaster ships to get my kills, and guess what, just because someone can get kills relying on the rest of their gang, doesn't mean the ships aren't **** and need redoing. The whole pvp balance in eve is messed up because of minmatar ships, all the other races have some way of dealing with it but not Gallente ships. So we're asking for these frankly reasonable changes because we know that this will not make Gall ships more desirable and only slightly more effective. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
150
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 18:13:00 -
[995] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:again fly something else if you can't get into situations where you can get on top of your opponent and tickle him from the inside.
ah yes, the fabled "warp in at 0 tactic".
that works about 1 out of 50 times btw. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 19:29:00 -
[996] - Quote
if you arent a ultra bad and fly in a group with logistics then it does in fact work.
solo in eve has its place but ffs every ship and race should not be able to do it well. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
320
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 20:13:00 -
[997] - Quote
Weren't gallente suppost to be the solo race? Niche got smaller, and thus people wanted them to work in fleets?
With minmatar, it was really just a problem with the battleships and caps, most of the other classes were the most useful in thier class. Then the boosts came, and all those great ships became greater, whilst we now see artillery in abaddons.
I've pretty much said from the outset that there was little beyond changes to ammo and tracking that needs to be done to hybrids, however the lack of ship changes, the lack of a meaningful synergy towards how the ships behave is depressing.
Deimos, Phobos, Eos, Astarte, Hyperion, Eris, Brutix and Mymidon all need a look at with specific changes (form fitting tweaks to major redesigns) which I think would give gallente a more competitive line up beyond (for me anyway) the ishtar and the Proteus.
Also Zarak1, you can't accuse me of flying with bads! You know full well that a Mach > Vindi for top damage dealing in almost every situation which is kinda sad. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 20:25:00 -
[998] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:... but ffs every ship and race should not be able to do it well.
I agree with "every ship" since there are ships designed for fleets, for solo and some even for... ... mining! I disagree with race since there is no reason why one race should be the fleet race, the other the solo race and the third race the gate camping race. I say yes to different strategies and approaches, to a different "balance point" every race has, but every race must have something competitive to get the basic jobs done. Otherwise Gamemasters should tell beginners to choose Amarr if they want to fight in fleets, Minmatar if they want to own everything in canes, Caldari if they want to run missions and Gallente if they want to haul stuff in a Iteron 5 :P |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 21:12:00 -
[999] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:the buffs are plenty enough for the platforms to do what they need to do now.
not for the Deimos. this ship is still subpar in comparison to its counterparts, and rails simply dont work well with it. please buff the Deimos in some way.
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Deimos, Phobos, Eos, Astarte, Hyperion, Eris, Brutix and Mymidon all need a look at with specific changes (form fitting tweaks to major redesigns) which I think would give gallente a more competitive line up beyond (for me anyway) the ishtar and the Proteus.
and this. Ishtar has always been ok, and the Proteus is showing a lot of promise with the rail buffs. but the others are terrible. |
Atuesuel
ELITE BR Vera Cruz Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 22:01:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:if you arent a ultra bad and fly in a group with logistics then it does in fact work.
solo in eve has its place but ffs every ship and race should not be able to do it well.
like all ways the other races call it crying, explain how to get a kill here, you are in a brutex , a cane is at 18km, how you going to win this smart guy let alone put damage on him. ? |
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 22:15:00 -
[1001] - Quote
i'm actually looking forward to the changes that are coming. 2 vigs 2 DD's and 2 comets ready to go.
been flying minmatar for far too long and these damage and tracking changes are the shot in the arm i needed to change races |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 22:33:00 -
[1002] - Quote
Atuesuel wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:if you arent a ultra bad and fly in a group with logistics then it does in fact work.
solo in eve has its place but ffs every ship and race should not be able to do it well. like all ways the other races call it crying, explain how to get a kill here, you are in a brutex , a cane is at 18km, how you going to win this smart guy let alone put damage on him. ?
Perhaps something like this
[Brutix, New Setup 2] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Overdrive Injector System II Damage Control II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Warp Scrambler II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Berserker SW-900 x2
You should be able to close and do damage, of course then there is still the neuts and large close range DPS to contend with so the brutix would probably still lose, sad thing is the Hybrid changes have done the most to improve the shield gank fits, you could argue it is not Hybrids that are broken now but armour tanking, and unfortunatley for Gallente especially active armour tanking.
|
Jerick Ludhowe
Purification of Eden XIN DOA'ED
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 23:17:00 -
[1003] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:ok, CCP, you still have not fixed the fact that all the ships with armor tanking bonuces cannot usethe bonus you gave them, because they cannot fit a full rack of guns, reppers, MWD, and boosters, unless you are fitting electron blaster on them (which is pathertic). So atm hyperion and britux cannot be fitted with 2 reps and 2 boosters even with maximum fitting skills, meaning they cannot possibly under any circumstance utilize their bonuces. It just is impossible. Thus the ship is useless. That is wihtout even begining to look into effectiveness of their fitting or active vs buffer tank or getting in range or anything like that . THey simply cannot be fit. That is stupid. CHange their bonuces, or change their fitting.
Secondly, remove speed penalty from active armor tank rigs. I liked flying active armour ships, but atm it is just silly. Leave penalty on trimarks, so buffertanks and amarr stay slow.
Thirdly pelase consider giving some gal ships a shield-tank. I seriously think it would massively improve the situation. Minmatar use two tanks, so can we.
You pretty much hit the nail on the head here man. Only thing i could add to this suggestion is the addition of 1 low slot to Brutix and Hyperion hulls.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 01:14:00 -
[1004] - Quote
Believe me you can easily fit a nice Hyperion, however it's' obviously not designed to fit the biggest guns, mwd, 1-2 heavy cap boosters and dual reps without any fitting mods... It's called balance and all the Hyperion need is a boost to active tanking in general.
With the new changes I could upgrade my favorite Hyperion fit from using electrons to using Ions - And I never had trouble with electrons except at one time my targets slipped outside my optimal range...
Pinky |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 01:37:00 -
[1005] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: most t1 platforms for the race cant tank nearly as well as the other three races
Maelstrom has the most powerful tank of all t1 subcaps. Of all races.
Ya my guess would be he missed that part were ccp fixed Minmatar tanks to be on par with everyone alse but left the OP weapons on them. |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 01:54:00 -
[1006] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Believe me you can easily fit a nice Hyperion, however it's' obviously not designed to fit the biggest guns, mwd, 1-2 heavy cap boosters and dual reps without any fitting mods... It's called balance and all the Hyperion need is a boost to active tanking in general.
With the new changes I could upgrade my favorite Hyperion fit from using electrons to using Ions - And I never had trouble with electrons except at one time my targets slipped outside my optimal range...
Pinky You are telling me that you can make the ship work if you try hard enough. That is correct. However i do not think that current situation is acceptable nevertheless. We have to use bad guns, use fitting mods and still get a ship that is inferior to it's competition in just about everything. Even rokh is better as an active tank, it hits 40km away, tanks 40% more dps and has bigger EHP. A ship with a resist bonus and no damage bonus is superiour than a ship designed for the sole purpose of active tanking. That is embarrassing. And yes, i do fly rokh over hyperion in some cases, and i have higher skill in gal. BS. And don't even get me started on the Abbadon.
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 01:55:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: most t1 platforms for the race cant tank nearly as well as the other three races
Maelstrom has the most powerful tank of all t1 subcaps. Of all races. Ya my guess would be he missed that part were ccp fixed Minmatar tanks to be on par with everyone alse but left the OP weapons on them.
maelstrom has a great tank? would you like to buy the brooklyn bridge? i am finally ready to sell it. the bank wants me to short sell so, i will sell it to you cheaply. |
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 02:36:00 -
[1008] - Quote
Atleast make Null 50% optial/falloff and give rails another 5% damage to help them atleast abit as you don't want to do any major changes with them for the time being :s |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 03:00:00 -
[1009] - Quote
The Hyperion has several advantages over the Rokh :
- Speed
- Damage Bonus
- Twice the drone bay in addition
- Versatility (5 meds for shield/ganksetups or plenty EWAR/Tackle)
Even before the current talk about boosting hybrids the Hyperion was a nice ship only being let down by the poor performance of active tanking mods and silly Gallente people naive enough to think it should be a straight out better ship than a Megathron... |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 03:29:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Shouldn't it be tho? Considering it's a tier 3 battleship and meant to be the 'ultimate blaster platform'.
If they could change the active tank bonus to something more fleet oriented to put it on the same caliber as an Abaddon would be pretty nice.
I still prefer a Domi though.
|
|
Rigel Silek
Spartan Forgeworks
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 05:55:00 -
[1011] - Quote
I like the changes coming to hybrids but I think they still don't go far enough where blasters are concerned. They need more falloff since, as they are, there can be a large gap between max range of blasters and ranges where autocannons and pulse lasers can effectively apply damage.
I'd also like to see change changes in how hybrids apply damage. I think it'd fit with the idea behind the weapons if, for blasters, the damage multiplier was increased and rate of fire decreased to make them high alpha/low DPS guns. Similarly, railguns could have damage multiplier left as it is and rate of fire increased to make them relatively low alpha/high DPS guns.
Lasers could also be changed to make beam and pulse lasers relatively equal in alpha and DPS but vary mainly in range.
On a side note, I think it's conceivable that hybrids could deal all four damage types at once. The change would mean giving them explosive damage that varies based on ammo type while all ammo types deal the same amount of EM damage. Now, before you shout overpowered, the amount of EM and explosive damage would be quite low.
The idea behind this is that the 'shell' of the blaster bolt would cause EM damage while railguns would apply a slight EM effect to the charge. Explosive damage would be caused by the heat/speed of the charge impacting the armor/hull causing a small explosion. This idea for explosive damage could also be used for lasers as well.
Well... Enough of my rambling. I'm sure someone will call my ideas stupid and me an idiot for even suggesting such changes but oh well! lol |
Gavius
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 09:45:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Not sure if anything like this has ever been suggested, but as a possible fix for rails, why not give them a sort of inverse fall-off? The idea being, if you have a 500 dps @ 50km optimal (arbitrary numbers just for simplicity) rail fit, it does 250 dps @ 25km, 300 @ 30, 400 @ 40km, etc. Like the polar opposite of blasters. Then at ranges past 50km, you have a sharp fall off again. Or not. Just a rough concept I'm sure someone can polish into a better idea.
This would give rails a very unique flavor, and would support hybrids philosophy of extreme damage at extreme ranges. It would make rails the premier sniping platform at extreme ranges while leaving the "middle" ranges left to lasers and projectiles. Low damage and high ROF would keep them outdamaging arties while leaving artillery with the high alpha strike flavor. That way blasters would facemelt up close but have very little damage at range, and rails would have negligible damage up close but would facemelt things at the opposite end of the spectrum.
It would also allow a clarification of roles between Gallente and Caldari platforms as you could change all the optimal bonuses on the Cald boats to supplement the new inverse fall off, and cater the gallante bonuses towards blasters without inadvertently buffing them as rail platforms.
Of course adding new game mechanics like that is not a simple fix... |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 10:04:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:i'm actually looking forward to the changes that are coming. 2 vigs 2 DD's and 2 comets ready to go.
been flying minmatar for far too long and these damage and tracking changes are the shot in the arm i needed to change races
yeah, like blaster frigates needed a boost
also, the cynabal will still be much superior to the vigilant. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 11:42:00 -
[1014] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:i'm actually looking forward to the changes that are coming. 2 vigs 2 DD's and 2 comets ready to go.
been flying minmatar for far too long and these damage and tracking changes are the shot in the arm i needed to change races yeah, like blaster frigates needed a boost
Yeah, hybrid frigates are basically fine and don't need any changes. The Daredevil and Taranis, for example, certainly don't need to become any better, and applying these changes will damage game balance.
I'm a bit worried that CCP hasn't commented on this at all. They seem to be going down their usual route of blanket changes again, despite the problems that arose when they did this with projectiles. In both cases, the result is that the ships that benefit most from the changes are the ships that don't actually need boosting at all. It's not a clever way of doing things. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 12:03:00 -
[1015] - Quote
The changes to small blasters is not great. If you knew anything about what you're talking about you know this has changed nothing. What has changed in a significant way is rail set-ups. If you were using the Taranis and Comet (like I have) to destroy Dramiel. This has become easier. Caldari frigates that use blasters have had a significant increase though. Tracking is very important when it comes to frigate combat. In the past or now. You could abuse the tracking of a Harpy, with a Jaguar for example. That will change. Also alot less capacitor usage is a logical and big plus, but more so for Caldari blaster ships.
Also, unlike what happened to small auto-cannons (increased damage output and applied damage + falloff). Blasters did not get a increase to applied damage. No increase in optimal and falloff.
Suggesting this makes them unbalanced. Shows that alot of you have no idea what you're on about. Small blasters would have been better helped with a increase in applied damage. Also, small rail-guns are superior to blasters in frigate versus frigate combat. Blasters are superior in dealing with larger ships, for the most part.
Anyway, thank CCP for some slight love to small blasters and stfu.... Small blasters are not as great as most of the r3t@rds claim them to be...
Thank you CCP
-proxyyyy |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 12:25:00 -
[1016] - Quote
1: Hyperion and other tier 3 BS are not supposed to be ultimate anything - They are supposed to be strong battleships dedicated to survive a punishment that would make other battleships explode while doing good dps. Each race has a dps battleship already that is designed for damage (armageddon, raven, megathron/dominix, Tempest/Typhoon) so plz don't come here tell me Hyperion is supposed to be the ultimate blasterboat that should do more dps. (And yes the dominix is an amazingly versatile fast battleship that can do a lot of dps with a stupid hard tank)
2: Blasters has a lot of dps because of the short range. changing the blaster for more range is against the concept of Eve and instead the next part of balancing will be looking into each individual ship making sure they have a FAIR chance of getting to blaster range without making them overpowered. this might not be easy against races like minmatar but you do have an option for drones and railguns as well as flying with other people helping with tackle.
3: Small blasters seems to be working better because frigates are good at getting close to people. But let it go for now and help tweak individual ships next... |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 16:16:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Seriously, if any of you are thinking of flying hybrids in fleet after crucible is released, probably you have to do it at your own expense. No fleet FC is going to favor this platform. Armour - Abbadon - shoot any thing within 90 kms - have a tank of 200k EHP Shield - Maelstrom - Alpha from 50km onwards till 120km - Full tank fit with a sensor/prop mod - Lows full gank fit. This is going to stay. Probably hybrid may be used for tackle soon after the release. After sometime when this much hyped hybrid rebalance cools down, because of massive fails of hybrid ships things will come back to hurricanes/drakes as before.
People will definitely fly Vigi, DD and Vindi, but only in roams.
In PVE no changes.
CCP will not do any more changes to Hybrid after this release. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 16:27:00 -
[1018] - Quote
For some reason that sounds good - Hybrids are not to be the new FOTM... They are just to be a balanced alternative. Granted hybrid buff still need a little more edge to be unique but at least hybrids no longer limp after everything else like a 3-legged dog... And PvE wise I'm sure people will start using hybrids more against gurista and shadow serpentis. I would prefer Rokh over Raven with the current buff to cap and damage just to get away from trivial missile slinging.
Pinky |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 16:36:00 -
[1019] - Quote
You have to use a Rokh to know its advantages and disadvantages. And after you use it in PVE will you realise that these changes have done NOTHING to upgrade the performance of the Rokh and I can say it will be same for all PVEing hybrid ships.
|
Cheekything
Dark-Rising
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 16:44:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:The Hyperion has several advantages over the Rokh : - Speed
- Damage Bonus
- Twice the drone bay in addition
- Versatility (5 meds for shield/ganksetups or plenty EWAR/Tackle)
Even before the current talk about boosting hybrids the Hyperion was a nice ship only being let down by the poor performance of active tanking mods and silly Gallente people naive enough to think it should be a straight out better ship than a Megathron...
Sadly Range and shield (buffer and damage lows) is why people choose the rokh. |
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 16:55:00 -
[1021] - Quote
True that for shield buffer.....
But if you are talking about Rokh advantage over blaster range, then with antimater it gains about 2km in optimal (net) at BS L5. Since what it gains from the BS bonus it loses it from the ammo range penalty. With NULL ammo it gains about 12km in optimal.
And I hope you wont use fail rails even after these changes go live. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 17:22:00 -
[1022] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:1: Hyperion and other tier 3 BS are not supposed to be ultimate anything - They are supposed to be strong battleships dedicated to survive a punishment that would make other battleships explode while doing good dps. Each race has a dps battleship already that is designed for damage (armageddon, raven, megathron/dominix, Tempest/Typhoon) so plz don't come here tell me Hyperion is supposed to be the ultimate blasterboat that should do more dps. (And yes the dominix is an amazingly versatile fast battleship that can do a lot of dps with a stupid hard tank)
You missed the quotation marks there. I just think the Hyperion needs to be a better fleet ship. Like the Maelstrom and the Abaddon. The Scorpion could use a buff as well regarding survivability, generally, decent logi has trouble keeping it alive. Both the Hyperion and the Scorpion need to be brought up to par with Maelstrom and Abaddon as mainstay fleet ships. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 17:25:00 -
[1023] - Quote
i plan on using the vig as a point man for armor gangs. with the capability to bring a target that is mwd'ing around down to 25m/s or lower at 14km (fed navy webs), my collegues will be applying nearly perfect damage. in this way, it is far superior to the cynabal since A) the cynabal cannot armor tank B)the web bonus of the vig lets my heaviest hitting t3's in gang do full dps C) it can finally have a reasonable tank and compete with the other t3's and pirate ships we fly dps wise.
comparing a cynabal and vigilant is analogous to comparing a race car to a bear trap. they have two completely different applications. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 17:31:00 -
[1024] - Quote
Only reason you are touching the Vigilante in the first place is the web bonus isn't?
Sorry bro but three ships that require Gallente ship skills to fly them, doesn't make up for the all the others. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 17:34:00 -
[1025] - Quote
that and the fact i'll be able to do 800~ while doing it.
i've said it before in this thread and i'll say it again. its not my fault you all fail at getting money.
imo t1/t2 suck urethra compared to t3 and *most* pirate ships. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 17:43:00 -
[1026] - Quote
That's pretty funny.
Hey bro, everyone can fly a Vigilante and afford to lose it. Those that can't would just sell a plex anyway.
You think this is 2006? |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 20:34:00 -
[1027] - Quote
not my problem |
Delphineas Fumimasa
The Rising Stars Academy
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 20:44:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:that and the fact i'll be able to do 800~ while doing it.
i've said it before in this thread and i'll say it again. its not my fault you all fail at getting money.
imo t1/t2 suck urethra compared to t3 and *most* pirate ships.
So Rokh > Raven? |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 00:45:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Ok, so here everybody is screaming about hybridss lacking damage projection. Others argue that it's balanced. Meanwhile I am very surprised nobody noticed that Null is messed up. Think about it: Vast majority of effective weapons range for lasers is in optima; buffing optimal by 50%(scorch) is buffing the laser range by almost 50%. That is a very large boost. If almost the entire range of autocanons is in faloff, and you buff faloff by 50%, you are extending the range of autocanons by almost half. If blasters depend on both optimal and falloff, buffing both of them by 25% just leaves it at that, 25% extension. That is not much. Range of null is worse than long-range t1 ammo. So to prove that it's not rubbish i will support it with numbers:
Weapon -----------------------Effective range (km) -------------Long-range ammo (km)--------Range improvement Mega Pulse Laser I.......................24 + 8.....=32..................36+ 8......=44.............................37.5% 800mm Repeating Artillery II.............4.8+19.2 =24.................4.8+28.8..=33.6...........................40.0% Neutron Blaster Cannon II...............7.20+10 .=17.2...............9+12.5.....=21.5..........................25.0%
So not only do we have shortest range weapons, we also have the shortest bonus. Solution is obvious: up the range bonus on null to 37.5 or 40%. This just makes things fair.
Please do something about this CCP.
Second problem: please increase warp-to range, the current one prevents use of rails in sniping.
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote: comparing a cynabal and vigilant is analogous to comparing a race car to a bear trap. they have two completely different applications.
Good one
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:not my problem 95% of the time i fly drone ships. I should ignore the whole thread? |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 01:25:00 -
[1030] - Quote
you took my last quote of context.
Quote:Mekhana Posted: 2011.11.20 17:43
That's pretty funny.
Hey bro, everyone can fly a Vigilante and afford to lose it. Those that can't would just sell a plex anyway.
You think this is 2006?
this guy was alluding to the fact that its not 2006 and folks arent rolling in it IRL anymore
to which i said not my problem.
if you fly drone boats and love it then you really havent got much to be complaining about anyways. your secondary weapon systems are alot better now. i was checking them out on eft and if they are flown as dps/buffer setups in gangs they are pushing some of the best numbers in each ship class now.
i do agree with you completely on the null issue however. that one change would make a great deal of difference in the applicability of blasters for most users. |
|
ClusterFook
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 02:16:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Isn't your corp the one that used exploits to gain a metric fuckton of isk in c6's...? No wonder you dont care about losing ships you probably have tens of billions lying around from when you used Blasters Boats with void to hit out at 150km+ doing wrecking blows everytime becuase of said exploits.
I think your opinion on balance is a bit skewed, at the very least your opinions on such are dismisable.
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 02:58:00 -
[1032] - Quote
I used the cane with hail actually. i even made quite a few peoples ships instapop using this too. the best part was the insta lock part of it.
i made so much i single handedly drove up plex prices this month |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate Villore Accords
143
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 05:21:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Ok, so here everybody is screaming about hybridss lacking damage projection. Others argue that it's balanced. Meanwhile I am very surprised nobody noticed that Null is messed up. Think about it: Vast majority of effective weapons range for lasers is in optima; [b]buffing optimal by 50%(scorch) is buffing the laser range by almost 50%. That is a very large boost. I think many people pointed this travesty out many times.... An person from Iceland who passed 7th grade algebra should have been able to figure it out a long time ago.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 05:30:00 -
[1034] - Quote
buffing Null would swiftly make blaster boats balanced. i guess common sense is too much to ask for. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 06:36:00 -
[1035] - Quote
If they buffed Null I mite have to change my opion on Hybirds |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 08:24:00 -
[1036] - Quote
A null buff would be pretty :unsmith: |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
560
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 08:27:00 -
[1037] - Quote
After much, much extensive testing. It is my opinion that while it is an improvement on hybrids; it is simply not good enough. I am just happy I cross trained for Minmitar and projectile weapons.
Trust in the rust.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 09:50:00 -
[1038] - Quote
buffing Null ammunition might not be a bad idea, however simply giving it more range or damage will just make it work like autocannons which might be good, but also wrong... But then again I miss the days where we just had T1 ammunition and some rare faction ammo from faction spawns |
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 10:45:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Ok I fly gallente, and I adore the megathron hulls. But they're ohmygod pregnant-whale sluggish. I'm not at everything elite and in order to survive level 3 missions I have to use a battleship. From what I'm reading I'm guessing this is normal.
But since I'm not captain number cruncher and I don't know all the relevant and viable fits yet, I have to ask...
Is it actually possible to fit a gallente blaster boat (specifically battleships) with a viable combat loadout and be cap-stable with a microwarp drive?
All of my dickering around with EFT and such (with all skills set to 5 which I most assuredly do NOT have) indicates that a gallente blaster boat with 5 mid slots and a Gist X-Type 100MN Microwarpdrive and 4 cap rechargers runs out of capacitor after 5 minutes, give or take.
I do not know how the cap boosters fit well in the equation, I'm still learning. Someone else please field this.
Now, for PvP fleets and such I guarantee you don't want to take a 300 million ISK module like the Gist X-type MWD on a commit or die battleship, so that 5 minutes drops sharply with other MWDs because the Gist has the lowest capacitor penalty and activation cost per cycle by craptons. And this cap check was done without any activated low or mid-slot modules, just guns, a MWD and 4 capacitor rechargers of the Ammatar Navy variety. So your mileage may vary, especially if, like me you're rocking tracking computers and webbers and all sorts of other stuff like hardeners.
People are calling for Gallente to have burst speed capability, why not simply put a +% speed bonus to microwarp drives as a racial ability? I've dicked around with the philosophy in tranquility and while it's absolutely great for getting in close and snatching level 3 rats with a webber, it only works once or twice before you cap-screw yourself. Bear in mind I haven't messed with it overmuch.
This gives gallente the sprint ability without taking away the overall spiffyness of minmatar speed. The tradeoff is, this is gonna be a short ride, you arrive at target with significantly reduced cap and if you don't turn OFF the MWD once you get close you kill yourself as soon as you light up any other module faster than a neut-happy bhaalgorn could ever dream of.
Add to this, no reduction in signature penalty on the MWD and yer taking more damage on the way in. . Which means a gallente ship will be coming in fast and hard, taking more damage from long-range fire and then once out of MWD and in range, pray to god the active tank kicks in before you lose the rest of your ship.
Oh. by the way, get that webber and scram online or you lose forever.
But making the blasters the hardest-hitting weapon in EVE by a wide margin hardly seems unfair, given they require suicide ranges and left as they are the gallente boats just do not have any real capacity to close any gap with anyone. I think with my current skills I can reach like... 505 M/s. And by the time I hit 505 I have to shut the bastard off because it drains cap so fast (still using tech 1 MWDs)
Now, I am hardly an expert here, and I'm relatively certain that someone here can point out glaring flaws in my theory, and I welcome it. The more I learn now, the less I have to learn the hard way (Yay gatecamps and getting podded!)
But my experience with blasters on a battleship on tranquility has been as such running level 3's with 2 tracking computers with tracking speed scripts and 2 magnetic field stabilizers:
Warp in, Pick target, charge with MWD, turn off MWD and throw on webs and trackers then start shooting. Kill 1-2 targets. the rest are now right at my optimal orbiting me. Even after I web them I cannot hit them. when I hit them the heavy neuts I'm using don't do significantly more damage (frequently less) than my 425 rail fit. All of my gunnery skills are level 3 or more, and rising. All of my cores are at MINIMUM level 3 and rising with many at 5. But long story short? I spend time trying to kill something, then warp out to recover, warp back in, warp out, then get pissed off and refit rails and even then I have to rely on drones as my primary DPS in a lot of cases. Like the ever-popular warping into the middle of a random gurista blob from an accelerator gate.
But the problem with running the MWD on the battleship is I'm still slower than a cruiser or frig on afterburner, and the very idea of chasing a minmatar capship and overtaking them almost seems laughable. ok I exaggerate, but i'll never catch a Minmatar Battleship in my megathron. ever.
So thoughts on racial MWD speed boost for cruiser to battleship sized Gallente boats? As has been said about a trillion times, all I need is to get to optimal (and my skills up, obviously) and it's on like Donkey Kong. The trick is getting to optimal, and giving a bonus to the most cap-hungry speed module in the game seems a good way to get there to me at least. You're not gonna outrun a minmatar popping the MWD pill, because you're going to run out of cap faster. But you should be able to catch him just long enough to have a prayer of snatching him.
And one of the big disappointments in the game for me as a relatively new player has been the description of gallente ships being the masters of blasters, with blasters touted as the highest damage output in exchange for stupidly danger-close range. Imagine my ecstasy, trying out the blasters, and finding that I can't catch anything, nor does the blaster do more damage than a freaking glorified machinegun.
I don't care if the range never ever gets extended, but right now the flesh-shredding advertisement fails at engagement range. I don't care if Blasters don't become the new "must-have" weapon. But I would like to see them competitive in the fights I get into. Plus it might help force more creative tactics than the artillery abaddon blob.
Sorry for the wall of text. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 12:12:00 -
[1040] - Quote
You are having difficulties for many reasons.
- Battleships does not belong in lv 3 missions because of numebr 2
- Big weapons are designed to hit battleships and larger
- Railgun and especially 425mm have bad tracking so stay at range
- > (warp to range when possible, snipe fast stuff first and use drones for the rest)
- Blasters for missions will often not be effecient due to short range, but if it works for you go ahead
- Being capstable with MWD beats the purpose and should be reserved for very few ships
- PvP is a toally different game, but yes gallente need the sprint option which in my opinion should be a combination of low mass, high agility and low cap making MWD clean your cap out fast (active rep boats should have more cap though)
Pinky |
|
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
379
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 12:42:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Also, capboosters exist for a reason.
Amarr ships have capboosters fitted.
Gallente have more medslots than Amarrs => Fit capboosters. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 13:31:00 -
[1042] - Quote
CCP, please update the op in this thread to highlight all the changes to blasters and not just the addendum of changes added recently
and
Buff null for all gun sizes.
plzkthx! |
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 18:36:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:You are having difficulties for many reasons. - Battleships does not belong in lv 3 missions because of numebr 2
- Big weapons are designed to hit battleships and larger
- Railgun and especially 425mm have bad tracking so stay at range
- > (warp to range when possible, snipe fast stuff first and use drones for the rest)
this is what I do. and it works. my problem was with the blaster, not the rails for level 3's.
Quote:Being capstable with MWD beats the purpose and should be reserved for very few ships At no point do I think gallente battleships need to be capstable on MWD. I was asking if they COULD, because if yes, then my 2 Isk on boosting MWD speed bonus as a racial ability changes it from a rush in and attack to being more minmatar than minmatar. Not my idea of a great fix, necessarily. I think MWD being atrocious power hogs makes this potentially feasible.
Quote:PvP is a toally different game, but yes gallente need the sprint option which in my opinion should be a combination of low mass, high agility and low cap making MWD clean your cap out fast (active rep boats should have more cap though) Pinky
Active rep boats are all gallente ships unless you're porting logistics, and even then, the logistics can only repair so many ships at a time. I'm not going to claim expert on PvP because my experience with PvP involves losing a couple ships to the gatecamps.
Oh well, went and bought new ships and figured out how to bypass the gatecamp.
But as far as I was thinking, you can active rep, or you can MWD, I don't thinks gall ships can do both for very long. 600 cap every what, ten seconds if a pretty ferocious rate for MWD. even once you knock it down to 450/10 sec with skills your capacitor doesn't last too long and if you active rep while running MWD we need to send ya back to capsuleer boot camp.
Giving the Gallente a speed boost from the MWD and NO mitigation for the capacitor consumption might be a good way to go for allowing ships to tub into blaster range without encroaching on the minmatar high-constant speed. |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 18:41:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote: But as far as I was thinking, you can active rep, or you can MWD, I don't thinks gall ships can do both for very long. 600 cap every what, ten seconds if a pretty ferocious rate for MWD. even once you knock it down to 450/10 sec with skills your capacitor doesn't last too long and if you active rep while running MWD we need to send ya back to capsuleer boot camp.
Well, apparently Someone did not realize that running MWD, Dual reps and 8 capacitor consuming guns at the same time is not a good idea. |
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 18:51:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Kaylyis wrote: But as far as I was thinking, you can active rep, or you can MWD, I don't thinks gall ships can do both for very long. 600 cap every what, ten seconds if a pretty ferocious rate for MWD. even once you knock it down to 450/10 sec with skills your capacitor doesn't last too long and if you active rep while running MWD we need to send ya back to capsuleer boot camp.
Well, apparently Someone did not realize that running MWD, Dual reps and 8 capacitor consuming guns at the same time is not a good idea.
hence why in my original post... you get in range, you use the webber/scram/both, and you turn the MWD OFF. Hence why I say sprinting. Get into range fast, turn off the speed, rock out your guns. Hope to hell you can kill them before they evac because once you start shooting if they get outta range you're pretty well screwed in the cap department
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:00:00 -
[1046] - Quote
SMT008 wrote:Also, capboosters exist for a reason.
Amarr ships have capboosters fitted.
Gallente have more medslots than Amarrs => Fit capboosters.
Yes you are absolutely correct.
Heavy Cap booster is a must for a blaster boat along with. 1) A prop mod. 2) A webbing mod. 3) A scram Mod. 4) A Tracking Mod.
Now how many Abbadons fit all of the above ???
It is very easy to criticise others. |
Vincent Gaines
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:02:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote:Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Kaylyis wrote: But as far as I was thinking, you can active rep, or you can MWD, I don't thinks gall ships can do both for very long. 600 cap every what, ten seconds if a pretty ferocious rate for MWD. even once you knock it down to 450/10 sec with skills your capacitor doesn't last too long and if you active rep while running MWD we need to send ya back to capsuleer boot camp.
Well, apparently Someone did not realize that running MWD, Dual reps and 8 capacitor consuming guns at the same time is not a good idea. hence why in my original post... you get in range, you use the webber/scram/both, and you turn the MWD OFF. Hence why I say sprinting. Get into range fast, turn off the speed, rock out your guns. Hope to hell you can kill them before they evac because once you start shooting if they get outta range you're pretty well screwed in the cap department
Yep, I would love to have a mega MWD towards my curse.. that way since he'll be down to 1/4 cap I can empty him in 1 cycle instead of 2.
|
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:09:00 -
[1048] - Quote
that's great. I love how people read "I'm kinda new" as "I'm a complete F*cking idiot that doesn't understand the basics and must explain to them in most basic terms the concept they have already shown basic grasp of."
I was asking if gallente ships can be rendered cap stable fitted MWDs, because if they CAN there is no sane reason to give them the suggested speed boost to MWD velocity. Addressing the idea of getting a blaster boat into engagement range, not asking for fitting advice. I've gotten a cap booster and am dickering around with how best to employ it.
Which leaves the question: Can gallente cruisers, battleships and battlecruisers be fitted with an MWD and stay cap stable or retain cap long enough that an MWD speed boost would be OP? If I had more experience (especially with cap boosters) I wouldn't have asked. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:28:00 -
[1049] - Quote
You mean with all modules active? No. Gallente doesn't have as much cap problems as Amarr but we can still get screwed over without proper cap management.
When you are buffer tanked most of your cap is spent on MWD and guns. And keeping those running will dry you out of 800s quite quickly.
|
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:38:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Kaylyis wrote:Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Kaylyis wrote: But as far as I was thinking, you can active rep, or you can MWD, I don't thinks gall ships can do both for very long. 600 cap every what, ten seconds if a pretty ferocious rate for MWD. even once you knock it down to 450/10 sec with skills your capacitor doesn't last too long and if you active rep while running MWD we need to send ya back to capsuleer boot camp.
Well, apparently Someone did not realize that running MWD, Dual reps and 8 capacitor consuming guns at the same time is not a good idea. hence why in my original post... you get in range, you use the webber/scram/both, and you turn the MWD OFF. Hence why I say sprinting. Get into range fast, turn off the speed, rock out your guns. Hope to hell you can kill them before they evac because once you start shooting if they get outta range you're pretty well screwed in the cap department Yep, I would love to have a mega MWD towards my curse.. that way since he'll be down to 1/4 cap I can empty him in 1 cycle instead of 2.
If Someone MWDs towards your curse alone because they brought the knife to a gunfight? They deserve to die horribly.
The question of getting into engagement rage doesn't have the same answer as "is getting into engagement range alone a good idea?"
MWD speed boosts would make blaster boats viable as pack hunters, but not so much for solo PvP. Unless you're brilliant and have an easy counter for cap neuts. One megathron charging you puts himself at a disadvantage to get you to where he can use his teeth. Rather like wolves, you just shoot him incoming. the equation changes if you have to deal with 2, 3 5, 10 or 50 of them doing a hard burn straight at you. That's the angle I'm looking at the problem from.
Why make galente solo gankers? there's other ships for that which do the job better. But if the tactic enables a better fleet usage than solo they'll still take losses but good luck alpha killing all of them before they're on top of you. Might encourage fleets to bring a mixed bag of ships since unless I'm mistaken MWDs can be killed by warp scrams.
Send the tacklers after the gallente chasers to keep as many of them as you can out of engage range while drilling them as much as you can. but the Command & Conquer blob of identical units is gonna get stormed under because if they're killing a couple of them every 15-30 seconds they still wind up with a majority of close range berserkers inside their lines, or they have to warp out and abandon the attack. |
|
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 19:41:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:You mean with all modules active? No. Gallente doesn't have as much cap problems as Amarr but we can still get screwed over without proper cap management.
When you are buffer tanked most of your cap is spent on MWD and guns. And keeping those running will dry you out of 800s quite quickly.
which is why I suggest making the prevailing engagement tactic of MWD speed boost. Blasters get close, disengage MWD (this is the important part) and start slamming their tackle gear and cap boosters while they start cutting things up.
Is this viable solo? Yeah, if your opponent's stupid enough to let you get that close. But I think it's a better fleet solution than a solo solution because a pack of wolves is gonna get the farmer with the shotgun, where one wolf probably isn't. |
ClusterFook
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 21:19:00 -
[1052] - Quote
Well im pretty sure they are done "balancing" hybrids. You know what they say you cant polish a terd. Redesigning them with any of the numerouse great ideas put forth would take actual effort, Instead we are given some very basic stat changes. Honestly i think i have put more thought and effort into thoery crafting a fix for hybrids than CCP has in impementing their "balance." I wonder how much coding they still do at CCP for EVE? Crusible seems to be vastly all art and superficial changes.
Oh well nothing to see ehre move along back to Mimatar |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 21:20:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote: I was asking if gallente ships can be rendered cap stable fitted MWDs, because if they CAN there is no sane reason to give them the suggested speed boost to MWD velocity. Addressing the idea of getting a blaster boat into engagement range, not asking for fitting advice. I've gotten a cap booster and am dickering around with how best to employ it..
All frigates can permanently run MWD quite easilly, however let's leave frigates out of this because they generally don;t have trouble getting in range. Cruisers can be made cap stable while MWD'ing, but you are sacrafacing quite a lot of your slots and fitting in many cases, so your ship will be weaker than most of the competition. For pvp they can run the mwd for quite a while with a cap booster.
BS run out of cap while mwd'ing very quickly, and whlist rood skills and a bunch of cap rechargers will allow you to permanently run mwd, that ship will be much weaker in pve (because it just sacrificed half of all it's slots for this) and pretty much useless in pvp.
|
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 21:53:00 -
[1054] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote:Which leaves the question: Can gallente cruisers, battleships and battlecruisers be fitted with an MWD and stay cap stable or retain cap long enough that an MWD speed boost would be OP? If I had more experience (especially with cap boosters) I wouldn't have asked.
Hmm.
Well, if it's possible anywhere, it'll be possible on the Thorax or one of its derivatives...
...
Okay, here we go. I'll just start by saying that I haven't spent a lot of time with HACs, and none of these are as tanky as I'd like on a 100M uninsurable ship- so I doubt I'll be winning any prizes for these. But:
http://i.imgur.com/EQLoX.png
First varient; works by cap regen alone. This means it can use those two mids for web/scram instead of a cap booster, and it's the fastest of all of them- but with the thinnest tank. I think you can squeeze 250mm IIs on there. You'll have to drop to meta on some of the stuff in the lows and maybe grab a grid implant, but it's doable. (wtf are rails using more grid than blasters for? I feel for the Caldari, I do)
http://i.imgur.com/XEZhn.png
Second varient; drops the scram (or web; pick whichever you prefer) for a cap booster and the CCCs for Trimarks. Advantage: ~20% more tank; disadvantage; ~9% less speed. 250s is... trickier. Again, you can make a lot of savings in CPU if you need to, but there's not a lot you can do about grid short of going down a plate size. I think a PG8 will work... but I'm too lazy to check
http://i.imgur.com/wf2Ff.png
Third varient; drops to Ions and grabs a PG6 to go up a plate size. MOAR BUFFER. 250s, not a prayer. Probably not even 200s . Happily, it's not significantly less tanky than the others, though it does lose a substantial amount of range.
Options for splurging (): IN EANMs, FN Mag Stabs, and, pricier still, deadspace MWDs and T2 rigs.
This is viable primarily because, the derpy way the 'Rax's MWD bonus works, with high skills the cap penalty of high meta MWDs becomes a bonus. . No, it's not just bug in EFT/pyfa, I just tested this on Sisi.
(And yeah, none of these are active tanking fits- good luck with that) |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 21:54:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Kaylyis wrote:Ok I fly gallente, and I adore the megathron hulls. But they're ohmygod pregnant-whale sluggish. I'm not at everything elite and in order to survive level 3 missions I have to use a battleship....
Nothing else beyond here matters.
There is Eve Survival, who dedicates its entire site explaining how to run missions, as well as a wealth of knowledge on Battleclinic on how to create effective PVE fits. Combine those two with some decent skills and that is really all you will ever need up through level 4 missions. I'm not sure why you would start talking about PVE here, but since you've already drawn the attention....Gallente and Caldari are absolutely fine in the PVE department. The shortcomings are largely noticed when other players are literally flying circles around you, while literally shooting you at ranges hybrids cannot match. That's why this thread exists.
I figured the title of this thread: "Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets," implies a PVP problem with hybrids. Please don't derail this thread. |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 22:22:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Kaylyis wrote:Ok I fly gallente, and I adore the megathron hulls. But they're ohmygod pregnant-whale sluggish. I'm not at everything elite and in order to survive level 3 missions I have to use a battleship.... Nothing else beyond here matters. There is Eve Survival, who dedicates its entire site explaining how to run missions, as well as a wealth of knowledge on Battleclinic on how to create effective PVE fits. Combine those two with some decent skills and that is really all you will ever need up through level 4 missions. I'm not sure why you would start talking about PVE here, but since you've already drawn the attention....Gallente and Caldari are absolutely fine in the PVE department. The shortcomings are largely noticed when other players are literally flying circles around you, while literally shooting you at ranges hybrids cannot match. That's why this thread exists. I figured the title of this thread: " Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets," implies a PVP problem with hybrids. Please don't derail this thread.
I think it's a PVE problem too. I for example fly some lvl4s from time to time and generally fly only Gallente ships, with exception to the Tengu which i traind just recently. And while I have over 10m sp only in gunnery support skills and hybrid, the performance in PVE still lucks by a fair amount compared to my low skills in missiles, flying the Tengu... It really is no fun to play when you need the range and use rails instead of blaster, but can't track any rat as soon as it comes near 20-30km. Just saying in my opinion Hybrids are under performed even in PVE environments. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 22:57:00 -
[1057] - Quote
if you are gallente, why on earth would you consider using something other than a drone boat for missions? infinite ammo...
i'm with the guy calling you out for derailment |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 23:24:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:if you are gallente, why on earth would you consider using something other than a drone boat for missions? infinite ammo...
i'm with the guy calling you out for derailment Every time i have to do the following highly entertaining sequence: Warp in Activate gate Turn on reppers Aggro everything Release drones Go watch something on youtube check for $$$$$ in 10-15 minutes
However, even though this sequence is really involving and highly engaging, after flying dominix and doing this for a bout 3 years i am getting a little bored. The only thing that changed in 3 years, is me having to check for isk more frequently cause my skills improved. So i would like some changge.
PvE is kinda part of the game. ATM i have guns taht reach to 180 km, and guns that don;t reach anywhere at all. WIth the improved javeling it will get a little better, but it's still annoying, dornes end up killing most of the rats even if you fly a gunship. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 23:43:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Do missions in low sec? |
Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 00:41:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:Do missions in low sec? how is that supposed to help balancing hybrids? -- Please like me, I'm an attention w*ore. |
|
Kaylyis
Line Ark Security Armaments Dragon Swarm Dynasty
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 01:17:00 -
[1061] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Kaylyis wrote:Ok I fly gallente, and I adore the megathron hulls. But they're ohmygod pregnant-whale sluggish. I'm not at everything elite and in order to survive level 3 missions I have to use a battleship.... Nothing else beyond here matters. There is Eve Survival, who dedicates its entire site explaining how to run missions, as well as a wealth of knowledge on Battleclinic on how to create effective PVE fits. Combine those two with some decent skills and that is really all you will ever need up through level 4 missions. I'm not sure why you would start talking about PVE here, but since you've already drawn the attention....Gallente and Caldari are absolutely fine in the PVE department. The shortcomings are largely noticed when other players are literally flying circles around you, while literally shooting you at ranges hybrids cannot match. That's why this thread exists. I figured the title of this thread: " Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets," implies a PVP problem with hybrids. Please don't derail this thread.
*Snerk*
This wasn't a request for advice on how to survive level 4's, I already know what fit and skills I need. It was more a commentary on how hard it was to currently get into engagement with blasters combined with issues spelled out earlier as an exampIe. weighed in on improving the ships to get into blaster engagement range. Do I think CCP will use the idea? Not a chance in hell. but them's the breaks.
Just cause someone's new doesn't mean they're an idiot.
I leave the number crunching on the actual buffs to the Blasters and rails to you all, because you all know those numbers better. I'm more concerned with delivery, because if ya can't get in range, then the numbers are more or less meaningless. |
Borachon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 01:30:00 -
[1062] - Quote
The base problem is that there is simply no way you can fit a decent armor or shield tank onto a gallente blaster boat without a massive rework of ships and/or modules. Armor tanks drop their speed/agility too much, they don't have the slots to shield tank. There's simply no way that's going to happen.
There's a simple strategy to fix Gallente blaster boats, one that's already hinted at here: Taranis Uber Alles. The Taranis is by far the most successful Gallente blaster boat because of its high damage, speed, low sig, and high structure. Blasters and a sig/speed/structure tank make it a challenging but fun boat to fly. The Talos/Deimos/Thorax should be able to sig/speed tank and use structure as a buffer until they get in close to kill things. To do this, they need three things: 1. Dual prop so that they can get in close by pulsing the MWD and then stay close/fast using AB/scram. 2. Decent structure buffer that doesn't kill their speed 3. A way to modestly slow down opponents that doesn't eat scarse midslots
To do this: 1. Buff reinforced bulkheads by removing the speed penalty. The speed penalty makes them worthless to the very ships that would like to use them to get more buffer while they dive in close. 2. Slightly buff overdrive injectors speed bonus - with a propmod, they result in lower top speeds than nanofibers *and* don't give the agility bonus that nanofibers do. Gallente should prefer overdrives (especially with the hybrid cargo size buff) while Minmatar prefer nanofibers, but overdrives need a slight buff for them to be competitive. 3. Add light and medium stasis web drones with a 4/8% velocity reduction to use because Gallente blaster ships lack midslots. 4. Give us some structure repair drones to use on each other between fights.
Basically, the following fits, which fit with the current SiSi hybrid fitting requirements, should be made to be a competitive blaster boats that you want to fly like a giant Taranis. They currently aren't viable because of the problems with RB2/Overdrives and the lack of necessary drones:
Talos, Talanis HIghs: 8x Neutron Blaster Canon Mids: MWD2/AB 2/Warp Scram 2/Stasis Web 2 Lows: DC2/RB2/2x Overdrive Injector/1x MFS Rigs: Polycarb/Hybrid damage Drones: 5x Light stasis webifier drones
Deimos, Deiranis Highs: 5x Heavy Neutron Blaster, 1x named medium neut Mids: Named MWD/AB2/Scram2 Lows: DC2/2xRB2/2xMFS/1xOverdrive Rigs: Polycarb/Dynamic Fuel Valve Drones: 2x med web/3x light web/armor+hull rep drones
Thorax, Thoranis Highs: 5x Heavy Neutron Blaster Mids: Named MWD/AB2/Scram2 Lows: DC2/2xRB2/1xOverdrive/1xMFS2 RIgs: ACR/Polycarb/Collision Accel Drones: 2x med web/3x light web/armor+hull rep drones |
Jazz Styles
SchlongBong
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 01:55:00 -
[1063] - Quote
This has probably been covered, but how about changing the armour rep bonus (obsolete) to a afterburner/mwd speed bonus, and then putting it on the gallente ships that are supposed to be blaster boats.
- Thorax & Deimos (remove the cap bonus and replace with speed)
- Hyperion
- Megathron? (Great blaster boat, but that tracking bonus is pretty sweet, and if the hyperion gets speed, it'll probably end up being better overall).
- Brutix and its variants.
- Myrmidon (I don't see this as a blaster boat, so change the rep bonus to be a hybrid damage bonus to make it a lighter version of the Dominix)
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 06:36:00 -
[1064] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote:This has probably been covered, but how about changing the armour rep bonus (obsolete) to a afterburner/mwd speed bonus, and the putting it on the gallente ships that are supposed to be blaster boats.
- Thorax & Deimos (remove the cap bonus and replace with speed)
- Hyperion
- Megathron? (Great blaster boat, but that tracking bonus is pretty sweet, and if the hyperion gets speed, it'll probably end up being better overall).
- Brutix and its variants.
- Myrmidon (I don't see this as a blaster boat, so change the rep bonus to be a hybrid damage bonus to make it a lighter version of the Dominix)
With the Combat Booster change, these bonuses will be very nice, so I wouldn't exactly want to junk them.
And the webbing drones above: webbing drones are viewed as useless because of stacking penalties; the talos can get away with 1 heavy because they move just fast enough to catch most cruisers.
The Talos may have a tanking issue, but thats kindof the point. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:01:00 -
[1065] - Quote
The Myrmidon should not be touched. Its one of the few Gallente boats that actually work what they are designed for. I'd like to see them with a bigger drone bay but this doesn't matter right now.
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:17:00 -
[1066] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:i plan on using the vig as a point man for armor gangs. with the capability to bring a target that is mwd'ing around down to 25m/s or lower at 14km (fed navy webs), my collegues will be applying nearly perfect damage. in this way, it is far superior to the cynabal since A) the cynabal cannot armor tank B)the web bonus of the vig lets my heaviest hitting t3's in gang do full dps C) it can finally have a reasonable tank and compete with the other t3's and pirate ships we fly dps wise.
comparing a cynabal and vigilant is analogous to comparing a race car to a bear trap. they have two completely different applications.
Agreed, its about understanding the role of a ship. Sure, Gallente ships have a harder time switching targets and reaching them, but when you do, you apply stupid amounts of damage. Use a fast crusier to tackle, and with the tracking bonus, logistics melt even faster.
Maybe its the WH PvP slugfests we do on top of wormholes.. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:35:00 -
[1067] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote:This has probably been covered, but how about changing the armour rep bonus (obsolete) to a afterburner/mwd speed bonus, and the putting it on the gallente ships that are supposed to be blaster boats.
- Thorax & Deimos (remove the cap bonus and replace with speed)
- Hyperion
- Megathron? (Great blaster boat, but that tracking bonus is pretty sweet, and if the hyperion gets speed, it'll probably end up being better overall).
- Brutix and its variants.
- Myrmidon (I don't see this as a blaster boat, so change the rep bonus to be a hybrid damage bonus to make it a lighter version of the Dominix)
Just no on the Myrmidon thing it's a drone boat thats why you dont see it as a blaster boat.
And yes it do's need it's bonus changed as well as the Dominix too. The Myrmidon needs to drop that rep bonus and the Dominix needs to drop that Hybird bonus and they both need it replaced with a 10% to armor hit points bonus to the ship it's not the drones if that's what anyone's thinking. |
Jazz Styles
SchlongBong
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:38:00 -
[1068] - Quote
Jaigar wrote: With the Combat Booster change, these bonuses will be very nice, so I wouldn't exactly want to junk them.
If you're referring to the 7.5% rep bonus, it's generally accepted that local repping is an inferior option for pvp (granted it works on the myrmidon if you put 3 medium repairers on, but not many others can do that). This is why you don't see many hyperions, or armour tanked brutixes etc. The idea with changing that bonus to aid speed is to let blaster boats do what they're designed to do, better, and local repping isn't one of those things. |
Jazz Styles
SchlongBong
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:41:00 -
[1069] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote: Just no on the Myrmidon thing it's a drone boat thats why you dont see it as a blaster boat.
Yeah I see a lot of autocannon fitted myrms for the caplessness (same with prophecies and the other no-damage bonus ships)
Rip Minner wrote: And yes it do's need it's bonus changed as well as the Dominix too. The Myrmidon needs to drop that rep bonus and the Dominix needs to drop that Hybird bonus and they both need it replaced with a 10% to armor hit points bonus to the ship it's not the drones if that's what anyone's thinking.
Ooo, I take it all back - change the rep bonus to a 10% armour hp bonus per level |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:51:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote:Jaigar wrote: With the Combat Booster change, these bonuses will be very nice, so I wouldn't exactly want to junk them.
If you're referring to the 7.5% rep bonus, it's generally accepted that local repping is an inferior option for pvp (granted it works on the myrmidon if you put 3 medium repairers on, but not many others can do that). This is why you don't see many hyperions, or armour tanked brutixes etc. The idea with changing that bonus to aid speed is to let blaster boats do what they're designed to do, better, and local repping isn't one of those things. Kindof missing the point here. The 15% boosters will give close to 20% rep bonus for up to 2 hours and cost roughly 8-15 mil ISK. Because they are removing the side effects of boosters and changing that skill to +5% booster bonus, theres no drawbacks besides a little isk investment. and 1.375*1.19=163% normal repping strength, which is pretty nice. |
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:54:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:i plan on using the vig as a point man for armor gangs. with the capability to bring a target that is mwd'ing around down to 25m/s or lower at 14km (fed navy webs), my collegues will be applying nearly perfect damage. in this way, it is far superior to the cynabal since A) the cynabal cannot armor tank B)the web bonus of the vig lets my heaviest hitting t3's in gang do full dps C) it can finally have a reasonable tank and compete with the other t3's and pirate ships we fly dps wise.
comparing a cynabal and vigilant is analogous to comparing a race car to a bear trap. they have two completely different applications. Agreed, its about understanding the role of a ship. Sure, Gallente ships have a harder time switching targets and reaching them, but when you do, you apply stupid amounts of damage. Use a fast crusier to tackle, and with the tracking bonus, logistics melt even faster. Maybe its the WH PvP slugfests we do on top of wormholes..
Yes it is the kind of PVP that normaly happends in WH PVP that make Blaster boats usefull still as they have always been very usefull in small gangs and smaller fleet fights.
But as the numbers Rise in a fleet fights the less likely you are to see a Hybird/Drone/Missile BS fleet of any kind at higher levels were High levels of dmg projection realy matter becouse you got to melt that other fleet faster then they can melt you and there for the travel time of blaster ships lower dps of rails and travel time of both missiles and drone pluse other missile/drone problems realy leave only Projectiles and Lazers as the only truely usefull Major fleet fight weapons.
Thats the nut shell and the only way I see out of it is..
1.) Give Caldari and Gallente usefull PVP Missile and Drone BS.
OR
2.) Make Hybirds the equel of Projectiles and Lazers buy turning Rails into a Kin/Therm verson of Beams zero reload time on Rails and Blasters into a Kin/Therm verson of Projectiles with 10sec reload time same as autocannons.
And no one realy whats the second option.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 08:01:00 -
[1072] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Jazz Styles wrote:Jaigar wrote: With the Combat Booster change, these bonuses will be very nice, so I wouldn't exactly want to junk them.
If you're referring to the 7.5% rep bonus, it's generally accepted that local repping is an inferior option for pvp (granted it works on the myrmidon if you put 3 medium repairers on, but not many others can do that). This is why you don't see many hyperions, or armour tanked brutixes etc. The idea with changing that bonus to aid speed is to let blaster boats do what they're designed to do, better, and local repping isn't one of those things. Kindof missing the point here. The 15% boosters will give close to 20% rep bonus for up to 2 hours and cost roughly 8-15 mil ISK. Because they are removing the side effects of boosters and changing that skill to +5% booster bonus, theres no drawbacks besides a little isk investment. and 1.375*1.19=163% percent normal repping strength, which is pretty nice.
Holy crap hell ya I toltaly missed that and did not even know they were removing penitals on boosters. Any hope that there going to make the legal in High sec.?
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 08:11:00 -
[1073] - Quote
No, Synth are the only ones legal, and with level 4 skills, those will still give you around 6% boost for 400k isk to 1.5 mil. I already bought up a few hundred.
But those with more dough can throw 20-40 mil (20 in placid ATM) for +25% rep amount for up to 2 hours.. might see more local tank ships return.
And I guess it should be noted that local armor tank ships fly a little faster than their plated brethren, and during a fleet fight, if you can set it up to hold out in say 5 or less on each side fight for 1-2 minutes, it might be just enough... |
Jazz Styles
SchlongBong
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 11:06:00 -
[1074] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:No, Synth are the only ones legal, and with level 4 skills, those will still give you around 6% boost for 400k isk to 1.5 mil. I already bought up a few hundred.
But those with more dough can throw 20-40 mil (20 in placid ATM) for +25% rep amount for up to 2 hours.. might see more local tank ships return.
And I guess it should be noted that local armor tank ships fly a little faster than their plated brethren, and during a fleet fight, if you can set it up to hold out in say 5 or less on each side fight for 1-2 minutes, it might be just enough... Can't wait to test this out in proper pvp, I too had missed the change to boosters... myrm ftw |
Spugg Galdon
Callidus Temple Forsaken.Empire
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 11:34:00 -
[1075] - Quote
Claymores will be the new FOTM with the booster changes. Not active armour tanked ships although active tanking on the whole will become far more prolific amongst small gang and solo PvP.
Extreme boosters plus crystal set and stupidly overpowered ship and weapons (claymore) = fun but not exactly balanced |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 12:14:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Dominix doesn't need to change anything - especially not for a tank bonus lol Most other gallente ships might need a few tweaks, but they are NOT as bad as people make them. They just have to be flown using special tactics and have a minor overhaul.
Hybrid turrets except a few of the guns sticking out seems pretty reasonable The ammunition need a revamp as they are too chaotic. Overdrives, nanofiber internals and inertia stabilizers definately need to be reworked Blasterships need to accelerate faster (lower mass? better agility?) Minmatar need to be fastest (higher velocity, higher mass? worse agility?)
Plates - make sure the Gallente ships can fit a MWD+plate and still have better or same mass as minmatar ships? Armor rigs - make sure they don't reduce a vital attribute for Gallente. Make them nerf sensor strength or scan resolution instead...
Pinky
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 12:44:00 -
[1077] - Quote
There are 3 changes which will have a great impact on the game but very likely more in favor of minmatar:
a) Hail Ammo b) Booster Changes c) T2 Ganglinks
As usual with such changes; each of them perceived as a standing alone change would not have much impact but in combination , "Hail Ammo" with "Drop-booster " and shield or skirmish T2-Link will hurt.
Whereas Soothsayer or Drop won't help gallente that much, same with skirmish links which do not have that much impact on gallente. They already got low signiture and do not have ships with web range boni.....
A Machariel with a signiture of 200 and a tracking of 0.1 while using Hail on 800mm Guns migth get a real nightmare. Just imagine a zealot doing the damage of 3 zealots and the tank of 2 :p
Finding synergies and carefully handle them is a key ability of system designers. Seems we got trolled heavily. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 12:58:00 -
[1078] - Quote
We're beating a dead horse here. CCP has stopped reading this thread long ago and clearly no longer doesn't care about our opinion because they consider current changes as final. And probably dropped the whole balancing process over 10 days ago like an anvil.
You people can keep arguing all you want but the next response you get out of CCP out of this whole ordeal is a message that the thread is locked.
This was just an excuse to get us shafted again.
This video is Crucible in a nutshell:
http://youtu.be/Un2slS7q5Zw |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 13:13:00 -
[1079] - Quote
QQ mekkie, maybe you should unsub if your so mad
the blaster changes will work nicely for what i want them for. the rest of you can go rot in a ditch somewhere lolz |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 13:14:00 -
[1080] - Quote
True - for some reason I feel totally humiliated having spent time and energy to check changes, predict impacts and consequences and dig up arguments for and against various stuff... |
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 13:47:00 -
[1081] - Quote
It is a bit sad that CCP's response to hilariously imbalanced gang links was to make the best ones (Skirmish tbh) even better... |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 15:29:00 -
[1082] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:It is a bit sad that CCP's response to hilariously imbalanced gang links was to make the best ones (Skirmish tbh) even better...
I've been ignoring using a alternative character in engagements, but I recently bought a T3 (Loki/Legion) character. The new t2 gang-links is very extreme. Also, CCP has not delt with off grid boosting. |
Ryans Revenge
League of Legends
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 15:41:00 -
[1083] - Quote
If some of you people are discussing this without trying the changes I'll point you towards sisi.
I had massive reservations about these changes when they first came out. However last night I was on sisi flying around in a deimos totally annihilating stuff.
The changes CCP have made very well may need some refinement and may even need to be completely revamped in future. But right now these few little changes have actually helped the gallente blaster boats quite a lot. So much that I'm eagerly looking forward to flying a deimos and grabbing nano ships by the throat before I proceed to gut them! :)
Thanks for the improvement CCP. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 16:42:00 -
[1084] - Quote
Ryans Revenge wrote:If some of you people are discussing this without trying the changes I'll point you towards sisi.
I had massive reservations about these changes when they first came out. However last night I was on sisi flying around in a deimos totally annihilating stuff.
The changes CCP have made very well may need some refinement and may even need to be completely revamped in future. But right now these few little changes have actually helped the gallente blaster boats quite a lot. So much that I'm eagerly looking forward to flying a deimos and grabbing nano ships by the throat before I proceed to gut them! :)
Thanks for the improvement CCP.
I have, and I'm not seeing the point.
I don't think there's any question hybrid ships have been significantly improved. The problem is the blaster philosophy is flawed and rails still don't do enough damage!!! Even with these changes, I would still choose a Cyclone/Hurricane/Harby over a Brut/Myrm, everytime. As to why, well, I've already stated that at least a dozen times in this thread. And I'm still working on a rather amazing wall of text on the side, since I still haven't heard anything from Tallest regarding the finalization or continuation of these changes. Coming soon.
Nothing has been balanced, as the title of this thread seems to imply. Nothing.
Honestly, the only thing I'm seeing for hybrids out of Crucible is that I'll be able to mission faster. Oh boy. |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 18:41:00 -
[1085] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Dominix doesn't need to change anything - especially not for a tank bonus lol Most other gallente ships might need a few tweaks, but they are NOT as bad as people make them. They just have to be flown using special tactics and have a minor overhaul.
Hybrid turrets except a few of the guns sticking out seems pretty reasonable The ammunition need a revamp as they are too chaotic. Overdrives, nanofiber internals and inertia stabilizers definately need to be reworked Blasterships need to accelerate faster (lower mass? better agility?) Minmatar need to be fastest (higher velocity, higher mass? worse agility?)
Plates - make sure the Gallente ships can fit a MWD+plate and still have better or same mass as minmatar ships? Armor rigs - make sure they don't reduce a vital attribute for Gallente. Make them nerf sensor strength or scan resolution instead...
Pinky
What are you talking about? The Dominix can't fit a full rack of Tech 2 Ion blasters or 350mm railguns + a normal fit even with perfect skills, it's hybrid damage bonus is borderline useless, just like the Vexor, can't fit guns without gimping itself. It sorely needs bonuses that are useful 100% of the time instead of the turret bonus. I don't suffer from insanity.. I enjoy it ! |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 19:05:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Ryans Revenge wrote:
I had massive reservations about these changes when they first came out. However last night I was on sisi flying around in a deimos totally annihilating stuff.
i would like you to give some context to this. annihilating what exactly with the Deimos, and at what range? what was your fit?
-a blaster Deimos does about 800dps, has about 30k EHP, and goes around 1600m/s....about the same as before; 1900m/s if you do a paper-thin shield buffer -a rail Deimos does about 450dps without drones, has a little more range than a pulse Zealot, and significantly less dps.
The rail Deimos is still subpar, and rails remain incompatible with a few other Gallente ships, i.e. you cant fit a decent tank. 30k EHP is nothing. it's garbage, when a typical Cane and Cynabal have 50k+ EHP. Drake 70K.
I tested my rail Deimos against a Cynabal and it was pathetic. You can't fit 250mm's, you cant fit TE's, you cant fit tracking computers. Your range is gimped with 200mm's, faction AM, and only 2 MFS.
when it comes to cruisers, rails seem ok only on a few ships. the Ishtar and Navy Vex can now fit a rack of dual 150's, and do some decent dps up to 30km with sentry drones, while retaining 40-50k EHP. the Proteus can fit 250mm's, and therefore do about 500dps at 21+29km with faction AM. which is excellent, but costs half a bill. rail Ferox may have some use as well. but that's about it. |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 19:14:00 -
[1087] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Hey guys
Tallest will be out of the office for the next week. He should be back to replying to the thread at the end of next week.
Last post by Tallest was around post #244 on the 11th, the message above was from the 16th. Sounds like Tallest won't show up until the 25th at least (which is Thanksgiving in the US). The patch is getting released on the 29th and has been stated, "no chance to get more hybrid changes in".
Still don't get why CCP would give the task of hybrid balancing to someone that would be on vacation for 2 weeks before their big patch, and that no other programmer/developer is capable at looking at Hybrid fixes.
I expect a big analysis from Tallest like the one Ytterbuim did here, on Gallente and Blasters. What his next fixes/plans are. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=321989#post321989
Because we are just repeating the same arguments over and over again, without any developer listening |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 21:25:00 -
[1088] - Quote
I like Ytterbium's analysis of such things and would love to see CCP Tallest doing the same thing in the future. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 21:56:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Nikollai Tesla wrote:Last post by Tallest was around post #244 on the 11th, the message above was from the 16th. Sounds like Tallest won't show up until the 25th at least (which is Thanksgiving in the US). The patch is getting released on the 29th and has been stated, "no chance to get more hybrid changes in".
Still don't get why CCP would give the task of hybrid balancing to someone that would be on vacation for 2 weeks before their big patch, and that no other programmer/developer is capable at looking at Hybrid fixes. 100% agree. I mean, I'm trying to remain positive through all of this. You know, CCP Soundwave did say if the changes aren't successful, they'll continue to work on them. Ok great, sounds real good on the surface, but there's no definitive timeframe, nor is there any recognition as to the state of the changes as they stand. In addition to this, CCP Tallest is supposed to be in charge of this yet basically disappears with no word of his absense for nearly a week, and THEN we find out he's basically gone during the most important part of the change process: QA feedback: us. Not cool, Zeus.
You know, I read that post by CCP Ytterbium earlier last week and he does say some really good things, in fact I think he covers the bases on hybrid shortcomings better than Tallest has. HOWEVER, he says some really demotivating things, too. The part about no magic trick in the collective CCP hat will fix anything instantly...I mean, what the hell? No one's expecting a change overnight but don't use that as an excuse to not be able to come up with great ideas. I mean, isn't it CCP's job to do so? Isn't the overwhelmingly negative player feedback IN THIS VERY THREAD enough evidence to show we're not happy with the hybrid changes for Crucible?
It's so damned simple. Three things need to happen:
1) CCP, STOP! First, UNDERSTAND the problem and ACCEPT proposals from players that address the issue, then 2) give hybrids that something so players and CCP can test the changes in tandem 3) if the changes are sufficient and don't break other mechanics, run with it. If not, GO BACK TO #1!
Nothing about Ytterbium's post fires me up more than the comment about "over-inflating the balance of power." Man, how can you know that if you're not willing to test the proposed changes in the first place?! You've got some great suggestions in here, CCP. TRY THEM AND TEST THEM! |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 22:14:00 -
[1090] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:if you are gallente, why on earth would you consider using something other than a drone boat for missions? infinite ammo...
i'm with the guy calling you out for derailment
Well I also do as I have good drone skills too. But in my experience is not really faster as with turret boats, though more versatile... Of course, lvl 4's are boring in general, but the unbalance between weapon system still exists. Just wanted to point that out. |
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 23:47:00 -
[1091] - Quote
I would say hybrids are almost perfect right now, but further agility changes and null ammo changes would probably fix everything. Maybe another 5% more agility on the hybrid boats and extend null optimal and falloff out another 25% or so.
Matari is supposed to be able to kite the other races. Loki, huginn, and rapier all have long range webs that compliment this. Theres no mid-range counter (think 25-35km range) to getting kited at this range for gallente. Blaster range is just too short to counter this, sensor dampeners will not force them in close enough, so yeah. This could be adjusted with better range on null ammo (like stated above), but Matari really should have the advantage if they are kiting.
But there needs to be a way for Gallente to counter this. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 01:19:00 -
[1092] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:I would say hybrids are almost perfect right now, but further agility changes and null ammo changes would probably fix everything. Maybe another 5% more agility on the hybrid boats and extend null optimal and falloff out another 25% or so.
Matari is supposed to be able to kite the other races. Loki, huginn, and rapier all have long range webs that compliment this. Theres no mid-range counter (think 25-35km range) to getting kited at this range for gallente. Blaster range is just too short to counter this, sensor dampeners will not force them in close enough, so yeah. This could be adjusted with better range on null ammo (like stated above), but Matari really should have the advantage if they are kiting.
But there needs to be a way for Gallente to counter this.
Redundant problem, you fit the shortest range weapon system on the slowest boats type between Matari and Wallente.
Either you make the ships with the shortest range weapon the fastest with weak tanks to get in and BAM !!
Or you fail.
Either you give the slowest one the tools to counter the "I shoot you from here" by significantly increase the range where it can apply decent dmg
Or you fail
Damps would definitively help blaster ships if those worked properly. You need to change the way those can be used, making them like DCU (single) and give to gallente hulls strong bonus (30% per lvl?) to this ewar would avoid Scorps full of those.
You can't just think "that's it, blasters got buffed" because of some tracking and small dps changes because it's not true. You need to make them a lot bigger or take notice on each and every minus factor that makes those suck and improve it, witch is impossible without buffing all other ships/weapons in game since those mods can be used by each and every one, and that's not tomorrow that you'll see gallente T1 hulls with more than 2 bonus |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 02:33:00 -
[1093] - Quote
The issue Tanya is that these current blaster tweeks will work perfectly fine in W-Space; its the other places where the initial warp ins are hard to dictate. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 08:21:00 -
[1094] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:The issue Tanya is that these current blaster tweeks will work perfectly fine in W-Space; its the other places where the initial warp ins are hard to dictate.
Yes it will work perfectly in fleets with "human" scouts and FC's and normal level of training. Highly trained fleets with outstanding scouts create warp ins in no time.
As 95% of eve players are "human" level of pilots this statement is truely correct.
Unfortunetly there are tons of situations where dictating range is pretty easy. The warp to 1,10,100 km makes it pretty easy for any type of eve player of any skill level. Simple station combat can be done from 2 opposite points both in docking range but more than 60 km apart. Pos battle is mostly done from a certain distance. There is also pos warfare in wh-space :p For WH Warfare T3 Ships are still state of the art.
I'm pretty sure the DEvs are aware of any synergie and problem any of the ships have. The system is so complex that predicting any outcome will be more than a gipsy and her crystal ball are capable of. Let's see what this 1st itteration will do and i still think there might be a range, speed buff for one faction or a speed, range nerf for 1,2 or 3 others.
It was mentioned by some of them that scorch / barrage might be to good.
Furthermore not all of the blaster ships do have this problems. Ceptors and the new destroyer will be fine. There are more yes. I just think we need a lot of analytics, a lot of communication and a lot of testing, change, testing change. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 11:20:00 -
[1095] - Quote
With the current changes blasters have an incredible damage potential. At close range blasters will annihilate anything really and the tracking buff finally makes them track better than autocannons. With NULL M you can even get damage up to 15-20km in case you get kited so stop complaining plz. On top of this most Gallente ships have a nice drone bay suppremacy easily able to help against being kited. This makes blasters dominate everything in web/scrambler range as they should, but they should not be competing with autocannons and pulse lasers in damage projection.
Autocannons have a great damage projection (even with reduced damage) sitting on fast minmatar ships, but the 2 weapon systems are supposed to be different and the remaining balance should be placed on the ships. Hybrid ammo is still a mess and rails still need an edge to be unique but blasters seems to work very well.
- Minmatar ships should have their mass and agility nerfed - They should be the fastest, but not having a good acceleration unless using the many lowslots for nanofibers.
- Gallente ships should have their mass and agility buffed - Gallente should be able to fit a plate and still have a faster acceleration and maneuverbility than a stock minmatar ship of the same class, but still have a lower top speed.
So make minmatar fastest and slow accelerating, but gallente fast and agile but not able to outrun minmatar ships. This gives gallente ships an option to catch their targets and minmatar is still the fastest ships with a better damage projection. People will have to fit railguns if they want projection...
Pinky
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 12:24:00 -
[1096] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: With NULL M you can even get damage up to 15-20km in case you get kited so stop complaining plz.
Kiting Range is defined as the Range you stay out of scrambler and webber range of a recon and keep the target tackled with a disruptor. This is usually 25 to 30 km. Minmatar will use their high damage ammo in this range while most gallente are not able to project damage with low damage ammo at this range.
Getting into scram/web range is brawling range not kiting.
Kiting = you do hit oponent does not hit nor tackle you. You can escape easily while enemy is traped.
Btw.: Blasters never had issues with tracking :p They always had the highest tracking........ Where the hell does the tale of terrible blaster tracking come from. I'm pretty sure people using 400mm signiture weapons on frigates and do blame tracking instead of signiture for the misses.
Pinky Denmark wrote: This makes blasters dominate everything in web/scrambler range as they should, but they should not be competing with autocannons and pulse lasers in damage projection.
Good luck getting anythin' in web/scram range.
I do have a feeling that the gallente fix won't be made by a gallente buff more it will be done by a scorch/barrage nerf. Just a feeling but it is the easiest way for the developers.
There is no best damage projection overall. There is a best damage projection within a certain range. After the patch. Gallente will have best damnage projection within blaster range and Minmatar within their Projectile Range. That part is fixed, really.
Now we get to the "gray" range problem. "Gray" range is the range out of webber and scrambler range but still within disruptor range. 3 of 4 races are able to project damage with short range weapons within this area (3 dimensional globe) 1 is not. Possible fix is make 0 of 4 not able to or 4 of 4 able to.
I'm simply not able to understand why the oscar category
a) the fastest ship b) the longest high damage range c) the longest scram/web range d) most agile ships e) no cap usage on guns f) most free low slots for range/damage increase g) enougth med slots to fit tank and utility h) able to fit a power neut i) somewhat imune to power neut j) highest damage on short range weapons AFTER applying possible damage mods. (Shield all low slots -1 vs Armor low slots -4)
are all combined in a single race making Minmatar need cap for their guns would solve a lot of problems. This is a hughe advantage You won't fix anything as long as there are suggestions like make it a little more agile but keep winmatar... They need to loose some oscar awards. The oscar awards should be distributed equal among all 4 races. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Purification of Eden XIN DOA'ED
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 13:42:00 -
[1097] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: With NULL M you can even get damage up to 15-20km
I'd say you can get fair damage at 15km with Null M and a falloff bonus attached to the ship. Damage at 20km becomes rather worthless unless you sacrifice either tank or gank in the lows for a TE II. Even with a TEII damage projection at 20km is not significant enough to push a kiting ship out of disruptor range in any reasonable time frame.
I believe that null should have both it's optimal and falloff bonuses increase from 25% to 37.5%.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:25:00 -
[1098] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:Jaigar wrote:The issue Tanya is that these current blaster tweeks will work perfectly fine in W-Space; its the other places where the initial warp ins are hard to dictate. Yes it will work perfectly in fleets with "human" scouts and FC's and normal level of training. Highly trained fleets with outstanding scouts create warp ins in no time. As 95% of eve players are "human" level of pilots this statement is truely correct. Unfortunetly there are tons of situations where dictating range is pretty easy. The warp to 1,10,100 km makes it pretty easy for any type of eve player of any skill level. Simple station combat can be done from 2 opposite points both in docking range but more than 60 km apart. Pos battle is mostly done from a certain distance. There is also pos warfare in wh-space :p For WH Warfare T3 Ships are still state of the art. I'm pretty sure the DEvs are aware of any synergie and problem any of the ships have. The system is so complex that predicting any outcome will be more than a gipsy and her crytal ball are capable of. Let's see what this 1st itteration will do and i still think there might be a range, speed both for one faction or a speed, range nerf for 1,2 or 3 others. It was mentioned by some of them that scorch / barrage might be to good. Furthermore not all of the blaster ships do have this problems. Ceptors and the new destroyer will be fine. There are more yes. I just think we need a lot of analytics, a lot of communication and a lot of testing, change, testing change.
Thing is that one get "warp in" bm's the other has "warp ins" to gtfo and one shot or maw two shot each primary target.
Thing is that 2 fleets with normal training level has you state are the best way to see those hybrid changes mean nothing and we're at the same point than before those.
Has I already said, they perform a little better and whenever you find fleets with less training with worst FC's -and there are a lot of those - then sure you'll annihilate everything, but not better or different than you would do with another fleet kind.
They need to give the tools to hybrid platforms and guns to be a choice you WANT in your fleet, like you want autos or arty, like you want tachs or pulse, like you want heavy missile/torps. Actually nothing done in this way, you still don't need or want because of whatever argument blaster/rails ships on your fleet when you still have the best available option if you use lasers or projectiles.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:32:00 -
[1099] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:With the current changes blasters have an incredible damage potential. At close range blasters will annihilate anything really and the tracking buff finally makes them track better than autocannons. With NULL M you can even get damage up to 15-20km in case you get kited so stop complaining plz. On top of this most Gallente ships have a nice drone bay suppremacy easily able to help against being kited. This makes blasters dominate everything in web/scrambler range as they should, but they should not be competing with autocannons and pulse lasers in damage projection. Autocannons have a great damage projection (even with reduced damage) sitting on fast minmatar ships, but the 2 weapon systems are supposed to be different and the remaining balance should be placed on the ships. Hybrid ammo is still a mess and rails still need an edge to be unique but blasters seems to work very well. - Minmatar ships should have their mass and agility nerfed - They should be the fastest, but not having a good acceleration unless using the many lowslots for nanofibers.
- Gallente ships should have their mass and agility buffed - Gallente should be able to fit a plate and still have a faster acceleration and maneuverbility than a stock minmatar ship of the same class, but still have a lower top speed.
So make minmatar fastest and slow accelerating, but gallente fast and agile but not able to outrun minmatar ships. This gives gallente ships an option to catch their targets and minmatar is still the fastest ships with a better damage projection. People will have to fit railguns if they want projection... Pinky
Thin is that's still worthless.
When your uber megathron hits stuff at 30km -waaaaaauuuu !!
My pest is using his shortest weapon system, the shortest range ammo, and blows your brains up with no effort with double your range.... and very sure any pulse bs does the same, time you get in range you're in hull. Nice stuff, you have now 200billions dps that you still have trouble to apply witch was the primary issue with blasters followed by tracking and dmg bonus. Tracking and dmg seem almost done, tools to get in range or counter the huge distance difference is still there.
Who's the most flexible of both, who has better chances to get the crap out of the other? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:35:00 -
[1100] - Quote
Blasters are not supposed to fend off kiting ships - fit railguns and/or use your drones...
If anything Null is not to blaim for Barrage and scorch being super sweet. |
|
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:40:00 -
[1101] - Quote
Still no dev response about making Null 50/50 optimal falloff? :| Atleast make it 37.5/37.5 ? |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:41:00 -
[1102] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Blasters are not supposed to fend off kiting ships - fit railguns and/or use your drones...
If anything Null is not to blaim for Barrage and scorch being super sweet.
read the entire post before you hit reply! We are getting kited with high damage ammo on high tracking short range weapons. That was the 3 of 1 race part. Surely i can use low tracking, low damage long range weapons to respond but they will still kite me to death. |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:49:00 -
[1103] - Quote
David Xavier wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Dominix doesn't need to change anything - especially not for a tank bonus lol Most other gallente ships might need a few tweaks, but they are NOT as bad as people make them. They just have to be flown using special tactics and have a minor overhaul.
Hybrid turrets except a few of the guns sticking out seems pretty reasonable The ammunition need a revamp as they are too chaotic. Overdrives, nanofiber internals and inertia stabilizers definately need to be reworked Blasterships need to accelerate faster (lower mass? better agility?) Minmatar need to be fastest (higher velocity, higher mass? worse agility?)
Plates - make sure the Gallente ships can fit a MWD+plate and still have better or same mass as minmatar ships? Armor rigs - make sure they don't reduce a vital attribute for Gallente. Make them nerf sensor strength or scan resolution instead...
Pinky
What are you talking about? The Dominix can't fit a full rack of Tech 2 Ion blasters or 350mm railguns + a normal fit even with perfect skills, it's hybrid damage bonus is borderline useless, just like the Vexor, can't fit guns without gimping itself. It sorely needs bonuses that are useful 100% of the time instead of the turret bonus. Erm, I can. You have to have perfect skills, and only 2 plates. med booster, MWD and no implants.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 15:55:00 -
[1104] - Quote
I did read it and my post still stays... CCP need to adjust ship balance to make the gallente ships make the contact in that situation, but boosting blaster T2 ammo range is not a solution. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 16:06:00 -
[1105] - Quote
now every point of view which is possible is made and every suggestion, analysis and so on possible is made. I'm out of here till next iteration of changes. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 17:14:00 -
[1106] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:now every point of view which is possible is made and every suggestion, analysis and so on possible is made. I'm out of here till next iteration of changes.
word
later bitchez |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 17:41:00 -
[1107] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:now every point of view which is possible is made and every suggestion, analysis and so on possible is made. I'm out of here till next iteration of changes. word later bitchez I don't know if I agree. Sure, we have a bunch of different viewpoints on what can be done to fix hybrids, but we don't have a consensus on the ROLE of blasters. Some people want damage projection to match other short range weapons, some want more faster or more agile ships to get in closer. Some people are looking at how blasters perform in a large fleet fight, others in a 1v1. There are several good arguments here, but I don't think we know where we want blasters once its all said and done. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:01:00 -
[1108] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I did read it and my post still stays... CCP need to adjust ship balance to make the gallente ships make the contact in that situation, but boosting blaster T2 ammo range is not a solution.
How can you say that?
The shortest range weapons need to be on the fastest ships. Conversely, all slower ships need have the best midrange weapons. Failure to meet this scenario results in imbalance. Minmatar have been that imbalance for at least two years: they have, arguably, the best mid rage and short range turrets on the fastest ships. The problem is, the other "best" mid range weapon is the pulse laser, which has nothing to do with hybrids or Gallente. The dominance of Minmatar speed and projectile perks and effectiveness goes all the way up the chain: rifter, wolf/jaguar, thrasher, stabber/rupture, vagabond/muninn, cyclone/hurricane, claymore/sleipnir. These are all FIRST PICKS for any pilot who wants to skirmish. Maybe the problem isn't with Gallente ships and hybrids so much as it is with Minmatar ships. What is the drawback for flying a Minamtar ship? In EVE, what is the counter to a Minmatar pilot, aside from a blob? What do I get in any other racial ship line that prevents Minmatar from not only opening a mid range engagement with decent damage, but also prevents him from running away if the fight doesn't go his way? What penalty is incurred for flying the fastest ships with incredibly good short and mid range guns? THERE ISN'T ONE!
How CCP hasn't recognized this is beyond me. You either nerf Minmatar speed, nerf projectile falloff, buff hybrid ship speed, or buff hybrid damage AND RANGE. It's frustrating to see CCP has avoided the range thing entirely as it's easily the largest contributer to hybrid imbalance. Minmatar ships were actually quite balanced PRIOR to the rather insane TC/TE falloff bonuses. Once this happened, they became godlike. I suspect the nerf to nano was thought by many to bring Minmatar ships back in line, except the nano nerf affected EVERYTHING. If you take everyone down a few notches equally, then the guy who was on top prior to the nerf IS STILL GOING TO BE ON TOP. :\
The only impression I've received from CCP regarding the above suggestions is they're afraid the balance of power will just shift to the other end of the spectrum. Let's assume for a moment, that we gave null 50%/50% bonuses to optimal/falloff. Let's ALSO assume that we increased the base stats of hybrid turret optimal/falloff by 50%. This would put blaster effective range in roughly the same area as scorch. Assuming this happened:
Minmatar would STILL have: -fastest ships -cap free guns -alpha
Amarr would STILL have: -incredible EHP across the board -instant ammo swap -dominant optimal
Increasing blaster range does NOT radically shift the balance of power. It does NOT obsolete the appeal of other ships. All it does is give Gallente hybrid users a fighting chance, and it actually gives Caldari hybrid ships an amazing new role. Yes, I realize the Merlin/Moa//Ferox/Naga/Rokh would be pretty fearsome (although, don't forget they don't get a hybrid damage bonus). Rightly so since they're the slowest ships in their respective classes. And really, wouldn't it be a nice change of pace to see a pack of these once in a while?
All this really does is increase hybrid ship popularity SOME, but not a lot. Isn't that the direction everyone wants to go?
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
299
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:04:00 -
[1109] - Quote
As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so. I am back at work now and will try to address the concerns that have been expressed while I was away.
As Soundwave and Affinity have explained for me in my absence, the cutoff date for changes that make it into the Crucible expansion has already passed (and had already passed when I went away).
As it turned out, I only had time to do one extra pass on the changes after they hit SISI. These changes (to the changes) were based on your feedback from this thread. There were many other suggestions here that I would love to do, but didn't have enough time to do them properly for this release. In the future, I will make sure that I have more time to make changes based on your feedback. The feedback that you was posted after the cutoff is far from worthless. I've read every single post and written down notes for future reference.
What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes. |
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:14:00 -
[1110] - Quote
thank you for updating the OP
hope you had a good vacation |
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:19:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Thank you, Tallest. That is very reassuring. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:29:00 -
[1112] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes.
yes, yes, yes. excellent summary. my suggestion is to focus on:
- hybrid ammo (t1 and t2), especially for blasters; null buff and/or scorch and barrage nerfs are needed; my vote is for former - medium rails: these guys are still quite hard to fit, and they could comfortably do with a further buff to damage along with ammo buffs - hybrid ship bonus tweaks (the Deimos especially, as the rail Deimos significantly more inferior compared to its counterparts); a good comparison is rail Deimos vs. pulse Zealot - Zealot with Scorch loaded wins at range, Conflag or multifrequency wins at close range by a long shot; why fly the Deimos? you get the idea.
active armor vs. passive armor tanking changes will take a lot longer than the options above.
thanks again, we'll let you get back to work now |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:37:00 -
[1113] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so. I am back at work now and will try to address the concerns that have been expressed while I was away.
As Soundwave and Affinity have explained for me in my absence, the cutoff date for changes that make it into the Crucible expansion has already passed (and had already passed when I went away).
As it turned out, I only had time to do one extra pass on the changes after they hit SISI. These changes (to the changes) were based on your feedback from this thread. There were many other suggestions here that I would love to do, but didn't have enough time to do them properly for this release. In the future, I will make sure that I have more time to make changes based on your feedback. The feedback that you was posted after the cutoff is far from worthless. I've read every single post and written down notes for future reference.
What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes.
Welcome back
I'm glad to see you take notice of different suggestions because I think there's no need to be some Harvard graduated to understand how difficult this hybrids rebalance is.
Has almost every one using them more or less pointed out, several small nerfs across the time has some small buff here and there brought too many drawbacks that are now very difficult to counter without either boost other races at the same time, or completely change the Gallente racial flavour.
I guess we're not sure you guys will be man of your words when you say that you guys will keep it further if needed, that's why so many arguments are redundant and over exposed, we need to be sure you guys got it.
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 18:56:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Hi Tallest :)
Thanks for the update. I like communication and i really enjoy each response :)
webifier range sounds sweeeet :> |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 19:04:00 -
[1115] - Quote
Although the panic has died a little it's still very sad more urgent changes didn't make it to release. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 19:08:00 -
[1116] - Quote
he said over the upcoming WEEKS/MONTHS. i hope hybrid ammo changes and individual ship tweaks make an appearance on sisi within 2 weeks. this stuff is super easy, just a bit of math.
things like propulsion mods, EWAR drones rig tweaking, armor tanking will require more testing. |
Ravcharas
GREY COUNCIL Nulli Secunda
123
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 19:45:00 -
[1117] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage.
Barrage is fine, it's Scorch that's the problem.
|
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:04:00 -
[1118] - Quote
Well, I hope CCP is not going to limit scorch range. Scorch is the Amarr version of stasis webifier. Once it's gone or dramatically reduced. You'll quickly find that Amarr ships are not even on the same level as Gallente ships + Hybrid turrets and even less so compared to Minmatar or Caldari.
Although, if they did do this. Then you would only assume barrage and Tracking enhancers range would be reduced too. With tracking computers or tracking enhancers being the only counter to any reduction in scorch range.
I can only see a more homogeneous landscape to come out of this. Something a part of the community says it does not want, but instead of increasing blaster range. CCP may just start reducing auto-cannon and laser range.
Like I said. This will only show how SH!T Amarr ships and turrets truly are. Again! Kinda like how most believed blaster were good, but that was because of one module (stasis webifier).
I know for a fact most solo pilots do not find Amarr ships to be good solo. If they're not good in that niche and not in fleets. What use are they? Mining Abaddon, with guardians repping incoming rat damage? |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate Villore Accords
143
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:10:00 -
[1119] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:I don't know if I agree. Sure, we have a bunch of different viewpoints on what can be done to fix hybrids, but we don't have a consensus on the ROLE of blasters. Some people want damage projection to match other short range weapons, some want more faster or more agile ships to get in closer. Some people are looking at how blasters perform in a large fleet fight, others in a 1v1. There are several good arguments here, but I don't think we know where we want blasters once its all said and done. Role of blasters - omgwtfpwn your enemy at close range. Every blaster boat pilot couldn't care less about adding range, they just want reward (omgwtfpwnery) proportional to the risk (ease of getting kited).
Before these changes, there was no reward (autocannons performed better in every way at close range), and too much risk (easy to kite). Whether the risk/reward ratio is good after these changes... will find out in a couple of weeks. |
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:11:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Welcome back Tallest. Will be interested to see what further tweaks and modifications you come up with in the next weeks/months; there's definitely a lot of feedback in this thread to mull over. I'm also confident that the community would be just as eager to give feedback on future changes, so don't be afraid to share the burden. Throw some stuff up on the test servers and let us bash it around Even if it seems crazy at first, we will be more than eager to run it through the grist mill for you.
It is refreshing to see the dramatic increase in communication from CCP to the community and the efforts to constantly improve/balance the game we both love. Keep it up! |
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:40:00 -
[1121] - Quote
the microjump/flash/teleport mod that was alluded to would be pretty fricken sweet. lots of tear could be extracted with such a device. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:47:00 -
[1122] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so. I am back at work now and will try to address the concerns that have been expressed while I was away.
As Soundwave and Affinity have explained for me in my absence, the cutoff date for changes that make it into the Crucible expansion has already passed (and had already passed when I went away).
As it turned out, I only had time to do one extra pass on the changes after they hit SISI. These changes (to the changes) were based on your feedback from this thread. There were many other suggestions here that I would love to do, but didn't have enough time to do them properly for this release. In the future, I will make sure that I have more time to make changes based on your feedback. The feedback that you was posted after the cutoff is far from worthless. I've read every single post and written down notes for future reference.
What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes. Tallest: May I make one small suggestion: Don't make any hasty changes until the current changes have settled in. There will be a period of transition as the more timid players take to the new ships and fittings and the better, bolder players make inventive and effective fits for them. This will take six months or so. Don't rush it, please. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 20:53:00 -
[1123] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:This will take six months or so. Don't rush it, please.
kindly stop making ******** suggestions. thanks.
those who plan on switching to rails have already done in-depth testing of every ship, and given detailed feedback. most of these individuals will probably not continue with hybrid use. this is the perfect time to add re-iterations and small buffs to ammo and ships to the test server.
understand that the blaster problem is completely unresolved. rails show promise only on a handful of ships, and remain incompatible with many hybrid platforms. hybrid ammo is in a dire need of a modest re-work.
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 21:00:00 -
[1124] - Quote
step back from the computer and remember to breath hungry eyes.
in the coming month there will probably some of these changes showing up on TQ
Relax! Just do it! |
Calica Dawnbringer
Foundation of Unknown Space
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 21:37:00 -
[1125] - Quote
I agree that this update is a step in the right direction.... but the biggest Blaster problem remains unsolved. which is damage projection outside of the range of webs.
A bit more optimal+falloff and they might start to be viable weapons. I'm saying experiment with it a bit more and if doesnt solve the problem, take it up...... slowly. start small (like +10% optimal/falloff) and go on from there. Dont make them impulse lasers or autocannons, just increase it enough to stand a decent chance on the battlefields these days.
The current update will make Blasters less useless, but they still remain in the last spot. And will stay there unless something adding to the range is done. Blasters need to be able to project SOME damage beyond 15km+. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 22:09:00 -
[1126] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Well, I hope CCP is not going to limit scorch range. Scorch is the Amarr version of stasis webifier. Once it's gone or dramatically reduced. You'll quickly find that Amarr ships are not even on the same level as Gallente ships + Hybrid turrets and even less so compared to Minmatar or Caldari.
Although, if they did do this. Then you would only assume barrage and Tracking enhancers range would be reduced too. With tracking computers or tracking enhancers being the only counter to any reduction in scorch range.
I can only see a more homogeneous landscape to come out of this. Something a part of the community says it does not want, but instead of increasing blaster range. CCP may just start reducing auto-cannon and laser range.
Like I said. This will only show how SH!T Amarr ships and turrets truly are. Again! Kinda like how most believed blaster were good, but that was because of one module (stasis webifier).
I know for a fact most solo pilots do not find Amarr ships to be good solo. If they're not good in that niche and not in fleets. What use are they? Mining Abaddon, with guardians repping incoming rat damage?
While something must be done to make blasters useful for other stuff than gank on belts/stations/gates we can't leave out sight the silly engagement ranges of the closest weapon systems out there, when one is about 300% and the other can pimp up to over 600% then it's obvious someone will loose, I hope not Amarr since they seem to be the most balanced race/guns out there.
While I think scorch is a little overpowered right now it's just because the inability for blasters to get in range fast enough and apply supposed dmg, one this is done and without touch anything on amarr ships/guns we'll see those are fine. They will still apply dmg from far distances but since our ships will be faster and have less tank but more dps I really think it's 50-50.
The ones being has always and for a long while again the pain in the ass because of all their advantages are still minmatar. Too easy to fit tank, neuts, ewar and full lows of dps mods, maneuvrability, range where it can apply dmg, tracking. Then you have Angel ships with all those advantages increased by a factor of 2 (at least)
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 22:19:00 -
[1127] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:the microjump/flash/teleport mod that was alluded to would be pretty fricken sweet. lots of tear could be extracted with such a device.
\o/
Yep that one would solve all the problems of range engagement and you could even cut blasters range to 10km I wouldn't mind -with obvious dmg buff- the moment this is gallente related and not another fracking mod everyone can put on their hull, you don't have to change whatsoever on other races, because this single improvement would change everything (with obvious drawbacks like timer or capacitor % to re-engage said ability)
But I guess this is too difficult to code and balance: animation coding, effects, timers etc
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 22:50:00 -
[1128] - Quote
the animation is already there. if it gets called the microjump drive then it would be a jump effect like caps but scaled to the smaller hulls.
i really hope they call it blink though so i can make a witty comment about gallentes and mages |
Jack Icegaard
The Omega Project
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 22:50:00 -
[1129] - Quote
You CCP-guys are funny. Some 20 months ago i posted a thread where i presented arguments for improving Hybrids. I had made some calculations and my conclusion were that for Hybrids to be competitive they needed:
Blasters: + 15% tracking +10 damage
Rails: + 10% damage
This was of course not the first thread about Hybrids; several in the community had raised the issue before me and even more threads would follow, often filled with very good evidence of Hybrid performence issues. The only comment i saw CCP contribute with in any of those thread were the oneliner:
"Blasters are awesome!" (true story)
So, years later we are informed via a dev blog that CCP now found out that Hybrid weapons really arent that good. Thats humor!
Well, Im glad that Hybrids finally got some attention and i think the changes in the OP looks very good. We should now see how this pans out on tranquility before any further boosts are considered imo.
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 23:50:00 -
[1130] - Quote
Thanks Tallest! Looking forward to seeing what you've come up with.
Not really sure if the changing of armor rigs is really the best idea. The thought of an armor rigged/armor plated hurricane with no speed penalty would be ridiculous, particularly with their small sig radius. To me that's the problem with a module/rig change solution, it will only make all the other races ships even more appealing. If the goal is to make Hybrid ships used more often and not just having a sea of Drakes/Hurricanes (soon Tornadoes/Oracles) I really think the answer lies in direct changes to the hulls of the hybrid ships and just a change to the second bonus to help them control range vice the armor. Beyond that I think team work, tactics and perhaps some more hybrid adjustments will make them more appealing.
But without a doubt lots of great ideas out there and hopefully something that works will be worked out.
But I'm just glad to hear this won't be the last of this effort and the commitment to making all ships have a role and place in this game. |
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 01:42:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Good to see a dev reply :3 Here's some more redundant observations:
For what its worth, I think this is the most important thing to remember about the whole "how does i maek blaster ship blast?" problem: there's no point in ~*simply*~ working out "a way for blaster ships to get into range." The biggest problem with blasters at the moment is that they require you to fight in scram range. This is a problem in and of itself, not just a problem of being able to close with the target or not. Currently there's no way to get around the fact that a ship that is required to fight in blaster range is forced to absolutely commit itself to fights in a way that no other ship is-- going into scram range is very often a one-way ticket. If your target is bait fit, or has friends waiting, or is fitting a cyno, or anything at all goes wrong and you're scrammed and webbed, you're not getting out. By comparison, Amarr, Minmatar, and Caldari ships can all kite and do decent, if not full damage from the edge of point range, allowing them a degree of safety that blaster ships will never enjoy under current mechanics.
If you want blasters to be a viable weapons system you must either increase their falloff range by buffing the hell out of Null, or you need to find a unique bonus for blaster ships that makes flying into scram/web range non-suicidal.
A Null buff would be by far the simplest solution to implement. I think the best way of implementing the latter idea would be to give Gallente ships a bonus to afterburners that renders them able to hit MWD speeds using afterburners instead, effectively making them into scram (but not web) immune versions of their current selves.
Good luck to your team, I really look forward to the day when more than 10% of blaster boats represent a viable option for PvP. Currently we've pretty much got the Serpentis ships and the Talos.
e: I'd also add that I don't think the way to *fix* the problem is by nerfing Barrage or Scorch-- Barrage / autocannons are pretty much perfect as-is (either you can go well into tackle range and do full damage, or you can kite and do 40-60% of full damage) and pulses aren't bad either (you get wicked range but chew through cap like a fat kid fresh out of thin-camp and have the worst tracking of the 3 closerange guns). Pulses and autos function well in PvP already-- leave them be and fix the problem child instead. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 02:13:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Good to see a dev reply :3 Here's some more redundant observations:
id just like to point out that the Proteus can do 512dps at 21+29km with a rack of 250mm's, with drones 670dps. 95k EHP, or you can get about 150k EHP if you give up 50 or so dps. this is excellent damage projection, and excellent tank. the Proteus will be an awesome medium range brawler with the rail changes. the blaster Proteus is probably one of the only viable blaster boats (due to scram range bonus), doing about 1k dps with 150k EHP minimum.
the Deimos is not so lucky and needs help badly. there are plenty of other examples you can use, such as the Brutix and Astarte. these ships simply cant have a good tank with a rack of rails.
Proteus is just fine, and will be competitive with every other T3 (except for the 100MN AB Tengu, which is plain stupid ). unfortunately, Legion is the worst T3 for pvp and i probably wouldnt use it even for comparison purposes. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 02:16:00 -
[1133] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Good to see a dev reply :3 Here's some more redundant observations:
...... DPS output at 30km: - Legion: 430 dps - Proteus: ~110 dps
DPS at 20km: - Legion: 430 dps - Proteus: ~260 dps
DPS at 10km: - Legion: 420 dps - Proteus: 415 dps
...... People fly Legions that aren't gang boosting alts in PVP?
Pro-tips for the mentally challenged: - Curse is a better neuting boat than the Legion - Zealot gives better bang for buck than the Legion - Legion is a slightly better HAM platform than the Sacrilege - Proteus can fit an extended range scram..... - Proteus fits a larger tank while retaining significant dps - Proteus can make good use of 5 x ec-600 drones..... - Tengu does 500+ dps at over 100km, laughing at both of you
BUFF AMARR!!!!!!!! |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 02:24:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Good to see a dev reply :3 Here's some more redundant observations:
I was just running through some T3 cruiser fitting options today. I was mostly interested in Legions but decided to compare my Legion fits with similar Loki and Proteus fits as well.
To give you an idea how screwed up hybrids still are (especially mediums), and how messed up Gallente ships are in general, check this out:
Legion with Heavy Pulses, 2x sinks, 2x tracking enhancers, and Scorch loaded: 432 DPS to 44km optimal.
Proteus with Neutrons, 2 MFS, 2 TE, and Null: 420 dps to 7.3+18.5km
Target: typical vagabond MWDing at a 45 degree angle from the shooter.
DPS output at 30km: - Legion: 430 dps - Proteus: ~110 dps
DPS at 20km: - Legion: 430 dps - Proteus: ~260 dps
DPS at 10km: - Legion: 420 dps - Proteus: 415 dps
From 0-8km, the Proteus out DPSes the Legion... by a hair... due to tracking issues with the pulses. At every other range the Legion is vastly superior. Oh, yeah, the Legion is also faster by 200m/s, has more EHP, and isn't restricted to armor tanking.
Now, granted, this is comparing a 6 gun Legion setup to a 5 gun Proteus, but even a 5 gun Legion puts out 360 dps-- it will still out-dps a Proteus anywhere beyond ~10km. And dropping that 6th gun for another low and installing a nano then makes the Legion 400m/s faster than the Proteus and just as agile.
A 2/2 gyro/TE Loki with Barrage also out-DPSes a Proteus outside 18km, doing double the dps of the Proteus at 30km. The Proteus' dps advantage over a Loki at close range (under 10km)? A mere ~90 dps. At the edge of point range, the Loki does 100% more damage than a Proteus, while at face**** range, a Proteus does ~20-25% more damage than the Loki. The Loki also gets ~60% more tank, is equal in agility to the Proteus, and goes 550m/s faster.
Why would anyone ever fly a blaster medium blaster ship? Every other weapon system and race gets better ships (faster, tankier, more agile, or all 3), better damage output in 90% of situations, and can actually apply damage from outside of scram range. Literally the only time Gallente ships outshine the others is when fighting at scram range, and they're at the same time the hardest ships to get into range with in the first place (being slower and sometimes even less agile than others) and least capable of staying there for long (because their tanks inferior or useless-- either you fit a shield tank that has no capacity, or you fit an armor tank that renders your ship completely useless by turning it into a brick).
For what its worth, I think this is the most important thing to remember about the whole "how does i maek blaster ship blast?" problem: there's no point in ~*simply*~ working out "a way for blaster ships to get into range." The biggest problem with blasters at the moment is that they require you to fight in scram range. This is a problem in and of itself, not just a problem of being able to close with the target or not. Currently there's no way to get around the fact that a ship that is required to fight in blaster range is forced to absolutely commit itself to fights in a way that no other ship is-- going into scram range is very often a one-way ticket. If your target is bait fit, or has friends waiting, or is fitting a cyno, or anything at all goes wrong and you're scrammed and webbed, you're not getting out. By comparison, Amarr, Minmatar, and Caldari ships can all kite and do decent, if not full damage from the edge of point range, allowing them a degree of safety that blaster ships will never enjoy under current mechanics.
If you want blasters to be a viable weapons system you must either increase their falloff range by buffing the hell out of Null, or you need to find a unique bonus for blaster ships that makes flying into scram/web range non-suicidal.
A Null buff would be by far the simplest solution to implement. I think the best way of implementing the latter idea would be to give Gallente ships a bonus to afterburners that renders them able to hit MWD speeds using afterburners instead, effectively making them into scram (but not web) immune versions of their current selves.
Good luck to your team, I really look forward to the day when more than 10% of blaster boats represent a viable option for PvP. Currently we've pretty much got the Serpentis ships and the Talos.
e: I'd also add that I don't think the way to *fix* the problem is by nerfing Barrage or Scorch-- Barrage / autocannons are pretty much perfect as-is (either you can go well into tackle range and do full damage, or you can kite and do 40-60% of full damage) and pulses aren't bad either (you get wicked range but chew through cap like a fat kid fresh out of thin-camp and have the worst tracking of the 3 closerange guns). Pulses and autos function well in PvP already-- leave them be and fix the problem child instead.
Always get back to range and not getting into range. If most pilots were unified in this thinking. CCP would have implemented these changes and they would be more significant than the current hybrid changes. I don`t believe CCP will look at this again for 6 - 13 months. There will be more pressing issues in the future and another look at Caldari and to a lesser extent Amarr.
Opportunity was lost (ha!). |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 02:56:00 -
[1135] - Quote
2/10
|
Wylee Coyote
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 03:13:00 -
[1136] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Greetings
Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.
Thanks. Your Tallest.
update (23/11/11): Final list of hybrid changes for the Crucible expansion.
Hybrid Turrets
* XL Turrets: -5 CPU * L Turrets: -3 CPU * M Turrets: -2 CPU * S Turrets: -1 CPU ** Exception: 75mm Railguns (they already have very low CPU requirements.)
* All hybrid turrets: -12% Powergrid usage. Rounded to nearest whole number. ** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.)
* All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
* All hybrid turrets: 5 second reload time
* All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good tracking when compared to other XL turrets) * All blaster turrets: + 5% to Damage modifier ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good tracking when compared to other XL turrets)
* All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good damage when compared to other XL turrets) * All railgun turrets: +5% to Tracking speed ** Exception: XL turrets (they already have good damage when compared to other XL turrets)
Ships
* Max Velocity +10 on the following ships: ** Arazu, Astarte, Brutix, Catalyst, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Enyo, Eos, Falcon, Guardian-Vexor, Helios, Incursus, Ishtar, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant
* Max Velocity +5 on the following ships: ** Cormorant, Federation Navy Comet, Hyperion, Kronos, Sin, Vindicator
* Inertia Modifier -5% on the following ships: ** Adrestia, Arazu, Ares, Astarte, Atron, Brutix, Catalyst, Celestis, Cormorant, Daredevil, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Eagle, Enyo, Eos, Eris, Exequror Navy Issue, Falcon, Federation Navy Comet, Ferox, Guardian-Vexor, Harpy, Helios, Hyperion, Incursus, Ishkur, Ishtar, Kronos, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Merlin, Moa, Phobos, Raptor, Rokh, Sin, Taranis, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant, Vindicator, Vulture
Ammo
* All hybrid ammo: 50% smaller volume (and hybrid turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Javelin (all sizes): Removed cap penalty * Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus * Hail (all sizes): Reduced falloff penalty from 50% to 25%
Baby steps it is, I would like to thank you for at least this much. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 03:33:00 -
[1137] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so. I am back at work now and will try to address the concerns that have been expressed while I was away.
...
As it turned out, I only had time to do one extra pass on the changes after they hit SISI. These changes (to the changes) were based on your feedback from this thread. There were many other suggestions here that I would love to do, but didn't have enough time to do them properly for this release. In the future, I will make sure that I have more time to make changes based on your feedback. The feedback that you was posted after the cutoff is far from worthless. I've read every single post and written down notes for future reference.
What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes. Tallest, may I make another suggestion: Please consider that the Gallente also have the drone platforms, all of which have been very competitive until now.
A small comparison:
- Frigates: All Gallente frigates have drones. Even the Helios, of all things, has a drone. Gallente will now have two excellent PVP frigates. Amarr, Minnies and Caldari have one
- AFs: Gallente now have two excellent PVP frigates where before the Enyo was difficult to fit. Amarr only has one
- Faction frigates: Empire factions have parity except the Minnies where the Firetail is subpar. The Daredevil is now even more vastly OP than it was. Meanwhile, the Dram is getting nerfed, the Worm is worthless compared to the T2 Ishkur, and the Cruor and Succubus are niche platforms.
- Destroyers: The Gallente now have a destroyer that out damages almost all t1 cruisers with the Catalyst capable of doing over 500dps. The Coercer is still stuck with one mid slot.
- Cruisers: Gallente now have two very competitive cruisers with the Thorax and Vexor. Minnies and Amarr only have one (Omen is extremely gimped, Stabber and Caracal are only good as anti-frigate platforms)
- HACs: Gallente now have two very competive HACS in the Deimos with the speed/agilty/fitting improvements and the Ishtar, which can chase off the Vagabond with ease. Caldari only have one (Eagle's role has been usurped by Naga)
- Faction Cruisers: Empire factions have platform parity, but here the Angels are still very OP with the Cynabal, which would be worse were there not only a drone platform (Gila), but also an extremely potent hybrid platform (Vigilant) which is now even more vastly OP in close combat. The Phantasm is lacking as a PVP platform.
- Recons: parity with other races, although ECM is still far too OP.
- T3 cruisers: The Proteus is very good in its roles, but the Legion is only really useful for gang boosting and the Tengu outclasses all the rest in use. Loki is balanced.
- Battlecruisers: Gallente now have two competitive platforms in the improved Brutix and Myrmidon, although the Myrmidon badly needs 100mb drone bandwidth. The Amarr are still stuck with the awful Prophecy. Ironically, the Ferox is now useful as a blaster platform. This is the weapons class, outside of HACs which are used as strawmen arguments in calls for nerfs to the Hurricane and Drake......
- Command Ships: The Astarte is now extremely competive, although the Eos is still supbar with its low drone bandwidth. Caldari still cannot fit HAMs without gimping their fits.
- Tier 3 BCs: The Talos is lacking compared to the other three, but is competitive in the niche close in dual web fits, although the Tornado is arguably better.
- Battleships: All three Gallente BS are now extremely good and can even go up against the Amarr under certain circumstances now. The Hyperion in a shield fit is now faster, has more ehp and vastly more dps than the Tempest in a shield fit and has closed the range gap considerably. Caldari BS have one niche PvP platform, Scorpion, the Raven suffers from poor dps from cruise missiles and fitting difficulties with Torpedos, although the Rokh might now shine as a blaster ship. Minnie BS are now subpar apart from the Maelstrom, which has a niche use in PvP (alpha to break logistics)
- Faction BS: In Empire factions, the Gallente are even more competitive now and there is general platform parity although the CNR is a PvE only platform. In pirate factions, the Machariel is still vastly OP, although the others (Vindicator, Bhalghorn, Nightmare, rattlesnake) totally outperform anything in their class in PVP and PVE
- Marauders: Here the Kronos is still subpar, although it has improved. As a class, Marauders desperately need new roles as they are wasted in PvE,where they are outclassed by pirate faction BS.
- Blackops: Very limited niche for very expensive and somewhat flimsy ships. Also need revision badly.
Tallest: Viewed across the whole gammut, the Gallente are now extremely competive and completely dominate some classes in viable choices available. I urge you to consider this when considering rebalances. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 04:48:00 -
[1138] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Tallest, may I make another suggestion: Please consider that the Gallente also have the drone platforms, all of which have been very competitive until now.
A small comparison:
- Frigates: All Gallente frigates have drones. Even the Helios, of all things, has a drone. Gallente will now have two excellent PVP frigates. Amarr, Minnies and Caldari have one
- AFs: Gallente now have two excellent PVP frigates where before the Enyo was difficult to fit. Amarr only has one
- Faction frigates: Empire factions have parity except the Minnies where the Firetail is subpar. The Daredevil is now even more vastly OP than it was. Meanwhile, the Dram is getting nerfed, the Worm is worthless compared to the T2 Ishkur, and the Cruor and Succubus are niche platforms.
- Destroyers: The Gallente now have a destroyer that out damages almost all t1 cruisers with the Catalyst capable of doing over 500dps. The Coercer is still stuck with one mid slot.
- Cruisers: Gallente now have two very competitive cruisers with the Thorax and Vexor. Minnies and Amarr only have one (Omen is extremely gimped, Stabber and Caracal are only good as anti-frigate platforms)
- HACs: Gallente now have two very competive HACS in the Deimos with the speed/agilty/fitting improvements and the Ishtar, which can chase off the Vagabond with ease. Caldari only have one (Eagle's role has been usurped by Naga)
- Faction Cruisers: Empire factions have platform parity, but here the Angels are still very OP with the Cynabal, which would be worse were there not only a drone platform (Gila), but also an extremely potent hybrid platform (Vigilant) which is now even more vastly OP in close combat. The Phantasm is lacking as a PVP platform.
- Recons: parity with other races, although ECM is still far too OP.
- T3 cruisers: The Proteus is very good in its roles, but the Legion is only really useful for gang boosting and the Tengu outclasses all the rest in use. Loki is balanced.
- Battlecruisers: Gallente now have two competitive platforms in the improved Brutix and Myrmidon, although the Myrmidon badly needs 100mb drone bandwidth. The Amarr are still stuck with the awful Prophecy. Ironically, the Ferox is now useful as a blaster platform. This is the weapons class, outside of HACs which are used as strawmen arguments in calls for nerfs to the Hurricane and Drake......
- Command Ships: The Astarte is now extremely competive, although the Eos is still supbar with its low drone bandwidth. Caldari still cannot fit HAMs without gimping their fits.
- Tier 3 BCs: The Talos is lacking compared to the other three, but is competitive in the niche close in dual web fits, although the Tornado is arguably better.
- Battleships: All three Gallente BS are now extremely good and can even go up against the Amarr under certain circumstances now. The Hyperion in a shield fit is now faster, has more ehp and vastly more dps than the Tempest in a shield fit and has closed the range gap considerably. Caldari BS have one niche PvP platform, Scorpion, the Raven suffers from poor dps from cruise missiles and fitting difficulties with Torpedos, although the Rokh might now shine as a blaster ship. Minnie BS are now subpar apart from the Maelstrom, which has a niche use in PvP (alpha to break logistics)
- Faction BS: In Empire factions, the Gallente are even more competitive now and there is general platform parity although the CNR is a PvE only platform. In pirate factions, the Machariel is still vastly OP, although the others (Vindicator, Bhalghorn, Nightmare, rattlesnake) totally outperform anything in their class in PVP and PVE
- Marauders: Here the Kronos is still subpar, although it has improved. As a class, Marauders desperately need new roles as they are wasted in PvE,where they are outclassed by pirate faction BS.
- Blackops: Very limited niche for very expensive and somewhat flimsy ships. Also need revision badly.
Tallest: Viewed across the whole gammut, the Gallente are now extremely competive and completely dominate some classes in viable choices available. I urge you to consider this when considering rebalances. Please give me some of whatever you are smoking that makes you think the brutix/astarte, thorax/deimos and hyperion are useful for anything except sitting at an undock and blowing stuff up that is stupid enough to undock right into them.
the brutix, even with an overdrive injector and shield tanking still only goes 1400 m/s which will still never catch up to my hurricane doing 1600 m/s or worse my tornado at 1800 m/s even an active tanking deimos without armor rigs cant catch up to it at that speed!
Need I go on? Blasters still do tons of damage almost never and autocannons still do almost as much damage pretty much always, and they do it without taking cap and being able to switch damage types |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 05:15:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Here's a very simple, and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on.
Maybe our glass cannons shouldn't be made out of glass?
We fight in the danger zone, yet we are successfully primaried and neutralised long before we actually start laying down the pain.
Outwardly we exclaim and boast about this suicidal nature, but in reality surviviblity is the #1 factor in ship choices, from std missle crows from 2005, to hml drake, abaddons with artillary and the dying embers of the nano age (aka angel).
Drone boats deal with all size classes with utility and arnt completely useless whilst jammed or neuted. And while some are more left field than others, with out realising it every suggestion on how to boost blasters revolves around how do I reduce risk.
If you do not look at the problem "what is the Hybrids Survival stratergy?", your solution will be wrong. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 05:47:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:
- HACs: Gallente now have two very competive HACS in the Deimos with the speed/agilty/fitting improvements and the Ishtar, which can chase off the Vagabond with ease. Caldari only have one (Eagle's role has been usurped by Naga)
you are indeed smoking something strong. the Deimos remains the worst HAC in the game. it is overshadowed by the pulse Zealot in every single situation. rails are incompatible with the way Deimos is.
the Vigilant is not OP in anyway, neither is any blaster boat in the game. Vigi's and Vindi's will remain (mostly) pretty killmails.
i do agree, the Cynabal is ridiculous, and the Tengu needs some serious nerfing because it's the only cruiser that can faceroll through any pve or pvp situation without any risk. |
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 06:01:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Here's a very simple, and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on.
Maybe our glass cannons shouldn't be made out of glass?
We fight in the danger zone, yet we are successfully primaried and neutralised long before we actually start laying down the pain.
Outwardly we exclaim and boast about this suicidal nature, but in reality surviviblity is the #1 factor in ship choices, from std missle crows from 2005, to hml drake, abaddons with artillary and the dying embers of the nano age (aka angel).
Drone boats deal with all size classes with utility and arnt completely useless whilst jammed or neuted. And while some are more left field than others, with out realising it every suggestion on how to boost blasters revolves around how do I reduce risk.
If you do not look at the problem "what is the Hybrids Survival stratergy?", your solution will be wrong.
Here is a very simple and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on also.
Maybe Hybirds should not be as good as Projectiles and Lazers.
Maybe just maybe Hybirds are fine and drones on drone ships should be boosted to the same levels as projectiles and lazers.
And maybe just maybe are ships need looked at and reworked as well. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 06:07:00 -
[1142] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:
- HACs: Gallente now have two very competive HACS in the Deimos with the speed/agilty/fitting improvements and the Ishtar, which can chase off the Vagabond with ease. Caldari only have one (Eagle's role has been usurped by Naga)
you are indeed smoking something strong. the Deimos remains the worst HAC in the game. it is overshadowed by the pulse Zealot in every single situation. rails are incompatible with the way Deimos is. the Vigilant is not OP in anyway, neither is any blaster boat in the game. Vigi's and Vindi's will remain (mostly) pretty killmails. i do agree, the Cynabal is ridiculous, and the Tengu needs some serious nerfing because it's the only cruiser that can faceroll through any pve or pvp situation without any risk.
Not that I'm a huge fan of Missiles myself but I think mybe you should fix them for PVP before nerfing the only good non-EW ship that race realy has.
|
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 06:34:00 -
[1143] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Here's a very simple, and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on.
Maybe our glass cannons shouldn't be made out of glass?
We fight in the danger zone, yet we are successfully primaried and neutralised long before we actually start laying down the pain.
Outwardly we exclaim and boast about this suicidal nature, but in reality surviviblity is the #1 factor in ship choices, from std missle crows from 2005, to hml drake, abaddons with artillary and the dying embers of the nano age (aka angel).
Drone boats deal with all size classes with utility and arnt completely useless whilst jammed or neuted. And while some are more left field than others, with out realising it every suggestion on how to boost blasters revolves around how do I reduce risk.
If you do not look at the problem "what is the Hybrids Survival stratergy?", your solution will be wrong.
Exactly my point.
A Null falloff buff (at least for medium ammo, I don't know that its necessary for larges [which can already be made to do good dps at range] or smalls [which go on ships that are meant to go into knife-fighting range]), would really make blaster-using Cruisers a more viable option for PvP. Cruisers having to get really close to their targets just kills their survivability. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 06:42:00 -
[1144] - Quote
Also, the Cynabal isn't too ridiculous-- it's like a marginally improved Vagabond that does less dps. It's very fast and agile and has a few k more ehp, but it trades some damage output to do it and it's highly cap-unstable. Any master baiter with a heavy neut or any gang with tackle-recons can make short work of a Cynabal.
Also, Rip Minner, why do you hate hybrids so much? I'm genuinely curious why you keep trying to push drones over hybrids for Gallente. Pretty much everyone hates drones-- they're bad for PvP (they can get blown up easily, they take forever to get on target, lots of them have tracking issues, etc), I think I remember hearing they're bad for the server (in terms of lag), and CCP has never been able to get their code working quite right.
e: redacted
Come to think of it, looking at this dps graph, maybe a buff to Null optimal range would be best-- this would allow blasters to out-track and out-dps autocannons out to ~25-30km, but would ensure that blaster damage drops off precipitously beyond that range, while autocannons' high falloff will keep their dps advantage at longer ranges. It wouldn't take much of a buff to shift the DPS curve for the blasters over a bit-- maybe so that the curves cross at ~28km instead of 20 (with 2 tracking enhancers)? A change like this would just make cruisers like the Deimos, Vigilant and Proteus so much more useful for PvP.
e2: Holy crap, I just noticed the dissolution sequencer actually adds drones to the Proteus. Nevermind, it's actually pretty good. I take back what I said about the Proteus. Null M could still use some range-love though. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 08:50:00 -
[1145] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes.
Awesome. Thank you... and sounds very good.
A few notes on that list:
- I really hope "tweaking of individual ships" includes a look at the poor Eos. It's by far the worst of the fleet commands (part of this has to do with the not-that-impressive inforwar gang links when compared to the other gang link types). For example, even after the patch it cannot fit 3 x gang link, guns, mwd and 1600mm plate without a grid module/rig. Compare to Damnation, which has absolutely no trouble fitting anything it likes.
- Sensor Damps need a looking at. They are seriously subpar, even on ships that get bonuses on them.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 09:18:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Here is a very simple and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on also.
Maybe Hybirds should not be as good as Projectiles and Lazers.
Maybe just maybe Hybirds are fine and drones on drone ships should be boosted to the same levels as projectiles and lazers.
And maybe just maybe are ships need looked at and reworked as well.
If hybrids are made inferior to projectiles and lasers, then the hybrid-using ships need innate hull advantages to make up for that inferiority elsewhere. Something like speed, sig, scan res or agility maybe... oh. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 10:03:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:
- HACs: Gallente now have two very competive HACS in the Deimos with the speed/agilty/fitting improvements and the Ishtar, which can chase off the Vagabond with ease. Caldari only have one (Eagle's role has been usurped by Naga)
you are indeed smoking something strong. the Deimos remains the worst HAC in the game. it is overshadowed by the pulse Zealot in every single situation. rails are incompatible with the way Deimos is. the Vigilant is not OP in anyway, neither is any blaster boat in the game. Vigi's and Vindi's will remain (mostly) pretty killmails. i do agree, the Cynabal is ridiculous, and the Tengu needs some serious nerfing because it's the only cruiser that can faceroll through any pve or pvp situation without any risk. he is just another matar noob who has no clue about pvp, his posts are full of bs , and fictions ... total fail this bomberlocks is |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 10:43:00 -
[1148] - Quote
I'm really hesitating to say buff null falloff/optimal without a lot of testing. it is a dangerous part to touch , maybe 10% would be ok but I'd like to see that in a test enviroment first. Amarr could be doomed with gallente tracking post patch + a hughe falloff change.
I prefer more some form of changes for modules which apply no damage but make sure enemy is not untouchable within the 20-30 km range.
-improving web range bonus on some ships or/and -Increase dampener usefullness (makes enemy to get closer)
Furthermore touching speed sounds not that harmfull as touching ammo or weapons once again.
A Microjumpdrive is a pain to implement. Just think about the restrictions it would surely get
- massive "where "restriction - massive "when" restriction - massive "reuse" restriction - massive "range" restriction - massive "who" restriction
and surely one less of our limited med slots.
It looks like a sounds good on paper idea for me. In a combat enviroment it will be eighter overpowered or it will be prenerfed like a black ops. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 11:24:00 -
[1149] - Quote
Perhaps active tanking ships should get a joint bonus for repairer effectiveness and cap usage? Not an answer in itself to the problem, but it would allow a bit more tanking while you try to mwd into range rather than mwding into range and being cap dead before you even activate your guns?
And welcome back CCP Tallest. If I might be so bold as to suggest; If someone like yourself has ownership of an issue like this, and in the cause of better communication, if you happen to be going away for a significant period of time perhaps you could post as much in the thread before you go? The frustration from an apparent lack of dev interest was bad for the health of everyone with an interest in this matter |
To mare
Advanced Technology
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 11:29:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so. I am back at work now and will try to address the concerns that have been expressed while I was away.
As Soundwave and Affinity have explained for me in my absence, the cutoff date for changes that make it into the Crucible expansion has already passed (and had already passed when I went away).
As it turned out, I only had time to do one extra pass on the changes after they hit SISI. These changes (to the changes) were based on your feedback from this thread. There were many other suggestions here that I would love to do, but didn't have enough time to do them properly for this release. In the future, I will make sure that I have more time to make changes based on your feedback. The feedback that you was posted after the cutoff is far from worthless. I've read every single post and written down notes for future reference.
What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:
* Further tweaking of individual ships. * Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage. * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking. * Small and Medium Webifier drones. * Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers. * Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.
p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes. Tallest: May I make one small suggestion: Don't make any hasty changes until the current changes have settled in. There will be a period of transition as the more timid players take to the new ships and fittings and the better, bolder players make inventive and effective fits for them. This will take six months or so. Don't rush it, please.
totally agree there is no point to overbuff a weapon system just because some people want it, the only result is to make those people happy with theyir new op weapon and make all the others cry on forum because the new weapon its OP. the new changes are enough for a start people will try to use blaster just to test them if they like they will be used more often if in 6 month people still don use them we need another look at it. |
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 11:44:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Btw how these testings are done? 1v1? or what cause that is the least what tq is about.
To mare: why to wait 6 months when many ppl already say these changes are not enough?? and the rest says ( oh wait and lets see) see what? That blaster ships still slower than ac's and dont realy have any advantage to compensate and rail ships are still totally underpowered ,due to missing a role. So pls tell me , what why should another balance wait for another 6 months? ppl will somehow realize new tactics for the blasters? hardly as those cant do anything better than the ac ships , or some miracle will make them better ?
As we can already see , large changes every 1-2 years dont work, but with smaller changes you have to do it frequent like every 2 months or so. |
Shaak Ti
D00M. Northern Coalition.
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 12:43:00 -
[1152] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:good stuff
Glad you are back, I hope you take a look also to the capital ships. By the look of the quick tweaks and messages, looks like you didn't really care about feedback. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 14:25:00 -
[1153] - Quote
GET THE FUkK OUT OF THE HYBRID THREAD YOU MOTHERSHIP FLYING ****** |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 15:06:00 -
[1154] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Also, the Cynabal isn't too ridiculous-- it's like a marginally improved Vagabond that does less dps.
nah, it is. the Cynabal is really fast and has one hell of a shield buffer, while retaining most of the Vaga's dps. this is why the Vaga is not used any longer. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 15:16:00 -
[1155] - Quote
So guys I think its all with Hybrids. CCP changed anything just tweaks. So thank you guys for discussion. I'm hoping that We will meet in better balanced game !
Take care ! Over and Out |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 15:30:00 -
[1156] - Quote
Someone mentioned the uninspiring command bonuses of the Eos. Here's an idea: move the Interdiction Manoeuvres (point/web range) warfare link out of the Skirmish Warfare category and into the Information Warfare category. This would complement Gallente ships quite well, since long-range warp jamming is Gallente's thing and web range is often called for as a means to buff blaster boats.
The link could either replace or be merged with Recon Operation (which increases range of EWar modules), and Skirmish Warfare could get a new kind of link to replace it (agility? tracking?). |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 15:36:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Here's a very simple, and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on.
Maybe our glass cannons shouldn't be made out of glass?
We fight in the danger zone, yet we are successfully primaried and neutralised long before we actually start laying down the pain.
Outwardly we exclaim and boast about this suicidal nature, but in reality surviviblity is the #1 factor in ship choices, from std missle crows from 2005, to hml drake, abaddons with artillary and the dying embers of the nano age (aka angel).
Drone boats deal with all size classes with utility and arnt completely useless whilst jammed or neuted. And while some are more left field than others, with out realising it every suggestion on how to boost blasters revolves around how do I reduce risk.
If you do not look at the problem "what is the Hybrids Survival stratergy?", your solution will be wrong. Here is a very simple and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on also. Maybe Hybirds should not be as good as Projectiles and Lazers. Maybe just maybe Hybirds are fine and drones on drone ships should be boosted to the same levels as projectiles and lazers. And maybe just maybe are ships need looked at and reworked as well. Changes to ship hulls, bonuses and slots will absolutely be part of the solution. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 15:46:00 -
[1158] - 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? |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 16:31:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Archare wrote: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?
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. |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 16:55:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Here's a very simple, and maybe pervasive final thought for you all to chew on.
Maybe our glass cannons shouldn't be made out of glass?
We fight in the danger zone, yet we are successfully primaried and neutralised long before we actually start laying down the pain.
Outwardly we exclaim and boast about this suicidal nature, but in reality surviviblity is the #1 factor in ship choices, from std missle crows from 2005, to hml drake, abaddons with artillary and the dying embers of the nano age (aka angel).
Drone boats deal with all size classes with utility and arnt completely useless whilst jammed or neuted. And while some are more left field than others, with out realising it every suggestion on how to boost blasters revolves around how do I reduce risk.
If you do not look at the problem "what is the Hybrids Survival stratergy?", your solution will be wrong.
Agreed. Its too easy to shut down Gallente ships with neuts and webs, and their tank isn't the best which doesn't help. I think an interesting change to Gallente would be an eWAR "resistance", reducing the effect of webs, painters etc. Currently the blaster philosophy is seriously flawed when it comes to larger ships. With frigates, additional tracking on blasters is definitely a plus, but once you get to cruisers and above: what good is tracking? Everything within your blaster range is within scram, neut, and web range. How is 37.5% additional tracking going to benefit a blaster Megathron when both him and his target are webbed down? Sure, it might make it easier to hit battlecruisers and below, but a web+scram makes anything slow enough for a battleship to hit (save long range weapons)
Blaster boats should be the pitbulls of EVE: once they latch on, you aren't getting them off until they're dead or you're dead. WIth an eWAR resistance change, a blaster brutix will run circles around a hurricane if they are both webbed, but it doesn't give the Brutix a free escape card, and can quite possibly get close enough to the hurricane to get under its tracking.
EDIT: To clarify, I don't mean that *every* Gallente ship should get a bonus like this, but perhaps change over the armor repairing bonus to this. |
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 16:59:00 -
[1161] - Quote
Some more general points about balancing hybrids and hybrid ships against other weapons and other ships:
Guns:
- Scorch, Barrage and Null all need adjusting. The range of Scorch is fine, as it fits the combat philosophy of Amarr. But it should pay for it more heavily in terms of both tracking and damage output. At the moment, scorch significantly outperforms rails with antimatter at the same middle ranges. As for Barrage, its falloff bonus just needs to be toned down a bit, to something like 40% instead of 50%. Null ought to allow high-tier blaster-fit cruisers a realistic option of fighting outside of scram range, but not much further out than that. To that end, it needs greater optimal range, maybe at the cost of some falloff.
- The short-range end of the hybrid ammo spectrum still needs more damage. Blasters need to melt face, and rails need to be viable options in mid-range engagements.
- Autocannons are simply far too easy to fit. Winmatar is no joke.
Ships:
- I really urge you to not mess around with new modules or unique abilities for blaster boats to help them get into range. New modules would just benefit Winmatar kiters even more than at present, and unique abilties (not to be confused with bonuses) for one subsection of one race's ships would be game-breaking. Rebalancing should be limited to tweaking numbers and changing bonuses.
- A small MWD speed bonus would be more useful to the Thorax and Deimos than reduced capacitor penalty. About 10-15% more cap should compensate for the lost bonus.
- The Deimos needs a lot more powergrid. Even with the lower fitting requirements of hybrids, it still won't have enough PG to fit a rack of Neutrons, MWD and 1600mm plate, even with TWO(!) ACR rigs. That's before you even try to put anything in the utility highslot. 12% more powergrid and 3% more CPU would be fair (this would allow for Neutrons, medium Nos, 1600 plate and MWD with two ACR rigs).
- Active tanking bonuses on the Brutix, Myrm and Hyp could do with being changed to a twin bonus to cycle time and cap use. Same net effect, but much more useful in practice. There might be a case for a net boost to the bonus as well. Both the Brutix and Hyperion need a significant boost to powergrid to make proper use of both of their bonuses.
- After the Crucible changes, the Brutix is still just too slow (even without plates or armour rigs). It's also very limited by only having 5 lowslots. Increasing that to 6 would give 17 slots in total, which is not without precedent for a tier 1 battlecruiser (the Cyclone already has 17). While we're on that subject, the Prophecy and Ferox could each do with an upgrade and additional fitting slot as well.
. The Brutix and the Hyperion are probably ideal ships to have high straight-line top speed but relatively low agility, as many have suggested. Just think of the amount of thrust those massive engines should generate! This would require no reworking of bonuses.
- Changing armour rig penalties to something other than speed (agility?), or just reducing the penalty, would be a very good thing for Gallente. Armour tanked Minmatar ships are not the reason they're called Winmatar, so a consequential boost to those fits is not a reason to avoid doing this.
That's all for now. More when I think of it. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 17:19:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:At the moment, scorch significantly outperforms rails with antimatter at the same middle ranges.
i agree that Scorch needs some serious adjustment, but it does not outperform medium rails with AM at medium range. Pulse Zealot gets about 430dps at around 50km with a bunch of TE's and heatsinks in lows (tracking would need to get nerfed, and dps slightly), whereas a properly fit rail boat gets about 500dps up to 30km or so (without drones).
either buff Spike damage, or nerf Scorch dmg slightly and decrease tracking. for medium guns anyway. Scorch L needs more serious nerfing. it's nuts.
and I agree, the Brutix (as well as the Deimos) is still a joke. it's way too slow, has a ****** tank, and mediocre dps with a decent tank. furthermore, rails are competely incompatible with it, i.e. u cant fit them, cant do decent dps with em. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 17:28:00 -
[1163] - 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. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:48:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:At the moment, scorch significantly outperforms rails with antimatter at the same middle ranges. i agree that Scorch needs some serious adjustment, but it does not outperform medium rails with AM at medium range. Pulse Zealot gets about 430dps at around 50km with a bunch of TE's and heatsinks in lows (tracking would need to get nerfed, and dps slightly), whereas a properly fit rail boat gets about 500dps up to 30km or so (without drones).
Not sure where you're getting your numbers from, or what your definition of a 'properly fit rail boat' is.
Post-Crucible, a max-skilled Deimos with 250mm rails, 3 MFS's and and 2 TEs (so a paper-thin sniper, which it's actually quite good at, bizarrely) will do 446dps at 23km optimal with faction AM. Show me a non-faction, non-T3 hybrid platform that can do that any better.
But you are right, sort of. All other things being equal, upper-tier rails (150s, 250s and 425s) with faction AM have very much the same dps and optimal as upper-tier Pulse with Scorch. However, this ignores the fact that upper-tier rails are incredibly difficult to fit to anything except dedicated paper-thin sniper fits, such as the aforementioned Deimos (your Proteus does not count). Middle-tier railguns are far more popular options (at least on Gallente ships) because of these fitting issues.
Slot layouts and ship bonuses also come into it. Compare two fleet battleships: the Mega Pulse Abaddon, and the 425 rail Megathron (I know they're different tiers, but they are role equivalents - the Hyperion is not a fleet battleship). The Abaddon can easily fit two heat sinks and still have a fearsome amount of armour buffer. But the Megathron (which is disadvantaged to start with by only having 7 turret hardpoints) has serious CPU problems, and usually only has room for a single damage mod after you've fitted it with even a lacklustre tank. That opens up a significant difference in damage at mid-range (also consider that the Abaddon can fit 2 TCs. The Mega can only fit 1 unless it sacrifices resists). Of course the Mega has more drone space and bandwidth, but in the vast majority of mid-ranged battleship engagements, drones are of minimal use. The difference in performance between the two at medium range (scorch/AM) is greater than I feel the difference in tiers and price justifies. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:50:00 -
[1165] - Quote
the Deimos sucks, and is not a viable rail platform. Neither is the Brutix unfortunately. im speaking of the Proteus with a Tracking Comps in mids. you can get similar numbers with the Astarte, but way less tank.
and just for fun, lets throw in 2 Gardes instead of your typical Valks or Hammers. this is something that can be flown in armor HAC gangs. 630 dps at 30km, 100k EHP. Valks are really fast, and you can get about 640dps with them.
[Proteus, DPS Rail] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Armor Explosive Hardener II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II
10MN Afterburner II Tracking Computer II Tracking Computer II
250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Medium Hybrid Collision Accelerator I Medium Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Proteus Defensive - Augmented Plating Proteus Electronics - CPU Efficiency Gate Proteus Engineering - Power Core Multiplier Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors Proteus Offensive - Hybrid Propulsion Armature
Garde II x2 Warrior II x3 Warrior II x2
anyway, this is probably the only viable cruiser-sized rail platform. if you wanna add tackle, mwd, and bonus to scram/disruptor, and tank then dps will drop by about 40, and range by a few km. unfortunately, this costs half a bill minimum. the Deimos needs some serious buffs to be taken seriously. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:58:00 -
[1166] - Quote
So, your definition of a 'properly fit rail boat' is a Proteus? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you look comparing that to anything other than another T3?
I'm not denying the Deimos sucks in its intended role, as a close-range blaster brawler. But you were talking about rails. Post-crucible, the Deimos will actually be a very desirable alternative to a beam-fit sniper Zealot.
EDIT:
ANYWAY, my point was that there are no realistic and viable rail gun fits that can rival Scorch at mid-range. You agree with me, so stop making us both look like idiots by creating an argument out of nothing. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:01:00 -
[1167] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:So, your definition of a 'properly fit rail boat' is a Proteus? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you look comparing that to anything other than another T3?
I'm not denying the Deimos sucks in its intended role, as a close-range blaster brawler. But you were talking about rails. Post-crucible, the Deimos will actually be a very desirable alternative to a beam-fit sniper Zealot.
both the beam Zealot and the "sniper Deimos" will become extinct once Tier 3 BC's are out. HAC sniper gangs have been dead for a long time, and this is the nail in the coffin. and no, with the current "buffs", the rail Deimos cant actually output the same dps as a beam Zealot.
im giving you a viable, medium range rail platform.
edit: ok, Deimos sucks. medium rails need more (with the exception of the rail Proteus). Scorch needs nerfing. done. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:05:00 -
[1168] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:ANYWAY, my point was that there are no realistic and viable rail gun fits that can rival Scorch at mid-range. You agree with me, so stop making us both look like idiots by creating an argument out of nothing.
It's a T3. STFU. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:12:00 -
[1169] - Quote
the rail prot is viable. that linked fit is terrible.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:25:00 -
[1170] - Quote
damn straight it's viable. the posted fit is excellent, for maxed dps. considering that a rail fit was never viable on the Proteus, this is probably the first public rail fit on the internets so deal.
replace a tracking comp with a disruptor for kiting, Gardes with Valks. replace AB with mwd if youre not gonna be in an armor HAC gang with logi support. replace hybrid rigs with t2 trimarks if you want another 50k EHP. replace T2 with faction if you can afford to lose, and done. now stretch your epeen somewhere else. this is a feedback thread. i'll leave Battleclinic to you and the rest of EFT warriors, because thats probably all you know how to do. |
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:28:00 -
[1171] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote: stop making us both look like idiots
you already got that covered bud. later.
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:43:00 -
[1172] - Quote
Unless it's in the context of saying "rails are so hard to fit, the only way I can make them work is on a 500m ISK Tech 3 cruiser", I don't want to read any more about your Proteus. Kindly stop derailing the thread. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 21:05:00 -
[1173] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Also, the Cynabal isn't too ridiculous-- it's like a marginally improved Vagabond that does less dps. nah, it is. the Cynabal is really fast and has one hell of a shield buffer, while retaining most of the Vaga's dps. this is why the Vaga is not used any longer.
I don't know who you fly with, but while there are a handful of people I know who choose to fly Cynabals over other ships, the majority of people don't feel like risking a 500m isk faction-fit pirate ship on a daily basis. They fly fly Vagas instead.
When you consider the massive difference in price (a fitted Vaga is ~150m isk), the Cynabal really is a marginal improvement on the Vaga-- if you look at both ships with all 5's skills, you'll see that they are almost identical in speed, dps output, and tank, and cap stability. The Cynabal has two advantages over the Vaga-- almost double the agility, and higher scan-res. I don't think its fair to call that "ridiculous," especially since its a much more expensive hull that also basically requires a 150m isk faction point to be fit properly due to CPU limitations. Sure, if you compare a both-cruiser 5's Cynabal to a HAC 4 Vaga, the Cynabal looks like a way better ship, but that's not exactly a fair comparison... |
Spugg Galdon
Callidus Temple Forsaken.Empire
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 21:10:00 -
[1174] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:the rail prot is viable. that linked fit is terrible.
Only fully agree with the bolded part.
I've been looking into a lot of potential fits with this buff and to be honest, although it is still very conservative, hybrids seem okay. Although medium rails still feel very underpowered.
The biggest issue now I believe is first; the hulls they fit on, and second; the useless ammo. As I've said before, decent versatile ammo is what we need next. And this is what I would love to see:-
2x Short range high damage offering damage choice within the guns limitations Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is High Thermal low Kinetic damage Lead (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal
2x short to mid range "Specialised" ammo Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking) : -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg
2x Mid range ammo catering for both Gallente and Caldari hulls Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff Iridium (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal
2x Long range ammo. One for sniping (unless you have alpha you can't really snipe) and the other for extreme long range. Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +75% dmg -75% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +75% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off
And something similar for energy turrets:-
2x Short range high damage offering damage choice within the guns limitations Multifrequency (short range EM) : Remains as is except high EM low Thermal Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) : As MF but with hi thermal damage
2x "Specialised" short to mid range ammo Gamma (short range hi RoF) : +50% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) : -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg
2x Mid range ammo Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg) : +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) : +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage
2x Long range ammo. One for sniping (unless you have alpha you can't really snipe) and the other for extreme long range. Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +75% dmg -75% Rof +40% optimal +75% Cap use Radio (Extreme long range) : +60% optimal |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:02:00 -
[1175] - Quote
Archare wrote:M1AU wrote: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.
Fair point. The idea was to give the Brutix an unique ability which could possibly free up on a mid slot and wasn't that hard to train for, for a tier 1 battlecruiser. Though it's probably better to let the Brutix and also the Hyperion stay with a tanking bonus of any kind. I actually also like the idea of a half cycle time / half cap need double-bonus of armor repairs, but I don't have any numbers to support it. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:32:00 -
[1176] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Unless it's in the context of saying "rails are so hard to fit, the only way I can make them work is on a 500m ISK Tech 3 cruiser", I don't want to read any more about your Proteus. Kindly stop derailing the thread.
t3's and pirate hulls for the win
you are a poor bad that should stop typing |
Morehei Atlas
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:40:00 -
[1177] - Quote
Think i might be going off topic but does anybody know if large rails will get the tracking buff they are badly in need off? The cap use balance is very welcome and a long time coming ie navy mega needs 4-5 cap mods just to have guns cap stable. Such a mega ship on paper but majorly handicapped in reality. Trained, built, used it for a few missions then sold all the nice faction mods because it just wasn't effective.
Leads me to my next point....gallente pilots are forced to cross train as the gall weapon systems are pants and have been for sometime. Other factions consolidate their skils while we are forced into time consuming cross training to get ships that are better for pve.....a major isk source for first time pilots.
I hope ccp don't go half-baked on hybrids balancing. I've already done some major cross training and evan with the buff as it stands gall battleships are pants for pve and probs won't bother with them again. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:51:00 -
[1178] - Quote
Giving dedicated blaster bouts a drone bonus is the most ******** idea i ever heared of. Drones are terrible for pvp. Killing a single small baby drone of your bunch will make all other 4 small baby drones entirely useless again. Do never ever rely on them. Most heartbreaking point on this web drone bonus idea is the loss of some other bonus on a ship not designed for drone usage. If you want to do a webbing job use a module designed for webbing or do put this bonus on a ship where it belongs to..... a drone boat with a hughe drone bay and not in need to hope that the bunch of drones ALL do survive.
It's like giving the eos a bonus like "needs less jumpfuel while using enemy jump bridges" Combat Gun ships are no viable drone platforms and that is good !
Yes i can use drones, yes i like them and i will use them but i won't rely on them for my survival.
i do rely on things like: cap boosters, power neutralizers, stasis webifiers, mwd |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 23:54:00 -
[1179] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:Drones are terrible for pvp *Cough* *Cough* Domi pilot <<<
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 00:44:00 -
[1180] - Quote
umm no?
drones in pvp can be quite formidable
everything used in a proper context has a place in pvp. |
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 00:47:00 -
[1181] - Quote
Random thought (partly as a result of Hungry Eyes' infuriating Proteus wankery). Why the hell is the Proteus so damn slow?
With Localised Injectors (which gives the most speed out of the Gallente propulsion sybsystems) the speed of a naked Proteus (with L5 skills) is only 238m/s. That's slower than every T2 Gallente cruiser bar the Arazu. The other subsystems are even worse, with two of them doing a paltry 188m/s (again, all L5s).
Once you start putting the mandatory plate(s) and trimarks on, it may as well not have engines at all.
Here it is against the other races' fastest propulsion subsystems (all L5 skills):
Loki - Chassis Optimisation: 297m/s Legion - Chassis Optimisation: 281m/s Proteus - Localised Injectors: 238m/s Tengu - Gravitational Capacitor: 231m/s
Seems a bit odd that the Proteus is only marginally faster than the Tengu, and significantly slower than the Legion (which in turn, is not much slower than a Loki). It's not like the Amarr are renowned for their mobility, is it?
The Proteus was overlooked in the Crucible blaster boat speed buff. It looks like it do with a serious boost. An immobile brick with massive ehp and a long point is a bit too limited a role for a T3 ship. Give it a serious speed buff. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 01:15:00 -
[1182] - Quote
Strategic Cruisers are really BCs in everything but sig radius. IE, they are all pretty ******* slow. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 01:25:00 -
[1183] - Quote
I don't buy that. The other 3 SCs are all a fair bit faster than their respective races' HACs (with the exception of the Vagabond, but that's... well, a Vagabond).
The Proteus is the odd one out. It's like the propulsion subsystems for Gallente and Amarr got mixed up. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:26:00 -
[1184] - Quote
On the other hand Proteus is the single T3 that can get the most insane buffer tank sporting 400k EHP or more - Maybe they accidentally switched a few stats between the Proteus and the Legion? |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:40:00 -
[1185] - Quote
We fly T3's on the daily and I think Pattern will back me up when I say that I have never heard anyone on comms talk about getting any of the T3's, Loki included, for their awesome speed.
T3's are like BC's with hac resists. That is why folks fly them. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:16:00 -
[1186] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:We fly T3's on the daily and I think Pattern will back me up when I say that I have never heard anyone on comms talk about getting any of the T3's, Loki included, for their awesome speed.
Well, obviously. But speed is still very important, particularly for a ship that in fleets is almost always employed as a tackler, and when flying solo as a blasterboat.
Speed may not be the deciding factor in buying or fitting one, or incorporating one into a fleet, but speed still has a significant impact on its effectiveness. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:26:00 -
[1187] - Quote
stop talking about t3's u scrub. u dont know what youre saying, and thread has been completely derailed. i posted that fuckin fit to show you that rails work on the Proteus. |
Vincent Gaines
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:44:00 -
[1188] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:stop talking about t3's u scrub. u dont know what youre saying, and thread has been completely derailed. i posted that fuckin fit to show you that rails work on the Proteus.
there's a difference between having rails work on the ship, and rails being effective on the ship.
you have yet to address the latter. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 18:04:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:stop talking about t3's u scrub. u dont know what youre saying, and thread has been completely derailed. i posted that fuckin fit to show you that rails work on the Proteus.
You were talking about (at great length) one rail-using shitfit. I'm talking about the balancing of a hybrid ship in the wider context. This is a thread about balancing hybrids and hybrid ships, is it not? |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 18:31:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:stop talking about t3's u scrub. u dont know what youre saying, and thread has been completely derailed. i posted that fuckin fit to show you that rails work on the Proteus. You were talking about (at great length) one rail-using shitfit. I'm talking about the balancing of a hybrid ship in the wider context. This is a thread about balancing hybrids and hybrid ships, is it not?
Yup, should really get back on topic here.
Back to medium railguns, with the introduction of these new tier 3 BCs which most of them kite, will be it beneficial to start using more medium railguns? I like the idea of rails and other weapon systems to force longer range eWAR ships off the field, but with the current crucible changes, will the rail change be enough? |
|
Vincent Gaines
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 19:34:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Back to medium railguns, with the introduction of these new tier 3 BCs which most of them kite, will be it beneficial to start using more medium railguns? I like the idea of rails and other weapon systems to force longer range eWAR ships off the field, but with the current crucible changes, will the rail change be enough?
I can tell you about the Eagle, and Tengu
An Eagle can't fit a full rack of 250s, even with AWU V.
Tracking sucks and even when at 110-150 can't hit. I haven't tried the new changes with an Eagle yet, however with the bonuses I think they should change.
The Tangrail did okay. It was hard to tell when I tested it on SISI. Not as much range but it had a decent tank and was cap stable. Horribly eclipsed as anything viable in PvP versus missile launchers.
If the Eagle is supposed to irritate EWAR, snipe frigs and destroyers the damage bonus might be better off changing to 7.5% tracking bonus per level. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 19:41:00 -
[1192] - Quote
Railgun tracking should be doubled:P |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:00:00 -
[1193] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:Drones are terrible for pvp *Cough* *Cough* Domi pilot <<<
That guy never met some fleet of sentry domis spider rep/remote energy |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 00:53:00 -
[1194] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:On the other hand Proteus is the single T3 that can get the most insane buffer tank sporting 400k EHP or more - Maybe they accidentally switched a few stats between the Proteus and the Legion? **** with the proteuses buffer tank and toys will be thrown out of the pram in a big way. Remember that survival statergy thing i mentioned? Thats what it looks like. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 02:36:00 -
[1195] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Seems a bit odd that the Proteus is only marginally faster than the Tengu, and significantly slower than the Legion (which in turn, is not much slower than a Loki). It's not like the Amarr are renowned for their mobility, is it?
The Proteus was overlooked in the Crucible blaster boat speed buff. It looks like it do with a serious boost. An immobile brick with massive ehp and a long point is a bit too limited a role for a T3 ship. Give it a serious speed buff.
that is stupid indeed. Why the hell is amarr faster? That does not make sense, CCP, plz fix/
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 02:47:00 -
[1196] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Seems a bit odd that the Proteus is only marginally faster than the Tengu, and significantly slower than the Legion (which in turn, is not much slower than a Loki). It's not like the Amarr are renowned for their mobility, is it?
The Proteus was overlooked in the Crucible blaster boat speed buff. It looks like it do with a serious boost. An immobile brick with massive ehp and a long point is a bit too limited a role for a T3 ship. Give it a serious speed buff.
that is stupid indeed. Why the hell is amarr faster? That does not make sense, CCP, plz fix/
Ho dammit very sure every sub combination were tested to arrive at this awesome conclusion right? Because atm the only way to make that legion be faster is by sacrificing another stat of those propulsion subs , unless I'm wrong and taking in account subs fitted only, no mods prop whatsoever.
What subs did you fitted for each? -I mean you can say a lot of stuff but without numbers, and from what I can see on SISI, my prot is not bad, slightly better than before. + definitive changes aren't sat since CCP tallest is about to improve ship by ship what's needed to make those work properly.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 02:52:00 -
[1197] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:On the other hand Proteus is the single T3 that can get the most insane buffer tank sporting 400k EHP or more
OC every time I use my Proteus I fit HG slaves + hardwirings +fleet boost + 25M boosters !!
How is this fair when I fly my poor tengu tanking like a king with crystals + booster+sub+amplifier+fleet boost+hardwirings+passive regen...
Indeed this is not fair ;(
|
Justin Cody
T.A.L.O.N. Company Psychotic Tendencies.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 04:32:00 -
[1198] - Quote
The problem with rails is that they were designed to fight at a distance that no longer is workable (thanks to the 250km locking cap) and insta-probing to warp your close range fleet on them.
Rails on cruisers and BC's can't compete with a similar alpha fleet because you can't fit a tank hard enough to actually compensate for the alpha fleet's alpha.
A rokh is one exception...but still blasters with some remote boosting can hit with null for 600 dps or so at 80km...
ranged fighting is outdated and has been nerf'd to hell against caldari/gallente rail boats in favor of lasers and artillery at what used to be medium but are now relatively long ranges that you cannot warp to with probes unless you already have the warp-in on the fleet or titan cyno bridge, |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 11:40:00 -
[1199] - Quote
the solution is simple: let's extend locking range and warp-to range. That's makes the battlefield bigger, that's only fun. I can easily set up my Rokh to hit at 280 km, and that's not even all lvl 5's. Gun's optimal exceeding your locking range is silly. People warping to your sniper is also silly. |
Sirius Cassiopeiae
Perkone Caldari State
94
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 12:09:00 -
[1200] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:the solution is simple: let's extend locking range and warp-to range. That's makes the battlefield bigger, that's only fun. I can easily set up my Rokh to hit at 280 km, and that's not even all lvl 5's. Gun's optimal exceeding your locking range is silly. People warping to your sniper is also silly.
THIS, THIS, THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS!!! |
|
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 13:12:00 -
[1201] - Quote
I'm all for expanding the battlespace, but rail dps only tickles from those sorts of ranges. Rails need another serious damage boost, to the point where they do more dps than beams. It's the only way to make them at all viable. |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 02:17:00 -
[1202] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:the solution is simple: let's extend locking range and warp-to range. That's makes the battlefield bigger, that's only fun. I can easily set up my Rokh to hit at 280 km, and that's not even all lvl 5's. Gun's optimal exceeding your locking range is silly. People warping to your sniper is also silly.
This is why hybrid balance is so intertangled with everything else. We can play with hybrid statistics all day long, or we theorize about game mechanic changes that would breathe new life into railguns.
Quote:I'm all for expanding the battlespace, but rail dps only tickles from those sorts of ranges. Rails need another serious damage boost, to the point where they do more dps than beams. It's the only way to make them at all viable. I think railguns could be made more unique by decreasing the damage penalty for long range ammos. That way 425mm Railguns would do more damage than tachs at long ranges (say over 125k), but within that range Tachs would do more. Currently a Rokh will only outdmg an Apoc if the Apoc is out of its optimal, and this happens around 175km range (which creates that warp-to problem like stated above).
EDIT: I forgot about the damage buff to rails, it affects the numbers, and I'm unsure what the current FOTM sniper is (arty abaddon?) Either way, the problem is still there. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
138
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 02:37:00 -
[1203] - Quote
Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part. |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos
264
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 13:11:00 -
[1204] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part.
Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 14:43:00 -
[1205] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part. Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed. so change them |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 14:49:00 -
[1206] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part. Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed. so change them Exactly, designing spaceships is not rocket-science. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 17:57:00 -
[1207] - Quote
nobody cares about sniping. make all hybrids viable at close-mid range, and rails further out. start with that first. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 18:31:00 -
[1208] - Quote
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
narrow minded person trying to say their opinion is everyones.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 18:33:00 -
[1209] - Quote
not my fault you cant see whats going on. im saying nobody cares about sniping UNTIL the basics are fixed. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 19:52:00 -
[1210] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
narrow minded person trying to say their opinion is everyones.
Your posts still aren't constructive... |
|
Ziester
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 00:35:00 -
[1211] - Quote
Oh sweet Moses, X-Mas before the time ? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 01:00:00 -
[1212] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:On the other hand Proteus is the single T3 that can get the most insane buffer tank sporting 400k EHP or more - Maybe they accidentally switched a few stats between the Proteus and the Legion?
Screw that. Even if it is a Tech 3 ships we need at least 1 fly blaster boat to make up for all the crap ones. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:04:00 -
[1213] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Seems a bit odd that the Proteus is only marginally faster than the Tengu, and significantly slower than the Legion (which in turn, is not much slower than a Loki). It's not like the Amarr are renowned for their mobility, is it?
The Proteus was overlooked in the Crucible blaster boat speed buff. It looks like it do with a serious boost. An immobile brick with massive ehp and a long point is a bit too limited a role for a T3 ship. Give it a serious speed buff.
that is stupid indeed. Why the hell is amarr faster? That does not make sense, CCP, plz fix/ Ho dammit very sure every sub combination were tested to arrive at this awesome conclusion right? Because atm the only way to make that legion be faster is by sacrificing another stat of those propulsion subs , unless I'm wrong and taking in account subs fitted only, no mods prop whatsoever. What subs did you fitted for each? -I mean you can say a lot of stuff but without numbers, and from what I can see on SISI, my prot is not bad, slightly better than before. + definitive changes aren't sat since CCP tallest is about to improve ship by ship what's needed to make those work properly.
People currently fit AC onto hybrid ships. Making the ships even better just means people will still fit AC onto hybrid ships. Over all the ship will still be more effective but the reason this happens and will continue to happen is that hybrids suck and still will after the patch. |
Ziester
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 16:03:00 -
[1214] - Quote
All those changes seem yummy, but I don't see anything related to buffing the range of blasters. Wasn't that the main issue blasters had originally ? |
LordBison
Heaven's Harvesters LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:00:00 -
[1215] - Quote
The final changes still leave hybrids neglected blasters will not get in range despite only a single digit /ms buff? how does a few ms change anything? Tallest is being lazy into actively changing this stuff... how many updates? 3 changes since the announcement? And yet he doesn't state a single reason why these teeny tiny changes benefit certain roles because of what he sees is lacking. We can see what is being changed and what they can apply to but I want a good reason from CCP's perspective into what intended roles hybrids are intended for. I have been flying Sniper Rokh's in defending systems and yet i see very little to benefit from long range ammo like spike. I can barely do any DPS anything at 200km (optimal) when they come to the gate. Against other BS's at that range a huge laughable DPS that they can just ignore me. (Switched to dictors since) |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:36:00 -
[1216] - Quote
The patch notes state that Hail has had its falloff penalty removed completly.
Can someone please confirm this to be the case? If so can Void be changed as well please. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 18:26:00 -
[1217] - Quote
Ziester wrote:All those changes seem yummy, but I don't see anything related to buffing the range of blasters. Wasn't that the main issue blasters had originally ? Yes. And it went entirely unaddressed. Makes you wonder what they're doing at CCP....
Alticus C Bear wrote:The patch notes state that Hail has had its falloff penalty removed completly.
Can someone please confirm this to be the case? If so can Void be changed as well please. Does it matter? Even if Hail sucked, projectile users still had plenty of "explosive" kick in RF Fusion. It blows my mind to the nth degree. Crucible was supposed to balance hybrids, yet this one single change to Hail is going to outshine all of the hybrid "buffs" and make projectiles even better than "the best" they already are. I've seen reports of reducing the falloff penalty, and I've seen reports of the penalty being removed completely. I haven't bothered to check it since I'm more interested in THE TOPIC AT HAND. Still, how can you not laugh when, in an effort to buff hybrids, all that really happened was projectiles got better? It's become apparent in the last week, this thread and its theme is a running joke by design. It's fitting really, since hybrids will remain the laughing stock of EVE Online weaponry. This will never change if CCP retains the broken and illogical philosophies of dominant Minmatar speed versus the dichotome of speed-penalized, laughable range, and subpar armor-tanking blaster boats. |
Tub Chil
Heretic University Heretic Nation
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 18:49:00 -
[1218] - Quote
Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.
so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff? |
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 19:19:00 -
[1219] - Quote
Tub Chil wrote:Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.
so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff? exactly, what the hell? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 19:44:00 -
[1220] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Tub Chil wrote:Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.
so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff? exactly, what the hell?
I believe he's saying that 20km + ranges were possible with autocannons using RF ammo and some TEs/TCs (making Hail a poor choice) while blasters never had/have anything close to this...not exactly made in the clearest manner but it still stands as fact.
EDIT: I should add the context of this post is with medium weapons. Still, the same problems exist with large turrets as well. |
|
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 21:56:00 -
[1221] - Quote
Tub Chil wrote:Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.
so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff?
Because Talest is either predudice and mostly uses Winmitar characters, or due to his holiday before the patch change freeze he missed the boat. Corruption or incompitence, take your pick.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:09:00 -
[1222] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Tub Chil wrote:Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.
so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff? Because Talest is either predudice and mostly uses Winmitar characters, or due to his holiday before the patch change freeze he missed the boat. Corruption or incompitence, take your pick. It is more likely that for now they just patched a hole and decided they will properly fix it later, because release date is son and a proper fix requires real game-changing stuff. So for now we just have better hybrids. |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:23:00 -
[1223] - Quote
I think the changes are a good start, but we need to see how they will affect tranquilly before anymore changes are added. The effect of running new T2 skrimish links to boost their speed along side the blaster tracking and damage and cap buffs may produce some interesting results.
So much is changing in this patch, so small steps at this point is for the better. |
Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
232
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:24:00 -
[1224] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:Ganthrithor wrote:Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part. Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed. so change them Exactly, designing spaceships is not rocket-science.
Well played sir. I see what you did there. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 22:43:00 -
[1225] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:I think the changes are a good start, but we need to see how they will affect tranquilly before anymore changes are added. The effect of running new T2 skrimish links to boost their speed along side the blaster tracking and damage and cap buffs may produce some interesting results.
So much is changing in this patch, so small steps at this point is for the better.
I almost think they need to go along the lines of increasing the optimal of AC and reducing their falloff to maintain effective max range, reducing their tracking so they dont hit as well at very short range. This might give Blasters a niche in being able to get under the other races guns. Currently AC have about the same tracking as hybrids after the hybrid buff. Buffing a weapon system to only have parity in an area that is supposed to excell in is not exactly doing it properly.
It would be nice to see all four races used to a roughly even ratio but alas we still wont, Mini and Amarr will still be the races of 0.0. Hybrids and Missiles just have too small a use.
Here's hopping they will fix it in 2014 when Hybrids get looked at again. |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 23:16:00 -
[1226] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Jaigar wrote:I think the changes are a good start, but we need to see how they will affect tranquilly before anymore changes are added. The effect of running new T2 skrimish links to boost their speed along side the blaster tracking and damage and cap buffs may produce some interesting results.
So much is changing in this patch, so small steps at this point is for the better. I almost think they need to go along the lines of increasing the optimal of AC and reducing their falloff to maintain effective max range, reducing their tracking so they dont hit as well at very short range. This might give Blasters a niche in being able to get under the other races guns. Currently AC have about the same tracking as hybrids after the hybrid buff. Buffing a weapon system to only have parity in an area that is supposed to excell in is not exactly doing it properly. It would be nice to see all four races used to a roughly even ratio but alas we still wont, Mini and Amarr will still be the races of 0.0. Hybrids and Missiles just have too small a use. Here's hopping they will fix it in 2014 when Hybrids get looked at again.
What are you smoking? Neutron Blaster II= .051 tracking, 800mm= .043 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 17:35:00 -
[1227] - Quote
Quote:* Hail (all sizes): Reduced falloff penalty from 50% to 25% So... patch is live and Hail has no falloff penalty.... |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 19:03:00 -
[1228] - Quote
Archare wrote:Quote:* Hail (all sizes): Reduced falloff penalty from 50% to 25% So... patch is live and Hail has no falloff penalty....
LOL!
How can you not laugh!?
So, for whatever reason, if I get tired of using RF fusion, I can use Hail!?
Seriously, how did this happen? YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BUFF HYBRIDS AND YOU BUFFED PROJECTILES!
It's a damned circus, I tell you. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 20:05:00 -
[1229] - Quote
all bow to the minmatar lords. what's thy bidding ....
So aretha is still using a shotgun but u. bolt switched rifle with a tankkiller mashine gun :p |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 22:57:00 -
[1230] - 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? |
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 23:43:00 -
[1231] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:all bow to the minmatar lords. what's thy bidding ....
So aretha is still using a shotgun but u. bolt switched rifle with a tankkiller mashine gun :p
Don't foget that the shotgun is complicated to use and needs a lot of Arethas brain capacity (CPU), it is heavy to equip (Power grid) and hard to use (cap usage) while Bolt has an easy to use lightweight tank killing riffle :)
I still prefer AC over Blasters on an Ishtar, more range, less CPU, less PG and CAP free while I can also choose damage type easily. ACs just support drones for PVE better than Blasters and you can use a better fit becouse more PG and CPU left for other modules. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 04:09:00 -
[1232] - Quote
how about adding a big boost to gallente hull resistance as they have to fight at close range |
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 13:10:00 -
[1233] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:I think railguns could be made more unique by decreasing the damage penalty for long range ammos. Interesting, but you can't do that without buffing blasters the same way. Is that a desirable goal? Maybe, maybe not- not wanting to debate that.
I have just had a thought about how you could make it work for one and not the other, though.
Give hybrids seperate damage modifiers for kinetic and thermal damage, then give close range ammo high % thermal and long range high % kinetic. Example (n.b. I just pulled these numbers out of my ass, they're not going to be balanced ):
Blasters: 1.5x thermal, 0.5x kinetic Rails: 0.5x thermal, 1.5x kinetic
(This is before the gun's normal damage mod is applied. Or after. Whatever. Multiplication is commutative.)
Divide the ammos into 4 range bands, with a high therm/high kin variant in each:
-30% optimal
Antimatter L: 32t + 16k (48); 56 w/Blasters, 40 w/Rails Lead L: 24t + 24k (48); 48 w/Blasters, 48 w/Rails
+0% optimal
Plutonium L: 25 2/3t + 16 1/3k (42); 46 2/3 w/Blasters, 37 1/3 w/Rails Iridium L: 18 2/3t + 23 1/3k (42); 39 2/3 w/Blasters, 44 1/3 w/Rails
+30% optimal
Uranium L: 20t + 16k (36); 38 w/Blasters, 34 w/Rails Tungsten L: 14t + 22k (36); 32 w/Blasters, 40 w/Rails
+60% optimal
Thorium L: 15t + 15k (30); 30 w/Blasters, 30 w/Rails Iron L: 10t + 20k (30); 25 w/Blasters, 35 w/Rails
Advantages:
GÇó More gradual damage falloff with longer range ammo for rails, as discussed above GÇó Stresses the racial damage types (Gallente/Blasters/Thermal; Caldari/Rails/Kinetic) GÇó Hell, it even works fluff-wise; rails shoot the ammo as shells and blasters as fireballs
Disadvantages:
GÇó More or less precludes any of the more interesting ammo-adjustment solutions GÇó There's probably a great gaping hole somewhere I'm not seeing. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 13:35:00 -
[1234] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: * Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking.
I hope you won't just buff active tanking to the level which will dumb down small-scale PvP ever further, but rather address passive tank and current EHP stupidity instead, will you?
Passive tank needs more penalties and/or less EHP values.
You'll surely need to revise your Dominion changes to arties as well. I do hope this side-task won't prevent you from reaching your goal Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 13:50:00 -
[1235] - Quote
Indeed multiple things will have to be looked into, however a straight buff to active repairing is exactly what is needed. Active repairing doesn't only stink because buffer tanks are better, but also because ships today are generating far more dps than they did a few years ago.
People currently using faction active shield tanks with a full set of hi-grade crystals are having fun in pvp, so perhaps we shuold make crystals do something else and give everybody the feeling of of working active tanks by simply making active reps generate x % more hitpoints pr cycle.
Shield and armor in general are very well balanced with armor having higher resist, using less cap pr hitpoint with shield boosters being nice burst tanks, invuls able to be overheated and EATING cap... Also armor has 1600mm plates which are giving more protection than the biggest shield extender. At the same time passive shield recharge was nerfed a lot in the past.
If anything I would look into fitting and drawbacks of buffer tanks/active tanks, but a straight buff is indeed a very valid buff.
Pinky |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 14:20:00 -
[1236] - Quote
Increasing repair rates is exactly what they should avoid at all costs.
Since 2006 there's already way too much tank around and this got even worse after introduction of rigs. Generic damage output increased by about 15% (faction ammo) while tank has received massive boosts - several straight HP boosts in 2006 (x2...x3, depending on ship class) plus introduction of current rigs, which promote tank over anything else.
Shooting at stuff and seeing it repping back or slowly losing few pixels of lifebar is not only dull and stupid, but also promotes blobs since it's virtually impossible to kill anything before reinforcements arrive or the situation changes in some other way.
As I said above, address EHP instead. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 15:31:00 -
[1237] - Quote
Active reps doesn't promote blobs - having 100x more people online at the same time than 5 years ago promotes blobs...
But yes rigs has side effects in a negative direction. Also EHP is strong, however CCP wanted to prolong the fights and I agree this buff is in fact working as intended. We just need active tanks to be in line. Active tanks have many reasonable flaws (easier alphaed, weak against neuts, limited space for cap boosters etc). nerfing hitpoints will be counterproductive to the CCP stated inventions where boosting active tanks will promote a viable alternative. Ofcourse I'm not ruling out several tweaks on buffer but with the amount of dps coming from a single BC these days there is nothing wrong with buffing active tanks to match.
The people using active shield tanks in lowsec with implants have great fun and if they seem overpowered it might be because they are often using faction battleships with faction equipment supported with fleet boosters and often logistics/falcons as backup.
Why not make sure everybody can have this fun without needing to pay billions for faction items and implants only to barely making it worth it?
Giving every active tank a boost in hitpoints generated while changing crystal implants to something else will give EVERYBODY an equal oportunity to have a viable active tank without riscing their implants has multiple benefits : 1,5b isk spent on implants will no longer give people the same advantage as now, people might use active tanks out of empire/lowsec without fearing loss of implants to bubbles and people will no longer be forced into faction equipment just to be competible with T2 buffer tanks.
Yes EVERYTHING and especially rigs will need a look into, however I completely disagree with not touching active reps as I believe the hitpoint buff did exactly what it was designed for - CCP just failed to locate all consequences and will need to adress them now (rigs being too strong, buffertank too easy to fit for their HP compared to active tanks and as I mentioned the need for active reps to be repairing more)
Pinky |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 15:40:00 -
[1238] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: Giving every active tank a boost in hitpoints generated while changing crystal implants to something else will give EVERYBODY an equal oportunity to have a viable active tank without riscing their implants has multiple benefits : 1,5b isk spent on implants will no longer give people the same advantage as now, people might use active tanks out of empire/lowsec without fearing loss of implants to bubbles and people will no longer be forced into faction equipment just to be competible with T2 buffer tanks.
That's slaves which need to be turned into armour-rep bonus implants. Don't fix something which isn't broken. Crystals don't affect capital mods and thus are fine.
What you propose is just silly. Why exactly EVE should drop its fundamental rule risk vs. reward and promote those unwilling to risk their implants? Carebears are already very safe while flying within their endless blobs with gazillion logistic ships on stand-by. There's no need in dragging everyone down to that level.
Enough of this communism. People are NOT equal just like human races are NOT equal etc. And there's no need in this artificial equalizing you propose. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 18:35:00 -
[1239] - Quote
I hope to god CCP is listening, and players for that matter. One will have irrefutable evidence and the other will be able to make a quick buck playing the market.
Hail is going to skyrocket in value. You took away the one thing that makes it less favorable than RF fusion. Now Hail provides the already-insane effective range projectiles are capable of via lack of falloff penalty, and it will hit harder than RF fusion.
There is only one thing to note here. All you did was extend the effective range. Three months from now, you'll be wondering why no one is using hybrids, despite your laughable "buffs" to them. Hail will be selling like hot cakes regardless of its grossly inflated price. Why? Because range is the key here. Range is what you didn't give hybrids, and it's what you gave to Hail. Don't claim you don't know how to balance hybrids months from now. I just told you how. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 18:38:00 -
[1240] - Quote
risc vs reward is a nice legacy, however so is the concept of diminishing returns and currently crystal sets will give the rich people a huge advantage. Also because it is a valuable asset plugged into your clone most people given this option will only use them in parts of Eve where they have a little risc of losing them...
Making slaves work as crystals will solve very few issues compared to fixing it the other way around. Maybe crystals shouldn't be changed to work like slaves, but for sure slaves should never be changed to work like crystals.
Pinky |
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 20:01:00 -
[1241] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:risc vs reward is a nice legacy, however so is the concept of diminishing returns and currently crystal sets will give the rich people a huge advantage. Also because it is a valuable asset plugged into your clone most people given this option will only use them in parts of Eve where they have a little risc of losing them...
Making slaves work as crystals will solve very few issues compared to fixing it the other way around. Maybe crystals shouldn't be changed to work like slaves, but for sure slaves should never be changed to work like crystals.
Pinky There's already a concept of diminishing returns in place there since LG Crystals cost a fraction of HG ones and provide half the bonus.
It's a total heresy to believe Slaves boosting EHP by nearly 50% are OK while Crystals which provide 52% increase for repairing rate are OP.
By your logic we should get rid of ALL pirate sets altogether along with the removal of faction ships. Only these measures can make everyone equal.
Edit: Off topic part removed, CCP Phantom Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 06:27:00 -
[1242] - Quote
I find it interesting that people talk about the range of other weapons platforms and expect this to be the main issue. Blasters in particular have always been a close range weapon that is supposed to do excessive damage at close quarters. No one has ever mentioned an issue when your target is within range of your guns but rather before.
The issue with blasters and armor tanked gallente and caldari ships in general (Rokh, Megathron, etc) has always been GETTING to your target and locking them down. Once their in your clutches it's pretty much good night Irene.
I find the solution rather simple. Give a web bonus in range not strength. Make it to where a Megathron can web out to 25 km and at least give it a chance to close in and lock the target down. The reason why the Vindicator is so popular is really because of the ability to lock it's target down with increased web strength.
If you truly want blaster platforms to be viable in a kite fest such as todays combat situations always are, you need to give the slower, brawlers an ability to actually catch something foolish enough to get within it's clutches. You wanna warp disrupt a Megathron? You risk being webbed.
it would certainly make for an interesting element to cat and mouse if you ask me.
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 10:22:00 -
[1243] - Quote
25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.
As for the risk of being webbed by gallente boats, it's already there. Just don't be stupid and don't stand still - pilot your damn ship instead.
I don't deny some stuff needs tweaking (shield rigs and extenders need to have speed penalties intead of foolish signature ones), but asking for such a long web is just way too much. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 12:17:00 -
[1244] - Quote
Iit is the range from 20 km to 30 which is the problem for blaster boats. We need stopping power or range or just continue flying Canes and Lokis :p |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 12:22:00 -
[1245] - Quote
That's why I say shield overtanking should be penalized as much as armour overtanking - i.e. making your ship slower. In this case typical Cane losts some of its appeal. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 12:51:00 -
[1246] - Quote
First : I am not into making anyone equal or making shield/armor the same. But I want everybody to have a competitive balanced game that does't give billionaires a huge advantage in active shield tanking or passive armor buffer. Especially the first because acitve shield tanking is way underpowered compared to buffer tanks unless you actually invest billions in implants AND faction modules. Spread the love, diversify the game play...
Second : After having clearly asked against anything that brought shield and armor tanks closer together (even if this is not what my proposal would do) you just asked for shield tanking to get the same penalties as armor tanking? Your logic is flawed compared to why you don't like any other suggestions...
Pinky |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 13:17:00 -
[1247] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:That's why I say shield overtanking should be penalized as much as armour overtanking - i.e. making your ship slower. In this case typical Cane losts some of its appeal. yeah make caldari even more slower --> they will start move backward ^^ hopefully faster than matar :D |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 13:55:00 -
[1248] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:That's why I say shield overtanking should be penalized as much as armour overtanking - i.e. making your ship slower. In this case typical Cane losts some of its appeal. yeah make caldari even more slower --> they will start move backward ^^ hopefully faster than matar :D Even slower? Have you flown amarr actually?
There's nothing wrong with making buffer-tanked Caldari and Matari slower. Matari will still be ahead of any other race while Caldari will stand on pair with Amarr in this regard. Gallente - somewhere in between Matari and the other two. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 13:59:00 -
[1249] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:That's why I say shield overtanking should be penalized as much as armour overtanking - i.e. making your ship slower. In this case typical Cane losts some of its appeal. yeah make caldari even more slower --> they will start move backward ^^ hopefully faster than matar :D Even slower? Have you flown amarr actually? There's nothing wrong with making buffer-tanked Caldari and Matari slower. Matari will still be ahead of any other race while Caldari will stand on pair with Amarr in this regard. Gallente - somewhere in between Matari and the other two. yeah in speed maybe but not in ehp or signature... dumb amarr |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 14:40:00 -
[1250] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:I find it interesting that people talk about the range of other weapons platforms and expect this to be the main issue. Blasters in particular have always been a close range weapon that is supposed to do excessive damage at close quarters. No one has ever mentioned an issue when your target is within range of your guns but rather before.
The issue with blasters and armor tanked gallente and caldari ships in general (Rokh, Megathron, etc) has always been GETTING to your target and locking them down. Once their in your clutches it's pretty much good night Irene.
I find the solution rather simple. Give a web bonus in range not strength. Make it to where a Megathron can web out to 25 km and at least give it a chance to close in and lock the target down. The reason why the Vindicator is so popular is really because of the ability to lock it's target down with increased web strength.
If you truly want blaster platforms to be viable in a kite fest such as todays combat situations always are, you need to give the slower, brawlers an ability to actually catch something foolish enough to get within it's clutches. You wanna warp disrupt a Megathron? You risk being webbed.
it would certainly make for an interesting element to cat and mouse if you ask me.
It would, but I think it's rather silly to suggest hybrids get their value from yet another module. There are two problems with using webs to bandaid hybrids:
1) realistically, this only fixes blasters and does nothing for rails 2) if I decided to trick out my ship in mid slots, foregoing a web and just using a scram/disrupt, I'm right back to underperforming hybrids.
I cannot stand using other modules to bandaid poor modules. It doesn't do anything but mask the underlying problems. No, hybrids need to be fixed. |
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 15:19:00 -
[1251] - Quote
I still think this thread is too cluttered with suggestions that just mask the underlying issues.
PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION CCP! THIS IS THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM WITH HYBRIDS!
Lets say we gave blasters an effective range that allowed TEs to boost it into the 20-25km range, much like autocannons and scorched pulses.
Let's also say we gave railguns respectable alpha damage and increased its dps to match either artillery or beams.
This is, by the way, pretty much what the playerbase has been asking for in this thread, as best as I can interpret.
Given these changes were made live, would I use hybrids? HELL NO!
Why not?
-projectiles are cap-free -lasers have instant ammo reload -ships with projectile bonuses provide the pilot with the best speed in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic -ships with laser bonuses provide the pilot with the best EHP in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic
If you are not willing to give Gallente/Caldari hybrid ships a native, passive, defensive mechanic, IN ADDITION TO GIVING HYBRID TURRETS MATCHING DPS AND RANGE STATS TO MAKE THEM EQUALLY EFFECTIVE IN COMBAT, then you WILL NOT entice pilots to choose hybrids.
The only thing I learned from the hybrid changes in Crucible is CCP doesn't understand the underlying problem. Well, here it is.
Make hybrids fun. Make them USEFUL. Make sure blasterboat pilots don't have to play the "all-in" game by committing to a fight without any option to run away. Make sure railguns are WORTH the trouble of costing cap, plagued with reload timers, stuck on weak ships, have fixed damage type. Hybrids still have all cons and no pros. You have yet to address this in Crucible. |
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 16:54:00 -
[1252] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic..
I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx.
Faction webs such as the True Sansha give a bonus to distance not strength. You forget you still have to reach your target even if it's webbed out to 30km in a battleship at only 60% strength.
The only ship I see this being overpowered would be the Vindicator so I wouldn't have the bonus applied to it since it already has a bonus to web strength.
Fon Revedhort wrote:As for the risk of being webbed by gallente boats, it's already there. Just don't be stupid and don't stand still - pilot your damn ship instead..
Wrong. The risk is within 10,000 km which we all know no Minny pilot dares get into especially with the proper gyro and tracking enhancer fitting. Being able to kite your target out to 30km + is the new norm. Orbit, shoot, repeat. That's all it is.
The web range bonus would at least give some Gallente hulls half a chance to reach their target.
Fon Revedhort wrote:I don't deny some stuff needs tweaking (shield rigs and extenders need to have speed penalties intead of foolish signature ones), but asking for such a long web is just way too much.
Oh please.... We all know it's always been closing range and keeping it with gallente is the problem 95% of the time. Your web can't reach your target to slow their kiting and you fit null which hits out to 28km but they still orbit out to 30km +. What happens? You die plain and simple.
|
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:02:00 -
[1253] - Quote
Magosian wrote:It would, but I think it's rather silly to suggest hybrids get their value from yet another module. There are two problems with using webs to bandaid hybrids:
Value? Blasters have ALWAYS been a short range weapon and always should be. The second your change that you've taken away their niche which is close close face melting dps.
Magosian wrote:1) realistically, this only fixes blasters and does nothing for rails
We're focusing on Blasters. Please try to keep up okay?
Magosian wrote:2) if I decided to trick out my ship in mid slots, foregoing a web and just using a scram/disrupt, I'm right back to underperforming hybrids.
What are you talking about? The typical fitting for mids on a Megathron are an MWD, Scram, Web, Cap Injector. Nothing has changed here. And please explain to me how exactly giving a web range bonus to a Megathron hull gimps blasters?
Have you heard nothing of the discussion's over the past 3 months on hybrids. It's not only the guns themselves but the hulls in which they are applied to that need changing as well.
Magosian wrote:I cannot stand using other modules to bandaid poor modules. It doesn't do anything but mask the underlying problems. No, hybrids need to be fixed.
Blasters are working as intended now with the patch update Magosian. A 3 mag stab mega with Void and Ogre's now pumps out 1406 dps with neutrons. The dps is now more than sufficient. Blasters recieved a tracking buff and fitting requirement reduction which is more than ample.
However it has always been applying these weapons to a hull that has hardly any chance of catching it's faster agile target that is the underlying issue.
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:18:00 -
[1254] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.. I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx. 25 km with free tech2 modules? What I'm saying is: throw in some isk and gang-bonuses and you'll end up with insanity of 50 km webs. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:24:00 -
[1255] - Quote
[quote=Magosian]I still think this thread is too cluttered with suggestions that just mask the underlying issues.
PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION CCP! THIS IS THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM WITH HYBRIDS!
Lets say we gave blasters an effective range that allowed TEs to boost it into the 20-25km range, much like autocannons and scorched pulses.
God no.... Just.. no... Once you do that you've effectively made blasters nothing more than an over glorified auto cannon. How many of these tracking enhancers would you see on a Megathron? How much would it's dps be gimped? And would the tracking be sufficient at 30 km? I doubt it.
Once you gave blasters range you just showed how ridiculous your ideas are like 95% of the people who whine about blasters being bad. You want a 30 km kite fest like Minny and that just doesn't happen nor should it with Blasters. Ever.
[quote=MagosianLet's also say we gave railguns respectable alpha damage and increased its dps to match either artillery or beams.
Buffing Rails alpha is needed. I agree.
[quote=MagosianThis is, by the way, pretty much what the playerbase has been asking for in this thread, as best as I can interpret.
Playerbase? I don't want a range increase nor ever will with blasters. If I did, I'd just fly with perfectly skilled auto cannons like I can now. You fail to see that given their role, blasters are perfectly fine now. It is CLOSING range and keeping it with a fat armor plated ship that just doesn't cut it anymore unless you have designated tackle and a perfect warp in.
[quote=MagosianGiven these changes were made live, would I use hybrids? HELL NO!
Why not?
projectiles are cap-free -lasers have instant ammo reload -ships with projectile bonuses provide the pilot with the best speed in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic -ships with laser bonuses provide the pilot with the best EHP in the game; [u][b]this is a passive defensive mechanic
Lasers are also the most cap draining and cannot keep up a barrage for long. That's one major drawback. And your describing ships that have defined roles which are fine. Gallente have face melting dps and tracking with the Megathron. Minny have agility, and Amarr have awesome tanks.
[quote=MagosianIf you are not willing to give Gallente/Caldari hybrid ships a native, passive, defensive mechanic, IN ADDITION TO GIVING HYBRID TURRETS MATCHING DPS AND RANGE STATS TO MAKE THEM EQUALLY EFFECTIVE IN COMBAT, then you WILL NOT entice pilots to choose hybrids.
Passive defense mechanic? What are you talking about? See you want homogenous weapons platforms which will NEVER happen nor should it. God.. stop arguing you want Blasters to do 30 km range and KEEP their awesome dps... Just stop..
The only thing I learned from the hybrid changes in Crucible is CCP doesn't understand the underlying problem. Well, here it is.
Make hybrids fun. Make them USEFUL. Make sure blasterboat pilots don't have to play the "all-in" game by committing to a fight without any option to run away. Make sure railguns are WORTH the trouble of costing cap, plagued with reload timers, stuck on weak ships, have fixed damage type. Hybrids still have all cons and no pros. You have yet to address this in Crucible.
Oh jesus... All I hear is : I fly minny I wanna fly gallente and make it as EZ mode as minny so give me my cake and eat it too! Let me ask you have you ever flown Gallente?
Have you ever flown a armor plated Megathron, had to close range, manage cap, keep optimal and actually pilot the ship instead of just hitting orbit at 30km and drooling? I hardly think you have.
Gallente especially with Blasters have a totally different feel and tactic to doing what they do. Their very situational yet excel every time they are used for that purpose.
Okay NOW I know your a moron. "Make sure blasterboat pilots don't have to play the "all-in" game by committing to a fight without any option to run away."
Yep you have no clue how to fly blaster boats nor the attitude behind flying them. You commit, you KNOW your stuck, you go in with risk and hopefully come out battered but alive. THAT is the risk you take for doing face melting dps. It's been that way since beta and I hope to god never changes.
Just go back to flying Minny. You sound like a top notch pilot for them anyways... |
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:35:00 -
[1256] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.. I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx. 25 km with free tech2 modules? What I'm saying is: throw in some isk and gang-bonuses and you'll end up with insanity of 50 km webs.
Insanity? You still have to reach your target in an armor plated battleship that does 900 M/S genius from 50 KM away.... Need I spell out the total stupidity in trying to use that approach? The bonus to webs would be range only NOT strength. And like I mentioned before the Vindicator would not get one since it already has a strength bonus.
You also forget the best web out there does 60% strength. Not 90% like the old days. That's still a bit of wiggle room say for a nano'd Hurricane to get out before the battleship can close the extra 15Km to scram them. It's all situational, yet the web range bonus would give certain hulls half a chance to catch their target.
Now what if you fit dual webs? Well have a stacking penalty or only have the bonus apply to one module in the role bonus so that doesn't happen.
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:42:00 -
[1257] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Value? Blasters have ALWAYS been a short range weapon and always should be. The second your change that you've taken away their niche which is close close face melting dps.
Consider for a moment the philosophy you just stated is "correct" DOES NOT ACTUALLY WORK! And it never will work without highest speed and removal of atrocious speed penalties due to armor rigs and armor tanking. Conversely, you could address this with range.
Tara Read wrote:We're focusing on Blasters. Please try to keep up okay? Maybe you missed the title of the thread. How about you try and keep up.
Tara Read wrote:What are you talking about? The typical fitting for mids on a Megathron are an MWD, Scram, Web, Cap Injector. Nothing has changed here. And please explain to me how exactly giving a web range bonus to a Megathron hull gimps blasters?
Have you heard nothing of the discussion's over the past 3 months on hybrids. It's not only the guns themselves but the hulls in which they are applied to that need changing as well. I like how you omitted the part where I plainly say the ships need changing too:
"If you are not willing to give Gallente/Caldari hybrid ships a native, passive, defensive mechanic, IN ADDITION TO GIVING HYBRID TURRETS MATCHING DPS AND RANGE STATS TO MAKE THEM EQUALLY EFFECTIVE IN COMBAT, then you WILL NOT entice pilots to choose hybrids."
By focusing solely on the mega and using it as an example with a web, you're doing exactly what I said, which is using another module to mask the shortcomings and poor base stats of hybrids in general. This does nothing for a shield brut or a ferox, both of which SHOULD operate in effectiveness like a shield buffered and TE'd cane, i.e. without a web. Even with Crucible hybrid "buffs" they still do not. THAT is a far greater issue than some DPS value in print.
Tara Read wrote:Blasters are working as intended now with the patch update Magosian. A 3 mag stab mega with Void and Ogre's now pumps out 1406 dps with neutrons. The dps is now more than sufficient. Blasters recieved a tracking buff and fitting requirement reduction which is more than ample.
However it has always been applying these weapons to a hull that has hardly any chance of catching it's faster agile target that is the underlying issue.
EFT-warrioring DPS numbers is EXACTLY why nothing is getting fixed! Just because you get monstrous numbers on paper doesn't mean it works in the field. It's the entire problem with this thread, it's how hybrids went overlooked for so long, and it's exactly why Crucible changes to hybrids were implemented and it is EXACTLY why hybrid popularity will NOT increase. Hybrids don't work, and they will continue to be a monumentally distant 4th choice in PVP. If that isn't clear to you by now, then I don't know what else I can say to you.
In addition to all of this, CCP Ytterbium pretty much said there is no way CCP will ever change the speeds of hybrid platforms to outmatch Minmatar ones. As long as they're unwilling to change this, the true philosophy of blasters will never be realized. Might as well try to change the philsophy itself. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:47:00 -
[1258] - Quote
Magosian wrote:I still think this thread is too cluttered with suggestions that just mask the underlying issues.
PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION CCP! THIS IS THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM WITH HYBRIDS!
Lets say we gave blasters an effective range that allowed TEs to boost it into the 20-25km range, much like autocannons and scorched pulses.
Let's also say we gave railguns respectable alpha damage and increased its dps to match either artillery or beams.
This is, by the way, pretty much what the playerbase has been asking for in this thread, as best as I can interpret.
Given these changes were made live, would I use hybrids? HELL NO!
Why not?
-projectiles are cap-free -lasers have instant ammo reload -ships with projectile bonuses provide the pilot with the best speed in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic -ships with laser bonuses provide the pilot with the best EHP in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic
If you are not willing to give Gallente/Caldari hybrid ships a native, passive, defensive mechanic, IN ADDITION TO GIVING HYBRID TURRETS MATCHING DPS AND RANGE STATS TO MAKE THEM EQUALLY EFFECTIVE IN COMBAT, then you WILL NOT entice pilots to choose hybrids.
The only thing I learned from the hybrid changes in Crucible is CCP doesn't understand the underlying problem. Well, here it is.
Make hybrids fun. Make them USEFUL. Make sure blasterboat pilots don't have to play the "all-in" game by committing to a fight without any option to run away. Make sure railguns are WORTH the trouble of costing cap, plagued with reload timers, stuck on weak ships, have fixed damage type. Hybrids still have all cons and no pros. You have yet to address this in Crucible.
I fully agree to this post. However, you have forgett to mention that projectiles also have less CPU and PG needs. So EVEN if you would have the same range with blasters to apply the same theoretical damage in real life situations projectiles still would have: - flexibility to choose damage type by ammo - less CPU usage - less CPU and PG usage for medium weapons - cap free usage
Now if I think about it a bit then the main advantage of projectiles is that they don't need CAP. Leaving more energy for active modules and being able to fire them with empty cap is very usefull.
I'm sure CCP knows the real issues, they just don't know how to fix it properly without making hybrids the next FOTM. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:49:00 -
[1259] - Quote
i'm more concerned that they are afraid of touching
a) ship balance because of sub number. a lot of people like what they are used to b) touching the core ui which is terrible out of the same reason.
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:57:00 -
[1260] - Quote
Hamox wrote:I'm sure CCP knows the real issues, they just don't know how to fix it properly without making hybrids the next FOTM.
I do.
Any med/large ship with a hybrid turret bonus gets their base scan resolution and base sensor strength doubled.
In addition to making hybrid ships more popular, this would also: -resurrect the pitiful Eos -resurrect the Gallente employment of Information Warfare (and Caldari to an extent) -take away some of that OP mojo from the Falcon -put Gallente back into the drone-domination throne as they will be able to commands drones faster and kill them quickest.
Fixed.
|
|
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 17:59:00 -
[1261] - Quote
quote=Magosian Consider for a moment the philosophy you just stated is "correct" DOES NOT ACTUALLY WORK! And it never will work without highest speed and removal of atrocious speed penalties due to armor rigs and armor tanking. Conversely, you could address this with range.
NO you don't. You DON"T change the roles blasters have. Stop arguing trying to make blasters the next fotm auto cannon. Gallente already have an agility buff, their talking about reducing rig penalties to make them MORE agile. What more do you freaking want?
quote=Magosian Maybe you missed the title of the thread. How about you try and keep up.
How cute. Do you always drool when you try to argue for homogenous weapons platforms?
quote=Magosian I like how you omitted the part where I plainly say the ships need changing too:
"If you are not willing to give Gallente/Caldari hybrid ships a native, passive, defensive mechanic, IN ADDITION TO GIVING HYBRID TURRETS MATCHING DPS AND RANGE STATS TO MAKE THEM EQUALLY EFFECTIVE IN COMBAT, then you WILL NOT entice pilots to choose hybrids."
Entice... jesus... You want 1406 dps at 30 km. Are you freaking kidding me? Just stop...
quote=Magosian By focusing solely on the mega and using it as an example with a web, you're doing exactly what I said, which is using another module to mask the shortcomings and poor base stats of hybrids in general. This does nothing for a shield brut or a ferox, both of which SHOULD operate in effectiveness like a shield buffered and TE'd cane, i.e. without a web. Even with Crucible hybrid "buffs" they still do not. THAT is a far greater issue than some DPS value in print.
Sigh..... It's like arguing with a wall.... Blasters have ALWAYS had short range. You say blasters have a shortcoming when their the strongest they've EVER been.... If you don't like the platform DON"T use it! You've made it perfectly clear in your earlier post you don't want to be committed to a fight so just fly whinematar or caldari and gtfo! Your argument has NO value when your arguing for making blasters homogenous to other platforms period. Blasters where never intended to be what you want!
quote=Magosian EFT-warrioring DPS numbers is EXACTLY why nothing is getting fixed! Just because you get monstrous numbers on paper doesn't mean it works in the field. It's the entire problem with this thread, it's how hybrids went overlooked for so long, and it's exactly why Crucible changes to hybrids were implemented and it is EXACTLY why hybrid popularity will NOT increase. Hybrids don't work, and they will continue to be a monumentally distant 4th choice in PVP. If that isn't clear to you by now, then I don't know what else I can say to you.
Maybe your 4th choice. I fly Gallente blaster boats and always have pre patch. I understand their niche, where their good at, how to be effective and assess certain situations. Your trying to argue hybrids don't work when they do! The issue like I said is with closing range TO your target... You keep avoiding this fact.
You don't want to have to burn to your target, you want to hit the orbit button at 30km with a rack of neutrons, drool and melt people with over 1200 dps with a typical two mag stab Megathron setup. Just stop...
quote=Magosian In addition to all of this, CCP Ytterbium pretty much said there is no way CCP will ever change the speeds of hybrid platforms to outmatch Minmatar ones. As long as they're unwilling to change this, the true philosophy of blasters will never be realized. Might as well try to change the philsophy itself.
Well gee golly genius LOOK at what they did! They gave Gallente a 5% agility bonus didn't they? Minny have always been the fast, agile ships. Your trying to morph blaster boats into an even more powerful variant that would be game breaking in every single way.
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:01:00 -
[1262] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.. I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx. 25 km with free tech2 modules? What I'm saying is: throw in some isk and gang-bonuses and you'll end up with insanity of 50 km webs. Insanity? You still have to reach your target in an armor plated battleship that does 900 M/S genius from 50 KM away.... Need I spell out the total stupidity in trying to use that approach? You're talking about some mythical 1 vs 1 situations. In reality such a Megathrone becomes a mandatory webbing ship in each and every gang.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:02:00 -
[1263] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Magosian wrote:I still think this thread is too cluttered with suggestions that just mask the underlying issues.
PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION CCP! THIS IS THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM WITH HYBRIDS!
Lets say we gave blasters an effective range that allowed TEs to boost it into the 20-25km range, much like autocannons and scorched pulses.
Let's also say we gave railguns respectable alpha damage and increased its dps to match either artillery or beams.
This is, by the way, pretty much what the playerbase has been asking for in this thread, as best as I can interpret.
Given these changes were made live, would I use hybrids? HELL NO!
Why not?
-projectiles are cap-free -lasers have instant ammo reload -ships with projectile bonuses provide the pilot with the best speed in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic -ships with laser bonuses provide the pilot with the best EHP in the game; this is a passive defensive mechanic
If you are not willing to give Gallente/Caldari hybrid ships a native, passive, defensive mechanic, IN ADDITION TO GIVING HYBRID TURRETS MATCHING DPS AND RANGE STATS TO MAKE THEM EQUALLY EFFECTIVE IN COMBAT, then you WILL NOT entice pilots to choose hybrids.
The only thing I learned from the hybrid changes in Crucible is CCP doesn't understand the underlying problem. Well, here it is.
Make hybrids fun. Make them USEFUL. Make sure blasterboat pilots don't have to play the "all-in" game by committing to a fight without any option to run away. Make sure railguns are WORTH the trouble of costing cap, plagued with reload timers, stuck on weak ships, have fixed damage type. Hybrids still have all cons and no pros. You have yet to address this in Crucible. I fully agree to this post. However, you have forgett to mention that projectiles also have less CPU and PG needs. So EVEN if you would have the same range with blasters to apply the same theoretical damage in real life situations projectiles still would have: - flexibility to choose damage type by ammo - less CPU usage - less CPU and PG usage for medium weapons - cap free usage Now if I think about it a bit then the main advantage of projectiles is that they don't need CAP. Leaving more energy for active modules and being able to fire them with empty cap is very usefull. I'm sure CCP knows the real issues, they just don't know how to fix it properly without making hybrids the next FOTM.
If you give blasters the same range as Auto cannons they WILL be the next FOTM. Everyone here keeps ranting about how auto cannons are better. Why not just go fly Minny like everyone else? Because all your doing is trying to create an even more unbalanced weapons platform.
|
Tara Read
Trauma Ward Free Beer.
39
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:04:00 -
[1264] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Tara Read wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.. I'm saying this would wind up being the max range with say battleship 5. The bonus would only apply to certain ships like the Megathron and the Bruitx. 25 km with free tech2 modules? What I'm saying is: throw in some isk and gang-bonuses and you'll end up with insanity of 50 km webs. Insanity? You still have to reach your target in an armor plated battleship that does 900 M/S genius from 50 KM away.... Need I spell out the total stupidity in trying to use that approach? You're talking about some mythical 1 vs 1 situations. In reality such a Megathrone becomes a mandatory webbing ship in each and every gang.
mythical... Jesus.... what have eve players become these days? Don't 1v1's still happen?
And in reality such a Megathron would just be more effective at what it does. It would have a chance to close range to it's target and apply DPS. Simple. And isn't all you guys who are bitching and moaning about Gallente not being used in your precious fleets anyways? |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:11:00 -
[1265] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Hamox wrote:I'm sure CCP knows the real issues, they just don't know how to fix it properly without making hybrids the next FOTM. I do. Any med/large ship with a hybrid turret bonus gets their base scan resolution and base sensor strength doubled. In addition to making hybrid ships more popular, this would also: -resurrect the pitiful Eos -resurrect the Gallente employment of Information Warfare (and Caldari to an extent) -take away some of that OP mojo from the Falcon -put Gallente back into the drone-domination throne as they will be able to commands drones faster and kill them quickest. Fixed.
This still does nothing to address the problem with hybrids, and it does nothing for information warfare links. Speaking of which, did you notice at all that whilst ecm/painter bonus from the info link went from 2 to 2.5%, the damp/TD bonus went from 1.2 to 1.25%? I guess CCP a) Cocked it up, or b) Think damps are overpowered already whilst ecm needs a helping hand.
Currently, frigates are good. No need to do anything more to either the ships, the blasters or the rails for those. Job done, congratulations CCP.
Cruisers and Battleships however are no different. Having a bit more fitting to play with has been useful, but ultimately changed nothing about the dynamics of fighting in hybrid ships. Sorry CCP, the changes were completely ineffective.
And I'm with those who don't want blasters to become autocannons under another name. I personally would like overwhelming dps at very close ranges AND a way to deliver it. I do not believe webs are the way to achieve this. I think the way it will have to happen is through a change in the speed/armour rig penalties (going faster and lose my tank, or tank and go even slower just doesn't work) and by changes to the affected ships. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:12:00 -
[1266] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:If you give blasters the same range as Auto cannons they WILL be the next FOTM. Everyone here keeps ranting about how auto cannons are better. Why not just go fly Minny like everyone else? Because all your doing is trying to create an even more unbalanced weapons platform. Not true. Minmatar ships will still be fastest. Minmatar ships will still utilize cap-free turrets. Minmatar ships will still be the mainstay for alpha. If blasters had an equivalent, effective range, all that does is allow a better-skilled hybrid pilot the ability to fend off a faster skirmisher. He still would not be able to point/web him, however, not if the skirmisher had half a brain.
It would be nothing close to FOTM. Cap-free guns are so juicy, they could provide beverages to India and China for the next decade. Please. |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 19:21:00 -
[1267] - Quote
If hybrid ships aren't made the fastest in normal play, then the problem will never be fixed. Period. Unless you call increasing range so blasters become AC clones a solution, but most of us actually like variety in game play. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 19:26:00 -
[1268] - Quote
For once the sinister looking amarr dude is right... A buff to web range will have to be done with severe caution and have been considered and abandoned in the past. 25km web before links and stuff is insane... |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 19:31:00 -
[1269] - Quote
Yeah web range bonuses hulls would just make the premier weapon of Gallente ships webs and not hybrids |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 20:33:00 -
[1270] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:If hybrid ships aren't made the fastest in normal play, then the problem will never be fixed. Period. Unless you call increasing range so blasters become AC clones a solution, but most of us actually like variety in game play.
I totally agree. Problem is, comments by CCP Ytterbium suggest Minmatar will never lose the speed crown.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to play with blasters if they had some mechanism to deliver that damage. Problem is, without the speed, they never will. :( |
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 21:42:00 -
[1271] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Julius Foederatus wrote:If hybrid ships aren't made the fastest in normal play, then the problem will never be fixed. Period. Unless you call increasing range so blasters become AC clones a solution, but most of us actually like variety in game play. I totally agree. Problem is, comments by CCP Ytterbium suggest Minmatar will never lose the speed crown. Don't get me wrong, I would love to play with blasters if they had some mechanism to deliver that damage. Problem is, without the speed, they never will. :(
let us think that through. once we would make the blaster platforms the fastest ships ingame, so to say they could catch anything, they definitly would become the new fotm and quite surely op. one could trash all kiting ships, because they would not be able to maintain a distance, dieing horrible fast because they sport tanks much more on the thinner side of life (speed tank, etc). in fact every ship would have to bow before the blasterspeedster which will rush in and melt face as soon as on grid. the only viable option in this department would be to give them much thinner tanks, or in other words copy the minmatarstyle and put a gallente sticker on it. nobody wants that homogenisation or that kind of talos swarms.
i still think it is worth a try to give hybrids a unique benefit in making them little cap booster, thus every firing hybrid gives the ship a little cap back, the amount would be a question of balancing, but it would defenitly make hybrids desireable. it would also make blaster/hybrids much less vulnerable to neuts, a common danger lurking in blaster range. of corse there would be amarr and minmatar pilots putting hybrids onto their ships, but after all we want make hybrids to be used, aren't we?
increasing range of blasters and making blasterboats fastest ships ingame is not the way to go, imo and the other limitations of hybrids still would be "needed".
edit: and no, it would not make hybrids a new fotm, because blasterrange still would be very limitet and rails still would be only viable for long range engagements. and yes blasterboats would have a defence against kiters, because combined with an active tank (which would need some love.. i admit) they could tank as long as they tickle the kiter with missed shots and strife shots. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 22:02:00 -
[1272] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Magosian wrote:Julius Foederatus wrote:If hybrid ships aren't made the fastest in normal play, then the problem will never be fixed. Period. Unless you call increasing range so blasters become AC clones a solution, but most of us actually like variety in game play. I totally agree. Problem is, comments by CCP Ytterbium suggest Minmatar will never lose the speed crown. Don't get me wrong, I would love to play with blasters if they had some mechanism to deliver that damage. Problem is, without the speed, they never will. :( let us think that through. once we would make the blaster platforms the fastest ships ingame, so to say they could catch anything, they definitly would become the new fotm and quite surely op. one could trash all kiting ships, because they would not be able to maintain a distance, dieing horrible fast because they sport tanks much more on the thinner side of life (speed tank, etc). in fact every ship would have to bow before the blasterspeedster which will rush in and melt face as soon as on grid. the only viable option in this department would be to give them much thinner tanks, or in other words copy the minmatarstyle and put a gallente sticker on it. nobody wants that homogenisation or that kind of talos swarms. i still think it is worth a try to give hybrids a unique benefit in making them little cap booster, thus every firing hybrid gives the ship a little cap back, the amount would be a question of balancing, but it would defenitly make hybrids desireable. it would also make blaster/hybrids much less vulnerable to neuts, a common danger lurking in blaster range. of corse there would be amarr and minmatar pilots putting hybrids onto their ships, but after all we want make hybrids to be used, aren't we? increasing range of blasters and making blasterboats fastest ships ingame is not the way to go, imo and the other limitations of hybrids still would be "needed".
Thats just not true and (in your words) "a matter of balancing". It is a very simple priniple that the shortest range is the fasterst guy, I don't know why this is so hard to understand for CCP and EVE players. Lets take this example: A fight starts at 40 km, the cane applies some damage while the bruttix has to get in range. Now if the bruttix is 50 m/s faster than the cane it still will need 20 seconds for one km so the cane has enough time to apply damage until the bruttix even starts to do some damage. So even if the bruttix hits like a nuklear bomb it still will loose a lot of EHP until it starts doing damage. Now why shall the Bruttix be overpowered? The cane still can kill it in time. It just is a matter of balancing so that this fight ends 50/50 depending if the pilots fit for more tank or damage and since you don't know the fit of your opponend it is always risky for both. Isn't this how it should be? At the moment it is only a risk for the Bruttix becouse the Cane can ALLWAYS decide to escape the fight... WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND? SLOW WEAPON = FASTEST GUY ON THE BATTLEFILD That is the easiest way to balance. As long as the short range guy is slower he will NEVER have a chance to win the fight. |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 23:13:00 -
[1273] - Quote
I just wanted to point out, that besides a webifier bonus, being the fastest race in the game or making you the most tankable race in the game, there still is the already mentioned alternative of a short speed boost module of some sort.
I can't give you any numbers or how it should be implemented exactly, but given the possibility of getting up close in a short period of time, without making you the fastest race in the game doesn't leave much else left. |
Delphineas Fumimasa
The Rising Stars Academy
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 23:21:00 -
[1274] - Quote
Meh, this should be a hybrid thread, but except for mag, all it is is Gallente blaster ***** fests. After all, tons of ravens in fleets, amirite?
Since speed is the issue, switch Caldari optimal bonus with Gallente hull bonus.
in other complaints, the Naga is better than the rokh in every way except tank. Um, yay? |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 23:40:00 -
[1275] - Quote
Delphineas Fumimasa wrote:Meh, this should be a hybrid thread, but except for mag, all it is is Gallente blaster ***** fests.
Yes, this is a hybrid thread, but to sum it up there are two major problems:
1. Rails have no reason to exist becouse on their optimal range where they make sense you just can use "Warp to 0". So you either can transform rails into Artillerie or fix the broken game mechanics. We all don't want to transform Rails into Arty, do we?
2. Blasters are not able to apply the theoretical supperior damage becouse their plattforms will never get close enough to their opponend befor the ship dies. So you can either transform Blasters into Auto Cannons or fix the game mechanics. We all don't want to transform Blasters into AC, do we?
The only good use for Blaster ships is to camp a Wormhole and kill passing travalers. The only good use for Rails is to... ... erm... ... I don't know, do you? |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 23:42:00 -
[1276] - Quote
Hamox wrote:As long as the short range guy is slower he will NEVER have a chance to win the fight.
i dislike the "never" in your statement. once the kiter has the brawler in his preffered engagement range, i expect the brawler to have a hard time in cathcing the kiter. but the other way around if the kiter is in the preffered engagement range of the brawler, the kiter will die an agonizing death. a brawling brutix is by no means a valid counter for a kiting set up. and that should stay that way.
i have no difficulties grawsping your opinion, i just dont think every setup should be a valid choice against every setup in every situation. in a proper gang face melting brawler are invalueable. with the new changes blaster provide that face melting ability. (though void still could use some love) but i recognize that there should be a hybridplatform thich is able to chase down slippery kiter dudes. variety&stuff = spirit of eve. the heavy inderdictors should fill that role since its their job to catch things. i guess noone thinks that balancing of hybrids and their platfroms is done.
but fixing hybrids is not homogenizing the set up possibilities, thus every set up can achive the same, it`s about giving hybrids a benefit, making them attractive to pilots. my idea, though not fleshed out and in need of some more work, would provide a benefit, fitting in the intended role of hybrids.
|
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 23:43:00 -
[1277] - Quote
I posted this idea before, but since CCP is showing some willingness to change hybrids and make them more useful, I'll post it again here.
Get rid of railguns and blasters and combine them to make 1 hybrid turret. Let the hybrid ammo loaded into the guns determine the characteristics of the guns (optimal and tracking, cap usage, damage, etc). Tweak the stats on ammo, so the damage projection at range is similar (or slightly less) to projectiles and lasers. Split the optimal/falloff stats at 50/50, this is the middle ground between projectiles and lasers.
Now, you can carry enough ammo or a variety of ammo to deal with range/kiting issues without the need to alter Gallente hulls to be the fastest in the game, and Caldari gunboats have the option of switching ammo depending on combat engagement ranges.
This makes the weapon system very unique in the EvE universe, both short-range and long-range weapon system in 1 package, also lives up to the "Hybrid" moniker. Allows the pilot of hybrid ships a lot of flexibility (aka. makes them desirable) in how they want to set-up to fight without making sweeping changes across 2 races. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 03:20:00 -
[1278] - Quote
So CCP after a few days I can safely say nothing in the game has changed.
I hope further changes to Gallente boats are brought soon.
|
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 04:05:00 -
[1279] - Quote
As far as CCP goes, they need to either wake up to this reality and end their love affair with minmatar, or they will never accomplish their stated goal of balancing hybrids and hybrid ships.
And as far as killing kiting setups, no ****, that's the whole point. Kiting is way too easy in this game, especially if you're Minmatar. You don't even have to fit a speed mod of any kind on a cane to make it easily able to kite just about every other BC out there, though people often slap one on there just for ***** and giggles. All of this without sacrificing any gank or tank. Try accomplishing that feat in a Brutix. In the blaster ships we have now we inevitably have to find a three way balance between speed, dps, and tank, which results in a ship that can't really provide anything satisfying on any of these fronts, either because you have to find a 'meh' balance that makes it shittier in every way to an AC boat, or you make it useless because you overcompensate on one of the three and you don't have a viable pvp ship. It should be the other way around, if you don't want to get shot at, then you need to make some sacrifices on tank so that you have the speed to escape and stay out of range. Anything else is just completely OP, which is the situation you see now with Minmatar boats.
How often do you actually wind up inside scram range when facing off against a Brutix or similar blaster ship? I can tell you from experience it is not often, even less so if you're by yourself and you don't have the help of a teammate or cloaky alt. Even when you actually wind up in range, you have to deal with incoming neuts, EWAR, and dps from your target and all his buddies, in whose optimal you will most certainly be. Meanwhile, all you have to deal with this situation is tank and dps. Outside of drone boats, Gallente ships don't have much versatility in their high slots. That's the reality as it stands now, and that's if you even make it into scram range. If you land outside it, without a teammate you will never catch an opponent, be it a Drake or a Minnie boat.
In order to balance the situation, blasters need to be the best at close range period. That means they need better tracking than ACs (so they can maneuver and actually mitigate some dps) as well as increased dps (to make up for the travel time and the tank that's already gone from getting shot at before they can even hope to return fire). The ships themselves need to be the fastest so they can at least control the engagement. Frankly I don't think that's too much to ask for a race that must 100% commit to every single fight they get in, and put themselves in the optimal of every nasty effect and turret that we can dream up in the EVE universe.
P.S. and for all you out there who are going to say "but you'll just make rails the new kiters," that's a load of crap. The whole point of kiting setups is to stay within point range. Rail tracking in point range is absolutely crap (for mediums anyway), and other race's boats already have the ability to hit out to point range with their "close range" weapons, already dealing more dps than a rail ship could ever hope to achieve. Ironically, the only ships that rail ships could reasonably kite are blaster boats. Not to mention you can work around that through agility tweaks to ships to change the dynamic from "fastest and most agile" to "fastest by turns like a pig" and "not quite as fast but handles like a hawk." That would allow skilled pilots to shine with different skills for different boats, and wouldn't be the oversimplified bollocks that we call pvp nowadays. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 05:45:00 -
[1280] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:As far as CCP goes, they need to either wake up to this reality and end their love affair with minmatar, or they will never accomplish their stated goal of balancing hybrids and hybrid ships.
And as far as killing kiting setups, no ****, that's the whole point. Kiting is way too easy in this game, especially if you're Minmatar. Seems like you, too, are taking about 1 vs 1 theory. If it's N vs X, then kiting is the most challenging and interesting aspect of the whole EVE gameplay. It really IS the aspect differentiating pr0's from b00n rabble.
That's like saying that PvP in EVE is all about locking someone, pressing guns and hitting orbit button - n00bs often tell us that on forums, but they hardly ever achieve anything with that kind of attitude.
Once again, I'm not saying Gallente should or shouldn't become the fastest race (in terms of linear speed), but those implying that your ship should have some unique stopping or catching power just cause you're shortest range guy... are just trolling. That's like me saying I should have most damage because I have least tank Or that my Abso should be ECM immune cause it - unlike NH - lacks fof missiles. Nonsense. It doesn't work that way. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 11:46:00 -
[1281] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:[quote=Julius Foederatus] ... but those implying that your ship should have some unique stopping or catching power just cause you're shortest range guy... are just trolling.
Is this a joke or serious? I really don't get it... What is your sollution to allow the short range guy to apply some damage? And please don't tell me some EFT CRAP that "proves" that Blaster Boats have more DPS and are therefore almost OP. What is your solution to fix hybrids for 1v1 or small scale fleets combat?
I'm sick of all you guys who tell others being trolls but never post a solution them selfs. How do you want to fix Hybrids?
How many of you great pr0s use Gallente BC or T2 ships (Cruiser or bigger, please no Frigs) for PVP? What ships do you use and why?
Where is the experienced FC that will tell us here that he builds his PVP fleet with mostly Gallente ships becouse Blasters have insane damage? |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:09:00 -
[1282] - Quote
The thing is:
- range of heavy missiles is way too good (cut it down to 40 km) - TEs provide way too big falloff bonus (15% seems reasonable) - passive shield tank mods should slow you down just like passive armour ones
After getting the stuff above sorted out, we may start looking at speed values and/or consider giving blasterboats something unique, like web resistance bonus (surely not 100% one - total immunity is proven as stupid at supercaps).
But it's crucial to follow the order. Trying to 'fix' gallente straight ahead is counter-productive. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 12:20:00 -
[1283] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:The thing is:
- range of heavy missiles is way too good (cut it down to 40 km) - TEs provide way too big falloff bonus (15% seems reasonable) - passive shield tank mods should slow you down just like passive armour ones
After getting the stuff above sorted out, we may start looking at speed values and/or consider giving blasterboats something unique, like web resistance bonus (surely not 100% one - total immunity is proven as stupid at supercaps).
But it's crucial to follow the order. Trying to 'fix' gallente straight ahead is counter-productive.
I agree with this and I mentioned it earlier that the Hybrid fix is just the first step on a long journey to improve EVE and take it "to the next level". Unfortunately I'm not experienced enough to understand all the mechanics and how they work together and how they depend on each other. Also EVE Players are very creative, so if you change one aspect to fix something players will find a way to use this change in a creative way that you never have expected. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:04:00 -
[1284] - Quote
I'm going to suggest something a little radical here.
Tracking on ALL short range weapons need looking at. Each tier of weapon should have the same tracking ability at a certain range related to their optimal and falloff. At 1 x Optimal pluss 1x falloff each weapon platform should have the same tracking ability.
Currently Minmitar/Amarr can shoot at Gallante from outside the Gallante pilots range. BUT with current tracking the Gallante pilot can not get under the guns of a Minmitar shipand to an extent Ammar too. I'm not infavour of increasing the Galle maximum efective range but I do think that a hole needs to be created in the effective ranges of the other races. All should have an upside and a down side. Mini really should not have an effective range from 3Km all the way out to 40Km with BS weapons. AC need to be changed so that under say 6 or 7Km they have real trouble hitting anything.
You could then remove the Tracking bonus from Galle boats and replace it with something different but with what I'm not sure.
Result, at long (short range) distance Galle still get owned but not as much as Mini would be loosing some tracking in this scenario otherwise Galle BS would hit frigs at close range too well. At short (short range) distances they own the others. due to taking little damage from Amarr/Mini BS due to tracking issues. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 13:18:00 -
[1285] - Quote
I've got another out of the box solution for Rails. How about rails doing constant damage at all ranges. Instead of ammo changing the amount of damage a rail inflicts it could act like a script and alter the energy requirement for rails. This would make rails the best ship in short duration sniping engagements but if the cap increase is ballanced correctly could/should make Galle even worse on their cap than Amarr are at long ranges.
This would make a totaly different game mechanic and new style of combat to anything we currently have. numbers can be altered to make Galle best at some range but poor at others. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 16:41:00 -
[1286] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:... You don't even have to fit a speed mod of any kind on a cane to make it easily able to kite just about every other BC out there, though people often slap one on there just for ***** and giggles. All of this without sacrificing any gank or tank. ...
yeear, for sure. care to share that fitting with us? i would also like to have a look at the fail fits getting kited by a cane without a prob mod. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 17:20:00 -
[1287] - Quote
From my perspective, there are three problems which need to be understood in order to fix this mess, ALL of them have everything to do with establishing a DESIRE to fly hybrid boats in PVP. Right now, there is virtually zero.
1) hybrids turrets themselves have no passive benefit:
- if I use projectiles, I get cap free use, choose damage type, and alpha
- if I use lasers, I get dominant optimal range and instant ammo swap/reload
- if I use hybrids, I get NOTHING
2) hybrid ships lack an effective, passive, defense mechanic:
- minmatar ships provide dominant speed; despite the nano nerf, nano is still a viable defense at all scales of pvp
- amarr ships provide the BEST EHP in the game; it's not even close
- if I use hybrids, I get NOTHING
3) because hybrid platforms lack the above, pilots cannot dictate terms of an engagement:
- minmatar pilots will use speed to determine fighting distance; if the fight goes awry, running is viable due to ship speed
- amarr pilots get max dps pontential due to no reload timers; lasers match "optimal" distance throughout all points of the fight. This is further magified by EHP: the longer you are around to shoot, the more dps you will do.
- hybrids can do NOTHING to dictate terms of an engagement
The result:
- Hybrid pilots suffer the most drawbacks just for choosing hybrids, just in their turrets. This is probably the single-biggest reason why pilots don't bother to use hybrid turrets.
- Pilots realize hybrid ships, mostly Gallente, do not have the means to increase survivability as much as other ships. I would include Caldari but the drake is a brightly-shining beacon which contradicts this. If the Tengu didn't cost so much, it would be just as bright.
In a game where "balance" is claimed to be present and valued, hybrids should be godlike. They cost cap, have reload timers, have such USELESS range in blasters, have such a poor choice in ammo variety, have a fixed-damage type, and are on ships that can neither close the gap nor sustain a heavy-beating. I mean there must be a reason I would CHOOSE to incur all of these deficincies, right? I must have some kind of doomsday-like ability because I have nothing else going for me, right? What is it!?!?!
CCP, you have to fix #1 and #2 or you will never achieve the balance you claim you are trying to realize. The easiest ways to do this would be to:
- make Gallente ships the fastest
- completely swap projectile turrets and hybrid turrets across the board, essentially allowing Gallente ships to use projectiles under the "hybrid name" and putting the burden of the most penalized-yet-most-damaging hybrid turrets on the fastest ships (let's face it: currently, this makes a hell of a lot of sense)
- increase ranges and base damages of hybrids so they are dominant in BOTH catagories, as they are turrets which already incur the most penalties
My take on all of this is supported by eve-kill stats, my own personal experience, and the value of ships/turrets/ammo on the market when compared to the other options. I suspect the stats will be a little skewed due to the Crucible release. For instance, this week, there are two hybrid vessels in the top 20 ship killers, Proteus and Lachesis, but it was ZERO hybrid ships two weeks ago. Either way, 10% is not exactly an impressive value. I have no doubts it will drop in a few weeks anyway. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 19:00:00 -
[1288] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:I'm going to suggest something a little radical here.
Tracking on ALL short range weapons need looking at. Each tier of weapon should have the same tracking ability at a certain range related to their optimal and falloff. At 1 x Optimal pluss 1x falloff each weapon platform should have the same tracking ability.
Currently Minmitar/Amarr can shoot at Gallante from outside the Gallante pilots range. BUT with current tracking the Gallante pilot can not get under the guns of a Minmitar shipand to an extent Ammar too. I'm not infavour of increasing the Galle maximum efective range but I do think that a hole needs to be created in the effective ranges of the other races. All should have an upside and a down side. Mini really should not have an effective range from 3Km all the way out to 40Km with BS weapons. AC need to be changed so that under say 6 or 7Km they have real trouble hitting anything.
You could then remove the Tracking bonus from Galle boats and replace it with something different but with what I'm not sure.
Result, at long (short range) distance Galle still get owned but not as much as Mini would be loosing some tracking in this scenario otherwise Galle BS would hit frigs at close range too well. At short (short range) distances they own the others. due to taking little damage from Amarr/Mini BS due to tracking issues.
Just looked at the numbers on this. Using this principle even after the buff we get that Galle ships still have the worst tracking at their effective maximum range. even after the buff. Yes Galle have the worst tracking, go figure. At this range Minmitar ships still have 16% better tracking at their Optimal+1x falloff range. Amarr are even worse with almost 21% better tracking.
So my point is that tracking on all short range weapons needs adjusting. I dont know if Galle should be made faster or the others slower but it needs correcting as currently on blaster boats with a tracking bonus the first two levels of bonus only just bring them in line with AC. I'd be in favour of reducing the others tracking this will make kiting a more skillful practice.
If you want to make the argument that blaster ships do get a tracking bonus well then a lot of Minmitar ships get falloff bonuses using these new numbers assuming a galle tracking bonus of 7.5% and a mini falloff bonus of 10% per level the numbers change to mini having 20% better tracking at this range.
TRACKING NEEDS FIXED |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 19:26:00 -
[1289] - Quote
Saw this on the dev blog today, wanted to cross post it since its official Data from CCP looking through their database, not from a kill board. The statistics are quite interesting:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=postmessage&t=40902&f=247&q=453895
CCP Diagoras wrote: Final blows, weapon type, 2011 only, PVP only:
Group: Projectile Weapon1,455,484 Energy Weapon392,605 Hybrid Weapon250,858 Combat Drone221,329 Heavy Missile203,896
Type: 425mm AutoCannon II388,602 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II207,378 200mm AutoCannon II163,613 150mm Light AutoCannon II144,349 720mm Howitzer Artillery II136,879
By ship type scoring the final blow: Hurricane378,864 Drake272,204 Sabre124,472 Dramiel118,128 Vagabond117,136 Cynabal113,905 Abaddon80,659 Tengu79,493 Harbinger71,286 Rifter67,721
|
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 19:31:00 -
[1290] - Quote
Nikollai Tesla wrote:Saw this on the dev blog today, wanted to cross post it since its official Data from CCP looking through their database, not from a kill board. The statistics are quite interesting: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=postmessage&t=40902&f=247&q=453895CCP Diagoras wrote: Final blows, weapon type, 2011 only, PVP only:
Group: Projectile Weapon1,455,484 Energy Weapon392,605 Hybrid Weapon250,858 Combat Drone221,329 Heavy Missile203,896
Type: 425mm AutoCannon II388,602 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II207,378 200mm AutoCannon II163,613 150mm Light AutoCannon II144,349 720mm Howitzer Artillery II136,879
By ship type scoring the final blow: Hurricane378,864 Drake272,204 Sabre124,472 Dramiel118,128 Vagabond117,136 Cynabal113,905 Abaddon80,659 Tengu79,493 Harbinger71,286 Rifter67,721
Just comfirms what everyone already knows. AC are almost as good at projecting their damage as Lasers are on a stationery ship add in the speed/agility of Mini ships and they are in aleague of their own.
|
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 20:07:00 -
[1291] - Quote
that's exactly the type of stats we expected and the results we predicted.
So, let's talk about fixing hybrids :) |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 20:17:00 -
[1292] - Quote
I'm not sure why CCP data is any less unbiased than a third party killboard. In fact, the conspiracy-theorist in me is tempted to say eve-kill is a better representation of the situation that anything CCP provides because we know it's all user-submitted data. This would be opposed to anything CCP might manipulate.
But I digress, the data still shows overwhelming favoritism in projectiles and Minmatar, followed by a distant second place with lasers and Amarr.
Nikollai Tesla wrote:CCP Diagoras wrote: Final blows, weapon type, 2011 only, PVP only:
Group: Projectile Weapon1,455,484 Energy Weapon392,605 Hybrid Weapon250,858 Combat Drone221,329 Heavy Missile203,896
Type: 425mm AutoCannon II388,602 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II207,378 200mm AutoCannon II163,613 150mm Light AutoCannon II144,349 720mm Howitzer Artillery II136,879
By ship type scoring the final blow: Hurricane378,864 Drake272,204 Sabre124,472 Dramiel118,128 Vagabond117,136 Cynabal113,905 Abaddon80,659 Tengu79,493 Harbinger71,286 Rifter67,721
I'm only seeing two things which I would call "interesting data:"
- the Drake, which isn't much of a surprise since it's the most bang-for-your-buck and most tank-for-your-buck available. Still, it's nice to see a break from the usual 80% Minmatar 20% Amarr pattern.
- Hybrid weapons coming in at #3 is kind of misleading since it only makes up less than 10% of the top 5 (9.94%). I'd also bet MOST of that is from highsec frigate fights and station camping.
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 20:57:00 -
[1293] - Quote
Magosian wrote:I'm not sure why CCP data is any less unbiased than a third party killboard. In fact, the conspiracy-theorist in me is tempted to say eve-kill is a better representation of the situation that anything CCP provides because we know it's all user-submitted data. This would be opposed to anything CCP might manipulate. But I digress, the data still shows overwhelming favoritism in projectiles and Minmatar, followed by a distant second place with lasers and Amarr. Nikollai Tesla wrote:CCP Diagoras wrote: Final blows, weapon type, 2011 only, PVP only:
Group: Projectile Weapon1,455,484 Energy Weapon392,605 Hybrid Weapon250,858 Combat Drone221,329 Heavy Missile203,896
Type: 425mm AutoCannon II388,602 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II207,378 200mm AutoCannon II163,613 150mm Light AutoCannon II144,349 720mm Howitzer Artillery II136,879
By ship type scoring the final blow: Hurricane378,864 Drake272,204 Sabre124,472 Dramiel118,128 Vagabond117,136 Cynabal113,905 Abaddon80,659 Tengu79,493 Harbinger71,286 Rifter67,721
I'm only seeing two things which I would call "interesting data:"
- the Drake, which isn't much of a surprise since it's the most bang-for-your-buck and most tank-for-your-buck available. Still, it's nice to see a break from the usual 80% Minmatar 20% Amarr pattern.
- Hybrid weapons coming in at #3 is kind of misleading since it only makes up less than 10% of the top 5 (9.94%). I'd also bet MOST of that is from highsec frigate fights and station camping.
The data is silghtly skewed as the period it covers also covers a time when hybrids were more successful. The Eve-Kill stats are more relevant as they address the ships and weapons as they are currently ingame. "The information in this blog is limited to kills that have taken place since the new kill report system was introduced in the Trinity expansion on December 5th, 2007, up until very early in the morning of November 29th, 2011." |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 22:30:00 -
[1294] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:CCP Diagoras wrote: Final blows, weapon type, 2011 only, PVP only:
Group: Projectile Weapon1,455,484 Energy Weapon392,605 Hybrid Weapon250,858 Combat Drone221,329 Heavy Missile203,896
The data is silghtly skewed as the period it covers also covers a time when hybrids were more successful. The Eve-Kill stats are more relevant as they address the ships and weapons as they are currently ingame. "The information in this blog is limited to kills that have taken place since the new kill report system was introduced in the Trinity expansion on December 5th, 2007, up until very early in the morning of November 29th, 2011."
Reading comprehension fail, a follow up poster specifically asked for only 2011 stats. CCP Diagoras posted 2011 stats, i''ve bolded the relevent sections and added links to both posts, #109 and #12
Was the request: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=453841#post453841
reply with only 2011 data https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=453895#post453895 |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 23:32:00 -
[1295] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Hamox wrote:As long as the short range guy is slower he will NEVER have a chance to win the fight. i dislike the "never" in your statement. once the kiter has the brawler in his preffered engagement range, i expect the brawler to have a hard time in cathcing the kiter. but the other way around if the kiter is in the preffered engagement range of the brawler, the kiter will die an agonizing death. a brawling brutix is by no means a valid counter for a kiting set up. and that should stay that way. i have no difficulties grawsping your opinion, i just dont think every setup should be a valid choice against every setup in every situation. in a proper gang face melting brawler are invalueable. with the new changes blaster provide that face melting ability. (though void still could use some love) but i recognize that there should be a hybridplatform thich is able to chase down slippery kiter dudes. variety&stuff = spirit of eve. the heavy inderdictors should fill that role since its their job to catch things. i guess noone thinks that balancing of hybrids and their platfroms is done. but fixing hybrids is not homogenizing the set up possibilities, thus every set up can achive the same, it`s about giving hybrids a benefit, making them attractive to pilots. my idea, though not fleshed out and in need of some more work, would provide a benefit, fitting in the intended role of hybrids. ok lest revise his statement then, unless the long range guy is either REALLY unlucky, REALLY stupid or undocks into the short range guy (kinda goes along with really stupid), he will never win.
Is there a single realistic scenario outside of having him undock into you where a blaster ship will do more damage than an autocannon ship? Other than having a warp in at < 5 which almost never happens autocannons will do more damage.
Even in certain warp in situations, matari ships are more agile and therefore will align faster and get there faster and still do more damage! |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 12:09:00 -
[1296] - Quote
Magosian wrote:CCP, you have to fix #1 and #2 or you will never achieve the balance you claim you are trying to realize. The easiest ways to do this would be to:
- make Gallente ships the fastest
- completely swap projectile turrets and hybrid turrets across the board, essentially allowing Gallente ships to use projectiles under the "hybrid name" and putting the burden of the most penalized-yet-most-damaging hybrid turrets on the fastest ships (let's face it: currently, this makes a hell of a lot of sense)
- increase ranges and base damages of hybrids so they are dominant in BOTH catagories, as they are turrets which already incur the most penalties
i believe you only want to apply one point out of your three? because combining the frist two would be the same mess as we are facing atm. and the third point ... well... i guess i missunderstood you there. but i could live with swapped blaster - projectile stats, i guess. im kind of intregued and its worth a try on sisi at least. although i think rails do need a completly different solution. still, just increasing range of blasters is the worst thing one can do.
Sigras wrote: ok lest revise his statement then, unless the long range guy is either REALLY unlucky, REALLY stupid or undocks into the short range guy (kinda goes along with really stupid), he will never win.
Is there a single realistic scenario outside of having him undock into you where a blaster ship will do more damage than an autocannon ship? Other than having a warp in at < 5 which almost never happens autocannons will do more damage.
Even in certain warp in situations, matari ships are more agile and therefore will align faster and get there faster and still do more damage!
i guess no argument from me is going to convice you anyway, so we can end this here and i will bow to the worked up masses. although i still believe you guys have a tendency for exaggeration.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 14:16:00 -
[1297] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:i guess no argument from me is going to convice you anyway, so we can end this here and i will bow to the worked up masses. although i still believe you guys have a tendency for exaggeration.
Exaggeration of what?
That if you're not at undocks, gate camping with the best web ships around (Minmatar), station undocks the ability for blaster ships to ever win some fight is one bet on the enemy stupidity, underskilled/experienced noobs, is close to 0?
No one says blasters can't succeed, but everyone is pointing how and when they do, that's the problem why blaster ships are terribad. You don't need them for any purpose because everything else in the game will do the same with much more flexibility witch means: better.
I don't know how this is difficult to understand or admit. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 15:53:00 -
[1298] - Quote
Indeed. Even if Gallente hybrid ships had the highest velocity, 5 medium slots, 4 low slots and shield a resistance bonus and a Damage bonus (nano-Ferox). As long as those ships had to engage close range (blaster range). The high velocity is negated. Is no benefit unless the ship is engaging a single vessel of same class or lower.
Amarr and Minmatar ships will still be able to apply alot of damage before being tackled. With similar defence. The damage output of a hybrid ship would have to be immense, but lets say this happened. Great! You're able to engage one other ship of the same class or lower. Now lets leave this vacuum!
In the current environment you have to deal with at-least 2 - 6 vessels. Which means skirmishing is often the best way to engage ships. Not to mention frigates that can warp disrupt a ship @ range and kill any drones sent to deal with them. Clearly most ships in-game are now able to project damage @ range. Meaning only another ship that's able to the same can have any hope of engaging ships able to project damage. While if a close range ship was put in the same situation. It would have to go close to 2 - 6 vessels to apply damage. Where all that velocity means nothing and would have to deal a immense amount of damage to destroy 2 - 6 ships and make it out of there intact. While your shield-Drake can shoot @ 2 shield-Hurricane's long before they come into range (70k to soften one or both up) or just leave if the ship cannot handle the situation. Not to mention a Drake can overheat to prolong being caught. BUT! It can apply damage! Something the close range ship cannot do with committing.
Range not only gives benefits in one versus one engagement, but it's greater advantage is skirmishing in a game with a ever growing player base, which means more and large fleets.
Blaster ships work best versus pilots who are close and even then. Generally only 1 other ship of the same class or lower. OR! Multi-ple ships below a hybrid ships class.
AND! The ships are still not optimal for fleets of any size really. Amarr and Minmatar will still be superior in fleet engagements. Meaning you will never see a Gallente ship in the top most used ships in game.
Most of you are beating a very dead horse and this has become the biggest waste of time. The issue has been identified a very long time ago. CCP wasted changes on a 20% tracking increase on turrets that track essentially the same as projectiles which everyone seems to think has no tracking issues at all. What CCP should have done was this.
Open a thread. Ask pilots to vote whether or not they want blasters to get a increase in range. So, they dominate close and mid range. Now that Minmatar Dominate mid range and are good long range. With Amarr dominating long range and good mid to lower.
OR! Keep blasters short range ONLY and give them there speed.
One of those things will make Gallente ships more useful and the other will keep Gallente ship essentially the same. Not as used as Amarr or Minmatar. Then the player base has no one else to blame if they vote and the issue remains the same. CCP can just say. DEAL WITH IT! |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 18:45:00 -
[1299] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Julius Foederatus wrote:As far as CCP goes, they need to either wake up to this reality and end their love affair with minmatar, or they will never accomplish their stated goal of balancing hybrids and hybrid ships.
And as far as killing kiting setups, no ****, that's the whole point. Kiting is way too easy in this game, especially if you're Minmatar. Seems like you, too, are taking about 1 vs 1 theory. If it's N vs X, then kiting is the most challenging and interesting aspect of the whole EVE gameplay. It really IS the aspect differentiating pr0's from b00n rabble. That's like saying that PvP in EVE is all about locking someone, pressing guns and hitting orbit button - n00bs often tell us that on forums, but they hardly ever achieve anything with that kind of attitude. Once again, I'm not saying Gallente should or shouldn't become the fastest race (in terms of linear speed), but those implying that your ship should have some unique stopping or catching power just cause you're shortest range guy... are just trolling. That's like me saying I should have most damage because I have least tank Or that my Abso should be ECM immune cause it - unlike NH - lacks fof missiles. Nonsense. It doesn't work that way.
Perhaps I should clarify, I wasn't commenting on the difficulty of the actual tactic of kiting, although it is frankly not as skillful as you're making it out to be. The FC says align somewhere, you keep your speed up, and overheat if you need to, warping out if any nasties get close and hit the primary. It requires a lot less skill than the tactics needed to counter nano gangs. What I was trying to get at is that there are no real disadvantages for a kiting fit on your ship. You have pretty good EHP, the best speed, and decent damage all in one package. The close range ship does not have this benefit of not having to choose between speed, tank, or dps. If someone wants to kite, they need to have to make some kind of significant sacrifice on their ship fit, probably to tank but maybe to dps.
And if it doesn't work that way, how is a ship with the shortest range ever going to apply damage on its own? A webbing range bonus on blaster ships might work, but then again you'll be very susceptible to ECM drones, and why fix a problem like that when you can just do it with base speed? Not to mention giving blaster ships web range bonuses would make kiting impossible in all circumstances. I'm not so against kiting that I want to see it gone forever. All those examples you give are either against very specific foes (ECM ships), which you can fit defenses for on your ship that don't greatly compromise your combat effectiveness. There's no solution that blaster ships can use by themselves to make up for speed gaps. It is hardwired into your ship and there's only so much you can do without making your ship worthless.
And as far as proxxxy's bollocks, no one is trying to make Gallente ships the be all and end all of fleet pvp. That has never been the goal. The goal is to make the game such that we can actually use close range, face-melting blaster ships as they're intended without having to constantly bring along neutral alts or teammates to get you in range. As long as we give close range ships a way to apply their dps that doesn't penalize them so much, we can use tactics to make up for the rest. That's why blaster ships need the best speed, and a much bigger dps boost, so that they can make up for their unique disadvantages in a gang situation.
And finally to the dude asking about cane fits, I don't have EFT in front of me cause I'm on a library computer atm, but if I recall a cane with 3x gyro, 2x TE, DCU or whatever people want to fit in that last slot, will go somewhere around 1.3km/s, which is way more than is necessary to kite any other BC, shield or otherwise. Having that extra nano will give you some extra time to get away and allow you a little more error room with overheats and such, but it's not strictly necessary to keep out of range of other ships. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:15:00 -
[1300] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Seems like you, too, are taking about 1 vs 1 theory. If it's N vs X, then kiting is the most challenging and interesting aspect of the whole EVE gameplay. It really IS the aspect differentiating pr0's from b00n rabble. That's like saying that PvP in EVE is all about locking someone, pressing guns and hitting orbit button - n00bs often tell us that on forums, but they hardly ever achieve anything with that kind of attitude. Once again, I'm not saying Gallente should or shouldn't become the fastest race (in terms of linear speed), but those implying that your ship should have some unique stopping or catching power just cause you're shortest range guy... are just trolling. That's like me saying I should have most damage because I have least tank Or that my Abso should be ECM immune cause it - unlike NH - lacks fof missiles. Nonsense. It doesn't work that way. Perhaps I should clarify, I wasn't commenting on the difficulty of the actual tactic of kiting, although it is frankly not as skillful as you're making it out to be. The FC says align somewhere, you keep your speed up, and overheat if you need to, warping out if any nasties get close and hit the primary. That's a total BS. A FC tells you how to pilot your ship??? LOL?
Kiting is something being done on your own! And no, just keeping a formation within a blob at a certain distance from the other blob is in no way called kiting. At least that's surely not something I for one would call kiting and put here as the most challenging game area.
Julius Foederatus wrote:It requires a lot less skill than the tactics needed to counter nano gangs. First of all, nano is dead. Kiting is not the same as nano. Only morons can call a ship doing 1300 m/s a nano one. I'm not sure what you imply by countering nano (kiting), but flying immobile brick requires next to no skill at all. Been there, done that - check my abaddon movies dating back to 2008.
Julius Foederatus wrote:What I was trying to get at is that there are no real disadvantages for a kiting fit on your ship. You have pretty good EHP, the best speed, and decent damage all in one package. The close range ship does not have this benefit of not having to choose between speed, tank, or dps. If someone wants to kite, they need to have to make some kind of significant sacrifice on their ship fit, probably to tank but maybe to dps. Are you kidding? A kiting ship sacrifices a crapload of stuff:
- a stopping ability of close-range brawlers - DPS - tank - often range as well
The exact values depend on setup, but saying "there are no real disadvantages for a kiting fit on your ship" is just another BS. Have you actually flown anything non brick-like?
Julius Foederatus wrote:And if it doesn't work that way, how is a ship with the shortest range ever going to apply damage on its own? Yet again, I'm not against making Gallente the fastest race, but the main issue is to allow kiting ships retain some chances against them. If it takes you way too long to get in range, then you must die in a fire and in no way Gallente boats could use some magic web-range bonuses, which will just grant them ability to get in range easily no matter what. Kiting ships don't have any granted ability to kill the opponents they engange, there's a constant struggle - unless, of course, you're one of those 'lock-f1-f8-orbit' guys.
As I already stated above, the very discussion is based on the fact that several game aspects are FUBAR.
- shield rigs and shield extenders don't slow you down. LOL? They should! - heavy missiles shoot up to 80 km which given their DPS is pretty OP - TEs grant +30% falloff, which is clearly way too much.
There's just too much range in the game atm. Or it's way too easy to gain it. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:18:00 -
[1301] - Quote
It's interesting that I have no issues with Gallente ships as they were and are now. I'm not the one crying about how bad blaster ships are. Since I've used them in intense engagements, for the most part, since I started pvp'ing in 2008.
Not to mention having flown them alot with various characters sense late 07.
I remember having fun with Thorax, Moa, Omen, Caracal, Vexor, Mrymidon, Bruitx fleets. 2 - 20 pilots having fun and flying spaceships. Going to 0.0 recently with friends (best ship is friendship) in Thorax's and ecm drones and owning nano-loser-h0m0-f@gs. Flying around in Caracal and sentry Vexor fleets. Flying many ships some find useless compared to battle-cruiser or compared to whatever most believe are worth flying.
I fly and have fun with most ships in-game. Most think blaster ships are broken. I don't! I know for a fact it has to do with the environment currently and where it's going. All close range ships are one dimensional and if they cannot tank alot of damage. They're useless when engaging the every increasing number of most of the losers in this game.
Blasters work primary in the frigate class. Where auto-cannons, pulse lasers, rockets and blaster are pretty homogeneous. To a lesser degree in large blaster too. Mainly, because most battleships are pretty immobile. Engagements are pretty static.
You cry about a issue. It's identified and you resist what you know to be true. Why? Because you don't want to make blasters close to pulse lasers? Something that was done to auto-cannons. Every close range ship including a stabber fleet issue has the same issue as a Brutix. Having to commit limits you. Those ships are not that popular and you don't find fleets of Stabber fleet issues.
How many fleets of HAM-Drakes do any of you see roaming around? Not many from what I see and I roam 100 -130 jumps per day. How many of you often leave the region you base in?
Is a shield-Hurricane with a warp scrambler be very good if it also has no tracking enhancers? I mean, a Hurricane would still be pretty fast, but would be limited to doing damage under warp scrambler range. Look @ the Serpentis cruiser or battleship. Not very good. When compared to a Cynabal, but it's still very fast and does alot of damage.
There are so many examples of ships that are very fast, but limited in range that are not good. Atleast compared with a setup that can increase range. Heavy missile, instead of heavy assault missile. |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:28:00 -
[1302] - Quote
Then what would you, oh master of pvp, call kiting? I'm not sure what gangs you fly in but good pvp is all about following a fleet doctrine, which means more than just sorting fits and calling primaries. People have to maneuver their ships and use their brains while still following the basic confines of the plan. So yes, it involves the FC telling you how to pilot your ship, otherwise you get caught and killed and your gang has that much less dps.
Also I lol'ed when you said kiting ships sacrifice range and DPS. The whole imbalance of the cane in today's pvp environment is that they get awesome dps at 20-30km with ACs and barrage, while still being faster than anything else out there. Canes sacrifice tank slightly, but not in any way that fundamentally impairs them. Drakes don't unless they go dual web, and even then they have pretty decent EHP. While they may have slightly less dps than brick setups, the whole point is that it's all relative: 50k ehp vs. 80k ehp is meaningless if the 50k ship has better dps, better range, and better speed, allowing it to dictate the fight from the start.
I don't understand why you think that any of the suggestions put forth would make kiting ships not have any chance against blaster pilots. You just have to actually make some serious sacrifices on your ship in order to kite. And it won't be viable against things like Harbingers that have great range and dps. But then again, your setup shouldn't be viable against every kind of ship out there, so that's all fine and dandy. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:39:00 -
[1303] - Quote
Whoever told you I fly in blobs? No need to use ueuphemisms like 'gang' or 'fleet doctrine'. Blob is a blob and that's it.
And - if you do enjoy flying there - who the hell told you blasters should be usable there
No need in bringing in OP ships like Cane or Drake. They are that popular for a reason.
Skipping OP ships and getting back to constructive discussion, I can tell you that my Nighthawk - a perfect kiting sample - is already next to useless against megapulses. It has literally no tank. I don't care about megapulses while flying, say, a Sleipnir. They don't track well enough at close range and I can tank them anyway.
You failed to get my message. Just fix shield-tank, heavy missiles, TE's etc. and all of a sudden Winmatar will barely retain a small window they can decently operate in. And Drakes won't be able to spam missiles from 80 km. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 19:40:00 -
[1304] - Quote
Also using mobile ships (kiting) can be easy. At-least in large fleets. It becomes harder with more targets on the field and the less in your fleet. Depending on the amount of frigates and ships that are able to project damage the other fleet has. Also, I tend to fly without logistics, which also allows many fleets to have it easy. Not to mention having to use un-bonused warp disruptor's and not bubbles or dedicated tackle like a Lachesis.
So 10 - 20 Drakes flying around with logistics do have it easy.
Also, it's easier to stay out of warp disruption range than hold it. Also, whom ever overheats first tends to dictate who gets away or gets caught. For example; When engaging a Dramiel in a Slicer I tend to over heat from the beginning and prolong getting caught. When a Dramiel pilot finally decides to overheat. I tend to double back to sling shot in scram range to prolong damage application. I either live or explode.
So when solo it is difficult when multi-ple ships are on the field. Also it's limiting. I cannot force a Brutix for example to not just mwd back to a gate if it attempted to overheat and catch me but failed. Which is how and where close range ships should be used. Places where high velocity means nothing. Where high vel ships work best are places like planets, belts and way away from a station or gate on grid. |
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 20:13:00 -
[1305] - Quote
If we're talking about "balancing" then maybe you should bring in OP ships, otherwise you kind of, you know, miss the whole ******* point of the exercise. And part of the problem is that blasters are not good in gang situations, so just saying they shouldn't be good there because they're not already good when we want to know how we can make them better is just dumb and lazy.
What does your Nighthawk do against blaster ships? We're not talking about megapulses here, we're talking about hybrids. Rails don't have the dps or utility to deal with kiting set ups, blasters don't have the range or the actual ability to apply dps against hulls that are almost always faster than your own.
And I don't care whether or not you fly in blobs, most pvp is done with multi pilots on each side, the tactics don't change dramatically whether its 5v5 or 50v50. If you're not going to engage in gang fights, how do you even have any experience with hybrid inadequacy in that regard? |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 20:22:00 -
[1306] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote: What does your Nighthawk do against blaster ships? We're not talking about megapulses here, we're talking about hybrids. Rails don't have the dps or utility to deal with kiting set ups, blasters don't have the range or the actual ability to apply dps against hulls that are almost always faster than your own.
It's all about paper, rock and scissors.
Rails outdamage beams since Crucible, btw. Use them if you think they'll suit you better than blast0rs. I for one have already designed a pretty good Astarte setup with rails. Absolution doesn't come close.
Getting back to topic, I've got to repeat once again - you seem to be missing the fact blasters are of no use only because of it being so easy to outrange them, thanks to TEs and great basic range of heavy missiles. And also the fact that Gallente ships tend to be outrun by shield-tanked ones only because of shield-tank not slowing you down. Address these issues and the range difference will get shortened by about 2/3 and speed difference by at least half. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 22:06:00 -
[1307] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote: And finally to the dude asking about cane fits, I don't have EFT in front of me cause I'm on a library computer atm, but if I recall a cane with 3x gyro, 2x TE, DCU or whatever people want to fit in that last slot, will go somewhere around 1.3km/s, which is way more than is necessary to kite any other BC, shield or otherwise. Having that extra nano will give you some extra time to get away and allow you a little more error room with overheats and such, but it's not strictly necessary to keep out of range of other ships.
you should not make any statements about fittings without consulting any fitting tools, because your memory fails you. and even an all V char should get problems perfoming easily what you are suggesting. but nevertheless the sinsiter looking amarr dude has a point in calling the tracking enhancer quite powerful.
all that head bashing in here will do no good, one should wait until ccp does the next balancing attemps. flaming all day long will not change that. |
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 03:27:00 -
[1308] - Quote
To fix hybrids you need to give them another role. There is no other solution. The reason is this:
If you had to design a close combat weapon/ship-combo in eve, what would it look like?
cap-free: a weapon that works exclusively within nos/neut range absolutely needs this characteristic. Giving this to a weapon that does work outside this range is harebrained. multiple damage types: you have due to the limited range a huge increase to your time to kill, this must be alleviated as much as possible by making the gap between paper dps and real dps as small as possible. the fastest and most agile ships: do i really need to say why a close combat weapon needs this? (some other stuff like shield tanking and utility highs for nos/neuts and other nasty surprises so its not just about dps would be nice as well, but the stuff above are the real must-haves for close combat).
So devs, the result is: you have designed the Minmatar as the close combat and sniping race (for sniping you absolutely need huge alpha or you can-¦t reasonably introduce sniping into the game). They are the ones optimized for it. Maybe that wasn-¦t intentionally, it-¦s a result of many many small changes over the years after all, so that can happen. But nonetheless it-¦s the current situation and you have to deal with it.
The Gallente/hybrids must not become like the Minnies/projectiles, so they can-¦t cover close combat and sniping any more (because they would need to become like those that are actually optimized for it).
Since the Minnies are already designed for it, give them the role of close combat and sniping: just change the ranges of the ACs to that of blasters (you might have to buff dps and will have to buff tracking to adjust those stats to the range change). And increase the range of Artys to those of rails (again damage and tracking needs adjusted to the range change). So the Minmatar-is-op-problem is resolved as well. They aren-¦t op, they are just designed for another role than that they are currently occupying.
The Gallente will take over the roles of the Minnies instead, all you have to do is giving them the ranges of the current projectile weapons (adjustments to damage and tracking because of the range change again). The ships not the fastest or the slowest, the weapons with flexible ranges and reasonably good damage and tracking, but uses both cap and ammo, fixed damage types and reload time and not really impressive alpha they are perfectly suited for a generalist role: not really outstanding anywhere, but easy and reliable to fly and good enough for being a viable alternative everywhere. Noone will cry op if the Gallente have the most flexible engagement range instead of the Minmatar, because they have many shortcomings instead of many advantages. But the Gallente won-¦t be gimped anymore as well, because they are very well designed for this role. Also: Caldari hybrid ships will be fixed like this as well.
So just by exchanging the weapons ranges of projectiles and hybrids (with adjustments to damage and tracking because of the range change) you have:
fixed Gallente/hybrids balancing issues fixed Minmatar/projectiles balancing issues fixed Caldari/hybrids balancing issues
increase the probing time to give the new sniping-arties just enough time to give off one shot with huge alpha and change position and you have:
reintroduced sniping. Without the problems caused by the fact that you tried to make low-alpha weapons do the sniping. "You either need less science fiction or more medication."
"Or less medication and more ammo!" |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 04:17:00 -
[1309] - Quote
I have no issue with allowing Gallente ships to have the highest velocity. However, I am against auto-cannons having anything like the falloff and optimal values of hybrids. I'm not against projectiles using capacitor. Does not make much sense with regard to real life, but hey! As for projectiles being limited in damage types as hybrids are now. Fine. Hybrids can have damage selection. No to losing Minmatar ships utility slots. I'll also throw in the a significant reduction in falloff of tracking enhancers.
Otherwise. I'm not willing to give up auto-cannons real flexibility (range ). Being able to engage close and @ medium range. Using capacitor is not that big of a deal. Damage selection is not that big of an issue. Very high velocity does not mean that much if there's not other factors that come into play. I'm also against Minmatar losing Artilleries volley damage.
Great! Now go on the test server or better yet tranq and fly a shield-Hurricane without tracking enhancers and fit a scrambler. You'll have most of what you've asked for. Come back and tell us how successful the new Gallente is. Mind you! You'll have alot more range than you would if you were using blaster, but hey. Most will get the point once anyone flies said set-up.
Anyone who has tried that set-up to see if Gallente would benefit or if it's just a lack of capacitor use or damage selection. Their opinion changes very quickly. Those who actually want to figure out what the issues truly are. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 04:47:00 -
[1310] - Quote
Anyway, their has been a significant change to hybrids. Rail-gun tended to be the only other option to artillery-cannon in ship classes not heavily bonused for their use.
For example; a Muninn has bonuses for using artillery, but most t1 Minmatar ships that are not specialised are able to use them. Most Amarr ships are not capable of this, because of the huge capacitor consumption of beam lasers. Rail-gun does not have that issue for the most part and now uses even less capacitor and power grid. How this translate into our current environment will be interesting.
All these set-ups below are a alternative to using artillery, but for Gallente ships to be viable in fleets. Medium Rail-gun will have no issues tracking ships destroyers and above @ around 12,000 meters and above. Minus some Cpu and power-grid issues on some ships. These set-ups are very viable. Again, a alternative to artillery-canon. Not to mention the utility of a large drone bay by all ships below. So yeah! Rail-guns are now significantly easier for most hybrid platforms to fit. Caldari hybrid ships are still pretty bad for the most part and I am speaking about the ships (bonuses, drones, damage or lack there of) and not the weapon system.
Brutix Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II
10MN MicroWarpdrive II Large Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Warp Disruptor II
200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Valkyrie II x5
[Thorax, Overdrive Injector System II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Warp Disruptor II
200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I
[Deimos Overdrive Injector System II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II
10MN MicroWarpdrive II Large Shield Extender II Warp Disruptor II
250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M [empty high slot]
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I |
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 09:04:00 -
[1311] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Anyway, their has been a significant change to hybrids. Rail-gun tended to be the only other option to artillery-cannon in ship classes not heavily bonused for their use.
For example; a Muninn has bonuses for using artillery, but most t1 Minmatar ships that are not specialised are able to use them. Most Amarr ships are not capable of this, because of the huge capacitor consumption of beam lasers. Rail-gun does not have that issue for the most part and now uses even less capacitor and power grid. How this translate into our current environment will be interesting.
All these set-ups below are a alternative to using artillery, but for Gallente ships to be viable in fleets. Medium Rail-gun will have no issues tracking ships destroyers and above @ around 12,000 meters and above. Minus some Cpu and power-grid issues on some ships. These set-ups are very viable. Again, a alternative to artillery-canon. Not to mention the utility of a large drone bay by all ships below. So yeah! Rail-guns are now significantly easier for most hybrid platforms to fit. Caldari hybrid ships are still pretty bad for the most part and I am speaking about the ships (bonuses, drones, damage or lack there of) and not the weapon system.
Brutix [shield] [Thorax [shield] [Deimos [shield]
There's the problem,yet again. You're having to shield tank those ships to try to make them viable! The Brutix has a rep bonus for crying out loud
Sort out the penalties associated with rigs and half of the remaining issues will go away. Either remove speed as an armour rig penalty (and why it was ever a penalty for having reps or resists I'll never understand apart from the usual laziness of giving identical problems to everything in a given rig section. Plating is big and heavy - ok, if you want to say there's a RP reason behind it then fine. But how do you justify it for reps?) or add speed as a drawback to shields.
Makes more sense to me that anything that adds real hp like extenders or plates should add mass; but anything that boosts resists ? Makes more sense for armour and shield resist mods to boost sig radius; rigs that boost rep and shield performance should affect something different again- tracking perhaps? Or anything else you care to add. But please, just lose speed penalties on armour rigs and lose armour penalties on speed rigs. You have made them mutually exclusive and it really hurts the possibilities for gallente ships. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 11:46:00 -
[1312] - Quote
Adding speed penalties to shield tank rigs (and extenders) is better than removing those from armour ones. Why? Because it will promote active tank.
So it would look like the following. passive tank: slow, huge EHP, cap independant, easy to fit, boring active tank: fast, small EHP, cap dependant, hard to fit, fun Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 11:52:00 -
[1313] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:m0cking bird wrote:... Brutix [shield] [Thorax [shield] [Deimos [shield]
There's the problem,yet again. You're having to shield tank those ships to try to make them viable! The Brutix has a rep bonus for crying out loud
since armor tank has moved from medium to low slots a long time ago, it always interfere with damage mods and stuff like that. these fits need the low slots for other stuff than tank to make them viable. why limit yourself in only using one possibility of tanking? and reject viable fits just because there using a different approach than the usual one? as for the brutix, one has to admit ignoring a bonus is not perfect, but there is no necessity to always use all boni. if the fitting is viable for its intended role then i dont see a problem.
the only other option would be decreasing number of mid slots on gallente ships and increaseing the low slot number. infact, giving gallente boats the slot layout of amarr. i vote for versatility ;)
Nikuno wrote: Sort out the penalties associated with rigs and half of the remaining issues will go away. Either remove speed as an armour rig penalty (and why it was ever a penalty for having reps or resists I'll never understand apart from the usual laziness of giving identical problems to everything in a given rig section. Plating is big and heavy - ok, if you want to say there's a RP reason behind it then fine. But how do you justify it for reps?) or add speed as a drawback to shields.
Makes more sense to me that anything that adds real hp like extenders or plates should add mass; but anything that boosts resists ? Makes more sense for armour and shield resist mods to boost sig radius; rigs that boost rep and shield performance should affect something different again- tracking perhaps? Or anything else you care to add. But please, just lose speed penalties on armour rigs and lose armour penalties on speed rigs. You have made them mutually exclusive and it really hurts the possibilities for gallente ships.
sounds like a really bad idea to me, given the fact that minmatar would profit much more from that than gallente boats. imagine the might of a cane with speed rigs but no gimped armor, because the armor reduces the speed but the rigs compensate without reducing the ehp. i certainly would like that, but it will not solve our problem.
|
Solinuas
Beyond Evil and Good
86
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 12:26:00 -
[1314] - Quote
It seems the most preferred and said methods after reading all 66 pages are as follows
1) Gal needs to be the fastest race 2) blasters need enough DPS to make up for the net 0 of burning into range 3) blasters need an inherent advantage over other turrets that is not just superior DPS |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 13:02:00 -
[1315] - Quote
Unfortunetly most tag cloud creators do not work on the https rss feed of eve forums. I will do it manually :( That needs some time.... i hope to get the cloud for you till tomorrow.
As far as my results go till now. the above poster is correct with the words range, speed, blasters as the top results. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 15:29:00 -
[1316] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Nikuno wrote: Sort out the penalties associated with rigs and half of the remaining issues will go away. Either remove speed as an armour rig penalty (and why it was ever a penalty for having reps or resists I'll never understand apart from the usual laziness of giving identical problems to everything in a given rig section. Plating is big and heavy - ok, if you want to say there's a RP reason behind it then fine. But how do you justify it for reps?) or add speed as a drawback to shields.
Makes more sense to me that anything that adds real hp like extenders or plates should add mass; but anything that boosts resists ? Makes more sense for armour and shield resist mods to boost sig radius; rigs that boost rep and shield performance should affect something different again- tracking perhaps? Or anything else you care to add. But please, just lose speed penalties on armour rigs and lose armour penalties on speed rigs. You have made them mutually exclusive and it really hurts the possibilities for gallente ships.
sounds like a really bad idea to me, given the fact that minmatar would profit much more from that than gallente boats. imagine the might of a cane with speed rigs but no gimped armor, because the armor reduces the speed but the rigs compensate without reducing the ehp. i certainly would like that, but it will not solve our problem.
No, I clearly stated that shield extenders and armour plates should BOTH increase the ship's mass, this would mean the canes sharing the same penalty if they wanted to go for ehp buffer tanking.
Rather than the rig groupings being [everything armour=speed loss] [everything shield = sig bloom] it should be [everything adding hp=speed loss] [everything giving resists=sig bloom] [everything boosting shield boost or armour reps= some other penalty]
This would be far more balanced and give a reason for active reps as many, including yourself, have stated. Now to see if CCP think the same way. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 18:46:00 -
[1317] - Quote
The ballance is done no need to keep going on. there are alot of other mods in the game that are in need or ballancing. Tracking enhansers compaired to tracking computers is one, that's part of the reason that Mini are uber as they shield tank and use the enhanser while other gun races use computers. Another hit galle took was the sensor damp nerf, yes they were overpowered but halfing their stats and limiting to one type was too much. Over all when scripts were introduced ships that used medium slot modules took a hit. and mini by default got a boost.
It happened little by little step by step must mini have directly and indirectly received too many improvements. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 19:07:00 -
[1318] - Quote
no, actually i didnt make my self clear.
Nikuno wrote: (...) and lose armour penalties on speed rigs (...)
baaad idea.
the rest may be worth a shot on sisi. this thread contains a lotof good ideas. it's time for testing them, there has been enough talking on the subject.
|
Joss56
Kernel of War Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 19:51:00 -
[1319] - Quote
Rails are in need to +/- 20% DPS to be a decent choice when you pop structures, for fleet fights since it doesn't have the big alpha of arty they're useless, doesn't matter if they do more dps overtime, you want to one shot stuff and rails are the last choice for this.
Blasters? -slow bricks, severly lacking flexibility of range cumulated with dmg types fixed and a very poo dps in the end of falloff.
The only viable blaster ships for fleets are Rokh's if someday blaster get more range, untill then we will most probably never see any of those in fleets. Hyperions and megas for this purpose are even worst, they're just good for brawl at gates and stations, open your eyes.
|
mine mi
FW Scuad E C L I P S E
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 21:35:00 -
[1320] - Quote
I think you should make a new set of weapons, such as a plasma cannon or a particle accelerator, trying to balance a weapon in two completely different types of ships must be a nightmare. |
|
To mare
Advanced Technology
20
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 22:46:00 -
[1321] - Quote
fking forum eated my post
atm blaster weapon era fine on TQ the main problem is the ships that use them, they are slow and they struggle to get in range especially when fitted with plates and trimark, many of you suggested to remove the speed penalty from armor rigs but that would also boost amarr and some minmatar ships and they dont need a boost. so my idea is to boost reiforced bulkheads, give the a +45% to ship hull hp remove all the speed/agi penalty from them and just give them a locking RANGE penalty like 7,5% per module because the engeneer have to remove some electronics for extra hull hp (this also prevents megabaits with 7 bulkheads) drop the cpu requirements to 25/30 cpu per module.
what we get in this way? all the hull tanking ships keep their original speed agility with a decent buffer tank a mega fitted with 1DC+4 bulkheads would have a speed of 1000ms (1500ms in OH) with a 130k EHP tank, 2 slot left for MFS and all the rigs slot free for hybrid rigs 1dmg rig +2 tracking rigs are easy to fit now with reduced fittings for hybrid weapons, of course repairs will be harder and costy but you will save about 40mils on rigs so its a fair tradeoff i think. in this way you can also keep gal ship fully capable to fit a armor tank if the situation need it like RR fleets but you will have a solid buffer tank for solo/small gang situations.
and if we wanna complete the job it wouldnt be a bad idea to change the 7,5% to armor rep in a + 5% hull hp |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 23:22:00 -
[1322] - Quote
To mare wrote:fking forum eated my post
atm blaster weapon era fine on TQ the main problem is the ships that use them, they are slow and they struggle to get in range especially when fitted with plates and trimark, many of you suggested to remove the speed penalty from armor rigs but that would also boost amarr and some minmatar ships and they dont need a boost. so my idea is to boost reiforced bulkheads, give the a +45% to ship hull hp remove all the speed/agi penalty from them and just give them a locking RANGE penalty like 7,5% per module because the engeneer have to remove some electronics for extra hull hp (this also prevents megabaits with 7 bulkheads) drop the cpu requirements to 25/30 cpu per module.
what we get in this way? all the hull tanking ships keep their original speed agility with a decent buffer tank a mega fitted with 1DC+4 bulkheads would have a speed of 1000ms (1500ms in OH) with a 130k EHP tank, 2 slot left for MFS and all the rigs slot free for hybrid rigs 1dmg rig +2 tracking rigs are easy to fit now with reduced fittings for hybrid weapons, of course repairs will be harder and costy but you will save about 40mils on rigs so its a fair tradeoff i think. in this way you can also keep gal ship fully capable to fit a armor tank if the situation need it like RR fleets but you will have a solid buffer tank for solo/small gang situations.
and if we wanna complete the job it wouldnt be a bad idea to change the 7,5% to armor rep in a + 5% hull hp
And how do you want to bring active tankers back to live? Equip Armor and have the same old problems again or equip Hull repairs? But then you need to change the mods or some bonuses becouse at the moment Hull Repairers work very slowly. |
To mare
Advanced Technology
20
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 23:32:00 -
[1323] - Quote
active armor tanker will still be able still to tank the way they do now
active tanking is no more viable not because the modules/ships are bad but because everyone prefer to blob than give a fair fight when they might lose the ships.
if you want to bring back active tanking you have to change something in the gameplay to give more reward to solo (or very small gang) before changing modules/ships |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 02:22:00 -
[1324] - Quote
To mare wrote:if you want to bring back active tanking you have to change something in the gameplay to give more reward to solo (or very small gang) before changing modules/ships
Impossible for other purpose than gate camping, station games, PVE and the very occasional fight vs a turd or sleepy guy engaging you with a pve fit or just because it's a noob.
Has far has the game evolves, has far has the number of players evolve, the numbers game will be worst than it is right now.
Before you try to do something for active tanking you need to consider this:
-benefits of using it vs buffer: actually none unless PVE
-drawbacks: extreme cap hungry, repair amount/cycle ridiculous in an environment where the numbers game IS the way to go
You have the heaviest cap hungry repair system making your ship cap stability extremely worst than buffer -unless pve- knowing at any moment, from one second to another there where you were 1vs1 you're now 1vs at least 3 but you can expect at least double but it's too late, you're already neuted you can't repair any more, your guns can't shoot and an enormous part of your tank EHP is just gone with your empty cap.
Shield buffer is the better way to go now, because self regen, because you keep the agility and the speed, because you keep a ton crap of cap for better guns, because you can now eventually fit neuts and now you can full load your low slots of dmg mods and because shield logistics are way better than armor logistics.
I've stopped trying armor stuff once I've realised there's nothing I can do to make it better and a valid choice vs shield stuff, just like use hybrids vs projectiles, some day you need to stop trying the impossible and start having fun.
|
To mare
Advanced Technology
20
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 02:45:00 -
[1325] - Quote
i agree with most of the things you say but my point was still to revam hull tanking to give a alternative form of buffer tank that use low slot and add no agility/speed penality to gallente blaster ships wich is what they actually need more. if you want to revamp active tanking you have my full support but thats not the place |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 15:00:00 -
[1326] - Quote
Well, it's been a few days now and the latest snapshot stands like this;
1Drake27661 2Hurricane16528 3Abaddon15827 4Tengu10749 5Armageddon7621 6Tornado4664 7Tempest4215 8Scimitar4193 9Cynabal3833 10Sabre3668 11Thrasher3280 12Huginn2922 13Rifter2712 14Vagabond2606 15Rapier2539 16Loki2463 17Capsule2383 18Lachesis2329 19Proteus2033 20Falcon2016
1Heavy Missile Launcher II12499 2425mm AutoCannon II4795 3Mega Pulse Laser II4591 4200mm AutoCannon II2907 51400mm Howitzer Artillery II2634 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II2293 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II2150 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II2092 9800mm Repeating Artillery II1922 10150mm Light AutoCannon II1921 11Heavy Pulse Laser II1487 12Heavy Neutron Blaster II1064 13Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I937 14Light Neutron Blaster II859 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I795 16Neutron Blaster Cannon II693 17'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher678 18280mm Howitzer Artillery II618 19Light Ion Blaster II605 20Dual 180mm AutoCannon II594
The resurgence of hybrid use is non-existent, and this should be on the back of the wave of euphoria over the buff. Note that the Tornado tier3 BC is already as popular and successful as the entire hybrid ship range from both caldari and gallente combined ! How long does CCP intend to wait to identify how successful or otherwise the hybrid changes have been? |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 15:22:00 -
[1327] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Well, it's been a few days now and the latest snapshot stands like this;
How long does CCP intend to wait to identify how successful or otherwise the hybrid changes have been?
We are no longer sticky :) That should answer this question |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7385
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 15:39:00 -
[1328] - Quote
The changes to blasters were not enough, there is still little point using them over lasers or projectiles. It's as simple as that.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 19:30:00 -
[1329] - Quote
Typical really. We'll see in the coming weeks if all of this was just an old case of CCP fitting a damage control. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:47:00 -
[1330] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:Typical really. We'll see in the coming weeks if all of this was just an old case of CCP fitting a damage control.
|
|
Spugg Galdon
Callidus Temple Forsaken.Empire
117
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 11:05:00 -
[1331] - Quote
Oh well.
Never mind.
Back to using Winmatar, Drakes, and Pulse frikkin' lazors
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 12:11:00 -
[1332] - Quote
Uhh. Is this all for Gallente Ships, Rails and Blasters ? Must be joking !!! |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 12:12:00 -
[1333] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so. What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing. Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months: .
So Tallest, have you made any progress so far? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 15:59:00 -
[1334] - Quote
Solinuas wrote:It seems the most preferred and said methods after reading all 66 pages are as follows
1) Gal needs to be the fastest race 2) blasters need enough DPS to make up for the net 0 of burning into range 3) blasters need an inherent advantage over other turrets that is not just superior DPS
Exactly.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who understands the demands of this thread.
More importantly, it's Crucible's lack of any of these three which explains why this thread continues to grow.
And no, I don't think hybrids need ALL of this stuff, but depending on the changes made, it might need to pull from some of it (multiple). |
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 18:19:00 -
[1335] - Quote
Let's ask ourselves why they removed the web bonus on the Talos? Did it make the ship too effective as a blaster platform? What's the problem with Gallente having an effective blaster platform?
Bonused webs are one way to achieve effective control over combat range. Bonused webs also amount to the same thing as a straight speed boost; namely get in range and stay there. So, why not give web bonuses to blaster boats? Blaster boats should be the pinnacle of tacklers, they need the ability to effectively do what they were designed to do.
The issue with the old 90% webs wasn't that they were effective on a few ships, the issue was EVERY ship could fit them. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 22:43:00 -
[1336] - Quote
I agree with you on that one Zachis about the 90webs were too much for every ship in game.
Thats why i'm averse to the idea of the rigs changing. I think either style of bonus for gals would be a great change. 90% webs or a armor rig bonus that removes the penalty from said rig. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 07:37:00 -
[1337] - Quote
The problem wasnt that 90% webs made the talos effective, but that the 90% web made the talos effective against small ships; small ships are supposed to be the counter to the new battlecruisers due to their use of large (poor tracking) guns, but with a 90% web, the talos could engage ships of all sizes
That being said, im not so sure that 90% webs are the answer because, when your slower than your opponents, you could have a 100% web and it still wouldnt matter because you would never get in range to use it. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 10:36:00 -
[1338] - Quote
I think web strength won't help me with the range issue :p |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 10:49:00 -
[1339] - Quote
Sigras wrote:The problem wasnt that 90% webs made the talos effective, but that the 90% web made the talos effective against small ships; small ships are supposed to be the counter to the new battlecruisers due to their use of large (poor tracking) guns, but with a 90% web, the talos could engage ships of all sizes
That being said, im not so sure that 90% webs are the answer because, when your slower than your opponents, you could have a 100% web and it still wouldnt matter because you would never get in range to use it. then why the tornado is faster than the cruisers ?? |
Viribus
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
29
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 12:21:00 -
[1340] - Quote
A sensible fix would be a massive increase to the agility of gallente ships. Not 5% for every hull, closer to 35%. Angel Cartel-tier.
Making blasterboats extremely maneuverable would allow them to more easily get tackle on faster ships within short range, as well as apply their dps earlier. |
|
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
43
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 13:52:00 -
[1341] - Quote
Viribus wrote:A sensible fix would be a massive increase to the agility of gallente ships. Not 5% for every hull, closer to 35%. Angel Cartel-tier.
Making blasterboats extremely maneuverable would allow them to more easily get tackle on faster ships within short range, as well as apply their dps earlier.
We need speed more than agility, to charge into range. Both would be best, granted, but we need to give the Minnies something
Messing about with battleships in a spreadsheet. What do people think of:
GÇó Dominix - 109 m/s, 97.1 kT x0.1254 (16.88s) -> 110 m/s, 96 kT x0.1265 (16.84s) GÇó Megathron* - 115 m/s, 98.4 kT x0.1216 (16.59s) -> 120 m/s, 98 kT x0.1205 (16.37s) GÇó Hyperion* - 115 m/s, 100.2 kT x0.1178 (16.36s) -> 130 m/s, 94 kT x0.127 (16.55s) GÇó Typhoon - 130 m/s, 103.6 kT x0.116 (16.66s) -> 115 m/s, 105 kT x0.11 (16.01s) GÇó Tempest - 120 m/s, 103.3 kT x0.12 (17.18s) -> 110 m/s, 104.5 kT x0.1115 (16.15s) GÇó Maelstrom - 94 m/s (), 103.6 kT x136 (19.53s) -> 94 m/s, 104.5 kT x0.113 (16.37s)
?
*Trying differentiate these two. Mega has tracking bonus and Hyp tank, so I thought Mega = nimble, Hyp = bullrush.
EDIT: On second thought, this doesn't give the Mins enough of an agility advantage.
GÇó Dominix -> 110 m/s, 96 kT x0.128 (17.03s) GÇó Megathron -> 120 m/s, 98 kT x0.1215 (16.51s) GÇó Hyperion -> 130 m/s, 94 kT x0.13 (16.94s) GÇó Typhoon -> 115 m/s, 105 kT x0.109 (15.87s) GÇó Tempest -> 110 m/s, 104.5 kT x0.11 (15.94s) GÇó Maelstrom -> 94 m/s, 104.5 kT x0.112 (16.23s) |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 18:48:00 -
[1342] - Quote
Clearly, this gallente boost was a roaring sucess, not sure what your all whin....
1Drake52592 2Hurricane24497 3Abaddon19255 4Tengu12979 5Armageddon8718 6Scimitar7012 7Tornado6982 8Maelstrom6169 9Tempest5572 10Sabre5237 11Cynabal5144 12Thrasher4384 13Huginn4355 14Loki4175 15Vagabond3817 16Lachesis3730 17Rapier3719 18Rifter3298 19Capsule3156 20Hound2982
...oh. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 19:39:00 -
[1343] - Quote
Sigras wrote:The problem wasnt that 90% webs made the talos effective, but that the 90% web made the talos effective against small ships; small ships are supposed to be the counter to the new battlecruisers due to their use of large (poor tracking) guns, but with a 90% web, the talos could engage ships of all sizes.
Excellent point.
And I think one which also has a simple fix, namely to add signature radius to turret ammo. Currently if you can track it, you can hit it for full damage. If you added in a sig radius component to turret ammo, then BS sized guns would be less effective/non-effective against small targets. Wouldn't matter how slow they were. |
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
43
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 20:00:00 -
[1344] - Quote
Zachis wrote:And I think one which also has a simple fix, namely to add signature radius to turret ammo. Currently if you can track it, you can hit it for full damage. If you added in a sig radius component to turret ammo, then BS sized guns would be less effective/non-effective against small targets. Wouldn't matter how slow they were.
a) Ammo doesn't say anything about sig radius (...and most of it doesn't say anything about tracking either), but guns do b) Because of the way the turret formulae work ( http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Turret_damage ), signature resolution and tracking are two sides of the same coin. Doubling signature resolution has the exact same effect as halving tracking.
In order to make this work you'd have to rewrite the turret formulae, which is very much a non-trivial thing.
Though I do think it's something that needs looking at. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 20:31:00 -
[1345] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Clearly, this gallente boost was a roaring sucess, not sure what your all whin....
1Drake52592 2Hurricane24497 3Abaddon19255 4Tengu12979 5Armageddon8718 6Scimitar7012 7Tornado6982 8Maelstrom6169 9Tempest5572 10Sabre5237 11Cynabal5144 12Thrasher4384 13Huginn4355 14Loki4175 15Vagabond3817 16Lachesis3730 17Rapier3719 18Rifter3298 19Capsule3156 20Hound2982
...oh. at least tier 3 bc is a success , even if it is only winmatard who would have thought ?:O |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 21:30:00 -
[1346] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Clearly, this gallente boost was a roaring sucess, not sure what your all whin....
1Drake52592 2Hurricane24497 3Abaddon19255 4Tengu12979 5Armageddon8718 6Scimitar7012 7Tornado6982 8Maelstrom6169 9Tempest5572 10Sabre5237 11Cynabal5144 12Thrasher4384 13Huginn4355 14Loki4175 15Vagabond3817 16Lachesis3730 17Rapier3719 18Rifter3298 19Capsule3156 20Hound2982
...oh. at least tier 3 bc is a success , even if it is only winmatard who would have thought ?:O
This whole topic is becomming rediculous... |
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 21:33:00 -
[1347] - Quote
Autonomous Monster wrote:Zachis wrote:And I think one which also has a simple fix, namely to add signature radius to turret ammo. Currently if you can track it, you can hit it for full damage. If you added in a sig radius component to turret ammo, then BS sized guns would be less effective/non-effective against small targets. Wouldn't matter how slow they were. a) Ammo doesn't say anything about sig radius (...and most of it doesn't say anything about tracking either), but guns do b) Because of the way the turret formulae work ( http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Turret_damage ), signature resolution and tracking are two sides of the same coin. Doubling signature resolution has the exact same effect as halving tracking. In order to make this work you'd have to rewrite the turret formulae, which is very much a non-trivial thing. Though I do think it's something that needs looking at.
Thank you for the link.
What I would propose is to make the turret damage equation more akin to the damage equation for missiles, where signature radius and explosion radius factor into the mix. Add a signature radius of the charge compared to the signature radius of the target into the damage side of the equation. Without messing with the current tracking formula for turrets.
My concern is, that without some modification to the turret damage equation any effective change to blaster boats is going to make them either too effective against smaller targets and imbalanced (worst case) or still ineffective (worst case #2, current status quo).
Regardless of any changes CCP makes or doesn't make, this thread and the discussion of hybrid weapons has been very fruitful for me personally, and hopefully demonstrated to CCP just how intertwined a true hybrid rebalance is with all of the combat mechanics in EVE. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 11:28:00 -
[1348] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:then why the tornado is faster than the cruisers ??
Because CCP either didn't listen to the concerns of myself and many others or they started public testing too late in the process to actually react to criticism and suggestions while they spend all their time giving the Talos a 25m3 drone bay... . The new battlecruisers are supposed to be faster than battleships, however making them faster than T1 and T2 cruisers is a bad thing as they instead should have made them the SIZE of cruisers but speed close to the other battlecruisers. The new concept of tier 3 BC's have given sniping a slight come back, but in the process neglected many old traits that kind of kept Eve together and I hope a few things will get polished soon...
- Making them smaller is fine by me (less damage from large weapons)
- Making them slower is definately required (plz dont take a **** on cruisers/hacs)
- Talos and other gallente blasterships need more agility and/or less mass (the missing link of hybrid balancing)
Also T2 long range ammo on short range weapon system in my opinion makes an unbalanced difference in why most people don't need long range weapon systems anymore, but this is mostly another issue.
Tornado works nice because
- They can pull range on anything but fast frigs making them pretty safe to fly
- They can snipe out of sentry gun range with enough artillery alpha to nuke small targets in 1 go
- Autocannons can hit at extreme range with good damage without getting too close to be in trouble
Oracle can do the same, however not fast enough to be worth it. Talos with blasters are still forced to be in range where it will get in trouble and railguns still don't have enough punch kill stuff on gates. Naga might be able to pull off the range with blasters and null, however none of them can compete with the Tornado for being ******** fast and able of escaping most tackling attempts except an unexpected killerfleet on a gate.
Pinky |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 15:40:00 -
[1349] - Quote
Hey Mr CCP Talles I've got a nice joke 4 U
I got in to the intaki station on SISI and I got one fresh shiny awesome overpowered Diemost.
I got 5 T2 neutrons 1 T2 MWD 1 meta 4 web (awesome) and since my fitting window was telling me my ship was already caped out with this I got a T2 med cap injector.
This is the point where it becomes really funny.
When I looked in to my ship stas I thought I was with my forum alt and his 900Sp, so I checked an no I was not dreaming !! My Diemost had 50 w (-/+) left to fit some tank and put some dps mods on it.
Now this is very funny, I couldn't find the civilian mods to fit it !!
Did you guys forgot to put those on SISI?? |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 15:48:00 -
[1350] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Clearly, this gallente boost was a roaring sucess, not sure what your all whin....
1Drake52592 2Hurricane24497 3Abaddon19255 4Tengu12979 5Armageddon8718 6Scimitar7012 7Tornado6982 8Maelstrom6169 9Tempest5572 10Sabre5237 11Cynabal5144 12Thrasher4384 13Huginn4355 14Loki4175 15Vagabond3817 16Lachesis3730 17Rapier3719 18Rifter3298 19Capsule3156 20Hound2982
...oh. at least tier 3 bc is a success , even if it is only winmatard who would have thought ?:O This whole topic is becomming rediculous...
You may find the topic ridiculous, what I find ridiculous is how many people around are totally incapable to read some numbers. It's not rocket science.
EDIT: Wait I see an hybrid ship at 6th position, it's a scimitar |
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 16:17:00 -
[1351] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Hey Mr CCP Talles I've got a nice joke 4 U
I got in to the intaki station on SISI and I got one fresh shiny awesome overpowered Diemost.
I got 5 T2 neutrons 1 T2 MWD 1 meta 4 web (awesome) and since my fitting window was telling me my ship was already caped out with this I got a T2 med cap injector.
This is the point where it becomes really funny.
When I looked in to my ship stas I thought I was with my forum alt and his 900Sp, so I checked an no I was not dreaming !! My Diemost had 50 w (-/+) left to fit some tank and put some dps mods on it.
Now this is very funny, I couldn't find the civilian mods to fit it !!
Did you guys forgot to put those on SISI??
No it is intended , it has to be "least" tanky one due to it has the best speed and versatility so it can choose its fights and disengage easily if outgunned/tanked. Oh wait you are not talking about everyones favourite race :( my mistake
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 17:01:00 -
[1352] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Hey Mr CCP Talles I've got a nice joke 4 U
I got in to the intaki station on SISI and I got one fresh shiny awesome overpowered Diemost.
I got 5 T2 neutrons 1 T2 MWD 1 meta 4 web (awesome) and since my fitting window was telling me my ship was already caped out with this I got a T2 med cap injector.
This is the point where it becomes really funny.
When I looked in to my ship stas I thought I was with my forum alt and his 900Sp, so I checked an no I was not dreaming !! My Diemost had 50 w (-/+) left to fit some tank and put some dps mods on it.
Now this is very funny, I couldn't find the civilian mods to fit it !!
Did you guys forgot to put those on SISI?? No it is intended , it has to be "least" tanky one due to it has the best speed and versatility so it can choose its fights and disengage easily if outgunned/tanked. Oh wait you are not talking about everyones favourite race :( my mistake
W8 I'm going to try to fit my vagabond with 425mm T2 auto canons and see if I can fully fit the ship like in TQ. Who knows |
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
43
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 19:01:00 -
[1353] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:W8 I'm going to try to fit my vagabond with 425mm T2 auto canons and see if I can fully fit the ship like in TQ. Who knows
Why are we comparing it to the Vaga instead of the Muninn? The 'rax is the tier 3 cruiser. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 19:31:00 -
[1354] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Hey Mr CCP Talles I've got a nice joke 4 U
I got in to the intaki station on SISI and I got one fresh shiny awesome overpowered Diemost.
I got 5 T2 neutrons 1 T2 MWD 1 meta 4 web (awesome) and since my fitting window was telling me my ship was already caped out with this I got a T2 med cap injector.
This is the point where it becomes really funny.
When I looked in to my ship stas I thought I was with my forum alt and his 900Sp, so I checked an no I was not dreaming !! My Diemost had 50 w (-/+) left to fit some tank and put some dps mods on it.
Now this is very funny, I couldn't find the civilian mods to fit it !!
Did you guys forgot to put those on SISI?? No it is intended , it has to be "least" tanky one due to it has the best speed and versatility so it can choose its fights and disengage easily if outgunned/tanked. Oh wait you are not talking about everyones favourite race :( my mistake W8 I'm going to try to fit my vagabond with 425mm T2 auto canons and see if I can fully fit the ship like in TQ. Who knows
Please let us know what you find out :P |
FlameGlow
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
48
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 19:49:00 -
[1355] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Hey Mr CCP Talles I've got a nice joke 4 U
I got in to the intaki station on SISI and I got one fresh shiny awesome overpowered Diemost.
I got 5 T2 neutrons 1 T2 MWD 1 meta 4 web (awesome) and since my fitting window was telling me my ship was already caped out with this I got a T2 med cap injector.
This is the point where it becomes really funny.
When I looked in to my ship stas I thought I was with my forum alt and his 900Sp, so I checked an no I was not dreaming !! My Diemost had 50 w (-/+) left to fit some tank and put some dps mods on it.
Now this is very funny, I couldn't find the civilian mods to fit it !!
Did you guys forgot to put those on SISI??
I got a better joke: Eagle It is out of grid with just the 5 T2 250mm rails and mwd |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 20:27:00 -
[1356] - Quote
Tallest where are you? |
Phunnestyle
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 23:30:00 -
[1357] - Quote
Tallets is hopefully busy ammending Supers drone bay capacity to 20 FBs & 20 Fighters!
P.S. loving astarte/vindi fleets now & even 425mm rail Rohk fleets XD something different...... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 00:08:00 -
[1358] - Quote
Well - Eagle is not supposed to be fitting MWD and Deimos is not supposed to fit neutrons... But Im pretty sure CCP are looking through most hybrid ships to make sure they can fit what CCP intends them to. Just because you guys fail at fitting stuff that the ships are not designed for doesn't mean everything is entirely broken (However I'm not saying that certain ships lack something). |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 00:29:00 -
[1359] - Quote
FlameGlow wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Hey Mr CCP Talles I've got a nice joke 4 U
I got in to the intaki station on SISI and I got one fresh shiny awesome overpowered Diemost.
I got 5 T2 neutrons 1 T2 MWD 1 meta 4 web (awesome) and since my fitting window was telling me my ship was already caped out with this I got a T2 med cap injector.
This is the point where it becomes really funny.
When I looked in to my ship stas I thought I was with my forum alt and his 900Sp, so I checked an no I was not dreaming !! My Diemost had 50 w (-/+) left to fit some tank and put some dps mods on it.
Now this is very funny, I couldn't find the civilian mods to fit it !!
Did you guys forgot to put those on SISI?? I got a better joke: Eagle It is out of grid with just the 5 T2 250mm rails and mwd
haha that one is funny too. Ho god makes a lot of time I haven't laugh like that |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 00:29:00 -
[1360] - Quote
F____ing ganked again by this fracking stupid forum !!! grrrrrrrr |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 00:42:00 -
[1361] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Well - Eagle is not supposed to be fitting MWD and Deimos is not supposed to fit neutrons...
Who said the Diemost, for memory is the Gallente HEAVY ASSAULT CRUISER , is not intended to fit neutrons? -where did you got that?? And where did you got that Eagle is not supposed to fit mwd?
Please links or you're just getting that stuff out of your ass, and that would be silly.
T2 Heavy assault cruisers, high end cruisers for specific tasks -read DPS- not being able to fit high end guns, decent tank, decent prop mods and ewar: web/disruptor., and never ever being cap stable even with AB instead... ridiculous design, but you have the right to love it.
You call that "high end" or T2 cruiser?? - you really think it's not meant to use the tools that help him do his job? You think this ship using the worst range weapon system, has to fit the lowest tier weapons and by so reduce even more his range and dps just to fit a stupid plate? it still dies the most, and eagle less just because doesn't undock
C'mon, lets be serious for a second. It's just like everything else in gallente line up, can succeed bet there's no reason on picking that one when you have better out there.
Edit: for your information even a stupid Navy Stabber is capable of fit highest end tier weapons and mwd, decent tank and web/scram, my version of NS has double prop, uses 220mm Vulcans (almost same dps than 425mm) keeps a very decent tank web and disruptor. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 01:15:00 -
[1362] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Pretty bad story:
I'll stick with a Mongol and Viking analogy. 25 viking warriors on foot raid a village. Woman and children. Smashing and grabing. Stolen gold. Now! A single Mongol warrior returns to his village while this is going on. Mongol warrior has a bow and arrow, short sword and is riding a horse. He starts shooting arows @ Vikings and takes out 2. The rest start rushing after the lone Mongol warrior and he rides, taking the Viking raiders to more open ground (Hurricane).
In the chase he drops 5 more Vikinge his mobility. Vikings atempt to throw axe's but cannot throw it far enought to be effective and cannot out run a horse. Now, the Mongol has brought the Vikings to a space where the Mongol has a advantage. More space to use superior mobility. Mongol kills the Vikings still not smart enough to disengage and move to either a forest or back to the village where the Mongol warrior has less of an advantage. (Mongol = Hurricane or Harbinger versus Vikings = Brutix
Clearly, the concept behind Mongol warriors martial tactics seem superior. Although limited to open area's where slower combatant have no hope of escape.
How could the Vikings change this. Well, they could all get horses the next time they raid. Great! Problem solved. More speed. Above happens again. Mongol starts taking out 2 viking raiders again. He now cannot out run the Vikings and he will be caught sooner or later. He just needs to prolong being caught as long as possible while taking out Viking Raiders. Out of the 25 he has killed 10 and is now caught or in a situation where he cannot run. Oh well! Go down fighting and kill more Vikings while they rush you for the final blow. 2 more Vikings are dead.
(Mongol = heavy missile Drake versus any other battle-cruiser)
Clearly much has not change. The focking Mongle is still able to prolong a chase long enough to pretty generate the same results. Except he is caught and killed in the end, which means success I suppose and more gold for whom ever is left. Still that is a costly battle.
Throw a Viking in this same situation and he is very limited. Mongles raided his village. viking shows up. If he rushes one and he alerts the others. He is dead. If he manage to kill one. He could not hope to out run the rest if they see viking killing one of there dudes. Clearly he must stay in the village to limit advantage of mobility and range of Mongol or else dead. He is dead anyway so he tries to suicide another Mongol before he goes and fail dies to arrows or blob of Mongol swords.
Ight. 300 years l8er. There's some innovation. Thanks to a new handsome viking named proxyyyy. Takes 300 years because the rest of his community have identified the issue along time ago, but think Vikings with bow and arrows and horses is not manly enough. Proxyyy leads his merry band of new Vikings raiding villages. Mongol warrior comes out of nowhere and kills a Viking. Another viking sees this and shoots him dead with a arrow. Yey! More profit because some dumb-ass Viking let his guard down and failed. The rest of us are good. We roll out like woman with vaginas because we use pink bows and arrows and ride unicorns.
-man it feels good to be a viking. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 09:22:00 -
[1363] - Quote
Can someone translate that drivel please? |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 11:35:00 -
[1364] - Quote
It is something about having more range and being able to dictate range wins you fights. Covered in some sort of medieval scenario about horses, bows and axes and the general proxyyy nonsense.
As for the hybrid "buff" it is in general a very big disappointment all around outside frigs and I am not really sure why there are so many changes that are intended to make gallente less worse, instead of actually fixing what broke gallente blaster ships 3 years ago(lack of close range efficiency in scenarios blaster ship are suitable) and adjust the rest later on.
Also I keep wondering why I can read more CCP feedback in Eve General than here. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 12:18:00 -
[1365] - Quote
Well at-least some people found it funny. This awesome story actually came to me in a dream. Just had to tell it. Also, CCP is done with blasters. You cannot fix what is not broken. At-least Gallente ships stats and their bonuses.
The issue is not limited to Gallente ships and can be found in all races. Unfortunately most Gallente ships operate in a small envelope. You have to resign yourself to choosing your battles very carefully. Once engaged, your position is tenuous. Any negative factor introduced is often disastrous. If a engagement does not end in under 30 seconds. You position is greatly reduced as time goes on. At-least in the current game environment.
There are only 2 ways to deal with this situation.
In any-case. A Drake (heavy assault missiles) or Hurricane (armour). Would have just as much trouble in the above scenario as a Myrmidon or Brutix. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 12:34:00 -
[1366] - Quote
Tanya if you have no clue about the CCP philosophy on balance you will never get your points across. Even a top of the line T2 cruiser is not always designed to fit the top tier guns, mwd and oversized plates/extenders. This might be the job for commandships.
Also long range ship are designed to use more fitting on the weapons leaving less tank and less mobility to compensate for being able to sit out of tackle range... Unfortunately this part of Eve hasn't been looked into since forever and it's somewhat broken. But if you want a MWD on your Eagle you better be prepared to drop tank or fit RCU's.
Pinky |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 14:05:00 -
[1367] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:You cannot fix what is not broken. At-least Gallente ships stats and their bonuses.
Depends a lot form what pov you look at it. The limited range always made them mostly small gang/solo ships, the gtfo ability was always terrible. Yes this works not really with the meta game, but still blaster ships did work within the overall mechanics of eve, even to a point of being the preferred tool for the job for some people.
What really changed back in the days was that most blaster hulls lost her ability to actually really work predictable and efficient at point blank. Point in case would be dual prop ranis or vindi that got what it takes to make them work at close range very well. If you for example give the cruiser, bc and bs hulls stronger webs and a utility med for using dual prop or dual web to archive something that the currently hybrid changes totally failed to archive. The ships would be actually worth brining to point blank because they would be pretty good and flexible there. Not because they do 5% more dps but because they can turn the meta game around, actually performing very good at this range and seriously outperforming other hulls in realistic close range fights plus being worth flown in solo/small gang again because they bring something to the table that you couldn't archive with other hulls.
I for myself still find it kind of funny that back in the days most pilots in mini hulls cried about not being as good as gallente when it comes to close range and now people first come up with shield/te setups on gallente hulls trying to make them just as good as minmatar at medium range. In both cases people simply using the wrong tool for the job, and if CCP gives people a good reason to do blaster pvp, you would see it right out there in pvp.
So yeah you might not be able to fix a broken concept, however you could replace it with a working one and start to balance the ships around the new one.
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 14:52:00 -
[1368] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Tanya if you have no clue about the CCP philosophy on balance you will never get your points across. Even a top of the line T2 cruiser is not always designed to fit the top tier guns, mwd and oversized plates/extenders. This might be the job for commandships.
Also long range ship are designed to use more fitting on the weapons leaving less tank and less mobility to compensate for being able to sit out of tackle range... Unfortunately this part of Eve hasn't been looked into since forever and it's somewhat broken. But if you want a MWD on your Eagle you better be prepared to drop tank or fit RCU's.
Pinky
I agree that a ship should not be able to fit everything and to have a great tank, a great cap, great damage and great speed. But when we come back to the Die-Most we see that we have a ship that MUST go through all optimals of all weapons, through all kind of EWAR, NOS, NEUT EVERYTHING until it can apply some damage. So lets check out what we can do with our Die-Most: 1. Equip big guns but die before you can get in range. 2. Equip good armor but never come into range. 3. Equip speed, have a sig radius of a Moon with weak tank, get a lot of damage and not being able to do enough damage once in range.
The problem is simple: Since Blaster Boats MUST come into range they MUST equip mods for speed. This is a absolutely MUST and not a stupid nice to have. From this MUST all problems come. You loost a med-slot, a lot of cap, CPU and PG to satisfy this MUST leaving less resources left for tank and damage. Now you could say that other ships also need to have a MWD. But they do not have to crawl through all that Neut, Nos, Ewar becouse they just shoot at you from a higher distance.
The problem still is the range: 1. A blaster boat has less DPS becouse it looses time while traveling to the target. 2. It is a one way ticket. When you decide to engage you have poor chances to escape and run away if needed. You put everything on one card. 3. If you can not come into range you will be kitet and you will die like a noob while the Cane pilot feels like the ultimative Pro
Becouse of 3 you decide to run away as long as you can or you decide to use other ships for PVP. So you cross train to other ships. This you can see from the kill statistics.
I can not understand why CCP isn't going to fix this properly. They know about this issue, otherwise they would be really stupid which I don't believe they are. So WHY this issue is not going to be adressed with the needed attention. Who needs half baked fixxes like 5% more tracking and 5 seconds less reload speed when it is clear and obvious that this changes will not fix anything?
Why is there a Gallente bashing for years now? Why is there so much sympathy with Mini from CCP?
I have found my ways to live with that becouse I cross trained to other races. I'm still active in this thread becouse I want this game to become better, with more strategies at PVP and deeper game mechanics. This CCP would achieve if they eventuelly would decide to FIX Hybrids and their plattforms instead of just bringing some useless changes to gain some time. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 16:17:00 -
[1369] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Tanya if you have no clue about the CCP philosophy on balance you will never get your points across. Even a top of the line T2 cruiser is not always designed to fit the top tier guns, mwd and oversized plates/extenders. This might be the job for commandships.
Also long range ship are designed to use more fitting on the weapons leaving less tank and less mobility to compensate for being able to sit out of tackle range... Unfortunately this part of Eve hasn't been looked into since forever and it's somewhat broken. But if you want a MWD on your Eagle you better be prepared to drop tank or fit RCU's.
Pinky
Little bit of sarcasm about nonsense stuff is always good to keep juices flowing and make some brains work. Not sure it works completely thou cause for the meanwhile nothing gets done, or at least done properly.
|
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 17:23:00 -
[1370] - Quote
You allude to some mythical time where hybrids were awesome. Apparently superior to the way hybrids were before the current expansion.
I don't remember it the way you do. In late 2008 I was soloing 0.0 with Drakes and Brutix's. I also had fun engagements with my close friend Josh, @ the time. We often only used Gallente cruisers, frigates and battle-cruisers.
I had the same difficulty I have today. I did then, before the nano-changes. Honestly, even more so. However, in our dual Thorax's. Josh and myself often caught vagabonds and curses by surprise. Using overheated modules under specific circumstances. (I'm really focusing on cruiser and battle-cruiser class ships here.) Frigates were alot easier to destroy with 90% stasis webifier's, but for engaging cruisers and above. Many ships could use mobile tactics that left Gallente and Minmatar battle-cruisers wanting (Drake, Harbinger).
Frigate engagements were alot more static than it is now (Honestly alot like how battleship engagements are today, but still ended quickly). Gallente frigates range limitations was not a serious issue then. So 90% stasis webifier was greatly effective here.
With battleships. No one has ever argued that 90% stasis webifier was not beneficial to battleships. Battleships had almost no issues dealing with ships of lower classes. Even frigates. However, the Tempest was still able to use it's mobility to effectively stay out of a Megathrons range (stasis webifier range = 13,000meters). The Megathron was loved because so many pilots used them to engage ships of lower classes.
It's alot easier for Gallente ships to catch mobile ships now than they ever did in the past period. Once I catch a vagabond now. I'm overheated (Thorax), often catching a mobile ship off guard. Stasis webifier has the same increase in range with heat it did in the past. Once applied the Vagabond has a velocity decrease. @ 10,000 meters I apply a warp scrambler. The Vagabonds micro-warp-drive is deactivated (caught). His propulsion module cannot be turned on (as long as my warp scrambler is active). Most Vagabonds do not use warp scramblers. So, I have mobility advantage (Thorax). (Damage output and defence)
This is the same tactics you had to do in the past. Although, one module had a more significant ability to limit another vessels mobility. Instead of 2 modules for the same purpose (warp scrambler and 60% stasis webifier).
So this mythical fantasy time were Gallente was popular because apparently they worked (I often pointed Gallente ships were popular for no reason @ the time). Did not exist. In fact. That was the time I switched to MInmatar because I believed Minmatar ships had more options to deal with the environment @ the time and coming changes. Even though. I had no answer for the Myrmidon, Brutix, Vexor, Taranis, and Ishkur @ the time.
All battleships were superior with 90% stasis webifiers. Amarr battleships were still superior to all other battleships @ the time as they are now. Maestroms and Rokhs were still tanking like a boss and killing sh!t even without a stasis webifier. The whole back in the Gallente hayday argument is deluded and fanciful. Good luck with it though. Also, dual propulsion cruisers have been a way to counter the current warp scrambler and stasis webifer mechanics. Not to mention, not even a Hurricane using dual tracking enhancers can track a cruiser orbiting close range with a afterburner. That is not going to be limited to Gallente ships only (also welcome to a year ago when I mentioned this on the forums).
Also, the problem is the weapon system (blaster). By virtue of blaster range. it limits certain hybrid ships to a sub-optimal concept. And make no mistake. Close range weapons are sub-optimal. All of them. No matter if it's auto-cannons without the benefits of tracking enhancers or ship bonuses to range or Heavy assault missiles and blasters. |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 21:24:00 -
[1371] - Quote
I'm never letting this thread die.
The players are waiting for more news. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 22:07:00 -
[1372] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:I'm never letting this thread die.
The players are waiting for more news.
This is a good reason to post in this thread. We need to keep bumping it. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 23:57:00 -
[1373] - Quote
the current hybrid rebalance wasnt that small and still the hybrid wepon platform is way behind lasers and projektils so u can see how broken they are and how little aplications they have.
as i see it there are only 3 options
1. make them similar to projectile turrets cuz they have the role that gallente was supposed to have
2. give them some unique abilitys like after getting damaged by hybrids u get web effects on enemy ships / neut effects / removing allignment /or 50% damage to higher class hulls / huge hull ressist boost if blasters are fitted (only for galente hulls) or there are many other options that would give a unique taste for blasters and rails. u dont need to give boosts to galente ships boost the MagFieldStab for extra speed buff , damage, evasion and so on, there are many options (but again effects only apply if used with hybrids) .
3. reinburst the SP spent on gallente boats and hybrid guns so everyone unlucky enough to train them can use it to retrain for winmatar or amar :)
and yes my balls still hurt after the recent hybrid rebalance |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 05:04:00 -
[1374] - Quote
Last test on SISI for that horrible Diemost:
5 Neutron Blaster II
6th high slot: empty
Meds 10MN MWD II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Lows 1x800RT 1xEnergised Reactive Membrane II 1xDamage Control II 1xTracking Enhancer II 2x Magnetic Field Stabiliser II
5x Warrior II
515 DPS with Null+Drones - 6.5Km+14Km 700 DPS with Void+Drones -4km+6km
29400 EHP Cap Stable for 3.5Min everything On
Well, little better for sure but not enough.
That utility high slot is totally useless, just because your cap is so fragile it's better not even try to fit something like useless NOS Since NOS is useless and that utility slot also, why don't you move this high slot to a med one or a low one?
Med: opens other fitting options like double web or if enough PG to fit cap injector and enjoy MWD'n al around chasing stuff.
Low: actually this one seems more interesting, +1EANM or +1 TE or +1 MFS or something else.
Actually in this current SISI version, with my poor skills, I think this ship needs for about 350+PG and 20% cap recharge just for fittings and cap, crappy estimation but the idea is there.
Then we have range, acceleration, linear speed, dmg application. While on paper and on fitting window you can easily see the 700DPS number in fact you can not apply it that much. With Void you mes with your distance first and then with your tracking there where you should have it to track properly your target, so either you're static at optimal and apply said dmg or you move and then it's catastrophic, your dps goes under the floor, removing Void tracking penalty and add some more falloff would help.
Actually my Proteus has those tools, 10% tracking per level + 10% optimal range per level, with sub at level 4 the dmg applied is quite impressive compared with Diemos adn the only difference between both is that I've fitted the Proteus for the same dps but I have +40% tracking and op range.
Doesn't makes the Proteus some sort of Hurricane mark II but this distance difference makes it more versatile without being overpowered. (then some might bring slaves blah blah and I'll ask you about double bonus web/neut Loki or Neut Legion or "I shoot ya from there, k?" Tengu)
So: -needs more pg/cap recharge
-utility slot moved low (my opinion) or med (most people ask this one)
-linear acceleration better but not enough already with 800RT, with 1600... 1410m/s without OL and my poor skills (950 radius youhou can you see me?)
-Dps bonus on hull it's ok for a ship of this size spit 700dps+ with blasters+drones it's very good. The main issue is with rails, it's plain crap but this comes from rails themselves and the ammo (needs almost 100% dmg+)
-Tracking issue comes only with short range ammo. Take it away please, give some more op/fall off range (ammo?) -long range ammo: op/fall off not bad with 1TE but dps it's just...meh? - ammo needs some more dps, 15%
-Rails: even with shield fit 4mfs 2te's it's...crap. Med railguns themselves are in need of a lot more dmg modifier, tracking now it's not bad. Ammo short range is really short (get rid of penalties!) and long range poor dmg. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 06:40:00 -
[1375] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote: Med railguns themselves are in need of a lot more dmg modifier, tracking now it's not bad. Ammo short range is really short (get rid of penalties!) and long range poor dmg. That's a total BS. Railguns already outdamage beams while consuming almost no cap and being extremely easy to fit. And on top of that having superior range.
Heavy Beam Laser II: 3.6 dmg mode / 6.00 = 0.6 250mm Railgun II: 3.63 dmg mode / 6.38 rof = 0.569
Now add a typical pair of bonuses (cap consumption vs damage one) and you'll see that there's no point in using beams whatsoever. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7385
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 10:21:00 -
[1376] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Well at-least some people found it funny. They are laughing at you.
m0cking bird wrote:You cannot fix what is not broken. You thought they were OK before the changes, you were wrong then and you're wrong now.
The changes for blasters didn't go far enough, you're still better off using lasers or projectiles.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 10:39:00 -
[1377] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Tanya Powers wrote: Med railguns themselves are in need of a lot more dmg modifier, tracking now it's not bad. Ammo short range is really short (get rid of penalties!) and long range poor dmg. That's a total BS. Railguns already outdamage beams while consuming almost no cap and being extremely easy to fit. And on top of that having superior range. Heavy Beam Laser II: 3.6 dmg mode / 6.00 = 0.6 250mm Railgun II: 3.63 dmg mode / 6.38 rof = 0.569 Now add a typical pair of bonuses (cap consumption vs damage one) and you'll see that there's no point in using beams whatsoever.
You rails still need ammo and you have 5s recharge timer on your ammo. With beams you also have more space left in your cargo for cap boosters. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 11:42:00 -
[1378] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Tanya Powers wrote: Med railguns themselves are in need of a lot more dmg modifier, tracking now it's not bad. Ammo short range is really short (get rid of penalties!) and long range poor dmg. That's a total BS. Railguns already outdamage beams while consuming almost no cap and being extremely easy to fit. And on top of that having superior range. Heavy Beam Laser II: 3.6 dmg mode / 6.00 = 0.6 250mm Railgun II: 3.63 dmg mode / 6.38 rof = 0.569 Now add a typical pair of bonuses (cap consumption vs damage one) and you'll see that there's no point in using beams whatsoever. You rails still need ammo and you have 5s recharge timer on your ammo. With beams you also have more space left in your cargo for cap boosters.
Damage multipliers only mean something when considered with the base damage they multiply. Your figures are meaningless Fon.
Let's take a look as they really stand, setup with 3 damage mods and ship bonuses with long range weapons;
Zealot 5 Heavy Beam II; 436 dps @ 23+10 with multi, 290 dps @ 81+10 with aurora
Muninn 5 720mm II; 347 dps @ 18+23 with emp, 232 dps @ 81+22 with tremor
Diemos 5 250mm rail II; 352 dps @ 18+23 with antimatter, 235dps @ 65+23 with spike
Eagle 5 250mm rail II; 282 dps @ 41+15 with antimatter, 188 dps @ 146+15 with spike
amarr has best for close range dps, for long range dps. amarr and minmatar both project damage further than rails (81km vs 65 for deimos, and laughable damage for eagle so we'll ignore that) minmatar gets huge alpha as well as virrtually identical dps to gallente (and massively better dps than eagle) amarr has instant ammo change minmatar is cap free minmatar has damage type selection
Where's the benefit of using rails ? |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 14:13:00 -
[1379] - Quote
How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
I'm pretty sure you've omitted drones of Deimos. Also - yeah, long-range sniping is dead, but still - what's the damage output of a Zealot at the distances Eagle is intended for? Muninn is a bit weird in its design.
Yet again, provide valid pairs for comparison.
abso: 535 DPS @ 15 and merely 490 @ 19 astarte: 535 @ 19 (and this ship has got x2.3 falloff in comparison)
apoc: 312 @163 (fleet setup dating back to 2008) mega: 343 @168 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
Figures imply 2 damage mods. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
297
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 15:13:00 -
[1380] - Quote
yes please boost rails some more, so our rokh fleet gets even better B) |
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 15:43:00 -
[1381] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
I'm pretty sure you've omitted drones of Deimos. Also - yeah, long-range sniping is dead, but still - what's the damage output of a Zealot at the distances Eagle is intended for? Muninn is a bit weird in its design.
Yet again, provide valid pairs for comparison.
abso: 535 DPS @ 15 and merely 490 @ 19 astarte: 535 @ 19 (and this ship has got x2.3 falloff in comparison)
apoc: 312 @163 (fleet setup dating back to 2008) mega: 343 @168 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
Figures imply 2 damage mods.
I used the ships you chose to quote originally. If you now admit they disproved what you were trying to demonstrate why make the assertion in the first place?
As for your latest attempts;
Absolution 6 heavy beam II, 2 HS II; 465 dps @ 15+10 with multi, 310dps @ 54+10 with aurora Astarte 7 250mm Rail II, 2 MFS II; 482 dps@ 18+23 with antimatter, 321 dps @ 65+23 with spike
The astarte gets 3.6% dps more for fitting an extra rail. If the guns were equivalent then it should gain an extra 16.7%. In other words, on this gallente ship, designed for doing damage, it is underperforming the equivalent laser platform by almost 13%, and to achieve equity has to use an extra slot. This could be seen as the Abso's extra low slot being used to fit a 3rd HS. Which makes the abso not only a better dps ship, but also still a superior tank.
Your turn. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 16:00:00 -
[1382] - Quote
Jack bubu wrote:yes please boost rails some more, so our rokh fleet gets even better B)
And yes, I did notice the 48 rokhs mixed in with the 70 abaddons and 17 maelstroms you used against ccp. I also noticed the loss of 5 of those rokhs and none of the abaddons or maelstroms. While I applaud PLs use of innovative setups, I don't believe we'll see this become one of your shining successes. I live in hope that you might prove me wrong.
Oh, and when will we see gallente rail bs in your fleet? |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 16:05:00 -
[1383] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
Why should the Zealot outdamage the Eagle when the Zealot is also much faster than the Eagle, and also has much greater flexibility of useful engagement range? And is much easier to fit.
|
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
297
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 17:18:00 -
[1384] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Jack bubu wrote:yes please boost rails some more, so our rokh fleet gets even better B) And yes, I did notice the 48 rokhs mixed in with the 70 abaddons and 17 maelstroms you used against ccp. I also noticed the loss of 5 of those rokhs and none of the abaddons or maelstroms. While I applaud PLs use of innovative setups, I don't believe we'll see this become one of your shining successes. I live in hope that you might prove me wrong. Oh, and when will we see gallente rail bs in your fleet? your pretty dumb my friend, because you obviously wherent in the engagement you assume we all engaged at the same time.
we went in first with the rokhs/maels and fought ccp for about 40 minutes, before NCdot came in abaddon in the end to finish them off.
you also forget that those abaddon all had t2 trimarks, dev implants that give them a 40% ! resistance and HP bonus aswell as 6% hardwirings .
Also their fleet was FC'ed by our CSM dude Elise randolph so we won either way hah! :P
And you will see a gallente rail BS in our fleet when you can properly shield tank them. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 17:40:00 -
[1385] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
I'm pretty sure you've omitted drones of Deimos. Also - yeah, long-range sniping is dead, but still - what's the damage output of a Zealot at the distances Eagle is intended for? Muninn is a bit weird in its design.
Yet again, provide valid pairs for comparison.
abso: 535 DPS @ 15 and merely 490 @ 19 astarte: 535 @ 19 (and this ship has got x2.3 falloff in comparison)
apoc: 312 @163 (fleet setup dating back to 2008) mega: 343 @168 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
Figures imply 2 damage mods. I used the ships you chose to quote originally. If you now admit they disproved what you were trying to demonstrate why make the assertion in the first place? As for your latest attempts; Absolution 6 heavy beam II, 2 HS II; 465 dps @ 15+10 with multi, 310dps @ 54+10 with aurora Astarte 7 250mm Rail II, 2 MFS II; 482 dps@ 18+23 with antimatter, 321 dps @ 65+23 with spike The astarte gets 3.6% dps more for fitting an extra rail. If the guns were equivalent then it should gain an extra 16.7%. In other words, on this gallente ship, designed for doing damage, it is underperforming the equivalent laser platform by almost 13%, and to achieve equity has to use an extra slot. This could be seen as the Abso's extra low slot being used to fit a 3rd HS. Which makes the abso not only a better dps ship, but also still a superior tank. Your turn.
Stupid forums have evaporated my post. Anyway,
where does this 3.6% come from? Just dividing X by Y is invalid since these figures come with different ranges. As I said, start comparing something comparable.
490 DPS for abso at 19 km 555 DPS for astarte at the same range
13.2 % increment.
Dragging in extra low of Abso is invalid since it's there for a reason. Astarte has got an extra mid and extra 25m3 dronespace.
By all means, boost rails even further. After they fix current volley damage of arties it will make sense to use rails and nothing else. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 18:32:00 -
[1386] - Quote
Mag's wrote:m0cking bird wrote:Well at-least some people found it funny. They are laughing at you. m0cking bird wrote:You cannot fix what is not broken. You thought they were OK before the changes, you were wrong then and you're wrong now. The changes for blasters didn't go far enough, you're still better off using lasers or projectiles.
I seem to school your corporation/alliances camps pretty well with my fail Gallente ships. You know, when you guys try to gank me. I suppose the good fights you throw me in local after I spank your whole crew solo is not a very honest response. (not to mention a nice little fight with, BlackBeard NL, she1and some other dude( friend dies because the other 2 ran away).
Also, you and your whole crew are a joke. Why anyone would listen to you could only reflect badly on them. (although you guys did get me back buy blowing up my rookie ship (nice camp)...)
Also, like I've said in a thread 2 weeks ago. Rail-guns have been boosted significantly. The power grid and CPU alone was a big boost to rail-gun.
-proxyyyy |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 19:22:00 -
[1387] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Nikuno wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:How about you starting comparing apples to apples and providing valid info?
It's pretty evident that a Zealot outdamages any other hac at his own optimal. All his bonuses are devoted to lasers and the ship's got no drones, no utility etc. It must outdamage everything in its class.
I'm pretty sure you've omitted drones of Deimos. Also - yeah, long-range sniping is dead, but still - what's the damage output of a Zealot at the distances Eagle is intended for? Muninn is a bit weird in its design.
Yet again, provide valid pairs for comparison.
abso: 535 DPS @ 15 and merely 490 @ 19 astarte: 535 @ 19 (and this ship has got x2.3 falloff in comparison)
apoc: 312 @163 (fleet setup dating back to 2008) mega: 343 @168 (fleet setup dating back to 2008)
Figures imply 2 damage mods. I used the ships you chose to quote originally. If you now admit they disproved what you were trying to demonstrate why make the assertion in the first place? As for your latest attempts; Absolution 6 heavy beam II, 2 HS II; 465 dps @ 15+10 with multi, 310dps @ 54+10 with aurora Astarte 7 250mm Rail II, 2 MFS II; 482 dps@ 18+23 with antimatter, 321 dps @ 65+23 with spike The astarte gets 3.6% dps more for fitting an extra rail. If the guns were equivalent then it should gain an extra 16.7%. In other words, on this gallente ship, designed for doing damage, it is underperforming the equivalent laser platform by almost 13%, and to achieve equity has to use an extra slot. This could be seen as the Abso's extra low slot being used to fit a 3rd HS. Which makes the abso not only a better dps ship, but also still a superior tank. Your turn. Stupid forums have evaporated my post. Anyway, where does this 3.6% come from? Just dividing X by Y is invalid since these figures come with different ranges. As I said, start comparing something comparable. 490 DPS for abso at 19 km 555 DPS for astarte at the same range 13.2 % increment. Dragging in extra low of Abso is invalid since it's there for a reason. Astarte has got an extra mid and extra 25m3 dronespace. By all means, boost rails even further. After they fix current volley damage of arties it will make sense to use rails and nothing else.
Division is a commonly accepted mathematical function often used to derive percentages. Congratulations on getting that far. 555/490 is a 13.3% better level of dps achieved by using 7/6 guns which is a 16.7% level of additional firepower. So even at your chosen level of combat the rails are underperforming the lasers by (572-555) 18dps on a ship dedicated to damage, with a range bonus and at the range chosen by you to show how good they are.
Now please also tell me why you're discussing 19km ranges for these ships? Is it because the apparent window of rail superiority (which maths proves to be otherwise) is so small ? Also at that range the abso would be pulse fitted anyway, so the whole argument is pointless. As for ignoring the extra gun required to reach this level of performance that is rather idiotic, as it still clearly demonstrates that rails outshine nothing and underperform in almost ever area. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 19:29:00 -
[1388] - Quote
It's 'outperfomed' merely cause of ROF bonus, which inreases cap consumption by 33%. It's idiotic to ignore different bonuses Abso and Astate receive.
We can discuss any range up to 80 km or w/e. The thing is, you can not ignore range superioirty, otherwise let's pull out blasters and they say they're fine cause they deal a crapload of damage.
A straight comparison between rails and beams show that rails are already ahead. As I said, use a typical pair of bonuses - that is cap usage and damage ones. Wanna compare Brutix vs Prophecy? Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 19:55:00 -
[1389] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:It's 'outperfomed' merely cause of ROF bonus, which inreases cap consumption by 33%. It's idiotic to ignore different bonuses Abso and Astate receive.
We can discuss any range up to 80 km or w/e. The thing is, you can not ignore range superioirty, otherwise let's pull out blasters and they say they're fine cause they deal a crapload of damage.
A straight comparison between rails and beams show that rails are already ahead. As I said, use a typical pair of bonuses - that is cap usage and damage ones. Wanna compare Brutix vs Prophecy?
Yet another pair of ships? It doesn't matter what ships you fit them too, rails will underperform. I showed it with your chosen zealot/deimos pairing. I showed it with your chosen absolution/astarte pairing AT the range you specifically chose. Twice you've asserted something untrue. Twice you've been shown clearly where the error lies. This won't change because you pick another set of ships because the guns themselves still remain unbalanced. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 20:05:00 -
[1390] - Quote
What are you talking about? I've seen barely an attempt of comparing apples to oranges. You threw away drones the Deimos has at its disposal - unlike Zealot - and then claim Zealot to outdamage it by a huge margin? Nice trick. Astarte vs Absolution - Astarte is already ahead damage vise even without its superior drones.
It makes no sense to ask for Gallente boats fitted with Rails to outdamage Amarr ones with Beams at short range and still leave them with greater dronebays, superior range and better cap stability.
What exactly are you asking for? Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 13:52:00 -
[1391] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:What are you talking about? I've seen barely an attempt of comparing apples to oranges. You threw away drones the Deimos has at its disposal - unlike Zealot - and then claim Zealot to outdamage it by a huge margin? Nice trick. Astarte vs Absolution - Astarte is already ahead damage vise even without its superior drones.
It makes no sense to ask for Gallente boats fitted with Rails to outdamage Amarr ones with Beams at short range and still leave them with greater dronebays, superior range and better cap stability.
What exactly are you asking for? yeah you are just way too dumb to be able to compare them which is pretty easy to do so , and cause you cant you come with this apple orange bs , btw who the hell cant compare apples to oranges in the first place?:O |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 14:31:00 -
[1392] - Quote
The golden age was in 2006, before the hp buff and rigs. Blaster ships where quick and did pack lots of punch. Gangs where a lot smaller, not anybody flown and fitted T2(because it was quite expensive, like 260M Vagas etc.). However even then they where pretty niche, compared to the all out pawn mobiles that the nos\ecm drone ships where.
During the nano age they where usable at least, given they had proper control and the ability to actually deploy her damage at close range. The mega was mostly popular because of her ability to lay down the hurt and reach out to full point range to at least force nano ships out of point range. Ofc the mega had the ability to go after undersized hulls, but hey w/o this ability it became pretty much useless, as most of the blaster ships. Not everybody flown a solo BS(actually it was only a very very small minority) so most of your targets where undersized(similar as today when I take my pest for a spin) and the reason the mega was actually useful(different to today, where it is on of the worst ships for the job).
People often play down the role of the web, it isn't really about killing frigs with BS, but being far less affected by tacklers(since they will hardly survive her doing) what gives you a similar ability to solo with this ship as a nano ship got(since it is harder to tackler) and keeping the ship fairly mobile. Controlling the fight is also a very important point, even if the odds are stacked against you(still being able to hold your target at your range against multiply targets and under multiple webs). Another point is that it allows you full 28km point range, since you don't need to a scram(what is pathetic when it comes to BS) and gives you back sig bloom on the target and the with overall lower transversal at very close ranges that you need to archive peak DPS at point blank(similar as a Oracle or nano Pest would force this scenario against MWDing targets somewhere between 15-24km).
Sure a Abaddon could kill a mega in a 1o1, however it wasn't able to catch it or many other ships. Even if the mega would have lost against any kind of BS in eve, it would have not been be a big deal(similar as a nano pest today) because 1o1 against another BS is mostly irrelevant when it not happens or when you simply can avoid it. What matters is the real performance of the ship against targets you actually encounter. This is also the point why blaster ships suck so much, they look balanced around a theoretical scenario, that however isn't encountered ingame(if you not a real fan of empire wars at least), while they lack what it takes to actually be useful in the situations you encounter ingame in Low Sec or 0.0.
Edit: Between the nos nerf and the projectile buff, the pest was pretty bad overall and one of the last BS you actually took serious into pvp. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 18:44:00 -
[1393] - Quote
Still looking forward to added hybrid changes. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 20:10:00 -
[1394] - Quote
wtf this thread is like groundhogs day... its just the same damn arguments over and over again... tallest please post some more changes for sisi next week so we can test them and start a new conversation...because this endless talk its getting redundant! |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 23:17:00 -
[1395] - Quote
As you've stated. Thread is dead and so is the conversation. Enjoy Gallente rail-gun boost. I'll be flying Rail-Deimos/Thorax soon enough. Have other things I want to use alot before then.
Like the more important issue of coming up with set-ups and using ships to deal with t2 gang-link boosted battle-cruisers and tier 3 battle-cruisers.
I rather point out how bad neg ten is on the forums though. That's my interest on the forums atm.
-neg ten are terrible. Leave your that one system alot more and then you can give me advice. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 23:38:00 -
[1396] - Quote
The Djego wrote:The golden age was in 2006, before the hp buff and rigs. Blaster ships where quick and did pack lots of punch. Gangs where a lot smaller, not anybody flown and fitted T2(because it was quite expensive, like 260M Vagas etc.). However even then they where pretty niche, compared to the all out pawn mobiles that the nos\ecm drone ships where. During the nano age they where usable at least, given they had proper control and the ability to actually deploy her damage at close range. The mega was mostly popular because of her ability to lay down the hurt and reach out to full point range to at least force nano ships out of point range. Ofc the mega had the ability to go after undersized hulls, but hey w/o this ability it became pretty much useless, as most of the blaster ships. Not everybody flown a solo BS(actually it was only a very very small minority) so most of your targets where undersized(similar as today when I take my pest for a spin) and the reason the mega was actually useful(different to today, where it is on of the worst ships for the job). People often play down the role of the web, it isn't really about killing frigs with BS, but being far less affected by tacklers(since they will hardly survive her doing) what gives you a similar ability to solo with this ship as a nano ship got(since it is harder to tackler) and keeping the ship fairly mobile. Controlling the fight is also a very important point, even if the odds are stacked against you(still being able to hold your target at your range against multiply targets and under multiple webs). Another point is that it allows you full 28km point range, since you don't need to a scram(what is pathetic when it comes to BS) and gives you back sig bloom on the target and the with overall lower transversal at very close ranges that you need to archive peak DPS at point blank(similar as a Oracle or nano Pest would force this scenario against MWDing targets somewhere between 15-24km). Sure a Abaddon could kill a mega in a 1o1, however it wasn't able to catch it or many other ships. Even if the mega would have lost against any kind of BS in eve, it would have not been be a big deal(similar as a nano pest today) because 1o1 against another BS is mostly irrelevant when it not happens or when you simply can avoid it. What matters is the real performance of the ship against targets you actually encounter. This is also the point why blaster ships suck so much, they look balanced around a theoretical scenario, that however isn't encountered ingame(if you not a real fan of empire wars at least), while they lack what it takes to actually be useful in the situations you encounter ingame in Low Sec or 0.0. Edit: Between the nos nerf and the projectile buff, the pest was pretty bad overall and one of the last BS you actually took serious into pvp.
I was not playing eve-online in 2006. So I wouldn't know if what you're saying is factual. Gallente battleships with 90% stasis webifiers would not increase their viability that much. Mobile ships will still be @ a advantage. Although engaging sub-battleships will be more effective. Once in stasis webifier range but, from what I've been reading in this thread. That's the problem to begin with (even getting into overloaded stasis webifier range). I have no issue getting into range, but Gallente battleships also have very strong defences and adequate damage projection. Which compensates for lack of mobility. Again, I don't have issues with Gallente battleships solo and I'm pretty sure most in this thread are focusing on medium turrets. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
88
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 07:30:00 -
[1397] - Quote
well, 90% webs did help a LOT, but really the deal was projectile turrets werent half what they are now . . .
That and frigates couldnt turn off your MWD with a warp scrambler and as you said, you could kill frigates with medium/large ships, so you could get more damage on target
Even that being said, there werent many cruiser sized blaster ships used . . . the thorax was insanely popular but the deimos was still the die-most and the brutix still wasnt really popular either . . . it was pretty much all megathron and thorax |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 10:35:00 -
[1398] - Quote
The damage of hybrids are pretty sweet now - but the balance between Gallente and minmatar ships are off and hybrids still need a look into the ammunition.
Minmatar ships need a slower acceleration and gallente ships need a faster acceleration while remaining the current top speeds. Unless the game mechanics are misleading I think an increase to minmatar ship mass and decrease of gallente ship mass should do a fantastic trick.
Those minmatar flying junkyards should be fast ships with their plenty rockets, however I don't see why the well designed gallente ships shouldn't be allowed much better agility including acceleration/deceleration? |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 18:20:00 -
[1399] - Quote
Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings, but still, following is the current stats copied from eve kill. ROKH is the sole representative here.
RankShipsKills
1Drake79930 2Hurricane45597 3Abaddon31775 4Tengu22205 5Maelstrom18365 6Tornado16221 7Armageddon14872 8Scimitar11504 9Tempest10319 10Sabre9789 11Cynabal9144 12Huginn8606 13Thrasher8188 14Loki7231 15Rapier7170 16Lachesis7156 17Vagabond7141 18Rokh7135 19Zealot7112 20Rifter7106
RankWeaponsKills
1Heavy Missile Launcher II33892 2425mm AutoCannon II13747 31400mm Howitzer Artillery II9400 4Mega Pulse Laser II8748 5200mm AutoCannon II7454 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II6344 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II5996 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II5341 9150mm Light AutoCannon II5245 10800mm Repeating Artillery II5046 11Heavy Pulse Laser II4640 12425mm Railgun II2587 13Heavy Neutron Blaster II2388 14Light Neutron Blaster II 2143 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I 2090 16'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher 2000 17280mm Howitzer Artillery II1713 18Dual 180mm AutoCannon II1662 19Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1598 20Neutron Blaster Cannon II1594
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
214
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 19:29:00 -
[1400] - Quote
Who's using all the Drakes? I thought large Drake blobs were readily counterable these days? |
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 19:37:00 -
[1401] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings, but still, following is the current stats copied from eve kill. ROKH is the sole representative here.
RankShipsKills
1Drake79930 2Hurricane45597 3Abaddon31775 4Tengu22205 5Maelstrom18365 6Tornado16221 7Armageddon14872 8Scimitar11504 9Tempest10319 10Sabre9789 11Cynabal9144 12Huginn8606 13Thrasher8188 14Loki7231 15Rapier7170 16Lachesis7156 17Vagabond7141 18Rokh7135 19Zealot7112 20Rifter7106
RankWeaponsKills
1Heavy Missile Launcher II33892 2425mm AutoCannon II13747 31400mm Howitzer Artillery II9400 4Mega Pulse Laser II8748 5200mm AutoCannon II7454 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II6344 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II5996 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II5341 9150mm Light AutoCannon II5245 10800mm Repeating Artillery II5046 11Heavy Pulse Laser II4640 12425mm Railgun II2587 13Heavy Neutron Blaster II2388 14Light Neutron Blaster II 2143 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I 2090 16'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher 2000 17280mm Howitzer Artillery II1713 18Dual 180mm AutoCannon II1662 19Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1598 20Neutron Blaster Cannon II1594
From what time period are all those numbers? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 19:41:00 -
[1402] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings, but still, following is the current stats copied from eve kill. ROKH is the sole representative here.
RankShipsKills
1Drake79930 2Hurricane45597 3Abaddon31775 4Tengu22205 5Maelstrom18365 6Tornado16221 7Armageddon14872 8Scimitar11504 9Tempest10319 10Sabre9789 11Cynabal9144 12Huginn8606 13Thrasher8188 14Loki7231 15Rapier7170 16Lachesis7156 17Vagabond7141 18Rokh7135 19Zealot7112 20Rifter7106
RankWeaponsKills
1Heavy Missile Launcher II33892 2425mm AutoCannon II13747 31400mm Howitzer Artillery II9400 4Mega Pulse Laser II8748 5200mm AutoCannon II7454 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II6344 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II5996 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II5341 9150mm Light AutoCannon II5245 10800mm Repeating Artillery II5046 11Heavy Pulse Laser II4640 12425mm Railgun II2587 13Heavy Neutron Blaster II2388 14Light Neutron Blaster II 2143 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I 2090 16'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher 2000 17280mm Howitzer Artillery II1713 18Dual 180mm AutoCannon II1662 19Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1598 20Neutron Blaster Cannon II1594
pandemic legion started using rokh as fleet sniper. but the railguns need about 10-15% more damage so the rokh can compete with abadon and still abadon would have more ehp and a bigger cargohold to load all the 800cap boosters. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 20:36:00 -
[1403] - Quote
"Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings" so why the tornado is there and no other tier 3 bc?:O winmatar is still op , hybrids still crap |
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 21:29:00 -
[1404] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:"Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings" so why the tornado is there and no other tier 3 bc?:O winmatar is still op , hybrids still crap
this pretty much.
|
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 21:30:00 -
[1405] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:I was not playing eve-online in 2006. So I wouldn't know if what you're saying is factual. Gallente battleships with 90% stasis webifiers would not increase their viability that much. Mobile ships will still be @ a advantage. Although engaging sub-battleships will be more effective. Once in stasis webifier range but, from what I've been reading in this thread. That's the problem to begin with (even getting into overloaded stasis webifier range). I have no issue getting into range, but Gallente battleships also have very strong defences and adequate damage projection. Which compensates for lack of mobility. Again, I don't have issues with Gallente battleships solo and I'm pretty sure most in this thread are focusing on medium turrets.
Well people complained a lot during the nano age, the "Can't get in range, can't do damage." isn't a new thing. While it is true that you had issues against nano fittings, you still seen the megas out there as the dps workhorse for solo/small gang game play. For me it did come down to having just the tool to get the job done quick or solo rather heavy tanked purger drakes(pretty annoying) or CS in a ship with a very solid defense against anything that could attack you at close range while being passable at scaring off a nano HAC or two. Similar to the cane, pest or nano drake today it was a ship that worked in your pvp environment against nearly any target you did face there and did offer a particular advantage(applied DPS, ability to take down stuff in belts and at gates extreme fast) over the the alternatives if you can live with her drawbacks(range, massive cap need, speed, weak tank).
While I am obviously a bit more BS focused then most of the eve players, in general the change would also make the Thorax pretty attractive, since it balances up her weaknesses with a solid advantage when it comes down to close range fighting. I wouldn't mind flying one again with adjustments to the web strength. The brutix will always suffer from being not as quick as a rax and lacking the punch of the mega, however with a extra med you could probably win 1o1s against other BCs with a TD or beefing up the tank in gank fits to useful levels.
In the end, what you see is what you get. Getting in range is key and the ships should offer a solid advantage if you pull it off for all the hassle and drawbacks involved with this in common pvp. You might be not able to gtfo in fights, however you become damn hard to tackle at your range by smaller ships, can pin down and kill neuting **** before it sucks you dry, counter close range tactics like tds or abs reasonable well and people will be really screwed if they fail to kite you in solo and small gang pvp. A point blank ship, that excels at web range pvp and gank, that has no real weakness in the meta game when it comes to close range pvp. Bring it in range and shoot stuff down with it, like it was back in the days.
Edit: If CCP changes the speed penalty at least for the resist and active tank armor rigs, I would be ok with the ability of the ships to bring them in range. Blasters are not great fleet weapons, kitting should remain a very viable tactic against blaster ships and this battle should be won or lost by player skill. Getting in range doesn't has to be very easy, however it should be worth it in realistic scenarios(at least the ones where it makes sense to fly a blaster ship), giving you the ability to actually take down the target once you managed it in a very effective and predictable way. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 22:37:00 -
[1406] - Quote
Data above is related to the period [2011-12-1 to 2011-12-12] |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo THE SPACE P0LICE
34
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 12:47:00 -
[1407] - Quote
Just wanted to report that railguns are much improved by the recent changes. Cormorant is pretty awesome now
The only thing I could suggest would be to reduce the rate of fire and increase damage, to make them better for sniping, and also to reduce server load (the same as what was done for projectiles a while back).
Blasters are still kinda meh; I wonder if a 100% optimal range increase would help? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 15:07:00 -
[1408] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Just wanted to report that railguns are much improved by the recent changes. Cormorant is pretty awesome now The only thing I could suggest would be to reduce the rate of fire and increase damage, to make them better for sniping, and also to reduce server load (the same as what was done for projectiles a while back). Blasters are still kinda meh; I wonder if a 100% optimal range increase would help?
well the frigcize hybrid ships where ok before the patch but now they are really greate becouse u can fit them easier
the problem is with cruiser and BS hulls, in those hulls u are either out of range or u are outdamaged by projektiles and lasers in the middle and long range |
Xtover
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:11:00 -
[1409] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:"Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings" so why the tornado is there and no other tier 3 bc?:O winmatar is still op , hybrids still crap Both the Naga and Oracle have proven quite effective in PvP.
The Talos is the only one that is struggling, considering the general tactic relies on range. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 20:16:00 -
[1410] - Quote
Xtover wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:"Probably it is too early to see a change in these rankings" so why the tornado is there and no other tier 3 bc?:O winmatar is still op , hybrids still crap Both the Naga and Oracle have proven quite effective in PvP. The Talos is the only one that is struggling, considering the general tactic relies on range.
The Talos has any other Gallente ship is only good on paper, station undocks, gates and gank in belts until they get meanings to fight in med range.
Med range, med range and med range.
Did I mentioned MED RANGE? ? |
|
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 22:42:00 -
[1411] - Quote
TLDR: Make Jav+Spike Blaster charges, and make Void+Null Railgun Charges
So i was looking at a way to fix blasters by fixing the ammo themselves instead of the guns. After looking at the stats for Tech 2 ammos, i came to the conclusion that the easiet fix would be switch the stats of Tech2 railgun ammo and Tech 2 blaster ammo.
Here are the stats bellow:
Used In |Ammo |Optimal| Falloff| Tracking|Damage Railgun|Void|0.75|0.5 |0.75 |14 Railgun|Null|1.25|1.25 |1 |8 Blaster|Jav |0.25|1 |1.25 |15 Blaster|Spike|1.8 |1 |0.25 |11 I hate this forum and its sucky formating
Currently Jav and Spike modify the range to much for railguns. Making the range too extreme or too short. Using void and Null in railguns would even out, the extremes and make the caldari range bonuses more useful.
While Blasters need tracking at close range, and Null is the weakest long range ammo of the short range guns. By using Jav instead of Void, you get tracking you need for super close range, at the cost of optimal which are tiny anyway. While giving you the range you badly need with spike, over Null at the penalty of tracking. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7385
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 09:03:00 -
[1412] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:As you've stated. Thread is dead and so is the conversation. Enjoy Gallente rail-gun boost. I'll be flying Rail-Deimos/Thorax soon enough. Have other things I want to use alot before then.
Like the more important issue of coming up with set-ups and using ships to deal with t2 gang-link boosted battle-cruisers and tier 3 battle-cruisers.
I rather point out how bad neg ten is on the forums though. That's my interest on the forums atm.
-neg ten are terrible. Leave your that one system alot more and then you can give me advice. You should read your own posts, before making judgement on others on the forum.
You stated in the past that no boost was needed, you were wrong. As can be seen by the fact that CCP and many more, knew that a boost was needed. You now say they are fine and no more change is required. Many can see that the boost made, wasn't nearly enough for blasters and maybe even rails. Blasters for sure, haven't had nearly enough change to make them viable.
But I see you are stuck in a system of Ad hominem retorts. (see what I did there) As funny as they are, they only point to how weak your argument actually is. So I'll take what you say with a pinch of salt.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 11:55:00 -
[1413] - Quote
Tbh blasters really are fine - but the ships need an overall balancing fix between minmatar and gallente (make Gallente agile and low mass and keep minmatar fastest but also highest mass with all the junk they got glued on their ships). This would also give nanofibers/overdrives a better role distribution with nanofibers helping minmatar a lot and overdrives being good for gallente ships wanting to chase down minmatar ships over range...
Railguns lack more power, but tbh so does beams but the increase should come from better alpha and not more dps. Railguns already have a good dps compared to the other weapon systems.
Then ofcourse hybrid ammunition (and energy ammunition) need a look over and I still don't see why minmatar ammunition doesn't do at least 25-50% explosive damage on EMP, phased plasma and all the other types. I don't personally think Null need a boost, however barrage and scorch could do with less range for the damage they provide.
Pinky |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 16:15:00 -
[1414] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Tbh blasters really are fine - but the ships need an overall balancing fix between minmatar and gallente (make Gallente agile and low mass and keep minmatar fastest but also highest mass with all the junk they got glued on their ships). This would also give nanofibers/overdrives a better role distribution with nanofibers helping minmatar a lot and overdrives being good for gallente ships wanting to chase down minmatar ships over range...
Railguns lack more power, but tbh so does beams but the increase should come from better alpha and not more dps. Railguns already have a good dps compared to the other weapon systems.
Then ofcourse hybrid ammunition (and energy ammunition) need a look over and I still don't see why minmatar ammunition doesn't do at least 25-50% explosive damage on EMP, phased plasma and all the other types. I don't personally think Null need a boost, however barrage and scorch could do with less range for the damage they provide.
Pinky
what if they changed the 5% damage bonus per level to a 7.5% to damage per level... that way you are looking at an increase of 12.5% in overall dps from the ships...
one thing that we need to aviod is making hybrids too good... we have all seen atry abbadons and that is just wrong...
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
12
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 17:44:00 -
[1415] - Quote
The Djego wrote:The golden age was in 2006, before the hp buff and rigs. Blaster ships where quick and did pack lots of punch. Gangs where a lot smaller, not anybody flown and fitted T2(because it was quite expensive, like 260M Vagas etc.). However even then they where pretty niche, compared to the all out pawn mobiles that the nos\ecm drone ships where. 2006/7 was indeed the golden age, and 'happy time' for me, probably where I racked up most of my kills - Blaster Megathron was loads of fun back then - careful flying and you could sucker in even nano-addicts, showing them the pointy end of an Ion II...
Haven't flown one in almost a year now, and haven't properly flown one in almost two. This still makes me a sad panda. On an aesthetics side, they also somewhat lost that 'visceral' nature when everything was updated, including mangling the SFX with those of dual RailgunsGǪ (Eve has sound? why yes, yes it does...)
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 18:01:00 -
[1416] - Quote
Mag's wrote:[quote=m0cking bird] You stated in the past that no boost was needed, you were wrong. As can be seen by the fact that CCP and many more, knew that a boost was needed. You now say they are fine and no more change is required. Many can see that the boost made, wasn't nearly enough for blasters and maybe even rails. Blasters for sure, haven't had nearly enough change to make them viable. But I see you are stuck in a system of Ad hominem retorts. (see what I did there) As funny as they are, they only point to how weak your argument actually is. So I'll take what you say with a pinch of salt.
As I've said before ccp removed my response. I have little interest in half things I say. I say whatever and then walk away from it like a BOSS. Anyway, this will be the last time I respond to you because, I've lost interest in the forums again. Also, you're terrible and anything I say could only help you become a better pilot and have a better understanding of gameplay...
Like the Minmatar changes that happened in the past. I stated the same. Those who have no ability come on the forums and whine. Minmatar ships were good then and now they're really good. Universal viability in most forms of combat.
Like most threads populated by terrible pilots with limited experience and skill. The focus have always been misplaced by bads like yourself. My statements seem self-contradictory when you've only read this thread, but I've stated in the past. I'm aware of the issue most other pilots not willing to spend time or patients needed for Gallente combat (choosing targets carefully). Since I engage and often interact with very good Gallente pilots. Having flown Caldari and Gallente Hyrbrid ships since late 2007. Most experienced Hybrid pilots like myself, have no issues with Gallente ships or Caldari hybrid ships. Many are aware that the concept of close range combat is limiting above frigates and destroyers. There was not much you could do to change this without increasing the range of blaster turrets. Which many did not want.
So, I've tried to steer the discussion in the only possible direction CCP would take. Based on my own experience and interactions with pilots better than your whole alliance combined, but also and more importantly. By those who only fly with-in fleets or have little to no pvp experience. The later are the vast majority of pilots. Often fallowing and never leading, so their leaders tell them what is useful with-in a fleet setting. Any-ship not useful within a fleet is then seen as terrible by upwards of 90% of the players in this game. So, accepting most pilots are not willing to put in the time needed to fly blaster ships correctly or accept Gallente combat doctrine (close range damage platform). Why not just randomly argue for a increase in blaster range? I get bored sometimes and need to do things to amuse myself.
(Also, anyone who still believes those statics of weapons used and ships flown are very representative of anything other than what the most popular and common fleet doctrines. Can only look @ how the Rokh has made that list (very skewed). Being represented by one entity (Pandemic Legion). Another argument that I've made a very long time ago.)
Anyway, back to this negative ten loser. CCP has already agreed with my analysis of the issue. Which is the concept is inferior compared with conventional warfare used by ships useful in large fleets like the Drake and Abaddon. The other is skirmish warfare in-bodied by Minmatar ships and some Caldari ships (Drake, Nighthawk, Caracal, Caracal Navy Issue, Osprey Navy Issue, Tengu, Rook, Cerberus). Since reading CCP's response. I'm confident CCP will not move to change Minmatar ships in a significant way. Which is something I believe might be pushed to excess by many in the community. Also, CCP will not touch scorch because that is Amarr ships 90% stasis webifier. Not to mention I believe scorch should be boosted. Removing all penalties and introducing a reduced capacitor usage bonus instead. Making Amarr as complete in fleet (conventional warfare) engagements as Minmatar are complete in skirmish warfare. Caldari is not as complete, but close enough. Gallente engagement concepts are outmoded, but not broken. It works, but is inferior to other concepts.
-proxyyyy |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 18:32:00 -
[1417] - Quote
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. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:29:00 -
[1418] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote: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.
I like this idea. From real physics lasers should go at light speed (means practicaly instant damage for us), then hybrids with about 40 km / second, then projectile with maybe 20 km per second and than missles that are the slowest.
I would like this, not becouse of balancing, just becouse it gives me better "feeling" and adds some deeper mechanics to the game. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7385
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 17:34:00 -
[1419] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Stuff.... Can I have a TL:DR
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 17:58:00 -
[1420] - Quote
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. |
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 19:28:00 -
[1421] - 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. |
Zachis
TBC
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 20:23:00 -
[1422] - Quote
Turrets calculate a chance to hit as I understand it, where signature radius of your target is factored in and accounted for in the tracking part of the equation. But, the main determinants of your chance to hit are "primarily transversal speed and range to target" (quoted from the Evelopedia Turret Damage)
Once you can reliably hit the target, however, the signature radius of your target no longer factors into the equation. It's just quality of hit from there, which depends on some random number generator function as well. One of the reasons a sniping BS can insta-pop frigates at range.
Creating a damage radius of ammo vs. signature radius of target comparison in the damage formula would make larger weapons less effective against smaller targets at any range, but not affect their abilities against similar sized targets. Possibly leading to more fleet diversity? Don't know.
Yes, this would amount to a change in turret damage mechanics, and I'm not certain this is the correct way forward, just an option. My fear is unless something like this is done, blaster boats will always run up against a wall in terms of balance. Namely that large turrets will be very effective on smaller targets, if the ship using those large turrets can pin smaller targets effectively (ie. speed changes, web changes).
I'd like to see fair and even balance across the board, this was just one idea of how to achieve that without making bigger = better in all situations.
I do appreciate the input, and perhaps I should throw this into the "ideas" forum for a proper bashing about. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 03:04:00 -
[1423] - Quote
Buuump!
Anyone planning of getting tickets to the Fanfest and start a commotion about the unfinished Hybrid rebalancing?
Me and my friends are planning an OWS style protest in front of CCP's headquarters. We'll be flying all the way from sunny Brazil to Icy Northern Europe to show our discontent. Do girls even wear bikinis there? |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 06:39:00 -
[1424] - Quote
do you honestly think anyone will give two ***** about your rabble rousing when there is hookers and blow afoot? |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 08:02:00 -
[1425] - Quote
Zachis wrote: 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.
No just because you can hit something doesn't mean you can apply full damage to it. Actually this is very rare outside of specific peak dps game play. In a peak dps situations most frigs wouldn't survive under 1 or 2 volleys of any close range BS weapon in eve since you would look at 2-4k hits even after resists. This didn't even happen back in the days with 90% webs, there is no such thing to archive against a target that is ten times harder to track than a BS.
Damage scales from 2-150% depending on how good you can hit, archiving 100+% in a BS even against a BC is very hard and requires mwd sig bloom, 4+ the range of a blaster bs and dropping transversal pretty much to zero by manual piloting(a nano pest or oracle can do it today) in solo/small gang pvp. All this combined is basically a 2000% tracking boost and you will never pull something like this off with blasters since the web/scram changes in QR. Back in the days blaster ships actually where the benchmark when it came to this play style since they where a lot more effective at close range against all kind of targets(similar as minmatar hulls today by using dualneuts at close or the range to do it).
Lacking this ability is also a big part of why the ships are far less useful for the nearly any scenario where a blaster ship would make sense in the traditional way compared to the alternatives today. A blaster BS is just as unpractical in a bigger fight than a frig(outside of the tackler role), it isn't very effective in catching people, it isn't as good at dealing with the huge majority of his targets in solo/small gang pvp(what means the target will be smaller) as other hulls. Technically getting some dps with a mega on a frig at close range isn't even a problem, since preventing a BS from tackling a frig isn't hard or challenging and in bigger fights, before the blaster BS would be in range you would have already died by getting gutted alive at medium range by acs or lasers or have so many drones, target painters or webs on you that it doesn't matter if you get shoot by blasters, lasers or acs, the result is the same in all cases. |
DickbeardThePirate
Aliastra Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 09:17:00 -
[1426] - Quote
Further increase the speed and decrease the inertia of gallente ships by maybe 5 or 10%.
Up blaster base damage by like 10-15% more. I think the range and tracking is pretty adequate right now.
I mean the gallente shotgun has gone from useless to viable but not nearly preferable to other combat methods, it just needs that little extra push to actually be good. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 11:03:00 -
[1427] - Quote
It would be a huge mistake to increase the damage on blasters and railguns... But we do still need more adjustments on ships, railguns and ammunition. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 12:49:00 -
[1428] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:It would be a huge mistake to increase the damage on blasters and railguns... But we do still need more adjustments on ships, railguns and ammunition.
a huge mistake ? is that people would start thinking about actually using them instead of doing some offline training for the next 4 months and getting projectile turrets and minmatar bs skills to lvl 5, i dont see how it might benefit enyone maybe ccp is happy that they get free money without getting more serverload, but for the playerbase there is less people to fight with or just to blow up
and if ur afraid u will see geddon fleets with hybrid guns on them then they are already there but not becouse they are so good but becouse geddon has a very big ehp and to put hybrids on them is just a secondary choise (becouse u only trained for the worst turret system in game- the hybrids) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 13:25:00 -
[1429] - Quote
If you need to boost hybrids further you need to do it through the ships supposed to use them... People are already starting to think about using hybrids in all aspects of Eve. It will ofcourse take a long time for the players to adjust skillwise and as such it will be natural to continue see lots of minmatar ships and autocannons for a long time (Minmatar has been I-win for a serious long time)
Also I see no value in your argumentation - just lol... |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 13:37:00 -
[1430] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:If you need to boost hybrids further you need to do it through the ships supposed to use them... People are already starting to think about using hybrids in all aspects of Eve. It will ofcourse take a long time for the players to adjust skillwise and as such it will be natural to continue see lots of minmatar ships and autocannons for a long time (Minmatar has been I-win for a serious long time)
Also I see no value in your argumentation - just lol...
lol or not but we both agree that (hybrids/hybrid using ships) still need some boost
and as the devs are already at it they could also take a look at drones/drone ships some caldari and amar ships :) |
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 22:13:00 -
[1431] - Quote
1Drake112715 2Hurricane61620 3Abaddon40951 4Tengu29786 5Tornado22717 6Maelstrom22443 7Armageddon18986 8Scimitar16075 9Tempest15259 10Sabre13866 11Cynabal12945 12Thrasher11957 13Huginn11252 14Vagabond10721 15Rokh10221 16Loki10198 17Rapier9947 18Zealot9833 19Hound9751 20Rifter9454
1Heavy Missile Launcher II45896 2425mm AutoCannon II19316 31400mm Howitzer Artillery II12441 4Mega Pulse Laser II12010 5200mm AutoCannon II10599 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II8857 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II8776 8150mm Light AutoCannon II7951 9125mm Gatling AutoCannon II7303 10800mm Repeating Artillery II6860 11Heavy Pulse Laser II6736 12425mm Railgun II3338 13'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher3333 14Heavy Neutron Blaster II3297 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I3146 16Light Neutron Blaster II3041 17Focused Medium Pulse Laser II2490 18280mm Howitzer Artillery II2385 19Dual 180mm AutoCannon II2373 20Neutron Blaster Cannon II2345
Well apart from PL's use of the novelty rokh, still no-show for hybrid using ships, and still a complete absence of gallente hybrid ships even allowing for the use of the rokh. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 02:42:00 -
[1432] - Quote
yikes |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 03:50:00 -
[1433] - 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. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 10:28:00 -
[1434] - Quote
Instead of blanket boosts to hybrids, wouldn't mind ships like the Hyperion get 7.5% damage bonus and a slot layout change, maybe the rokh losing a low, gaining a mid and having its resists bonus changed to damage. Etc.
Phobos, Hyperion, Ishtar and talos still need more grid
Tier 1 battlecruisers need improved fittings, extra slots.
Active tanking bonus needs to be dealt with
Myrmidon, Eos, need more drones, improved warfare bonuses. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:28:00 -
[1435] - Quote
The effectiveness of the hybrid buff was perfectly clear before the release of Crucible. One could judge it from the pages of dissatisfaction expressed by hybrid user(s) when they were released into singularity.
After Crucible release, the stats spoke for itself. Currently no hybrid ships (DPS Class) are in top 20 used, other than the ROKH and 425mm T2 guns, coming in and out of the bottom ten of the top twenty list not so very often.
Based on past/present trend when any buff is new, players use it more in the begining to see how the changes benefit them. We see a spike there (example Tornado). But for Hybrids we saw none. Still remaind largely unused.
I have mostly used it (currently am using) for PvE. Before crucible I used to fly a blaster ROKH. Now I use a Rail ROKH. My reason for the switch is with a full rack to 425mm T2 guns I do not have to fit a PG rig anymore. Thats the only benefit for me. With javelin, the range/dps sucks with NPCs beyond 30 km. So I have to use Faction AM that generates 650 dps. I recently spend 5 Mill worth of ammo in Angel Extravaganza mission forcing me to switch over to Normal AM and that has brought my DPS to 500. I am tired of running after ranged NPCs using Blaster boat thats why I have shunned it for now because using NULL ammo the DPS really sucks as you need from 8-15 volleys to kill a single NPC BS.
We still remain at HYBRIDS ARE STILL FLAT OUT BROKEN.
Time will definitely tell whether it takes CCP another 4 years to notice it ? |
Julia Connor
Austudy The Welfare State
119
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 19:48:00 -
[1436] - Quote
Just keep asking and you'll get what you want but please can you stop stating the obvious OVER and OVER and OVER again? |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 20:44:00 -
[1437] - Quote
It is a little bit disapointing to have no reply from CCP. Overall CCP communication is not very professional. Remember how this whole thread started? The thread opener was away for 2 weeks and nobody knew, people wondered whats going on... I don't care anymore if they will do more changes or not but I would like to get an answer. Being ignored is not a nice thing and I wonder if this company really deserves to get my money??? |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 21:47:00 -
[1438] - Quote
Hamox wrote:It is a little bit disapointing to have no reply from CCP. Overall CCP communication is not very professional. Remember how this whole thread started? The thread opener was away for 2 weeks and nobody knew, people wondered whats going on...
We got ignored for month, the first time CCP really started to react, was as CCP Zulu talked about stuff like "I think that blasters will be even better after the patch." in a interview or "live on tape" blog(can't remember, been a while) and unleashed a well deserved **** storm similar to his "our pixels are comparable with 1000 dollar designer jeans" blog. This was during a time you had multiple 20+ site threads on this matter and every pvper stated you right in the face, that the QR changes will nuke blaster ships out of the game. Later we got a response from Nozh, but I rather would erase reading it from my memory, since it was basically the prime example of flawed logic applied to working game concepts that made them useless in the end.
Knock yourself out if you like: Link |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 23:40:00 -
[1439] - Quote
Hamox wrote:It is a little bit disapointing to have no reply from CCP. Overall CCP communication is not very professional. Remember how this whole thread started? The thread opener was away for 2 weeks and nobody knew, people wondered whats going on... I don't care anymore if they will do more changes or not but I would like to get an answer. Being ignored is not a nice thing and I wonder if this company really deserves to get my money???
becouse in the past every time they made a half backed statetment or theory, they released a wave of nerdrage even calling the ccp oficials stupid :)
so now they rather sit back and read ur posts without saying anything until they have a real plan, or they say everything works as intended or do nothing until the flames of rage go down and people adjust there skill training to the new cirkumstances and we all seen how that works out. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 23:46:00 -
[1440] - Quote
and to be honest the gameplay is already so complex that if u make a change to it, those changes affect alot more then just the intended part. and u would need to study all the implications for months to see the big picture and thats for every single change. ccp dosnt have the manpower for that
and like it or not but all the past changes favored the minmatar warfare style some intended but most not |
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
299
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 10:55:00 -
[1441] - Quote
We are here and we are reading your feedback.
We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012. |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 11:47:00 -
[1442] - Quote
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 |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 13:39:00 -
[1443] - Quote
Julia Connor wrote:Just keep asking and you'll get what you want but please can you stop stating the obvious OVER and OVER and OVER again?
You know, after 3 years of talking and hundreds of pages of feedback seems they were not clear enough.
Also the supposed hybrids balance announced for this expansion AND announced IN the expansion video is not there.
So has you can see, it's still not clear so you have to repeat it again and again and again until someone (?) that can do something gets it. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 13:49:00 -
[1444] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:We are here and we are reading your feedback.
We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012. I'm willing to suggest you stop iterating on hybrids for a while to address other issues - cynoes, passive tank (too good for 0 isk investement), rigs and so on. Oh, and fix tracking enhancers already. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 16:50:00 -
[1445] - 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. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 18:24:00 -
[1446] - Quote
and plz when u think about balance dont think like paper, rock, scisors, sword, bow, leather shirt, heavy armor......
but focus on making it more realistic thats why we play here Real Life modern warfare isnt about spaceships but u can still see how it would be realized if it was :) |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 19:01:00 -
[1447] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:We are here and we are reading your feedback.
We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012.
yay i had a feeling you were on a hiatus untill january... i just did not want to tell anyone cuss i am bitter...
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 19:18:00 -
[1448] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:We are here and we are reading your feedback.
We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012. I'm willing to suggest you stop iterating on hybrids for a while to address other issues - cynoes, passive tank (too good for 0 isk investement), rigs and so on. Oh, and fix tracking enhancers already.
nerf passive tank ? that would be another boost towards minmatar and just wondering how u make it that it costs u 0 isk :D or do u simply fly it as a blank hull |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 00:31:00 -
[1449] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:We are here and we are reading your feedback.
We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012.
Thank you for your feedback, it is good to read from time to time that you are working on it. Good things need their time and as long as you feed us here and there a little bit we will be patient and we will also try to help you as good as we can :) Let us know what direction you want to balance and we will deliver you free bug testing even before the changes are made on Sisi. We have many well experienced players here that will give you good ideas and thoughts so that you can improve your pre-balancing even before the changes go live on Sisi and later on TQ. We all know that the whole game is very complex and changes have many effects, some as intended but some aren't. We are more than happy to give you any support :) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:13:00 -
[1450] - Quote
I'd rather we get this balanced and done before taking on new projects like the balance between buffer and active tank (because balance between shield and armor is still knife sharp except for rig penalties).
- Hybrids
- Minmatar/Gallente balance on speed/mass/agility (as part oh hybrid balance)
- Perhaps Tier 3 speed and agility (they're faster than HACs wtf? Give them BC mass/agility/speed)
- Then other things...
Pinky |
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 13:38:00 -
[1451] - Quote
You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf) - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 13:55:00 -
[1452] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf) - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons.
- EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values // what exactly is wrong with that ?
- shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty // why should it ? its just an electromagnetic field around ur ship
- base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf) // flightttime, therefore alot of vasted cycles, less dps then other weaponsystems, and so on.... (have u ever even used heavy missiles ?) |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:49:00 -
[1453] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf) - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons. - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values // what exactly is wrong with that ? - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty // why should it ? its just an electromagnetic field around ur ship - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf) // flightttime, therefore alot of vasted cycles, less dps then other weaponsystems, and so on.... (have u ever even used heavy missiles ?)
-EHP. I'd leave as is. It seems a lot until you fly in a fleet, and then it's not enough to prevent you being 1-volleyed. It'll never be possible to alter it to be able to suit all styles of play from solo to large fleet, so if active tanks get a bit of a tweak (where it currently makes no sense with certain ship bonuses) we have tanking for both ends of the spectrum that actually works well enough.
-shield extenders shouldn't impose mass? why not? --For 'realism': Aren't they generated by massive machines you install?(Check armour repairers, armour repair rigs, etc which don't add any hp at all) Why should adding mass even slow you down in space? It just reduces acceleration, not achievable velocities. --For game play: Because it makes good sense in trying to balance the current trend for shield buffers that leave your speed unaffected and skew game play heavily away from armour being viable at the same type of game style. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 16:14:00 -
[1454] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf) - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons. - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values // what exactly is wrong with that ? - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty // why should it ? its just an electromagnetic field around ur ship - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf) // flightttime, therefore alot of vasted cycles, less dps then other weaponsystems, and so on.... (have u ever even used heavy missiles ?) -EHP. I'd leave as is. It seems a lot until you fly in a fleet, and then it's not enough to prevent you being 1-volleyed. It'll never be possible to alter it to be able to suit all styles of play from solo to large fleet, so if active tanks get a bit of a tweak (where it currently makes no sense with certain ship bonuses) we have tanking for both ends of the spectrum that actually works well enough. -shield extenders shouldn't impose mass? why not? --For 'realism': Aren't they generated by massive machines you install?(Check armour repairers, armour repair rigs, etc which don't add any hp at all) Why should adding mass even slow you down in space? It just reduces acceleration, not achievable velocities. --For game play: Because it makes good sense in trying to balance the current trend for shield buffers that leave your speed unaffected and skew game play heavily away from armour being viable at the same type of game style.
u dont need machinery to generate stronger em fields, just some extra batteries and shield extenders add only half the hp of armor plates, most shieldbased ships are anyway slow exept winmtar, and as an extra if u fit a passive shield tank ur out of cap and need to wait 10 mins until it recharges |
YuuKnow
151
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 01:07:00 -
[1455] - Quote
I'm generally in either Faction or Tech 1 Bships. My megathron's are performing adequately with the new hybrid changes. Doesn't seem like anything too unbalanced IMHO.
I would propose that if additional tweaking is needed, it be made on a ship by ship basis in terms of racial bonuses, turret/launcher capacity... not to the whole hybrids class in uniform.
on a side note, perhaps it would have been more interesting to tweak "hybrids" by not tweaking hybrids at all, but rather increasing the unique racial personalities of ships that used the hybrids. AKA, giving more drone space to the Gallante, or giving more launchers to Caldari with misile damage bonuses added into the simultaneous hybrid damage bonuses.
just my 2 cents (isk) |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 03:57:00 -
[1456] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:You can not 'have it done' without addressing core issues. And if one keeps boosting hybrids mindlessly they will easily become OP after he fixes:
- TE's - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty (which is just stupid and results in overtanked ship being as fast and agile as active tanked one - wtf) - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf)
That's why I say we'd better start doing small steps in many directions rather than try achieving a mythical balance between bare weapons. - EHP values provided by shield extenders and plates; also base EHP values // what exactly is wrong with that ? - shield extenders not imposing speed/mass penalty // why should it ? its just an electromagnetic field around ur ship - base range of heavy missiles (80 km before any rigs - wtf) // flightttime, therefore alot of vasted cycles, less dps then other weaponsystems, and so on.... (have u ever even used heavy missiles ?) -EHP. I'd leave as is. It seems a lot until you fly in a fleet, and then it's not enough to prevent you being 1-volleyed. It'll never be possible to alter it to be able to suit all styles of play from solo to large fleet, so if active tanks get a bit of a tweak (where it currently makes no sense with certain ship bonuses) we have tanking for both ends of the spectrum that actually works well enough. Current craploads of EHP don't mean anything in blob warfare either, so that's a poor excuse of leaving proper PvP in fubar (overtanked) form. I find it quite funny how they first state 'fights don't last long enough' and boost ehp only to find out that 'atries have lost their alpha-strike appeal' and boost them in turn, too. Given how popular they are atm and how clueless CCP members have often been in the past, I'm quite scared that they might consider boosting EHP once again, which would just kill all the joy of proper PvP while providing next to nothing for blobs.
That's why I say: - fix EHP (and corresponding mods) - fix arties (dominion was an absurd)
Adopting a fundamental rule that a heavily tanked ship (of massive EHP) is to be slow will make the game better by an order of magnitude. At the moment only overtanked armour boats are slow, while shield overtanking comes with no proper penalties (signature radius by no means is equal to the same reduction in speed). Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor Federal Consensus Outreach
791
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 07:04:00 -
[1457] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:proper PvP while providing next to nothing for blobs.
So blobs aren't "proper PvP" now? Jesus. Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 08:31:00 -
[1458] - Quote
there is no pvp in eve, u have a fleet ganking a guy or smaller fleet fighting a bigger fleet. if u wont a proper pvp u have to arrange it like a duel or a contest.
and what do u wont to achieve with a reduced ehp ? that arties kill everything with an alpha strike ? cammon wake up everyone will train them and who shoots first wins
i would even suggest to increase ehp so the fights take even a bit more longer and more tactical options becoume available
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:13:00 -
[1459] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: Adopting a fundamental rule that a heavily tanked ship (of massive EHP) is to be slow will make the game better by an order of magnitude. At the moment only overtanked armour boats are slow, while shield overtanking comes with no proper penalties (signature radius by no means is equal to the same reduction in speed).
I agree with you entirely on this point. We should either have the situation where the penalty to armour rigs is changed from speed or the penalty to shield rigs is changed to speed, or they rearrange the rigs to be ehp classed for shield and armour with speed penalties / resist classed for shield and armour with sig bloom penalties / armour repairer or shield booster effectors with some other (non-speed) penalty.
As for reducing ehp from current levels though - all this would do would be to broaden the effective alpha to even more weapon types than artillery. Currently artillery is the one weapon type that poses this problem for a fleet (unless numbers are so overwhelming) and as such I really don't mind it being unique. What we need are unique traits that offer advantages to the other weapon types similarly - lasers have this to a degree with instant ammo change, and also with scorch. Hybrids have no such feature and this is what rails desperately need as blasters will never ever be able to compete in large fleets from what I've seen to date. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:43:00 -
[1460] - Quote
Reducing EHP will come with fixing artillery, which got pushed intro fubar state in Dominion (so were tracking enhancers).
Instant ammo switching is a feature mostly being pulled out as a massive advantage at forums only. Selectable damage types are several times better than this, so is zero cap usage. I'm quite puzzled to see it being mentioned that often. How can one even compare those?
Rails don't need any further boosts as they already outperform beams. As for the 'features', there are hardly any available in the first place. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 10:57:00 -
[1461] - Quote
Armor plates and shield extenders seems fine to me - The problem is armor repairers and shield boosters doesn't repair/boost enough hitpoints even in small scale pvp as well as. A straight 25-50% boost applied to cycle time and hitpoints pr cycle at the same time changing the bonus on Slave and Crystal implant sets... This means the average active tanks will be much better, but without the implants people no longer have the super insane active shield tanks or monster buffered ships.
About the speed of shield boats the problem is mostly minmatar. Tbh the minmatar and angel cartel ships are too generous with the fitting. Look at the Hurricane easily being able to field biggest autocannons, 2 T2 medium energy neutralizers, mwd, 2 extenders and all the lowslots with gyrostabilizers and tracking enhancers - And still having spare powergrid and especially cpu without any fittting mods or implants. Some minmatar ships need a more balanced aproach to cpu/pg (Hurricane could easily lose 160 powergrid and 65 cpu while the fits stay almost the same as now).
Also it is a shame to have minmatar not only the fastest, but also the most agile, lightest and having plenty capacitor for MWD'ing. As I said before I think a lot of issues would be sorted by reducing the agility and mass on specific gallente blaster ships making them faster accelerating and benefitting well from MWDs, and while minmatar will still be the fastest ships they should have mass added and agility decreased. Also the armor rig penalties should definately have another drawback.
TL;DR =
- I agree last blaster changes should be made primarily on ammunition and ships
- Plates and extenders are fine
- Boost active repairing a lot but nerf slave/crystal implants to prevent monster tanks
- Review and decrease powergrid/cpu on Hurricane + other minmatar ships
- Make blaster ships more agile and reduce mass equal to 1 plate
- Make minmatar ships less agile and increase their mass - but they will still be the fastest
- Change armor rig penalty
Pinky |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:08:00 -
[1462] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Armor plates and shield extenders seems fine to me - The problem is armor repairers and shield boosters doesn't repair/boost enough hitpoints even in small scale pvp as well as. A straight 25-50% boost applied to cycle time and hitpoints pr cycle at the same time changing the bonus on Slave and Crystal implant sets... This means the average active tanks will be much better, but without the implants people no longer have the super insane active shield tanks or monster buffered ships. About the speed of shield boats the problem is mostly minmatar. Tbh the minmatar and angel cartel ships are too generous with the fitting. Look at the Hurricane easily being able to field biggest autocannons, 2 T2 medium energy neutralizers, mwd, 2 extenders and all the lowslots with gyrostabilizers and tracking enhancers - And still having spare powergrid and especially cpu without any fittting mods or implants. Some minmatar ships need a more balanced aproach to cpu/pg (Hurricane could easily lose 160 powergrid and 65 cpu while the fits stay almost the same as now). Also it is a shame to have minmatar not only the fastest, but also the most agile, lightest and having plenty capacitor for MWD'ing. As I said before I think a lot of issues would be sorted by reducing the agility and mass on specific gallente blaster ships making them faster accelerating and benefitting well from MWDs, and while minmatar will still be the fastest ships they should have mass added and agility decreased. Also the armor rig penalties should definately have another drawback. TL;DR = - I agree last blaster changes should be made primarily on ammunition and ships
- Plates and extenders are fine
- Boost active repairing a lot but nerf slave/crystal implants to prevent monster tanks
- Review and decrease powergrid/cpu on Hurricane + other minmatar ships
- Make blaster ships more agile and reduce mass equal to 1 plate
- Make minmatar ships less agile and increase their mass - but they will still be the fastest
- Change armor rig penalty
Pinky
this one
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 11:54:00 -
[1463] - Quote
There's nothing wrong with current values active tanks provide. Boosting these values will just ruin the joy of proper PvP.
There's nothing with admitting the necessity of shield extenders to slow ship down. Active tanks need a clear advantage to become viable and the only logical advantage is mobility. Since very few will justify giving repairers a speed bonus, we just have to introduce speed penalty for passive tank mods. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:03:00 -
[1464] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:There's nothing wrong with current values active tanks provide. Boosting these values will just ruin the joy of proper PvP.
There's nothing with admitting the necessity of shield extenders to slow ship down. Active tanks need a clear advantage to become viable and the only logical advantage is mobility. Since very few will justify giving repairers a speed bonus, we just have to introduce speed penalty for passive tank mods. especially for winmatar ,why those ships have comarable ehp to the other races while flying 20-30% faster , it makes no sense |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:20:00 -
[1465] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:There's nothing wrong with current values active tanks provide. Boosting these values will just ruin the joy of proper PvP.
There's nothing with admitting the necessity of shield extenders to slow ship down. Active tanks need a clear advantage to become viable and the only logical advantage is mobility. Since very few will justify giving repairers a speed bonus, we just have to introduce speed penalty for passive tank mods.
if u take a look at the current fleet tactics its all about applying as mutch dps as possible to 1 target and shield/armor reppers dont give u more EHP to survive a few seconds longer but u need to fit a buffer as big as possible and hope u will survive untill a logistics ship can remote rep u
and if u wont some real pvp go to the ideas forum and ask for some sorts of an arena system where u can fight 1 on 1 with any specific shipclass u wish cuz it wont happen in actuall gameplay |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 12:47:00 -
[1466] - Quote
Real pvp ?
The only "ideal" enviroment for that is the eve alliance tournament. This is a pretty good indicator for ballance in a regulated and limited enviroment.
I bet in the next alliance tournament we will see not many gallente ships. My prediction is: catalyst, ranis and vindicator might be used but not much more. A lot of Machs, Sleipnirs and Thrasers will be present.
A lot of games struggled with the balance between health amount vs. damage reduction vs. health repair. The tools we got in eve are well known to most palyers as EHP vs. Ewar vs. active tank/logis.
First we have to monitor if all 3 are sufficient tactics in most present enviroments. I won't discuss the results anbd efficiency of such a monitoring but there might be some work to do.
The major issue in all games is there is a max amount of incomming damage /players at which it is impossible to create any balance. Because of that we only can measure battles in certain conditions.
In eve this will be:
- small fleet battles: passive tank + active tank - ewar -
- docking games: active tank with officer mods + Ewar +
- Gate games: passive tank + active tank - ewar -
- arena: active tank + ewar + passive tank -
We need new ideas, like -"combine active tank with damage reduction" or -"with passive tank no damage reduction possible"
Personal Note on opinion of current state: - Gallente frigs are awesome. They do not nor have ever had a range issue. They are nice! - Gallente cruiser sized hulls with rails and blasters are not that nice. Drone boats are still used and cummon in. - BC/BS SIze: pretty mixed feelings here. I do not feel much difference from before the changes. The situations where vindicators were great before are still the same. No Change in preferences. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 13:18:00 -
[1467] - Quote
I agree that super fast minmatar ships with lots of dps are really annoying (borderline gamebreaking) and I would like the running capabilities of dickfleets reduced myself. I just think you are blaiming the wrong factor.
Unfortunately I don't find the caldari ships too fast and making shield buffers increase mass you might slow down minmatar a little, but you'll also make caldari go backwards. (Amarr can alse be slow but thats mostly armor rigs armor rigs)
Don't blaim shield tanking for annoying dickfleets - blaim minmatar and angel cartel ships for having too little mass and too much agility. And blaim MWDs for being too fast for their limited drawbacks...
And how can you claim active tanking is fine when Brutix, cyclone, sleipnir, claymore with shield bonuses rarely use active tanking? Myrmidons and Hyperions shield tank as often as they active tank where Im flying too and I'd rather fit an extender on a Hawk rather than even a faction shield booster... The only guys using active tanks to handle much more than a handfull of people for a few minutes are using faction setups with commandships, implants and drugs. And they have to pray on not getting neutralized and blobbed. Make active tanks for everybody and find another role for crystals and slaves.
Pinky
*Dickfleet = super fast fleets dicking around catching stragglers and easily kiting other fleets with suppreme speeds and range with little danger of taking losses because they also get in warp super fast should you get close to them or surprise them on a gate... Tier 3 BC's are super nice in this role btw. Small signature and faster than hacs easily capable of landing, shooting and warping out almost instantly makes them near impossible to catch once they are in position. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 22:31:00 -
[1468] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: And how can you claim active tanking is fine when Brutix, cyclone, sleipnir, claymore with shield bonuses rarely use active tanking? Myrmidons and Hyperions shield tank as often as they active tank where Im flying too and I'd rather fit an extender on a Hawk rather than even a faction shield booster...
That's why I'm saying buffer tanking is way too good for its cost (there's none actually) and its drawbacks (very insignificant). Fix buffer and active tanking will turn out much more viable.
Matari speed is a whole another story. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 23:20:00 -
[1469] - Quote
What i really would love to see is some strange design decisions like the "nightmare" a shield tanked laser ship. This is new, this is fresh and unique. It shows some out of the box thinking and brings us a new flavor.
whatever you do, be creative :) No matter if you take ship designs, ammo design, weapon design whatever :) Be creative, no stagnation ;) |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 09:55:00 -
[1470] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote: And how can you claim active tanking is fine when Brutix, cyclone, sleipnir, claymore with shield bonuses rarely use active tanking? Myrmidons and Hyperions shield tank as often as they active tank where Im flying too and I'd rather fit an extender on a Hawk rather than even a faction shield booster...
That's why I'm saying buffer tanking is way too good for its cost (there's none actually) and its drawbacks (very insignificant). Fix buffer and active tanking will turn out much more viable. Matari speed is a whole another story.
myrmidon and hyperion is being used for pve and in pve active shield tank is twice as good as active armor tank. and u cant buffer tank in pve cuz u will pop :). and as for passive shield tank in pve there is only a handfull that u can consider viable.
so u are now flaming about passive shield tanks in pvp, but just consider that there are alot more solo pve players then active pvp players. and if u change the way shield tanking works for alot of people lvl 4 and lvl 5 missions might become imposible to complete.
another option would be to boost active armor tanking
btw this forum is for hybrid guns not for shield/armor tanking :) |
|
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 10:14:00 -
[1471] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote: And how can you claim active tanking is fine when Brutix, cyclone, sleipnir, claymore with shield bonuses rarely use active tanking? Myrmidons and Hyperions shield tank as often as they active tank where Im flying too and I'd rather fit an extender on a Hawk rather than even a faction shield booster...
That's why I'm saying buffer tanking is way too good for its cost (there's none actually) and its drawbacks (very insignificant). Fix buffer and active tanking will turn out much more viable. Matari speed is a whole another story. myrmidon and hyperion is being used for pve and in pve active shield tank is twice as good as active armor tank. and u cant buffer tank in pve cuz u will pop :). and as for passive shield tank in pve there is only a handfull that u can consider viable. so u are now flaming about passive shield tanks in pvp, but just consider that there are alot more solo pve players then active pvp players. and if u change the way shield tanking works for alot of people lvl 4 and lvl 5 missions might become imposible to complete. another option would be to boost active armor tanking btw this forum is for hybrid guns not for shield/armor tanking :)
Well I'm doing quite a few lvl 4's in empire space but I rather see NPCs getting balanced around different weapon systems and tanks, so that not a single weapon system or tank is preferable against pretty much all of them. If it makes sense to change the way how active armor or shield tanks work in a PVP environment, do it. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 10:59:00 -
[1472] - Quote
Whatever you do plz dont touch the balance between shield and armor... Shield boosting does have some advantages that are very usefull for PvE, but shield and armor are very, very accurately balanced except for the slave/crystal sets.
Armor tanks generate the most HP pr. cap used in return for not getting armor until the end of the cycle. Armor also have a higher base resistance. Shield boosters can fit x-large shield boosters with a huge instant burst tank (tanking a lot of dps for a short duration) but will be burning cap in huge amounts, and shield resistance is lower compared to armor.
The real reasons why shield tanks are so much better than armor tanks for PvE these days are the Capacitor Control Circuit rigs each giving a huge regeneration of cap without any penalties making permanent shield boosting much, much easier than was originally intended. CCP really should look at the energy rigs where ccc rigs and acr rigs in my opinion should only give out half their current bonus and get a penalty like reduced sensor strength, signature or similar.
The way PvE are designed with MANY npc's doing LITTLE dps on their own makes burst tanking nice because you can then tank what you need until you have killed enough npc's to decrease their dps. In my npc ships should have more hitpoints, more dps and bigger bounties in return for less numbers - It'll be a lot of work but making PvE combat closer to PvP is a good thing in my world and if the CCC rigs gets sorted to a non-game breaking level armor tanking should definately be in it's right place.
And about the buffer tanks I don't think they're overpowered considered the amount of dps in space these days - The problem as I was trying to explain you is active tanks just not keeping up. Not only compared to extenders, but the experience I have is even burst tanking pvp shield ships like cyclone or Hawk will MELT in the face of even light resistance unless you are a pilot with maxed skills, faction modules, drugs, commandship bonus and picking your targets very carefully... Thats why I'd rather extender fit a hawk and a cyclone. Don't nerf buffertanks - boost active tanks and balance NPC's accordingly. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 11:43:00 -
[1473] - Quote
You guys wrote much !!! But what about CCP ? ANY info from their side ? Or they just ignores you ???
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 12:01:00 -
[1474] - Quote
They're taking a holiday vacation with their families while pondering about their next move... Tallest promised a dev blog on further hybrid changes estimated to arrive in january.
Pinky |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
203
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 12:04:00 -
[1475] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:They're taking a holiday vacation with their families while pondering about their next move... Tallest promised a dev blog on further hybrid changes estimated to arrive in january.
Pinky good DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=706442#post706442 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:01:00 -
[1476] - Quote
A lot of crap posted by both sides...
Proper pvp?
Make tier 3 BC's slower and less agile?
What the **** is this ****. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 15:23:00 -
[1477] - Quote
Holy crap.
Tallest, please stop listening to the EFT warriors in this thread. I don't think many of them actually play the game.
Hybrids are very good now. Very much balanced with lasers and projectiles. The only imbalance I see in the 3 main turrets right now is the ability for projectiles to use any damage type. Restrict them to kinetic / explosive, and everything is peachy.
In your next wave of balancing, please address ship bonuses that have become obsolete. You know the ones I'm talking about: armor rep bonuses on gallente hulls and laser capacitor bonuses on amarr hulls. Change them to a different bonus. Maybe change the armor rep bonus to a resist bonus or something. Give all Amarr laser boats a 20-25% cap reduction on lasers and replace the cap bonuses with something useful like damage, rate of fire, optimal, tracking or armor resist. Then you won't see people flying around in laser boats with autocannons fitted.
That is all. Go on everyone, hate on this post if you want because I didn't call for a 40% damage increase and 200% range increase for hybrids. Hate all you want. I'm not wrong.
Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 16:30:00 -
[1478] - Quote
Rebirth Mining Director wrote:Holy crap.
Tallest, please stop listening to the EFT warriors in this thread. I don't think many of them actually play the game.
Hybrids are very good now. Very much balanced with lasers and projectiles. The only imbalance I see in the 3 main turrets right now is the ability for projectiles to use any damage type. Restrict them to kinetic / explosive, and everything is peachy.
In your next wave of balancing, please address ship bonuses that have become obsolete. You know the ones I'm talking about: armor rep bonuses on gallente hulls and laser capacitor bonuses on amarr hulls. Change them to a different bonus. Maybe change the armor rep bonus to a resist bonus or something. Give all Amarr laser boats a 20-25% cap reduction on lasers and replace the cap bonuses with something useful like damage, rate of fire, optimal, tracking or armor resist. Then you won't see people flying around in laser boats with autocannons fitted.
That is all. Go on everyone, hate on this post if you want because I didn't call for a 40% damage increase and 200% range increase for hybrids. Hate all you want. I'm not wrong.
alt troll post |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 16:53:00 -
[1479] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:alt troll post Alt? Yes. I don't need you morons sending hate mail to my main.
Troll? Hardly. I meant every word of what I said. Preceding my post is 70+ pages of game breaking suggestions from people who think their hybrid boat should win any engagement against any possible opponent 10 out of 10 times. It's time for people to wake up. Hybrids are very good now. In some specific situations they are weak, in others they are ******* outstanding. That's the mark of a balanced weapon system. If you're too stupid to figure out how to use them to their advantages, that's your problem, not the weapon system's.
Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 16:58:00 -
[1480] - Quote
i maintain my troll post position. your words are carefully chosen to illicit emotional posts from folks who have been discussing things in this thread. go back under your bridge, troll |
|
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:04:00 -
[1481] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:i maintain my troll post position. your words are carefully chosen to illicit emotional posts from folks who have been discussing things in this thread. go back under your bridge, troll If I was troll posting I would say something like:
You sound emotional. My words were chosen to illicit responses from fools like you.
But, for once, I'm serious. The only people still asking for hybrid changes are people who will NEVER be satisfied. Let's cross hybrids off the list. It's time to move on to other things that actually could use some improvement. You know, like ship bonuses.
Also, an addition to what I was saying above about limiting projectiles to kin / explosive: It's time. If a fleet scouts an incoming enemy fleet of abaddons and switches to armor ships with em / hardeners, that's good game play. If a fleet scouts incoming enemies in malestroms and switches to shield ships with kinetic / explosive hardeners only to have the maels load EMP, that's broken. Homogenization is bad. Anything that encourages diverse fleet compositions is good. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:09:00 -
[1482] - Quote
your trying way too hard |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:10:00 -
[1483] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:your trying way too hard *sigh* Seriously?
Talk about a "never satisfied" mentality...
EDIT: The fact that you think I'm trolling because I'm saying hybrids are balanced now shows just how out of whack your thought process is... Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:14:00 -
[1484] - Quote
it's so whacked bro |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:17:00 -
[1485] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:it's so whacked bro Admitting it is the first step to recovery. Now we just need to work on basically everyone else in this thread. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:18:00 -
[1486] - Quote
the guns are not the issue its the platforms that use them asides from the proteus that are. i do not expect an orca pilot to understand this so, keep on keepin on troll |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:20:00 -
[1487] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:the guns are not the issue its the platforms that use them asides from the proteus that are. i do not expect an orca pilot to understand this so, keep on keepin on troll This is the "i should win every fight" mentality I was talking about.
Having trouble getting into range? Bring a tackler. You know, that thing that has been a staple of eve game play since day one. Once tackled, roll on in with your blasters and **** face. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Clara Sprudel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:46:00 -
[1488] - Quote
Rebirth Mining Director wrote:Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:the guns are not the issue its the platforms that use them asides from the proteus that are. i do not expect an orca pilot to understand this so, keep on keepin on troll This is the "i should win every fight" mentality I was talking about. Having trouble getting into range? Bring a tackler. You know, that thing that has been a staple of eve game play since day one. Once tackled, roll on in with your blasters and **** face.
Maybe you should read this whole thread again, you would see that it is not about a new gallente I-WIN-BUTTON. People are discussing ways to make pvp more competitive for many situations, 1vs1, small fleets and large fleets.
I do not agree with Zarak1 in many points, but I agree with him that you are a troll. You only post assumptions and try to offend people. There is allways someone like you who from time to time jumps into this thread and tries to sound very intelligent and proffesional. If hybrids and the plattforms are fine for you go out and use them, give us some evidence, kill people and show the killmail, form a Gallente Blaster fleet and shoot the crap out of everyone and show us your great skill ;) |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 17:54:00 -
[1489] - Quote
Clara Sprudel wrote:People are discussing ways to make pvp more competitive for many situations, 1vs1, small fleets and large fleets. But that's really my point, isn't it. There are ships that are very good in 1v1 that make use of every weapons system, hybrids included. Most of the suggestions in this thread are an attempt to make all hybrid boats everywhere able to kill anything in 1v1. That is bad and not how eve should work.
When you're talking about fleets, however, it's a totally different argument with even less substance. I've said it before and I'll say it again....
Clara Sprudel wrote:form a Gallente Blaster fleet and shoot the crap out of everyone and show us your great skill ;) Homogenization is bad. If you're flying a fleet composed entirely of Gallente blaster boats, you deserve to be kited and die in a fire. Bring some tackle. Bring some ranged weapons. Bring some e-war. Bring some logi. Get your enemy right where you want him, then obliterate them with blaster fire. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 18:26:00 -
[1490] - Quote
are you done soap boxing yet? would be nice to have a true dialogue instead of this non sense |
|
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 18:30:00 -
[1491] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:are you done soap boxing yet? would be nice to have a true dialogue instead of this non sense When you have a counter-point to something I've said, feel free to share it. I'll be happy to debate you to your heart's content. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:24:00 -
[1492] - Quote
there is nothing to discuss with you. you just want to retort and reiterate your troll post repeatedly. the rest of the folks who have been engaging in dialogue however were pleasant and reasonable. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:25:00 -
[1493] - Quote
Rebirth Mining Director wrote: Homogenization is bad. If you're flying a fleet composed entirely of Gallente blaster boats, you deserve to be kited and die in a fire. Bring some tackle. Bring some ranged weapons. Bring some e-war. Bring some logi. Get your enemy right where you want him, then obliterate them with blaster fire.
So only winmatard should be able to form homo gangs? Like vaga vaga cyna cyna cane dramiel??? Cause thats what i see most of the time. nerf matar now!!!
|
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:40:00 -
[1494] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:the rest of the folks who have been engaging in dialogue however were pleasant and reasonable. What a surprise. You got along with the rest of your fellow "buff hybrids moar" circle jerk gang?
Naomi Knight wrote:So only winmatard should be able to form homo gangs? Like vaga vaga cyna cyna cane dramiel??? Cause thats what i see most of the time. That's because there's 2 way to counter a gang like that: ewar and longer range weapons on tanked hulls, or form your own angel homo gang. Most people choose the later because they're unoriginal. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 19:58:00 -
[1495] - Quote
Rebirth you are correct that minmatar guns need to have explosive/kinetic damage in all their ammunition and yes Amarr ships need some more exciting bonuses instead of cap reduction (since projectiles and hybrids are now updated and lazors no longer seem overpowered). But in return your attitude is all wrong... What a shame.
Pinky |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 20:21:00 -
[1496] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:But in return your attitude is all wrong... What a shame. Yeah, quite frankly: you're right.
In fact, I agree with nearly 100% of what you have said in every one of your posts for the entirety of this thread. Your ideas are well thought out and very rational. You've delivered them clearly and concisely. And you've been drowned out by the people shouting "GIVE BLASTERS MOAR DAMAGE AND NO CAP USE AND 60KM RANGE AND INSTANT RELOAD LOOLZ" from the rooftops at every opportunity.
And the sad part? There's a good chance CCP will listen to them, and not you, because they are louder.
EDIT: Also, to anyone who thinks I'm wrong about CCP paying attention to the loudest first? Ask yourself why traders dress the way they do on the floors of most futures exchanges. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 20:55:00 -
[1497] - Quote
no, i got along with the people who were not assholes for the sake of being one. you obviously havent read any of the pages in this thread and where i stood on any of this stuff.
you are trolling very poorly |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 20:57:00 -
[1498] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:no, i got along with the people who were not assholes for the sake of being one. you obviously havent read any of the pages in this thread and where i stood on any of this stuff.
you are trolling very poorly Who are you again? Go away kid, the grownups are talking.
Christ, what an attention ***** you are, Zarak. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 21:38:00 -
[1499] - Quote
There are several ways to balance active and passive tank types without boosting repping values themselves, which is the last thing one should consider doing.
In addition to (or instead of, if you so please) what I've already said (plain reduction in EHP) it's also very appealing to increase fitting requirements for plates/extenders and reduce them for active modules.
2600 MW for 1600mm plate - hell, yes! In this case passive tanking becomes much more interesting fitting-wise. It's no longer 'overtank with plates and put biggest guns on top of it', but rather 'I have to actually make a tough choice'. 500 MW for a large shield extender - w00t!
As for repping mods, they are already balanced pretty well by cap consumption. If anything, they should require less PG and less CPU.
And this of a direct relation to hybrids, btw. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 22:05:00 -
[1500] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:There are several ways to balance active and passive tank types without boosting repping values themselves, which is the last thing one should consider doing.
In addition to (or instead of, if you so please) what I've already said (plain reduction in EHP) it's also very appealing to increase fitting requirements for plates/extenders and reduce them for active modules.
2600 MW for 1600mm plate - hell, yes! In this case passive tanking becomes much more interesting fitting-wise. It's no longer 'overtank with plates and put biggest guns on top of it', but rather 'I have to actually make a tough choice'. 500 MW for a large shield extender - w00t!
As for repping mods, they are already balanced pretty well by cap consumption. If anything, they should require less PG and less CPU.
And this of a direct relation to hybrids, btw.
I'd be ok with that idea. Would make it hard/impossible to fit 1600mm on cruisers though, unless I'm mistaken. But then again I do think the whole "oversized" fitting requirement is silly, and could do with a general renaming in terms of gameplay. Afterall, does anyone outside a few fittings evr use small shield extenders? And I'm not sure such fittings do exist anyway. |
|
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 23:49:00 -
[1501] - Quote
I concur with the fact that buffer mods need a boost in requirements. Its far too easy to fit large anything on a cruiser. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 03:30:00 -
[1502] - Quote
I was wondering why that rebirth name seemed so familiar. you guys are those terrible mercs that quote prices for jobs you probably couldnt even begin let alone accomplish
lol |
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 11:48:00 -
[1503] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:I was wondering why that rebirth name seemed so familiar. you guys are those terrible mercs that quote prices for jobs you probably couldnt even begin let alone accomplish
lol Yes, that's us! Tell your friends! Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
135
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 12:41:00 -
[1504] - Quote
This Zarak seems like a smart guy. Vote him for president! //sarcasm "Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."
"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 13:16:00 -
[1505] - Quote
I agree it is weird a 1600mm plate cost 1/5th of a Large Armor Repairer, however I find it hard to see how cruisers and battlecruisers have too many hitpoints when most of them crumble in a very short time under fire from just 1-3 similar fitted enemies. At least pilots now have enough survivability to react on his surroundings. Something active repairing have trouble with atm. Currently buffertanks offer a valid game-play enjoyed by all players. Buffertanks are not overpowered because active reps are worse, it's Active tanks that need love because they don't offer the same enjoyable game-play like buffertanks (except with faction mods, drugs and implants in specific bonused ships)
Reducing the hitpoints given by extenders and plates will dramatically reduce the living time of most ships even if they already die fast in a typical engagement effectively reversing what CCP have accomplished with recent HP boosts. Increasing fitting requirements would make people fit smaller plates which makes sense with their names, but then you will have the same problem as above with ships unable to stay alive for more than a brief amount of time.
Yes, it's stupid that we use medium extenders on frigates, large extenders on cruisers and don't have XL extenders for battleships, but less hitpoints or bigger fitting requirements will ruin the working buffer-gameplay we have now instead of bringing active reps up to date.
Obviously I would love for shield extenders to be renamed properly and maybe removing micro extenders in return for implementing an XL extender for battleships. Plates could also easily be without 50mm and 100mm plates and make good use of 3200mm plates.
Again, with the amount of dps ships have today I believe these solid changes will help the game much more than just nerfing plates and extenders
Pinky |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 13:42:00 -
[1506] - Quote
You can downgrade your guns anytime, which kinda is the very point of upping requirements. Fitting choices instead of no-brainers.
Also, not all players enjoy overtanked EVE. So speak for yourself. Current active tanks do offer valid gameplay. Buffer offers overtank which takes forever to chew through. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
135
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 13:59:00 -
[1507] - Quote
I agree. When it takes over 3 minutes of sustained blaster fire on a trimarked BC something is a touch wrong, tbh. Reduced buffertanks would honestly allow for more hit and run style favored by stealthy pilots.
And honestly, it's not so much the plates and extenders as it is the 3x rigs. (Trimarks and CDFEs) "Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."
"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:06:00 -
[1508] - Quote
Not only stealthy loners, it promotes small-scale PvP in general. Being unable to kill anything before a crapload of reinforcements arrives is the reason why it's so safe to blob up and so unreasonable to fly in small numbers. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:09:00 -
[1509] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:I agree it is weird a 1600mm plate cost 1/5th of a Large Armor Repairer, however I find it hard to see how cruisers and battlecruisers have too many hitpoints when most of them crumble in a very short time under fire from just 1-3 similar fitted enemies. At least pilots now have enough survivability to react on his surroundings. Something active repairing have trouble with atm. Currently buffertanks offer a valid game-play enjoyed by all players. Buffertanks are not overpowered because active reps are worse, it's Active tanks that need love because they don't offer the same enjoyable game-play like buffertanks (except with faction mods, drugs and implants in specific bonused ships)
Reducing the hitpoints given by extenders and plates will dramatically reduce the living time of most ships even if they already die fast in a typical engagement effectively reversing what CCP have accomplished with recent HP boosts. Increasing fitting requirements would make people fit smaller plates which makes sense with their names, but then you will have the same problem as above with ships unable to stay alive for more than a brief amount of time.
Yes, it's stupid that we use medium extenders on frigates, large extenders on cruisers and don't have XL extenders for battleships, but less hitpoints or bigger fitting requirements will ruin the working buffer-gameplay we have now instead of bringing active reps up to date.
Obviously I would love for shield extenders to be renamed properly and maybe removing micro extenders in return for implementing an XL extender for battleships. Plates could also easily be without 50mm and 100mm plates and make good use of 3200mm plates.
Again, with the amount of dps ships have today I believe these solid changes will help the game much more than just nerfing plates and extenders
Pinky
there is no need to remove anything and frigs using a medium shield extender ?
camon dont make up numbers a frigate has about 40 powergrid a medium shield extender about 28
there is no need to change buffer passive tank
and active armor could use a buff as it heals only half of shield boosters and armor tank guns use cap exept a few minmatar ships that are being armor tanked
and yes projektiles are too good to be true as they dont need any cap and outperferm other turrets and if needed can change damage typesbut the usability of it isnt that big and its expensive cuz u need to use faction ammo and loose some dps |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:11:00 -
[1510] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Not only stealthy loners, it promotes small-scale PvP in general. Being unable to kill anything before a crapload of reinforcements arrives is the reason why it's so safe to blob up and so unreasonable to fly in small numbers.
if u wont to have duels u have to arrange them !!!! |
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:19:00 -
[1511] - Quote
i think there are some flaws in the examples.
To get a better view of the case a question. Is it the passive tanking plates for example or the remote repair power of logi's which do bring us to this problem. Blobing up fleets are using alpha weapons to reduce the chance a that a logi is fast enougth to react. There will always be hughe fleets. There will alwaays be a min / max calculation.
The more problematic points in current warefare are.
- Slots needed to create a sufficient active tank with shield vs armor. - Requirement costs of passive tanking modules. - Tanking modules do give a FIXED value instead of a scaling value. A static valkue is bad design. - Is there a chance for combining some values like resists on reppers and reducede logi effect to shift some values. - What can be done to reduce the need of alpha. - Is alpha overpowered ? - is range overrated ? Or do current warefare tactics favor certain conditions.
We are not here to make a statement towards ccp like "Change x that the effect will be Y" We can show certain synergies and ref3elct all effects something will have on the game. The decisions are not made by us. So let'S stop flaming each other and instead bring up some new ideas.
New ideas are needed and no number switching :p
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:34:00 -
[1512] - Quote
Medium shield extender on a frigate? That is pretty standard even on Rifters and Merlins... MAPC 4TW Downgrading guns works for minmatar ships, but many other ships will have problems with this aproach. And you don't enjoy other pilots being able to react on your attack? I feel sorry for your lack of empathy - The boost on hitpoints have definately helped Eve into a more tactical adventure instead of being 10 seconds of wtf followed by an explosion... This is an MMORPG - If you want to blow up people without having to play with his friends you will need to work for it. And if it takes 3 minutes to kill a single plated battlecruisers with Trimarks something must be wrong with your dps?
Pinky
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:35:00 -
[1513] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:You can downgrade your guns anytime, which kinda is the very point of upping requirements. Fitting choices instead of no-brainers. While I agree with the sentiment here, the problem is that right now amarr ships, particularly cruiser and battle cruiser size ships, already have to make this decision. Fitting heavy pulses and a decent tank is very difficult on some ships, impossible on the rest. We're forced to choose between a downsized tank, or fit smaller guns... but I think that's a good thing.
Until the hybrid buff, hybrid ships had to make this choice too. Now, less so, but still to some extent. Minmatar ships can leisurely fit their biggest guns, full tank, mwd, and whatever other utility mods they want with little concern for fitting. Increasing the fitting requirements for plates and extenders would hurt the ships that already have to make this fitting decision. Instead, I think it would be more effective to rebalance the ships that can fit things too easily. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:51:00 -
[1514] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Not only stealthy loners, it promotes small-scale PvP in general. Being unable to kill anything before a crapload of reinforcements arrives is the reason why it's so safe to blob up and so unreasonable to fly in small numbers. if u wont to have duels u have to arrange them !!!! If you want to look persuasive, post with your main. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
70
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 14:52:00 -
[1515] - Quote
I was going to reply some ideas in this thread, but decided it would be better in a separate thread in Features & Ideas. It discusses balancing issues between weapons by fixing the fundamental flaws of the ships that use them. Solving most of the balance issues of the weapons themselves.
Thread here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=558939 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:10:00 -
[1516] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:You can downgrade your guns anytime, which kinda is the very point of upping requirements. Fitting choices instead of no-brainers. While I agree with the sentiment here, the problem is that right now amarr ships, particularly cruiser and battle cruiser size ships, already have to make this decision. Fitting heavy pulses and a decent tank is very difficult on some ships, impossible on the rest. We're forced to choose between a downsized tank, or fit smaller guns... but I think that's a good thing. Until the hybrid buff, hybrid ships had to make this choice too. Now, less so, but still to some extent. Minmatar ships can leisurely fit their biggest guns, full tank, mwd, and whatever other utility mods they want with little concern for fitting. Increasing the fitting requirements for plates and extenders would hurt the ships that already have to make this fitting decision. Instead, I think it would be more effective to rebalance the ships that can fit things too easily. Cruisers are irrelevant at least since tier2 BC release, so it makes no sense to mention them in the first place. Battleships are unaffected at all - it's always possible to use several plates plus top-tier guns, while the very idea of having CPU and grid is giving players something to think about while compromising between various goals.
I don't see how increasing PG requirements can hit amarr the most, given they already have biggest grid among all races. MWD, cap booster, plates, neuts etc. eat up the same amount of grid, thus the bigger is their % in grid usage, the better it is for Amarr. Besides, the whole issue is not that relevant anyway since it's dependant on exact values.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:14:00 -
[1517] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Cruisers are irrelevant at least since tier2 BC release, so it makes no sense to mention them in the first place. I disagree with this. Faction cruisers and HACS are certainly included in my statement and are very relevant.
Fon Revedhort wrote:Battleships are unaffected at all - it's always possible to use several plates plus top-tier guns, while the very idea of having CPU and grid is giving players something to think about while compromising between various goals. Again, I disagree. Please go test your theory on an Armageddon. Don't forget a MWD and heavy cap booster for those hungry lasers.
Fon Revedhort wrote:I don't see how increasing PG requirements can hit amarr the most, given they already have biggest grid among all races. It hits them the hardest because lasers have, far and away, the highest fitting requirements of any weapons system. Also, Amarr usually need to fit cap boosters - another high powergrid module, more then any other race.
Also, I didn't mean to come across like I was saying Amarr are underpowered and in need of a buff. I think we're doing ok, and I love my Amarr ships. I was just trying to illustrate some of the problems with increasing fitting cost on some modules instead of balancing the ships that make fitting too easy. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 15:43:00 -
[1518] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Cruisers are irrelevant at least since tier2 BC release, so it makes no sense to mention them in the first place. I disagree with this. Faction cruisers and HACS are certainly included in my statement and are very relevant. Fon Revedhort wrote:Battleships are unaffected at all - it's always possible to use several plates plus top-tier guns, while the very idea of having CPU and grid is giving players something to think about while compromising between various goals. Again, I disagree. Please go test your theory on an Armageddon. Don't forget a MWD and heavy cap booster for those hungry lasers. Fon Revedhort wrote:I don't see how increasing PG requirements can hit amarr the most, given they already have biggest grid among all races. It hits them the hardest because lasers have, far and away, the highest fitting requirements of any weapons system. Also, Amarr usually need to fit cap boosters - another high powergrid module, more then any other race. Also, I didn't mean to come across like I was saying Amarr are underpowered and in need of a buff. I think we're doing ok, and I love my Amarr ships. I was just trying to illustrate some of the problems with increasing fitting cost on some modules instead of balancing the ships that make fitting too easy.
indeed |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 19:24:00 -
[1519] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:It hits them the hardest because lasers have, far and away, the highest fitting requirements of any weapons system. For some weird reason you cut my quote and then got what you deserved - missed the point entirely.
If fitting essential mods uses, say, 1% of grid, then the rest of it goes for guns and it's literally impossible to avoid fitting the largest ones. If fitting those mods uses, say, 50, then it's kind of hard to do that.
For instance.
1) a plate requires 500 MWs Ship A has 2k MWs, after fitting a plate there's 1500 MWs left for fitting guns etc. Ship B has 1.5k MWs, 1000 is left after the plate
2) a plate requires 1000 Ship A has now 1k left Ship B - merely 500
3) lol-case: a plate uses 1500 MWs Ship A has 500 spare MWs and still can fit something like quad light beam lasers Ship B can not fit anything, despite its racial guns being easier to fit themsevles
As for capbooster, it has to be fitted regardless, so it's irrelevant. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 19:28:00 -
[1520] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:For some weird reason you cut my quote and then got what you deserved - missed the point entirely. No, I got what you're saying the first time around. I still disagree. If they make changes to the fitting of modules, all ships will need to be rebalanced since it will break ships that are fine now. Instead I suggest they just rebalance the worst offenders like the hurricane that have no-compromise fitting options.
I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 19:32:00 -
[1521] - Quote
Stuff like Canes and Drakes is to fixed regardless, to be quite honest Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 20:10:00 -
[1522] - Quote
History Son!:
As long as the community will not support a increase in medium and to a lesser extent large blaster range. Most Gal ships will never be considered viable. Solo or 2 - 4 pilot engagements are not done by the mojority of pilots ingame. So having ships focused for that purpose seems ********. You know, when most Amarr or Min ships can do the same and more. Even in the past. The most used Gal ships were ships that could be used in fleets with rail-gun (rail-gun-Megathron, Lachesis, Onieros, Arazu, rail-gun-Deimos). Blaster Megathrons had the same issues they do now. Pulse lasers were just better compared to all other turrets. So there was never a time since 2007 were they were useful comparatively. Every battleship could use 90% stasis webifier, but some had better projected and applied damage and considerably more velocity. So even the time blaster ships were considered the most viable. Pulse lasers were considered superior. However, the one turret most pilots considered blasters were superior to @ that time was projectiles.
Why? @ the time. Most projectile ships were limited to being effective in warp scrambler range. Certain ships like the Vagabond, sliepnir, Huginn and Muninn could use Min ships superior velocity. The Tempest was also and still able to out manoeuvre less mobile ships in a armour or shield variant.
So other than those specific ships. Every other Min ship operated under warp scrambler range. Min ships had superior mobility compared to Cal, Amarr and Gal. However even if the could out run every other ship in a specific class. Auto-cannons could only viably operate under warp scrambler range. Min had damage selection. However the ammunition was not as focused as it is now. Projectiles did not use capacitor then and pulse lasers were still considered supiroer. Even close range.Gal ships have always had a significant advantage in terms of defense in every class and damage. Not to mention most @ the time had nice graphs on the difference in damage of a Megathron compared to a Tempest. You know, to prove auto-cannons were not viable @ all. Gal ships could do everything most Min ships could, but better...
So what change? The changes in projectile damage was only 5 - 7%. The slight increase in base falloff of mid and high tier auto-cannons was slight. More focused damage ammunition did not yeild that much of a difference. Many had pretty graphs @ the time. Suggesting the changes were a "Joke". At-least in that regard they were correct. At-least to a certain extent... All the changes so far amounted to a significant increase in projectile applied damage under warp scambler range (once you factior in more focused damage and slight base falloff increase). Still, it didn't change much. Although artillery became overpowered compared to other long range turrets. At-least under 100km. Auto-cannons remained the same and apparently long range fleet engagements was becoming obsolete. (The stars seemed to align for the Minmatar race)
Then CCP listen to a handful in the community who suggested changes to tracking enhancers. Which was to help artillery. That was all it took. You could effectively take away all other changes, with the exception of base increase to autocannon falloff and you would have what we have now.
Min were now viable in fleet engagements (Gal were left behind as the only race that operated and focused close range only). Something primarily limited only to long range battleships and 3 - 4 T2 ships. Before, Min ships couldn't superior mobility because, what would that matter if auto-cannons could only work close range (This is what those pushing for increase Gal velocity don't seem to understand)? Using shield setups would increase mobility, but @ a cost of significant reduction in defence. Autocannons could only work close range @ the time. A armour plate would yield more effective hit-points, while maintaining most of a ships damage (Hurricane) and minmatar ships still had a advantage in velocity.
CCP did not intend for auto-cannons to be used outside of warp scrambler range @ the time of the projectile changes. CCP did intend to make artillery more effective in terms of range, compared to rail-gun and beam laser @ the time. The changes to tracking enhancers was intended to increase artillery, but not autocannons. Funny thing is. For the crowd that wanted ballance. The game was more balanced then than it is now. You had 2 races focused for close range engagements (Min and Gal) and 2 races focused for fleet engagements (Caldari and Amarr). Now it's just Gal focused for close range engagements and the other races for close range and fleet engagements.
Serious question. What would happen if CCP increased medium and larger blaster range? Everything else would remain the same. CCP just decided to introduce a significant increase to tracking computers. The values would be close to autocannons in terms or projected and applied damage, but with a balance of optimal and falloff. Min ships would still be more mobile and Gal would still be able to use armour. This is what pulse lasers are able to do @ the moment, but alot more viable. Being able to kite a single Gal ship would become very difficult, if not impossible and Min would still be able to disengage.
In one go the whole issue surrounding blaster would be solved. Or! CCP should just nerf medium and large autocanons falloff. So tracking enhancers will not effect those values as much. Bringing Minmatar back down to Gal engagement ranges. The other option is insane damage output, but that would be game breaking. I can already think of amusing ways to abuse such a weapon. Most of the other suggestions including the "just increase speed" crowd will not work. It sounds great and I'm for it. If only to show Gal ships would still be last choice given Min, Armarr or Cal are not available. Coupling speed with range would be another matter...
-proxyyyy |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 20:33:00 -
[1523] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:History Son!:
As long as the community will not support a increase in medium and to a lesser extent large blaster range. Most Gal ships will never be considered viable. Solo or 2 - 4 pilot engagements are not done by the mojority of pilots ingame. So having ships focused for that purpose seems ********. You know, when most Amarr or Min ships can do the same and more. Even in the past. The most used Gal ships were ships that could be used in fleets with rail-gun (rail-gun-Megathron, Lachesis, Onieros, Arazu, rail-gun-Deimos). Blaster Megathrons had the same issues they do now. Pulse lasers were just better compared to all other turrets. So there was never a time since 2007 were they were useful comparatively. Every battleship could use 90% stasis webifier, but some had better projected and applied damage and considerably more velocity. So even the time blaster ships were considered the most viable. Pulse lasers were considered superior. However, the one turret most pilots considered blasters were superior to @ that time was projectiles.
Why? @ the time. Most projectile ships were limited to being effective in warp scrambler range. Certain ships like the Vagabond, sliepnir, Huginn and Muninn could use Min ships superior velocity. The Tempest was also and still able to out manoeuvre less mobile ships in a armour or shield variant.
So other than those specific ships. Every other Min ship operated under warp scrambler range. Min ships had superior mobility compared to Cal, Amarr and Gal. However even if the could out run every other ship in a specific class. Auto-cannons could only viably operate under warp scrambler range. Min had damage selection. However the ammunition was not as focused as it is now. Projectiles did not use capacitor then and pulse lasers were still considered supiroer. Even close range.Gal ships have always had a significant advantage in terms of defense in every class and damage. Not to mention most @ the time had nice graphs on the difference in damage of a Megathron compared to a Tempest. You know, to prove auto-cannons were not viable @ all. Gal ships could do everything most Min ships could, but better...
So what change? The changes in projectile damage was only 5 - 7%. The slight increase in base falloff of mid and high tier auto-cannons was slight. More focused damage ammunition did not yeild that much of a difference. Many had pretty graphs @ the time. Suggesting the changes were a "Joke". At-least in that regard they were correct. At-least to a certain extent... All the changes so far amounted to a significant increase in projectile applied damage under warp scambler range (once you factior in more focused damage and slight base falloff increase). Still, it didn't change much. Although artillery became overpowered compared to other long range turrets. At-least under 100km. Auto-cannons remained the same and apparently long range fleet engagements was becoming obsolete. (The stars seemed to align for the Minmatar race)
Then CCP listen to a handful in the community who suggested changes to tracking enhancers. Which was to help artillery. That was all it took. You could effectively take away all other changes, with the exception of base increase to autocannon falloff and you would have what we have now.
Min were now viable in fleet engagements (Gal were left behind as the only race that operated and focused close range only). Something primarily limited only to long range battleships and 3 - 4 T2 ships. Before, Min ships couldn't superior mobility because, what would that matter if auto-cannons could only work close range (This is what those pushing for increase Gal velocity don't seem to understand)? Using shield setups would increase mobility, but @ a cost of significant reduction in defence. Autocannons could only work close range @ the time. A armour plate would yield more effective hit-points, while maintaining most of a ships damage (Hurricane) and minmatar ships still had a advantage in velocity.
CCP did not intend for auto-cannons to be used outside of warp scrambler range @ the time of the projectile changes. CCP did intend to make artillery more effective in terms of range, compared to rail-gun and beam laser @ the time. The changes to tracking enhancers was intended to increase artillery, but not autocannons. Funny thing is. For the crowd that wanted ballance. The game was more balanced then than it is now. You had 2 races focused for close range engagements (Min and Gal) and 2 races focused for fleet engagements (Caldari and Amarr). Now it's just Gal focused for close range engagements and the other races for close range and fleet engagements.
Serious question. What would happen if CCP increased medium and larger blaster range? Everything else would remain the same. CCP just decided to introduce a significant increase to tracking computers. The values would be close to autocannons in terms or projected and applied damage, but with a balance of optimal and falloff. Min ships would still be more mobile and Gal would still be able to use armour. This is what pulse lasers are able to do @ the moment, but alot more viable. Being able to kite a single Gal ship would become very difficult, if not impossible and Min would still be able to disengage.
In one go the whole issue surrounding blaster would be solved. Or! CCP should just nerf medium and large autocanons falloff. So tracking enhancers will not effect those values as much. Bringing Minmatar back down to Gal engagement ranges. The other option is insane damage output, but that would be game breaking. I can already think of amusing ways to abuse such a weapon. Most of the other suggestions including the "just increase speed" crowd will not work. It sounds great and I'm for it. If only to show Gal ships would still be last choice given Min, Armarr or Cal are not available. Coupling speed with range would be another matter...
-proxyyyy
+1
|
Rebirth Mining Director
40
|
Posted - 2011.12.23 20:51:00 -
[1524] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:GIANT WALL OF TEXT You know, you could have just said nerf winmatar. I don't think anyone in this thread would disagree with you. Director of The God Squad's mining division. Now recruiting Orca pilots! |
Rutuli
Vangers.
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 06:03:00 -
[1525] - Quote
Might be out of topic, but after a few anoying fights against serpentis, i realized that dampeners arent just to shut down target capabilty and shoot something without getting shooted, its also a good tactic to force the enemy to enter into blaster range |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 07:12:00 -
[1526] - Quote
Rutuli wrote:Might be out of topic, but after a few anoying fights against serpentis, i realized that dampeners arent just to shut down target capabilty and shoot something without getting shooted, its also a good tactic to force the enemy to enter into blaster range
would u enter into blaster range and leave ur optimal compfortzone with ewar on u and most likely more ewar when u close in if u had the chance to simply retreat ??
dont be smarter then u can handle :D |
Rutuli
Vangers.
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 07:31:00 -
[1527] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Rutuli wrote:Might be out of topic, but after a few anoying fights against serpentis, i realized that dampeners arent just to shut down target capabilty and shoot something without getting shooted, its also a good tactic to force the enemy to enter into blaster range would u enter into blaster range and leave ur optimal compfortzone with ewar on u and most likely more ewar when u close in if u had the chance to simply retreat ?? dont be smarter then u can handle :D
The point its you can rush into close range, so blaster can actually work, without losing half of your hp inthe way when you are being kited. I know dampeners are actually useless since you need a pair in a ship with bonuses for it to get a good result and you still exposed vs multiple targets. But it fit gallente doctrine someway...
Pd: sry for the bad english, its 4:30am here and im at work QQ |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 07:45:00 -
[1528] - Quote
Rutuli wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Rutuli wrote:Might be out of topic, but after a few anoying fights against serpentis, i realized that dampeners arent just to shut down target capabilty and shoot something without getting shooted, its also a good tactic to force the enemy to enter into blaster range would u enter into blaster range and leave ur optimal compfortzone with ewar on u and most likely more ewar when u close in if u had the chance to simply retreat ?? dont be smarter then u can handle :D The point its you can rush into close range, so blaster can actually work, without losing half of your hp inthe way when you are being kited. I know dampeners are actually useless since you need a pair in a ship with bonuses for it to get a good result and you still exposed vs multiple targets. But it fit gallente doctrine someway... Pd: sry for the bad english, its 4:30am here and im at work QQ
as u already said its useless. and fallowing this "gallente doctrine" of urs, open the market window and look for another ship when u rush at this oponent :) , cuz most likely he will be faster then u are
and as i can predict ur argumant by fitting some speed mods, the rest of ur tank is lost as well |
Rutuli
Vangers.
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 08:02:00 -
[1529] - Quote
I know it doesnt work,im trying to trow some ideas of how make blasters usable without just asking for speed, range and basicly just changing the whole deal to turn blasters into ACs and gallente ships into speed devils. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 11:43:00 -
[1530] - Quote
Rutuli wrote:I know it doesnt work,im trying to trow some ideas of how make blasters usable without just asking for speed, range and basicly just changing the whole deal to turn blasters into ACs and gallente ships into speed devils.
whats wrong about making the galente similar to minmatar ?
camon just step outside ur shell and start using ur head its not there to prevent the rain from falling in ur throat and this rock paper scisors thinking was nice when pc games just started
imagine if USA would use a military doctrinbe or a weapon system that is far behind the russians or chinese one wouldnt they try to adapt it and improve it ? or reinvent a new one that can best counter therese ?
and the current galente way dosnt work for years now. so u think they wouldnt try to adapt ? that an openminded democratic society would keep things as they are even if they dont work ? dont u think they would try at first to copy that what is working and later improve and change it, to best counterattack ?
i dont wont a game like wow i wont my games as complex as chess on roids |
|
Clara Sprudel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 14:49:00 -
[1531] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Rutuli wrote:I know it doesnt work,im trying to trow some ideas of how make blasters usable without just asking for speed, range and basicly just changing the whole deal to turn blasters into ACs and gallente ships into speed devils. whats wrong about making the galente similar to minmatar ? camon just step outside ur shell and start using ur head its not there to prevent the rain from falling in ur throat and this rock paper scisors thinking was nice when pc games just started imagine if USA would use a military doctrinbe or a weapon system that is far behind the russians or chinese one wouldnt they try to adapt it and improve it ? or reinvent a new one that can best counter therese ? and the current galente way dosnt work for years now. so u think they wouldnt try to adapt ? that an openminded democratic society would keep things as they are even if they dont work ? dont u think they would try at first to copy that what is working and later improve and change it, to best counterattack ? i dont wont a game like wow i wont my games as complex as chess on roids
I fully agree with this point. If someone would keep it the way it is than it is Amarr. A society where you have one leader and nobody is allowed to question decisions would lead to such a situation. But an openminded democratic society would allways allow better ideas to remove bad practices. In reallity Gal would not exist becouse Caldari and Amarr would have killed every Gal ship and taken over their space. Apparently they could not do that becouse Winmatar protects the Gallente romantic idealists :)
About rock, paper and scisors. I really do not want such a game. Who wins this is only a question of fortune and decisions. This is not what we should aim for. I want intergallactic 3D chess! Chess has nothing to do with luck, it has to do with decisions you make becouse you use your brain. Rock, paper, scisors is for nobrainer becouse the stupid has the same chances like the skilled one. |
Rutuli
Vangers.
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 19:55:00 -
[1532] - Quote
why would you want 2 races to be the same, fly winmatar and win rock papers and scisors is part of the design of the game, still in your hands to make decisions to help you win against your counter, and is not a 1vs1 game |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.12.26 22:16:00 -
[1533] - Quote
Rutuli wrote:why would you want 2 races to be the same, fly winmatar and win rock papers and scisors is part of the design of the game, still in your hands to make decisions to help you win against your counter, and is not a 1vs1 game
u know when u pop into a discusion, read at least the previuos 10 pages before making any coments, cuz it makes u look foolish otherwise
and yes i can understand u are here only becouse u wont the minmatar to stay as they are. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
22
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 04:48:00 -
[1534] - Quote
NOW. on to hybrids. Railguns - fairly nice, they perform well in PvE, and in PvP given the right setup. I'd suggest ramping up the "no-warp-to" bubble limits from 150km to 250km, to envelop railgun operation ranges. this would make caldari optimal bonuses more viable,
Blasters - The guns outperform at operating range (1km-5km, mediums on a moa testbed with all three turret types) by about 100-200dps, which is quite good. The problem was never that, however. The problem is getting within 5km of your target is virtually impossible in the blaster-based hulls. Virtually anything a blaster boat can catch can usually beat it's brains in (lack of tank, or simply beating on it on it's way into range), and anything it can't catch, well... either gets away, or picks it apart at range.
I still support my MWD speed bonus idea, (2% to 5% speed bonus per level of frig/cruiser/whatever on gal gunboats) as it would only be useful for plunging in straight into scram range, at which point that advantage disappears.... as opposed to an outright speed/agility buff, which is useful in and out of scram range. Try it on the thorax (it's current mwd bonus is useless anyway) and see what you get. I'd also DECREASE (you heard me) it's agility. (basically, a thorax would do 2.5k-3k m/s, straight at the foe. Basically the berserker role blasters are meant for.)
I'd do the thorax that way, and I'd be tempted to do the brutix(with or without repper bonus, I'd keep it honestly) , talos(drop the tracking bonus or add a third), and megathron(again, tracking or a third) as well. frigates need no help.
In a nutshell: Rails are meh, blasters are still fail (but none of it is the weapons fault themselves).
Edit: Off topic part removed, CCP Phantom |
Rutuli
Vangers.
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 06:21:00 -
[1535] - Quote
And even if you manage to get into range, you probably will have half hp.
|
Clara Sprudel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 12:43:00 -
[1536] - Quote
Rutuli wrote:And even if you manage to get into range, you probably will have half hp.
Yes but once in range the enemy should have problems to hit you becouse of tracking issues and your high transversal speed. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 16:02:00 -
[1537] - Quote
Clara Sprudel wrote:Rutuli wrote:And even if you manage to get into range, you probably will have half hp.
Yes but once in range the enemy should have problems to hit you becouse of tracking issues and your high transversal speed.
I just bolded the interesting part of you comment to say that it's a big part of the problem, not only they hit/apply high dmg from far distances but they have no issues with tracking at shortest ranges, on top of that they will hit for 110% dmg just like blasters.
|
LeHarfang
Intersteller Masons Wonder Kids
27
|
Posted - 2011.12.30 10:02:00 -
[1538] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Clara Sprudel wrote:Rutuli wrote:And even if you manage to get into range, you probably will have half hp.
Yes but once in range the enemy should have problems to hit you becouse of tracking issues and your high transversal speed. I just bolded the interesting part of you comment to say that it's a big part of the problem, not only they hit/apply high dmg from far distances but they have no issues with tracking at shortest ranges, on top of that they will hit for 110% dmg just like blasters.
Agreed. Trying to hit a target thats 1 meter from you with a sniper is ridiculous if you can use a shotgun. Or at least, the shotgun should be far easier to aim a close range than a sniper rifle which basically would only get extremely lucky shots at close range (like 1 on 100 shots). I mean, with the hybrid ammo with the most damage, you also get the lowest range which is like 5km, 8 with falloff. Thats even closer than scram range, that's ships physically hitting each other close range.
Now try to get in that range in the slow armored Gallente BSs (the domi speed is atrocious to name an example) when webbed. Just forget it. The ennemy BSs, and smaller, will always outrun you as they run from you the other way (if he continue shooting at you) or warp out.
I mean, i understand having a good armor tank to get close to the ennemy, but if you cant get close in the first place, the whole tactic is pointless
Also, blasters in PvE? Its a waste of time pretty much since no NPCs will come close enough for your blasters to hit them. I mean, yes they are a good support for heavy ansd sentry drones to pick off the little frigates that comes close and annoy you, when in a Gal drone boat like the domi, but thats about it. Useless as a main DPS because of range. Tracking speed bonuses are good for gunboats like the mega, hyperion or talos but they still have the problem of getting in range.
Edit: One way to solve this problem would be having ships take more damage from the rear (in the engines) and less on the front. That way ourunning you the opposite way would'nt be the best solution-
nevermind, you cant even shoot them in the first place. :/ |
Clara Sprudel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.30 12:01:00 -
[1539] - Quote
LeHarfang wrote:[quote=Tanya Powers] Agreed. Trying to hit a target thats 1 meter from you with a sniper is ridiculous if you can use a shotgun. Or at least, the shotgun should be far easier to aim a close range than a sniper rifle which basically would only get extremely lucky shots at close range (like 1 on 100 shots). I mean, with the hybrid ammo with the most damage, you also get the lowest range which is like 5km, 8 with falloff. Thats even closer than scram range, that's ships physically hitting each other close range.
Now try to get in that range in the slow armored Gallente BSs (the domi speed is atrocious to name an example) when webbed. Just forget it. The ennemy BSs, and smaller, will always outrun you as they run from you the other way (if he continue shooting at you) or warp out.
I mean, i understand having a good armor tank to get close to the ennemy, but if you cant get close in the first place, the whole tactic is pointless
Also, blasters in PvE? Its a waste of time pretty much since no NPCs will come close enough for your blasters to hit them. I mean, yes they are a good support for heavy ansd sentry drones to pick off the little frigates that comes close and annoy you, when in a Gal drone boat like the domi, but thats about it. Useless as a main DPS because of range. Tracking speed bonuses are good for gunboats like the mega, hyperion or talos but they still have the problem of getting in range.
Edit: One way to solve this problem would be having ships take more damage from the rear (in the engines) and less on the front. That way ourunning you the opposite way would'nt be the best solution-
nevermind, you cant even shoot them in the first place. :/
I agree with you that the Gal strategy is broken and to fix hybrids they need to fix the game mechanics in many aspects. Lets hope CCP will come back with a good idea after the vacation :)
|
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 13:05:00 -
[1540] - Quote
1Drake167782 2Maelstrom146771 3Hurricane115519 4Abaddon68304 5Tengu51712 6Tornado40193 7Tempest32236 8Scimitar32090 9Armageddon31982 10Sabre26232 11Hound24679 12Cynabal22131 13Huginn21608 14Vagabond18972 15Thrasher18746 16Rapier18163 17Rifter17090 18Loki16740 19Zealot16144 20Oracle16093
1Heavy Missile Launcher II70717 21400mm Howitzer Artillery II46919 3425mm AutoCannon II36688 4Mega Pulse Laser II21519 5200mm AutoCannon II19261 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II18047 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II16830 8150mm Light AutoCannon II15065 91400mm Gallium Cannon14855 101400mm Prototype Siege Cannon13304 11125mm Gatling AutoCannon II12552 12800mm Repeating Artillery II11783 13Heavy Pulse Laser II11507 14'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher7557 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I5950 16Heavy Neutron Blaster II5754 17425mm Railgun II5397 18Light Neutron Blaster II5394 191400mm 'Scout' Artillery I5128 20'Arbalest' Cruise Launcher I4691
Latest figures. The novelty rokh has disappeared as expected and not a single hybrid using ship appears on the top 20. If anything, the hybrid using ships are going backwards in terms of representation. On the weapons list the total combined presence of rails and blasters amounts to a pathetic 4.7%. |
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 14:17:00 -
[1541] - Quote
What the Talos didn't make the top 20?!? What a shocking surprise.... even though CCP promised not to let the ship suck compared to its brothers.... but it sucks. On EFT there are a few fits that seem competitive, but in the game its basically even more of a "flag shp" example of what's wrong with Gallente Boats than the Diemost which I thought would be hard to achieve. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 14:28:00 -
[1542] - Quote
i dunno the talos is a mean belt ratter... i mean thats the ships role right? to kill asteroid rats? |
Justin Cody
T.A.L.O.N. Company Psychotic Tendencies.
24
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 22:34:00 -
[1543] - Quote
Blaster damage is currently awesome and acceptable.
Rail alpha is still pathetic, the dps is ok and on the talos the tracking bonus makes them useful for nano fleets and ninja rattingin belts. Ganking with blasters and a 1600mm plate also is workable.
However for fleet combat where the target must die on the first volley...apparently low tech projectiles weapons are best. Because IRL a shot gun overpowers a rail gun amirite?
I think one of the biggest problems in EVE right now is an obsession with "balance" and weapon equality rather than flavor and strategic use.
artillery has a massive alpha...ok fine, how about we look at having artillery do what artillery really does best. Area Effect Damage. At least give them an ammo type...say cluster munitions that allows for area effect but gives a 90% reduction on alpha damage. Give them some flavor.
Ac's are fine Blasters are fine...and do **** face up close. Rails have no advantage over lasers or artillery since the locking range was capped at 250km. Spike ammo is pathetic in damage and tickles ships. People aren't even sure they are being hit...or just recieving gang bonuses...
For a special attribute to spike...how about it gets a property where it can actually do some damage straight to hull or armor through shields or progressively penetrates the existing layer of defense to the layer below...yes it could be abused but right now there is no reason to use it.
Void honestly hits just fine on large targets and Null is nearly antimatter dps at a longer range. Nothing wrong there. Javelin ammo seems ok, but as with all rail specific ammo...could use the damage turned up.
rails can still use 20-30% more damage if we are in fact concerned with balance. That or remove the 250km locking cap. That kills rail pilots to be quite honest. And the fact that any useful damage still puts them within auto-cannon fall-off range. WHICH IS WHY RAILS STILL FAIL.
if an AC boat can hit a rail ship with dps...that isn't balance. That is favoritism towards projectiles. Bonus to projectiles? no cap use at all.
Heck I remember when large guns used SOME cap...and it wasn't much either. But more to the point projectiles have range and damage type diversity, use no cap, have great tracking (AC's), high alpha (arty), and are attached to the fastest and fastest locking ships in game with the most agility.
ya...makes me wanna fly an eagle too. How about you?
rail range advantage was nerf'd with the 250km cap. Undo that and maybe...maybe you get some more usefulness out of it. Still needs more damage though. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 01:56:00 -
[1544] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:1Drake167782 2Maelstrom146771 3Hurricane115519 4Abaddon68304 5Tengu51712 6Tornado40193 7Tempest32236 8Scimitar32090 9Armageddon31982 10Sabre26232 11Hound24679 12Cynabal22131 13Huginn21608 14Vagabond18972 15Thrasher18746 16Rapier18163 17Rifter17090 18Loki16740 19Zealot16144 20Oracle16093
1Heavy Missile Launcher II70717 21400mm Howitzer Artillery II46919 3425mm AutoCannon II36688 4Mega Pulse Laser II21519 5200mm AutoCannon II19261 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II18047 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II16830 8150mm Light AutoCannon II15065 91400mm Gallium Cannon14855 101400mm Prototype Siege Cannon13304 11125mm Gatling AutoCannon II12552 12800mm Repeating Artillery II11783 13Heavy Pulse Laser II11507 14'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher7557 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I5950 16Heavy Neutron Blaster II5754 17425mm Railgun II5397 18Light Neutron Blaster II5394 191400mm 'Scout' Artillery I5128 20'Arbalest' Cruise Launcher I4691
Latest figures. The novelty rokh has disappeared as expected and not a single hybrid using ship appears on the top 20. If anything, the hybrid using ships are going backwards in terms of representation. On the weapons list the total combined presence of rails and blasters amounts to a pathetic 4.7%.
well alot of people have been saying that the curent hybrid buff is just a kik between the legs
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 02:02:00 -
[1545] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:What the Talos didn't make the top 20?!? What a shocking surprise.... even though CCP promised not to let the ship suck compared to its brothers.... but it sucks. On EFT there are a few fits that seem competitive, but in the game its basically even more of a "flag shp" example of what's wrong with Gallente Boats than the Diemost which I thought would be hard to achieve.
MeBiatch wrote:i dunno the talos is a mean belt ratter... i mean thats the ships role right? to kill asteroid rats?.
live is full of surprises isnt it :D and only a broken promice is a good promice :D
but still im trying not to loose hope that ccp will fix hybrid using ships this month and we can see at least one of them in the top 5 list :) |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 09:22:00 -
[1546] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:1Drake167782 2Maelstrom146771 3Hurricane115519 4Abaddon68304 5Tengu51712 6Tornado40193 7Tempest32236 8Scimitar32090 9Armageddon31982 10Sabre26232 11Hound24679 12Cynabal22131 13Huginn21608 14Vagabond18972 15Thrasher18746 16Rapier18163 17Rifter17090 18Loki16740 19Zealot16144 20Oracle16093
1Heavy Missile Launcher II70717 21400mm Howitzer Artillery II46919 3425mm AutoCannon II36688 4Mega Pulse Laser II21519 5200mm AutoCannon II19261 6720mm Howitzer Artillery II18047 7220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II16830 8150mm Light AutoCannon II15065 91400mm Gallium Cannon14855 101400mm Prototype Siege Cannon13304 11125mm Gatling AutoCannon II12552 12800mm Repeating Artillery II11783 13Heavy Pulse Laser II11507 14'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher7557 15'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I5950 16Heavy Neutron Blaster II5754 17425mm Railgun II5397 18Light Neutron Blaster II5394 191400mm 'Scout' Artillery I5128 20'Arbalest' Cruise Launcher I4691
Latest figures. The novelty rokh has disappeared as expected and not a single hybrid using ship appears on the top 20. If anything, the hybrid using ships are going backwards in terms of representation. On the weapons list the total combined presence of rails and blasters amounts to a pathetic 4.7%. winmatard online |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.01 12:45:00 -
[1547] - Quote
The lack of support and vodooh Any sane person in space knows that a lot of players stated way before the introduction of former fixes that the current approach is not able to close the gap to minmatar ships and the solution to design problems is not a matter of more damage and trackig on blasters.There are different synergies working against blaster ships. The lack of support which other ships can provide easily, speed reduction favors range, easy to shutdown with energy neuts and ecm. This was stated 1000 times. A cane has always a neutralizer fitted and some medslot voodooh. Also amar hac fleets are making use of some strange medslot vodooh, like ecm mods on zealots. gallente design does not support such tactics.
A Niche exists but it is and will stay a niche Gallente is niche and will be niche in the future. The used ships are Ares for tackling. Phobos as lowsec hic because of the fast locking time (3 sebo's). Vindicator/kronos for Empire Wardec Station brawling, Dominix for PvE, Myrmidon for scout interception and finally some weird people are using shield brutix/astarte in arenas. After this patch the amount of ares reduced significant because of the thrasher armies.
Break habits ! Stats do proove this observations. My only hope left at the current point is that there might be with a tiny glimpse of a chance the bandwidth of some drone boats will be reconsidered. The community is not willing to adapt to any other change beside that. Who the hell likes to throw another year into the skill training without being sure that the results will be nice. Breaking habits is the most difficult part of system design and analytics. same goes for games and in each other part of the life. So there will always be a hughe wall of resistance against more game changing changes. For example see speed nerv. sov changes, The interbus highway changes (yulai as hub), ship spinning and so on and so on.
Innovation and brain storming The current stats are as expected. no miracle, no out of the box. The design problem which we are currently facing is that we need new models in design. something which will bring a new flavor into the game which was not seen in space till now and which is effecting all ships. For such inovative designs we do not need discussion at the start, we do need brain storming idea clouds. The results of this brain storming can be discussed afterwards but at the start we need something new. witching numbers is boring and won't help anyone. Bringing back gallente ships and bring some fresh blood to pvp and tournaments with shocking effects like micro jumpdrive, surprise buttons (long cooldwon strange ranged effects), decoy projectors, fata morgana/illusions. This would break the range / speed / blob cycle and bring back some gold rush feeling to players without long skill changes.They can but they do not have to and maybe a gallente will find himself usefull again without minmatar pilots to feel like we got XXX now. My suggestion is do brain storming and let the players discuss the results. Why not ? You do need a VISION
Player knowledge
Quote:Disinformation Unlike traditional propaganda techniques designed to engage emotional support, disinformation is designed to manipulate the audience at the rational level by either discrediting conflicting information or supporting false conclusions. A common disinformation tactic is to mix some truth and observation with false conclusions and lies, or to reveal part of the truth while presenting it as the whole Eve is heavily relying on the "the player knows" effect. In modern warefare the most important aspects are effects that disturb this knoledge. In EVE ecm is only working on a ship not the player. Cloaking is not effecting player knowledge. there is still a local. Advanced warefare tactics are only possible in WH space which is a really good starting point for further development.
Time investment and design models Furthermore the gaming community has changed dramaticly. Players are not willing to invest the same amount of time on a given day to a game. Players demand the "get into game , get some action" tactics and log of afterwards. This is refelcted by current F2P models. This is also a major problem for 0.0 space as sov warefare is only possible with a lot of time commitment.
CCP has to find some solutions to these aspect. Unfortunetly i got the feeling that most development is still bound to old rules in the western world. Some asian designers are more tought. they got a better feeling for the changing customer market and do excelent customer research and idea modelling.
Addendum Well this post will be one post on page 12353 of a thread which is not read and a lot of people will not agree and troll me because they can :) I still hope there will be some new design philosophies. There need to be. *sigh* the only chance i feel to push some more in new designs is to run for csm but thats too time consuming :p
So get me new ideas CCP in the area of ship vs ship and sov warefare. WH space is a good starting point. Get the ball rolling and do some brain storming not only number crushing, you now do have the ressources in human and time aspect. I do like a creativity contest with prices for shocking new ideas.
quinta essentia - TLDR Old 2001 Design concepts are bad. Number crushing is bad. Brainstorming for new warefare modules tactics is needed. (micro jumpdrive, illusion/decoy mods) Wspace is great start Get online and get action model. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 07:09:00 -
[1548] - Quote
has ccp made any sugestions how they will change the hybrids now ? or are they still on vacation :D |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 12:42:00 -
[1549] - Quote
Justin Cody wrote:Blaster damage is currently awesome and acceptable.
While dps by it self is becoming interesting, and interesting doesn't mean good ! -a f++cking shotgun on his op range should just head shot or balls shot you each time you're in that range, so no the total dps/alpha is not enough considering those ships still can't get in range to apply that POOR dps.
The day I'll get out with some proteus and be able to scare a single cynabal pilot not afk in null, then I'd say blasters and gallente stuff are probably useful.
W8, let me try to explain it differently.
Cyna with 425mm auto canons and regular fit with barrage hits up to 55/60 km, using faction point can just disrupt you at 30km and put shots on you with shortest range/biggest dps ammo up to 35km.
Your poor proteus with it's ubber gazillions eft dps, just good to gank stuff in belts will not only be incapable to catch it but he'll be happy if it ever manages to put 10dps on it.
Let's talk about speed ok? - heu no, never mind, let's forget speed.
W8, "T3 is not faction stuff blah blah blah"
Right, I'm just telling you a single T1 CRUISER, faction yes but still T1, even badly fitted/piloted will kick your ass your eft gazillions dps ubber blaster Proteus. |
Clara Sprudel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.02 13:44:00 -
[1550] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:[quote=Justin Cody]W8, "T3 is not faction stuff blah blah blah"
Right, I'm just telling you a single T1 CRUISER, faction yes but still T1, even badly fitted/piloted will kick your ass your eft gazillions dps ubber blaster Proteus.
You can even faction fit your Proteus in this example and spend double the money of the Cynabal and still you would loose the battle in most cases. The only thing that could propably save you are rails but I'm not sure if you would apply enough damage to get the Cynabal down fast enough. |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.03 13:43:00 -
[1551] - Quote
Clara Sprudel wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:[quote=Justin Cody]W8, "T3 is not faction stuff blah blah blah"
Right, I'm just telling you a single T1 CRUISER, faction yes but still T1, even badly fitted/piloted will kick your ass your eft gazillions dps ubber blaster Proteus. You can even faction fit your Proteus in this example and spend double the money of the Cynabal and still you would loose the battle in most cases. The only thing that could propably save you are rails but I'm not sure if you would apply enough damage to get the Cynabal down fast enough.
Rails wouldn't be able to track it unless with sub + tracking witch means no drones and so no drones to pop ecm drones, to ecm the cyna or put some dps on it.
Once again, unless it's some cyna pined down at the gate by rapiers/lokis using double faction webs where in this case the prot will apply the dps.
Even on SISI I'm having dozens more kills solo with 10MN MWD or 100MN AB Tengu than I can ever get with some Proteus HG Slaves and +5 DMG implants+boosters+fleet boosts. Now I've not even tried gate camping on SISI, first because I don't like looser strats and secondly because I'm perfectly sure I could get at least that much kills at that gate with a HAM's Tengu.
It's all Gallente, "specific situations" or call it backstabbing, but you can do the same with far more flexible stuff in any other race unless it's about warp disrupt at 100km .... I mean it's really interesting to WD at 100km, how could we even fight without that? |
Bouh Revetoile
The Scope Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.03 14:29:00 -
[1552] - Quote
Making blasterboat able to kill kiting boat would just mess up everything ; the "problem" here is that kiting boat are the hardcounter (in some way) to blaster boat. The only way to fix that is to make kiting boat very bad at what they can do which is obviously idiot.
I think many people should stop thinking that blaster boat should kill vagabond or cynabal at every encounter without any sacrifice. A working blaster ship is not necessarily a vagabond or cynabal killer. Taking these extreme particular case to say that blasters dont work is idiot. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.03 15:14:00 -
[1553] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Making blasterboat able to kill kiting boat would just mess up everything ; the "problem" here is that kiting boat are the hardcounter (in some way) to blaster boat. The only way to fix that is to make kiting boat very bad at what they can do which is obviously idiot.
I think many people should stop thinking that blaster boat should kill vagabond or cynabal at every encounter without any sacrifice. A working blaster ship is not necessarily a vagabond or cynabal killer. Taking these extreme particular case to say that blasters dont work is idiot.
The problem is that currently there is no place in large fleets for rail ships (which are out-damaged and out-alpha'd by the laser and artillery ships of the same class), no place in small gangs for fast, mobile fights for either rails (which are out damaged by the pulse/autocannon ships of the same class and out paced by the same) or blasters (which just never get into range to start with), no place in any engagement where you start a fight at over 15km with blasters(when the fight is over before you become vaguely useful). This is not an extreme case, it's every case except camping station undocks (where the gallente blasters really shine but that still leaves rails as unwanted in their entirety). |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.03 19:56:00 -
[1554] - Quote
The gun mechanics in the entire game are just wrong. If the tracking of your guns is equal to or greater to the transversal velocity of a targeted ship you should hit it, end of. The maximum theoretical damage output of the different ship classes is too similar, when a frig can put out over 300 DPS that's just wrong, current mechanics force fleets to just be a mass of one philosophy of BS with a small group of supporting ships. If as I always understood it CCP want people to use every type of ship in combat the ability of one class of ship to effectively engage other classes of ship needs to be widened. Frigs should only really be able to tackle BS not easily kill them unless they have a large numerical superiority. on the other hand BS should find it almost impossible to hit frigates unless they are on approach in which case they derve to die.
I know it's never going to happen as this would need every weapon/ship in the game to be worked on in one masive hit which I fear we have passed the point of being able to do due to how much work this would be.
One can but hope though. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.03 22:15:00 -
[1555] - Quote
I'm no fan of bigger = better philosophy since the time of the interceptor introduction. The more we get to that stage the more viable blob warefare gets. We already had this exact gameplay.
The current game mechanics with tracking etc was introduced in 2004 when the megathron was the king of the hill in removing small ships. It wasn't neewb friendly. It was a plain pain in the ass.
Did you ever got removed from game with a hughe alpha strike? That was eve in the beginning as a new pilot. The bigger weapon won. I can remember the so called "speed ravens" removing entire squads from screen. Megathrons and Apocalypse at empire gates removing pilots from 200 km range with a single shot....... Sweet memories, when i was young :) |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 08:09:00 -
[1556] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:I'm no fan of bigger = better philosophy since the time of the interceptor introduction. The more we get to that stage the more viable blob warefare gets. We already had this exact gameplay.
The current game mechanics with tracking etc was introduced in 2004 when the megathron was the king of the hill in removing small ships. It wasn't neewb friendly. It was a plain pain in the ass.
Did you ever got removed from game with a hughe alpha strike? That was eve in the beginning as a new pilot. The bigger weapon won. I can remember the so called "speed ravens" removing entire squads from screen. Megathrons and Apocalypse at empire gates removing pilots from 200 km range with a single shot....... Sweet memories, when i was young :)
and now torps lost there area effect and cant hit anything smaller then a BC,golem compared to some other ships looks pretty useless. u get still poped in 1 shot if u fly a frigate sized hull and get cought by a buble in 0.0. i dont see anything wrong about it poping a smaller ship in a few shots as long as it dosnt orrbit u at 1 km range. a destroyer at sea can also kill a human sized target at 1-100km :D if someone is broadcasting the target.
anyway bigger should be better and a frig shouldnt have half the dps of a battleship and still be unkillable like some guys here are proposing |
Clara Sprudel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 11:00:00 -
[1557] - Quote
I accept the fact that not every ship should be able to win vs every ship, there is nothing wrong about it, but: If you start to play EVE the Game Masters tell you that every factions are equal. You invest a whole year in skills to find out that you have invested into a wrong faction becouse they are NOT equal. Every faction should have mothods and ships to win vs other factions. It can not be that one faction wins over the other faction! The principle of stone, paper scissors should apply to SHIPS and SHIPTYPES, not to factions. So if you are beeing attached by a Hurricane you only can win in a Blaster boat in following two situations: 1. The Hurricane Pilot is stupid. 2. You have more luck on earth than anybody else and you manage to warp, uncloak or wathever right next to the cane. You also have by accident 2 webs fittet and can stay in your blasters optimal.
The situation is very simple: Gallente is usefull for gate camps and some WH situations. Everything else they suck. Other factions have the right tools at hand to manage more different situations.
For PVP you need one of the two attributes: Speed OR Range. Unfortunaltely Winmatar have both and Gallente has none of those.
This is the case why in a Drake you can win vs a Hurricane: Becouse you can shoot at it and apply damage on the Canes kitting range. However, the Cane still has the advantage to just leave the fight if needed.
I highly recommend to every Gal Player who wants to PVP to join a Pirate Corp and to camp Gates, becouse this is the only thing the Democrats are able to do :P
And one last thing: I really do not understand why this very simple fact is so hard to understand for CCP and why they needed years to react and still didn't fix the problem. To be honest I loose hope to this issue and in the meantime I belive this will never change in EVE. So the only advise would be: Get over it or leave the game :( |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 11:00:00 -
[1558] - Quote
Bigger should never been better in a game of possibilities... Using tactics and strategy to counter bigger stuff should be perfectly viable |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 16:07:00 -
[1559] - Quote
I hope everyone had an enjoyable holiday season, even CCP.
Back to the matter at hand.
Hybrids still suck. Gallente ships still suck.
The most painful part about this patch was the introduction of the tier 3 battlecruisers, which illuminate as bright as day, the glaring issues between races. I don't know how devs could have tested a Tornado/Oracle/Naga vs Talos and thought "Yep, this is exactly the way it should be!" Seriously! You must have written-off the Gallente race with the implementation of these tier 3 battlecruisers. There is no other explanation. A real shame too, since the Talos is probably the coolest-looking of all of them.
I digress.
Blasters still lack the range to be effective, railgun damage is still subpar, and hybrid ships are still too slow and defenseless to make the hybrid platform viable.
More importantly, hybrid turrets and the ships designed to use them are ultimately lacking appeal. Many players stated this several times before Crucible, in this very thread, yet it remains an issue post-Crucible. You WILL NOT convince players to change their turret and ship preferences when you refuse to provide any meaningful incentive to do so. A blaster turret with slightly more damage and tracking is still a blaster turret. Ditto for railguns. You haven't changed how they were used, at all, so why should anyone bother to try them? On top of all of this, Gallente ships still lack basic defensive mechanics necessary to survive long enough to use shoot anything in the first place. Amarr have armor resists, Caldari have shield resists, and Minmatar have speed. What do Gallente have?
I don't know why this is so hard for CCP to fix. Stop living in the numbers looking for a solution. Look at the problem conceptually. Here are some suggestions:
-increase the effective range of null ammo to match barrage and scorch -give hybrid ammo the overhaul it desperately needs (reduced reload timers is worthless without decent ammo selection) -crown gallente as the speed king -make local rep MUCH more effective -swap the properties of hybrids and projectiles -significantly increase scan resolution and sensor strength on all gallente ships -reduce mineral costs of hybrid turrets and ships, at least until this is all ironed out (this is the least you could do for CCP customers who make, use, buy, and lose anything related to hybrids)
Side note: I was packing a carrier bound for nullsec when I noticed an assembled Hurricane is roughly 40,000m3 smaller than the Brutix. I couldn't help but chuckle. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 16:08:00 -
[1560] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Bigger should never been better in a game of possibilities... Using tactics and strategy to counter bigger stuff should be perfectly viable
so ur point is to win with a frigate that cost 300k isk against a battleship that costs 140kk isk ?
and if a frigate could kill any bigger ship why even vaste time and isk to train them and then buy them ?
the only thing a frigate should do to a battleship is to be annoying
otherwise there efficency should reflect in there isk cost |
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 16:46:00 -
[1561] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Bigger should never been better in a game of possibilities... Using tactics and strategy to counter bigger stuff should be perfectly viable so ur point is to win with a frigate that cost 300k isk against a battleship that costs 140kk isk ? and if a frigate could kill any bigger ship why even vaste time and isk to train them and then buy them ? the only thing a frigate should do to a battleship is to be annoying otherwise there efficency should reflect in there isk cost
So your point is a Supercarrier should be able to kill each none capital ship no matter of size and a titan should be able to DD everythin in space?
b) If my efficiency should reflect my isk cost i demand my sabre to be able to kill each tier 1 battleship and each bc without any mercy and much effort. A Hurricane is cheaper than a sabre :p
Fitted sabre 115 mio isk. Fitted dominic 83 mio isk. Fitted daredevil more than my sabre! |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 17:04:00 -
[1562] - Quote
Magosian wrote:I hope everyone had an enjoyable holiday season, even CCP. -increase the effective range of null ammo to match barrage and scorch -give hybrid ammo the overhaul it desperately needs (reduced reload timers is worthless without decent ammo selection) -crown gallente as the speed king -make local rep MUCH more effective -swap the properties of hybrids and projectiles -significantly increase scan resolution and sensor strength on all gallente ships -reduce mineral costs of hybrid turrets and ships, at least until this is all ironed out (this is the least you could do for CCP customers who make, use, buy, and lose anything related to hybrids)
+1 for more speed and Local rep.
Basically, give the Deimos the Phobos stats. In fact just make the Phobos the HAC of the two. And give it drones and less mass. Win for Gallente.
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 17:55:00 -
[1563] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Bigger should never been better in a game of possibilities... Using tactics and strategy to counter bigger stuff should be perfectly viable so ur point is to win with a frigate that cost 300k isk against a battleship that costs 140kk isk ? and if a frigate could kill any bigger ship why even vaste time and isk to train them and then buy them ? the only thing a frigate should do to a battleship is to be annoying otherwise there efficency should reflect in there isk cost So your point is a Supercarrier should be able to kill each none capital ship no matter of size and a titan should be able to DD everythin in space? b) If my efficiency should reflect my isk cost i demand my sabre to be able to kill each tier 1 battleship and each bc without any mercy and much effort. A Hurricane is cheaper than a sabre :p Fitted sabre 115 mio isk. Fitted dominic 83 mio isk. Fitted daredevil more than my sabre!
thats a stupid argument u can fit a dominix easily for 100bil isk what i was talking about was hull price not fit price |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 18:06:00 -
[1564] - Quote
Hull price of sabre still more expensive than dominix :p
sabre 47 mio isk dominix 45 mio isk
you started the more valuable ship argument not me :p |
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 18:20:00 -
[1565] - Quote
gallente still dont have a place in eve ..... they suck at pvp and pve in almost every aspect .... gallente are the worst for doing sleepers sites in WH obviously. and in incursions they suck as well or are overshadowed by other ships. good luck getting into an incursion fleet with a gallente boat. and they are not that great at missions either .... even my maximum skilled sentry domi is only about as good as your average tengu and the Domi is more work and MUCH more training. NO PLACE IN PVE AT ALL.
in pvp rails are the most fail turret to use by far. NOBODY uses rails in pvp except at a pos bash and if they do its usually a fluke or some dumb gallente guy trying to pretend he can do something with rails(he cant). blasters are such short range that literally anyone who can kite u out of web/scram range(which is mostly everyone because everyone is in minmatar ships now) has got your number. blasters and rails both have no place in fleet warfare. blasters although doing good dps on paper it is not that great or even less damage then autocannons after the matar person switches their ammo to one of your resist holes (EM/EXP).gallente are very vulnerable to neuts and blasters use tons of cap especially with t2 ammo ... so much that you cant even run your guns by themselves and be stable. something minmatar never have to worry about. NO PLACE IN PVP.
so what have we learned? gallente ships are terrible at almost every aspect of PVE and PVP.
in order to remedy this we need alot more then just a 5-10% dmg increase.
Gallente have to be the fastest ships in the game by far or blasters will always fail at their role ... this is the only fix for blasters.
all races need to have selectable dmg type ammo or at the very least hybrids should be only ones to get it.. absolutly no reason winmatar should get it on their ammo and have their guns use no cap as well. giving them 2 advantages over hybrids with no drawbacks besides a paltry 5-10% less dps which is negligable after the selectable dmg type and completely irrelevant when the other guy can hit you outside of your maximum tackle and blaster range with his turrets. (Barrage or scorch vs Null)
Artillery needs to be nerfed ... its Alpha is way out of line compared to other races alpha capability. so much so that dps on long range turrets doesnt mean a thing anymore ... the big alpha is far more important. dps becomes irrelavent once you get into the area where ships are easily getting 1 shotted by an arty ship or 1 volley'd in a fleet enviroment. if you got 10 maelstroms doing 10k volleys each they are effectivly doing 100k DPS for the first shot ... and since the guy who is getting shot is most likely getting 1 volleyed then that 1 second is the only second that mattered.
if you think dps is more important then alpha you would be wrong .... i saw a tengu get 1 shotted by a tornado quite easily(t1 guns) http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11747101
but im pretty sure the tengu that got popped had more dps then the arty tornado.... it did not help him .....and the tornado got a perfect kill... no damage taken and killed tengu in 1 shot it does not get any more lopsided then that and dps was/is irrelevent in the fight. that comparison gets far more lopsided in fleet enviroments.Not to mention taking logistics ships out of any fight.... so much so that people are using artillery on abaddon fleets and such(this should be glaringly game-breaking when people start doing that.) i made a post about it when i was completely drunk and didnt do any of the correct math for it but this is only way we are going to bring winmatar to the same level as the other races ... right now we are playing winmatar online literally .... just look at the stats for what people are flying and killing other people with ...aside from the drake 90% or more are minmatar ships and turrets dominating the killboards and statistics. its not even a comparison at this point.
Artillery's alpha is so overpowered it effectively bypasses concord's entire purpose lol in addition to making logi irrelevent ..... this is an example of some of my alliance mates testing out the new tornado's at a popular mission hub http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=11747101 .... 5 t3's + paladin's getting alpha'd by just a few battlecruisers with t1 guns causing almost 6 billion isk damage in bout an hour or 2. .. lol ..... too easy and very sad as we actually made quite a bit of money doing it at the expense of the common highsec missioner. and i'm sure this is not in CCP's best interest to keep it this way as i believe a few of the guys probably rage quited and CCP lost subscription fee's all the while we are playing for free because we bought plex with the loot =)
if CCP can not get this right this time i am sure their will be alot of people leaving this game. especially gallente pilots who are rightfully getting a little jaded about not being able to use their ships in any high level PVE or PVP Scenario's. |
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 19:22:00 -
[1566] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Making blasterboat able to kill kiting boat would just mess up everything ; the "problem" here is that kiting boat are the hardcounter (in some way) to blaster boat. The only way to fix that is to make kiting boat very bad at what they can do which is obviously idiot.
I think many people should stop thinking that blaster boat should kill vagabond or cynabal at every encounter without any sacrifice. A working blaster ship is not necessarily a vagabond or cynabal killer. Taking these extreme particular case to say that blasters dont work is idiot.
my response to this is
a blaster boat being able to run down and kill a kiting boat is how it SHOULD BE. and will not break anything. right now we are seeing the opposite end of that which is far worse.
a minmatar ship that can outrun anything and still hit you at warp disruptor ranges 20-30k is far more unbalanced. a good minmatar pilot right now can simply toy with his blaster boat victim at 20-30km and stay out of scram/webs while still doing good damage and an escape route if he so chooses.
Right now the only way for the blaster boat to kill the mimatar boat is if the minmatar pilot messed up and allowed the blaster boat to juke his orbit and overheat to land a web/scram ... this is FACT. and even if the minmatar pilot cant break the tank on blaster boat for some reason he can just disengage. NO RISK AT ALL
and thats one of the reason u see people flying tons of minmatar and drakes as they can apply their dmg from a distance and are fast enough(usually) to stay out of tackle. and anything that can tackle them(provided they are fighting at range like they should be and avoiding heavy tackle) they can usually kill with a small amount of effort. they effectively dont have to commit to a fight. as we all know unless your a bait ship .... getting tackled usually means your next primary and are about to die and is bad.
A blaster boat being really fast and charging in to get a tackle is pretty much a kamikaze/suicide run anyway .... he has to do that or he is 100% dead. and he will most likely get tackled right back for his brave but stupid racial tactics. no other race's ships in the game require you to put yourself in such a vulnerable position to fill their role.
and not to mention if the skirmish boat landed a couple of good hits before he got tackled he still has a good chance to win the brawl as the blaster boat likely did almost 0 damage before he got a tackle on his target(if he even can do that) and the dps diffrence between blasters and other short range turrets will not make up for even that.
so again a blaster boat being the fastest ship on grid isnt overpowered at all. and it wouldnt change a thing for fleet fights as 10 myrmidons trying to run down 10 canes/drakes the canes/drakes are gunna win 100% of the time as they can kill the myrms before they can even get tackles on a few of them and the myrms even if they were faster cant apply their dps as a group cause their blaster range WILL NOT ALLOW IT. where the canes can all apply the majority of their fleets damage at any one target. same with a drake and that what makes them so succesful. on battleships the disparity is far worse in fleet engagments.
even medium blaster boats you can pretty much just web them at 10-11k and stay at that range and dominate them cause the blaster range is that bad.
medium neutrons with Void only have 3.4 optimal and 3.1k falloff medium neutrons with AM only have 2.3 optimal and 6.3k falloff medium neutrons with Null only have 5.6 optimal and 7.8k falloff
so even with the longest range ammo for the biggest medium blasters your only doing like 20% of your blaster damage at best at 10km. if you get caught in the open by a skirmisher boat of equal skill the blaster boat is 100% dead everytime. no wonder why u rarely see gallente ships in nullsec. they have no place there besides a few specialized ships (Arazu/Lachesis)
way to easily kited at those ranges and ships that use blasters as a primary weapon system need to be the fastest(by alot) to make up for that AND have a much higher dps then whoever they are going after to make it a balanced fight. right now we are not seeing balanced fights ... and a gallente pilot who gets alot of kills solo is the only true measure of skill a pilot can show.
|
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 21:46:00 -
[1567] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Justin Cody wrote:Blaster damage is currently awesome and acceptable. While dps by it self is becoming interesting, and interesting doesn't mean good ! -a f++cking shotgun on his op range should just head shot or balls shot you each time you're in that range, so no the total dps/alpha is not enough considering those ships still can't get in range to apply that POOR dps. The day I'll get out with some proteus and be able to scare a single cynabal pilot not afk in null, then I'd say blasters and gallente stuff are probably useful. W8, let me try to explain it differently. Cyna with 425mm auto canons and regular fit with barrage hits up to 55/60 km, using faction point can just disrupt you at 30km and put shots on you with shortest range/biggest dps ammo up to 35km. Your poor proteus with it's ubber gazillions eft dps, just good to gank stuff in belts will not only be incapable to catch it but he'll be happy if it ever manages to put 10dps on it. Let's talk about speed ok? - heu no, never mind, let's forget speed. W8, "T3 is not faction stuff blah blah blah" Right, I'm just telling you a single T1 CRUISER, faction yes but still T1, even badly fitted/piloted will kick your ass your eft gazillions dps ubber blaster Proteus.
this is correct .... the proteus is a perfect example of gallente fail racial mechanics .... even with null u can barely hit out to web range ... technically any ship that is faster then the proteus and can hit them outside 20+km(faction scram range) will completly dominate it .... regardless of ship or fitting as long as they fulfill the 2 requirements to beat a blaster boat.(more speed and dps application past the maximum range of blasters) ..... and if the proteus somehow magically had 10,000 dps coming from its blasters it wouldnt change anything about that scenario and the proteus being completely helpless.
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 21:58:00 -
[1568] - Quote
I think we need to define "kite". It SHOULD be outruning your opponent long enough to kill him before he kills you. It shouldn't be the inability of your opponent to ever reach you. However, the later is how it works in EVE.
I know the ATs aren't a great example of actual pvp, but think of the tengu kite teams: they had to split up in order to prevent a catastrophic failure if they were caught. This was only because of the limited size of the arena. Some did get caught, but left a huge gap between each other so the other team had a long trek between targets.
Because of the nature of kite, if a tackler ever does get in range to tackle, you can just warp off. There is no need to split up your group.
I think this is closely tied to interceptor balance. There needs to be a way to catch and hold long enough to at least pick one off. |
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 02:17:00 -
[1569] - Quote
I am also going to add that there is an obvious side benefit to using autocannons over other short range turrets as they get a much higher increase in additional range from a tracking enchancer compared to their racial counterparts. i just did this comparison on a seperate thread to prove to the people there that yes indeed TE's give more of a benefit to AC then Pulse or blasters.
its a well known fact that TE's benefit projectiles more then anything else .... lets do a comparison to see of this is true.
i might add that this has been done several times already but i am doing it again and checking my calculator twice and using equal samples to make sure it is an accurate representation.
Hurricane 425mm Autocannon II with EMP + 1 TE = 13.3% optimal increase / 33.3% Falloff increase. TV= 46.6%
Myrmidon Hvy Neutron Blaster II with AM + 1 TE = 11.5% optimal increase / 28.6% Falloff increase. TV= 40.1%
Harbinger Heavy Pulse Laser II with Multi + 1 TE = 14.6% optimal increase / 23.1% Falloff increase. TV= 37.7%
TV= True Value of overall ranges percentage increase
All skills at level 5 using same gun type and ammo type for the respective race's ships with no optimal or falloff bonuses on the ships and same range penalty on all 3 ammo so this list is a perfect comparison.
as you can see the increase is purely based on the Turrets original Optimal and falloff numbers.
the turrets with the higher total original optimal+falloff numbers recieve a greater benefit inherently. this is multiplicative as you add more tracking enhancers but the increase remains these static percentages that i have listed here with all samples being equal .... if we add the optimal+falloff percentages we will see the true value comparison of overall added benefit per turret system per tracking enhancer. and also the overall weakness of other short range turrets in overall range compared to Autocannons.
in conclusion ....
425mm AC II with +1 TE is recieving 23.6% more effect then a heavy pulse II with +1 TE and a 13.7% more effect then the heavy neutron blaster II +1 TE. in terms of additional ranges created by a TE. this is quite a significant advantage. and is well known to people that understand the numbers and gives minmatar ships a much greater skirmish ability coupled with their fastest speed = OP
the 425mm AC II is the superior weapon system in terms of range and in terms of increase of range due to tracking enhancers in comparison to its racial counterparts. |
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
74
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 06:13:00 -
[1570] - Quote
Fade Azura wrote:nonsense You see, falloff and optimal are entirely equivalent and so it makes perfect sense to just add the two together and act as though the resulting sum has some kind of meaning. |
|
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 10:51:00 -
[1571] - Quote
well since optimal+falloff together are the total sum of your effective engagement range it means quite alot obviously as thats what determines your ability to hit your enemy at diffrent ranges. a higher total means a better engagment profile regardless. a ship with 10km optimal +10km falloff +20 obviously has a better engagement profile then one that has +5km optimal and 10km Falloff. +15
this is easy to see and does not take a mathematics wizard. stop posting if you cant even understand the basics of it. i see no flaws in my comparisons and my results are the same as everyone else that properly compared them in the past .... this has been done like 20 times before and is already proven long ago. |
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
74
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 11:06:00 -
[1572] - Quote
Fade Azura wrote:well since optimal+falloff together are the total sum of your effective engagement range That's ridiculous. At optimal + falloff, you're doing ~40% of your nominal dps, which means you're well outside your "effective engagement range." If you wanted a measure of the range at which you're still applying a respectable proportion of your dps, you need to look at optimal + half falloff or thereabouts (at which point you're only losing ~25% of your raw dps). All things being equal, optimal is approximately twice as 'good' as falloff for applying damage at range.
But hey, keep on adding apples to oranges if you like.
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 11:24:00 -
[1573] - Quote
I'm at a point where i would like to request a thread lock :p
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 13:42:00 -
[1574] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:I'm at a point where i would like to request a thread lock :p
the tread has since long ago nothing to do with the topic we are just keeping it alive till ccp gives a respons what will be the upcoming changes to hybrids
and they promised to do so this month |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 14:04:00 -
[1575] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:...we are just keeping it alive till ccp gives a respons what will be the upcoming changes to hybrids
and they promised to do so this month
Super interesting stuff related to hybrids rebalance |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 14:54:00 -
[1576] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Making blasterboat able to kill kiting boat would just mess up everything ; the "problem" here is that kiting boat are the hardcounter (in some way) to blaster boat. The only way to fix that is to make kiting boat very bad at what they can do which is obviously idiot.
Obvious it's obvious, the blaster boat shouldn't be able to kill kitting ships at each encounter but why should kitting ships be able to apply so many dps have the ability to gtfo and have far too much tank?
Quote:I think many people should stop thinking that blaster boat should kill vagabond or cynabal at every encounter without any sacrifice. A working blaster ship is not necessarily a vagabond or cynabal killer. Taking these extreme particular case to say that blasters dont work is idiot.
What sacrifice are you talking about? Vagabond or Cynabal with meta4 MWD go at least 15 to 60% faster every other cruiser/hac can ever go, what's your sacrifice?
Vaga and Cyna are hardly cap stable? -funny blaster ships have never bean and we're used to, so what's your sacrifice?
Vaga and Cyna use their speed, have capless guns that can track/hit far to good, apply far too much dmg at those distances (dmg selection is certainly one of their biggest advantages) and all this using their top speed, where's your sacrifice?
Now tell us all about sacrifices and how good your uber blaster boat is after some sacrifice to catch his prey without many other minmatar setups helping him do the job? Also tell us for this whole time where you were just useless waiting other to do the job for you, wouldn't you be better even in a rupy or a trasher? -my answer is yes.
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 16:41:00 -
[1577] - Quote
Well for some more news on blasters....
LIVE ON TEST SERVER
Null ammo range buff increased from 25% to 40% |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 18:17:00 -
[1578] - Quote
Archare wrote:Well for some more news on blasters....
LIVE ON TEST SERVER
Null ammo range buff increased from 25% to 40%
now is that for falloff and optimal or just one or the other?
lol i tried to lead sisi but the last time i loaded the test server on this comp (its my spare) was back when i was testing tyranis... lol |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 19:03:00 -
[1579] - Quote
15% extra range is not enough thats like 3km extra effective range and like 5 km more effective range with 2 traking enchancers fitted
so ur still out of range and unable to catch anything
very dissapointing not worth it even to start any testing |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 21:36:00 -
[1580] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:15% extra range is not enough thats like 3km extra effective range and like 5 km more effective range with 2 traking enchancers fitted
so ur still out of range and unable to catch anything
very dissapointing not worth it even to start any testing
Agreed.
Base ranges of blasters is so short, there really is no way for Null to compete with Barrage/Scorch without adding 50% to both optimal and falloff, and that's just for starters. Adding 40% to only one of the two results in the exact same problem. |
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate Villore Accords
143
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 22:42:00 -
[1581] - Quote
Current 25% is applied to optimal and falloff. Why wouldn't 40% increase apply to both as well?
It'll push Heavy Nuetron blaster opt+fallof range (with three TE2's) past the magic 24 km warp disruptor II range. That's all I ask for.
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 22:46:00 -
[1582] - Quote
Currently in Sisi 40% range bonus and 1.4 is falloff multiplier. |
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
291
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 23:20:00 -
[1583] - Quote
Instead of just buffing T2 ammo I would say that blasters really need a bit more range, for all ammo types. I am personally not happy to buff T2 ammo more, the introduction of high damage ammo at long range was what initially broke balancing between weapon types. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.05 23:26:00 -
[1584] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Currently in Sisi 40% range bonus and 1.4 is falloff multiplier.
Ok cool, thanks for the clarification. I have to say though, while this is better, I still think that slightly misses the mark. I know I crunched the numbers in the past and I remember thinking to myself several times, 50% / 50% would be needed. I'll crunch the numbers again just to make sure.
Thanks again for the clarification, Dare. Happy New Year! |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 06:32:00 -
[1585] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Current 25% is applied to optimal and falloff. Why wouldn't 40% increase apply to both as well?
It'll push Heavy Nuetron blaster opt+fallof range (with three TE2's) past the magic 24 km warp disruptor II range. That's all I ask for.
the range mod is applyed to null not void |
Fade Azura
Azura Industries
124
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 11:28:00 -
[1586] - Quote
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. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 14:18:00 -
[1587] - 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. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 15:43:00 -
[1588] - Quote
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 |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 15:50:00 -
[1589] - Quote
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. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.06 16:43:00 -
[1590] - Quote
Incidentally, shouldn't this thread be sticky again if hybrids are still being reworked on SiSi? |
|
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. |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 17:48:00 -
[1621] - Quote
at least, every race should have a ship that can be used for the same task equally good.
and now projektils/minmatar are not only the best in pvp but also in pve for example the machariel fitted for high alpha onshots rat battleships in belts at a distance of 100km
is that balance ? with railguns u are happy when u hit 25% shield at this distance
same with lazors or missiles and sentrys aint better either :( damage drones nowdays are becoming even useles after so many turret bufs so drone ships are also the worst choise for pve or pvp |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 18:59:00 -
[1622] - Quote
I have a crazy idea...
...Maybe Hybrid platforms could do with a 5 to 25% (role bonus, per level of cruiser required) reduction to fitting requirements to the weapons they are supposed to use, like caldari get that bonus applied only to railguns, whiel gallente get that bonus applied only to blasters? :) |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 19:19:00 -
[1623] - Quote
Morgan North wrote:I have a crazy idea...
...Maybe Hybrid platforms could do with a 5 to 25% (role bonus, per level of cruiser required) reduction to fitting requirements to the weapons they are supposed to use, like caldari get that bonus applied only to railguns, whiel gallente get that bonus applied only to blasters? :)
they already got that with the last patch:D and if they do it again it would change nothing, maybe a few more slots on galente ships would do the trick (low/med) |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 20:00:00 -
[1624] - Quote
They lowered all hybrid weapon's requirements yes. But I'm not talking that, but rather, about giving Gallente a Blaster-specific bonus that also works as a railgun-specific penalty (or lack of bonus) while giving caldari a railgun-specific bonus that doest' apply to blasters. In orde to further breach the gap and reward people who want to fy Blasters/Railguns.
But its just an idea. ;)
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 20:06:00 -
[1625] - Quote
Morgan North wrote:They lowered all hybrid weapon's requirements yes. But I'm not talking that, but rather, about giving Gallente a Blaster-specific bonus that also works as a railgun-specific penalty (or lack of bonus) while giving caldari a railgun-specific bonus that doest' apply to blasters. In orde to further breach the gap and reward people who want to fy Blasters/Railguns.
But its just an idea. ;)
that should be more like if u use blasters on ur ship u unlok 1 med and 1 low slot extra:D |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 20:32:00 -
[1626] - 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.
Agreed. Admittedly I never thought of this, but I don't see why not. At least it goes some way in "sharing" the current Winmatar crown. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 20:32:00 -
[1627] - Quote
CCP, what are you doing with medium rails? the dps is too low, and you cant fit 250's on anything except a shield Astarte. and even then, it's too squishy with average dps. medium rails are unusable.
null buff is great for ships like the Mega/Vindi, Rokh and Vigi/ Deimos. unfortunately, 425mm's will still vastly outperform Heavy Neutrons on my shield Myrm. maybe thats fine.
after null is buffed, you have to do something about rails. i wont even mention drones, your brains would probably melt down from all the thinking. but drones boats suck in pvp, compared to their turret counterparts. Sentries should be able to teleport or move alongside their ship on the Gila, Domi and Ishtar. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 20:38:00 -
[1628] - Quote
Nikuno wrote: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.
This sums it all up quite nicely. I'd like to make a small addition in suggesting, possibly, hybrid ships getting that missing "unique desirable feature." Either way, there is fresh evidence showing an utter lack of appeal for hybrids, despite Crucible buffs.. "Appeal" needs to be added to hybrids more than anything. I hope you're reading this one, CCP. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 22:50:00 -
[1629] - Quote
something more about drones after ccp changed the pve mechaniks so npc can aggro drones they got even more useles and in some enviroments speak Wormholes/lvl 5 missions and a few more u cant use them at all cuz the npc do change targets
thats also a big gallente issue |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 23:11:00 -
[1630] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:... Sentries should be able to teleport or move alongside their ship on the Gila, Domi and Ishtar.
I like this idea, while I like the concept of Sentries they are so much micro management becouse you always have to stay in range, pack them, unpack again and so on. If they just could fly 50 m/s and would follow the drone boat it would really help and they still would be a difference to combat drones becouse you could not send them to a target.
About the Ammo changes: Wouldn't it be easier to change the range on the weapon instead of changing e.g. Null in general, then realize that Medium and Large need different changes, do this changes, then realize that T2 is okay but T1 and faction suck, then change T1 Ammo, after that you realize that balance between tier 1 and 2 and 3 are not okay and finally end up with changing the weapon. So why not leave Ammo as it is and change the weapons directly? The Ammo should only give the extra juice but not the general balance becouse the dependencies and combinations are hard to predict.
So lets better think about what a T1 Med Blaster should be able to do and what the T2 should do better and then just change the Weapons accordingly, makes sense?
|
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 23:22:00 -
[1631] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:something more about drones after ccp changed the pve mechaniks so npc can aggro drones they got even more useles and in some enviroments speak Wormholes/lvl 5 missions and a few more u cant use them at all cuz the npc do change targets
thats also a big gallente issue
This was actually ninja changed in crucible. In a couple of the sites, such as an exceptional grav site which only has 1 BS which has troubles hitting small ECM drones, I'd use EC-300s to jam/get him to swap. I tried to do it last week and the sleepers only changed to drones after a jam cycle went off (reagro appears to be random), but then swapped right back to me before even popping it. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.08 23:43:00 -
[1632] - 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
Hey this was a nice german joke. I can not understand how you could misunderstand it! :)
The joke was that it will take 5 years with half baked changes and then overnight a Dev decides to finally fix Blasters. In my scenario he gives them a sort of special Hybrid X-Ray 2000 (produced by Binford who has recently started to support Gallente) that shots like a corona without the need to lock a target so you can melt the electronic of every enemy ship on the GRID. To balance it he decides to reduce the Signature Strengh with 5% (or maybe 7.5%, he is not sure and doesn't want to make dramatic changes) so you will lock a bit slower if you decide to do something other to your target instead of just melt it :) After the first 50000 Minmatar winers they will propably also reduce Gallente agility slightly while Minmatar Pilots complaining that this will not change anything. In the meantime Amarr just decides to use Hybrids on a Abandon and Caldari scraps all missle boats and hopes that X-Ray 2000 will be introduced to Railguns in the next sommer update :P
Sidenote: The Caldari could also use Blasters on their Hybrid plattforms but they decided that they are too proud to use Gallente crap! Unfortunately Minmatar doesn't find any X-Ray 2000 on their scrap yard so they decide to salvage the old Caldari missles boats and combine them with Projektiles, maybe this could help vs X-Ray 2000? We will find out soon, approx 2019! |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 07:33:00 -
[1633] - Quote
Hamox wrote: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 Hey this was a nice german joke. I can not understand how you could misunderstand it! :) The joke was that it will take 5 years with half baked changes and then overnight a Dev decides to finally fix Blasters. In my scenario he gives them a sort of special Hybrid X-Ray 2000 (produced by Binford who has recently started to support Gallente) that shots like a corona without the need to lock a target so you can melt the electronic of every enemy ship on the GRID. To balance it he decides to reduce the Signature Strengh with 5% (or maybe 7.5%, he is not sure and doesn't want to make dramatic changes) so you will lock a bit slower if you decide to do something other to your target instead of just melt it :) After the first 50000 Minmatar winers they will propably also reduce Gallente agility slightly while Minmatar Pilots complaining that this will not change anything. In the meantime Amarr just decides to use Hybrids on a Abandon and Caldari scraps all missle boats and hopes that X-Ray 2000 will be introduced to Railguns in the next sommer update :P Sidenote: The Caldari could also use Blasters on their Hybrid plattforms but they decided that they are too proud to use Gallente crap! Unfortunately Minmatar doesn't find any X-Ray 2000 on their scrap yard so they decide to salvage the old Caldari missles boats and combine them with Projektiles, maybe this could help vs X-Ray 2000? We will find out soon, approx 2019!
hehe :D |
Uinuva Karma
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 11:01:00 -
[1634] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:... Sentries should be able to teleport or move alongside their ship on the Gila, Domi and Ishtar. I like this idea, while I like the concept of Sentries they are so much micro management becouse you always have to stay in range, pack them, unpack again and so on. If they just could fly 50 m/s and would follow the drone boat it would really help and they still would be a difference to combat drones becouse you could not send them to a target.
Sentry drone ships received a Master Almost-Ninja Buff in Crucible. It's called the Reconnect to lost drone -key shortcut.
I've had great success with abandon/reconnects, it allows new kind of tactics, mixing sentry and conventional drones. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 12:53:00 -
[1635] - Quote
Uinuva Karma wrote:Hamox wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote:... Sentries should be able to teleport or move alongside their ship on the Gila, Domi and Ishtar. I like this idea, while I like the concept of Sentries they are so much micro management becouse you always have to stay in range, pack them, unpack again and so on. If they just could fly 50 m/s and would follow the drone boat it would really help and they still would be a difference to combat drones becouse you could not send them to a target. Sentry drone ships received a Master Almost-Ninja Buff in Crucible. It's called the Reconnect to lost drone -key shortcut. I've had great success with abandon/reconnects, it allows new kind of tactics, mixing sentry and conventional drones.
it is only good if u get disconect and to use them for warp out pvp is a good tactic to just loose them cuz sentrys are easy to kill and with 400~ dps u wont do mutch damage to becoume a real treat before the drones get killed
and heavy drones are sitting ducks too slow for pvp or pve
and i had also great succes on reconecting to them after i got disconected :D |
Uinuva Karma
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 16:36:00 -
[1636] - Quote
Imaginative more you must be if succeed you want, mhrmrm, young Jedi
|
Vokradacka
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 16:55:00 -
[1637] - Quote
we need something like ... ---- teleport all drones to cargo bay "icon" + damage all for 90% shield\armor\structure --- .... its fair enough |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 20:00:00 -
[1638] - Quote
Another week or so gone, new figures;
1Maelstrom57868 2Drake42169 3Hurricane34209 4Tengu25683 5Abaddon23004 6Tornado14330 7Tempest11939 8Scimitar10217 9Sabre8760 10Armageddon7463 11Zealot6618 12Huginn6565 13Cynabal6272 14Manticore6188 15Scorpion6167 16Hound6041 17Rapier5998 18Vagabond5694 19Nyx5659 20Oracle5401
1Heavy Missile Launcher II23039 21400mm Howitzer Artillery II15437 3425mm AutoCannon II11905 4Mega Pulse Laser II9333 5200mm AutoCannon II6178 6220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II5194 7150mm Light AutoCannon II5142 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II4900 9720mm Howitzer Artillery II4604 10800mm Repeating Artillery II4417 11Heavy Pulse Laser II3508 121400mm Gallium Cannon3371 13'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher3283 141400mm Prototype Siege Cannon3101 15425mm Railgun II1866 16Light Neutron Blaster II1799 17Citadel Torpedo Launcher I1653 18Ion Siege Blaster Cannon I1563 19Neutron Blaster Cannon II1552 20Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1527
No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 20:06:00 -
[1639] - Quote
Uinuva Karma wrote:Imaginative more you must be if succeed you want, mhrmrm, young Jedi
hay master yoda ^^ |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 20:10:00 -
[1640] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Another week or so gone, new figures;
1Maelstrom57868 2Drake42169 3Hurricane34209 4Tengu25683 5Abaddon23004 6Tornado14330 7Tempest11939 8Scimitar10217 9Sabre8760 10Armageddon7463 11Zealot6618 12Huginn6565 13Cynabal6272 14Manticore6188 15Scorpion6167 16Hound6041 17Rapier5998 18Vagabond5694 19Nyx5659 20Oracle5401
1Heavy Missile Launcher II23039 21400mm Howitzer Artillery II15437 3425mm AutoCannon II11905 4Mega Pulse Laser II9333 5200mm AutoCannon II6178 6220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II5194 7150mm Light AutoCannon II5142 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II4900 9720mm Howitzer Artillery II4604 10800mm Repeating Artillery II4417 11Heavy Pulse Laser II3508 121400mm Gallium Cannon3371 13'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher3283 141400mm Prototype Siege Cannon3101 15425mm Railgun II1866 16Light Neutron Blaster II1799 17Citadel Torpedo Launcher I1653 18Ion Siege Blaster Cannon I1563 19Neutron Blaster Cannon II1552 20Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1527
No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful.
oh boy oh boy fleet maelstrom banned the abbadon
dark days indeed i wonder how big is the persentage now of projectile/minmatar ships in use comared to all 3 races together :D |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 20:23:00 -
[1641] - Quote
dont forget lazors are just a bit better then hybrids but projectile platforms are by far better then lazors
so all weapon platforms need a buff or the projectiles need a nerf |
M1AU
Farstriders New Eden Industrie Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2012.01.09 23:01:00 -
[1642] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Another week or so gone, new figures;
1Maelstrom57868 2Drake42169 3Hurricane34209 4Tengu25683 5Abaddon23004 6Tornado14330 7Tempest11939 8Scimitar10217 9Sabre8760 10Armageddon7463 11Zealot6618 12Huginn6565 13Cynabal6272 14Manticore6188 15Scorpion6167 16Hound6041 17Rapier5998 18Vagabond5694 19Nyx5659 20Oracle5401
1Heavy Missile Launcher II23039 21400mm Howitzer Artillery II15437 3425mm AutoCannon II11905 4Mega Pulse Laser II9333 5200mm AutoCannon II6178 6220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II5194 7150mm Light AutoCannon II5142 8125mm Gatling AutoCannon II4900 9720mm Howitzer Artillery II4604 10800mm Repeating Artillery II4417 11Heavy Pulse Laser II3508 121400mm Gallium Cannon3371 13'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher3283 141400mm Prototype Siege Cannon3101 15425mm Railgun II1866 16Light Neutron Blaster II1799 17Citadel Torpedo Launcher I1653 18Ion Siege Blaster Cannon I1563 19Neutron Blaster Cannon II1552 20Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I1527
No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful.
Didn't know so many Nyx SCs blowing up nowadays huh? Or should that be Onyx? Edit: or are those numbers final blows? |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 00:15:00 -
[1643] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful.
Just going to state, you can't determine if something is balanced based on popularity. People are already trained for Maelstroms, Baddons, and Drakes, and the blobfests aren't going to change fleet doctrine unless its to something more powerful. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 08:59:00 -
[1644] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Nikuno wrote:No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful. Just going to state, you can't determine if something is balanced based on popularity. People are already trained for Maelstroms, Baddons, and Drakes, and the blobfests aren't going to change fleet doctrine unless its to something more powerful.
yep
from abadon to maelstrom :D as u need only half the ships to kill something in an alpha strike
basic math mate basic math |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 09:10:00 -
[1645] - Quote
Also rapier/huginn are there but not other recon and that cant be explained by projectile>> other weapons --> other recons needs a boost. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 11:26:00 -
[1646] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Nikuno wrote:No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful. Just going to state, you can't determine if something is balanced based on popularity. People are already trained for Maelstroms, Baddons, and Drakes, and the blobfests aren't going to change fleet doctrine unless its to something more powerful.
So, following your logic, people trained for Maelstroms, Abaddons and Drakes for some random reason that had nothing to do with their being more useful/powerful/successful and it was pure coincidence that they just turned out to be so wonderfully good? People train for them because they're the best, because if they train gallente/hybrid equivalents then they don't get into fleets. Your logic isn't even circular, it just springs from nowhere on a passing lack of thought !
As for recons, the gallente recons are fine if you want to use warp disruptors/scramblers, but the sensor dampeners continue to linger in the realm of almost pointless compared to their ecm counterparts.
And while we're at it I might as well get the full set and also point out, yet again, that information warfare links are utterly abysmal and should be replaced with something people could actually make use of, or at the very least the bonuses should be reviewed. Even the sensor integrity link on an Eos with a mindlink gives a bonus that scrapes a pathetic percentage of the effectiveness of the eccm mods, whilst a passive armour/shield resist link will give bonuses close to or exceeding their BEST faction mods. And don't even get me started on skirmish mods and their bonuses ! Come on CCP, it's another thing that has been broken for years, in the light of your current aim of fixing broken content - when will this be looked at ! |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 11:45:00 -
[1647] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:dont forget lazors are just a bit better then hybrids
Really? Actually show me any decent rails fleet fit that can dish 10k alpha strikes because this never happened before the changes with implants/boosters whatever, doesn't happen after changes blahblahblah and will certainly not happen at the end of this new year.
I've read somewhere maxed laser pilots can dish 20k volleys with faction ships -Nightmare Price tag vs Males is not the same for sure but it could be interesting to see what a full fleet of those could do (r+ñpe face everyone in the system probably)
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 11:51:00 -
[1648] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:dont forget lazors are just a bit better then hybrids Really? Actually show me any decent rails fleet fit that can dish 10k alpha strikes because this never happened before the changes with implants/boosters whatever, doesn't happen after changes blahblahblah and will certainly not happen at the end of this new year. I've read somewhere maxed laser pilots can dish 20k volleys with faction ships -Nightmare Price tag vs Males is not the same for sure but it could be interesting to see what a full fleet of those could do (r+ñpe face everyone in the system probably)
i would like to see this fit |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 11:53:00 -
[1649] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Nikuno wrote:No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful. Just going to state, you can't determine if something is balanced based on popularity. People are already trained for Maelstroms, Baddons, and Drakes, and the blobfests aren't going to change fleet doctrine unless its to something more powerful.
Just give me the ability to SD in about 10sec and do massive dmg at 15km around my ship explosion function of the quality/quantity ammo left in the cargo at the moment of that explosion.
Blob exterminated for ever.
If you want to deal with this blob issue it's not by introducing tools like Tier 3 BC's that you are going to avoid those or change something, it's by giving the tools to players. ATM there's none other than "disconnect" and go play WT's or BF3 (personally don't play those but know a lot of people doing it)
EDIT: even on SISI where ships cost 100isk you don't see that much gallente/calamari hybrid stuff or just one trying here, another trying there and 1h latter it's all drakes/vagas/cynas/drams/maelstroms/machariels/tornados/oracles and OC capitals/super cakes |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 16:39:00 -
[1650] - Quote
Jaigar wrote:Nikuno wrote:No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful. Just going to state, you can't determine if something is balanced based on popularity. People are already trained for Maelstroms, Baddons, and Drakes, and the blobfests aren't going to change fleet doctrine unless its to something more powerful.
Not sure I agree on this. I'd also venture to say the point is moot. I personally am hoping CCP approaches this "balancing" problem two-fold: firstly, as a means to make hybrids more effective when compared to its counterparts, but more importantly, giving hybrids a desirable feature which will increase its popularity AND its effectiveness at the same time.
You could argue blasters already have a "desirable feature" as they have the highest dps in the game. However, the truth of the matter is, range is so pathetically short and the hybrid platforms which use these turrets are not fast enough to make any real use of it. In addition to this, blasters' claim to the dps crown is THE ONLY desirable trait. There is nothing else. Rails don't have a single characteristic worth mentioning.
Whether or not you choose to correlate hybrid shortcomings to its lack of pvp popularity is your choice. You could also take a look at the market and explain to me why an Astarte is significantly cheaper than a Sleipnir, and whatever explanation you want to give, it's your choice.
In any case, I don't think it's a stretch to say:
-effective turrets get used in pvp, period -effective ships get used in pvp, period -players WILL figure out how to use effective items IF they have desirable traits (plural)
Argue cause and effect all you want, but such a debate is meaningless when you're missing both the cause (effectiveness) and effect (popularity). More to the point, the state of hybrids and hybrid platorms are missing both of these, and I do not think this is debatable. I think the market clearly shows this, as does the eve-kill.net top 20 stats page. |
|
mine mi
FW Scuad E C L I P S E
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 17:10:00 -
[1651] - Quote
The weapon is half of problem the other half is the ship bonus
gallente not need rail need a medium range weapon
caldari not need blaster need a medium range weapon
fix the bonus create new weapon |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 21:17:00 -
[1652] - Quote
mine mi wrote:The weapon is half of problem the other half is the ship bonus
gallente not need rail need a medium range weapon
caldari not need blaster need a medium range weapon
fix the bonus create new weapon
Create new weapon and then? Leave the existing broken? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. |
mine mi
FW Scuad E C L I P S E
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 21:32:00 -
[1653] - Quote
I did not say that, each race has 2 weapons, except the Caldari and Gallente, who have to share. I say create a medium-range weapon for Gallente, to replace the rails and a medium-range weapon for the Caldari to replace the blaster. |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.10 21:41:00 -
[1654] - Quote
I could live with that, really. But then again, I'm a caldari Pilot who has Gallente hybrid training and it makes perfect sense in the EVE universe, since they share a homeworld (a reason for having shared weapon systems). |
mine mi
FW Scuad E C L I P S E
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 00:05:00 -
[1655] - Quote
this was 200 years ago,and if all is ok,if all has sence, why this post has 84 pages |
Laurence Pinkitin
Aliastra Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 02:35:00 -
[1656] - Quote
mine mi wrote:I did not say that, each race has 2 weapons, except the Caldari and Gallente, who have to share. I say create a medium-range weapon for Gallente, to replace the rails and a medium-range weapon for the Caldari to replace the blaster.
So it would be something like this?
Blasters-Short range-ownage-station games ect. ?????- Medium range-good damage projection,Damage in between blasters and rails-Main fleet weapon? Rails- Long range-Fleet Sniper |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 12:48:00 -
[1657] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Jaigar wrote:Nikuno wrote:No hybrid using ships, 5.9% of weapons are hybrids. Still dreadful. Just going to state, you can't determine if something is balanced based on popularity. People are already trained for Maelstroms, Baddons, and Drakes, and the blobfests aren't going to change fleet doctrine unless its to something more powerful. Just give me the ability to SD in about 10sec and do massive dmg at 15km around my ship explosion function of the quality/quantity ammo left in the cargo at the moment of that explosion. Blob exterminated for ever. If you want to deal with this blob issue it's not by introducing tools like Tier 3 BC's that you are going to avoid those or change something, it's by giving the tools to players. ATM there's none other than "disconnect" and go play WT's or BF3 (personally don't play those but know a lot of people doing it) EDIT: even on SISI where ships cost 100isk you don't see that much gallente/calamari hybrid stuff or just one trying here, another trying there and 1h latter it's all drakes/vagas/cynas/drams/maelstroms/machariels/tornados/oracles and OC capitals/super cakes
thats an interesting tought or if a ship explodes it does massive damage on everything within 15km depending on ship size and class
would give more reality to gameplay and some interesting strategy on counteracting brainless blobs (ctrl + left click and press F1 :D) |
Londor Rogers
Exanimo Inc Psychotic Tendencies.
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 16:42:00 -
[1658] - Quote
of topic yay I love how in the hybrid weapon thread people are talking about exploding ships that do damage in a 15 km radius. This would be epic at making blaster boats way more viable.
Oh wait most blaster boats will be within this range when they kill stuff..... lol
Oh and could you imagine all the ships self destructing on the Jita undock. CCP you have to implement this freekin awesome well thoughtout idea............. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 17:09:00 -
[1659] - Quote
Londor Rogers wrote:of topic yay I love how in the hybrid weapon thread people are talking about exploding ships that do damage in a 15 km radius. This would be epic at making blaster boats way more viable.
Oh wait most blaster boats will be within this range when they kill stuff..... lol
Oh and could you imagine all the ships self destructing on the Jita undock. CCP you have to implement this freekin awesome well thoughtout idea.............
you would need alot of thinking on this topic and it should only work in 0.0 space and effect mostly long range ships (blobs) close range fighters would only get minimal damage drones none but its only small talk
btw everything about hybrids has already been said in this topic now its up to ccp to find what is good for the game and what not |
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
40
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 18:17:00 -
[1660] - Quote
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.
|
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 19:03:00 -
[1661] - 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 |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 20:08:00 -
[1662] - Quote
i just wonder if this change is now final
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 20:33:00 -
[1663] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:i just wonder if this change is now final
CPP still does a bad job when it is about communication. Just one post like "We are testing A or B out on Sisi to see how it affects the balance. Please feel free to use Hybrids and let us know your experience...." would have taken them about 5 minutes. Aren't we worth that time? Is it really that difficult to COMMUNICATE? I really don't get it. It is hard to believe how the same "mistakes" happen again and again... |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 20:57:00 -
[1664] - Quote
Hamox wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:i just wonder if this change is now final
CPP still does a bad job when it is about communication. Just one post like "We are testing A or B out on Sisi to see how it affects the balance. Please feel free to use Hybrids and let us know your experience...." would have taken them about 5 minutes. Aren't we worth that time? Is it really that difficult to COMMUNICATE? I really don't get it. It is hard to believe how the same "mistakes" happen again and again...
Excellent point. How did Null buffs get to SiSi, yet the thread which basically begged for this buff (among other things) was never notified of the change?
For shame |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 12:09:00 -
[1665] - Quote
I'm not sure if the changes to ammo tange and gun damage are the ultimate solution.
Ships which are already good like vindicator @ docking games become monsters and ships which are somewhat strange will still be strange like eos, astarte....
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 16:58:00 -
[1666] - Quote
what is strange that both minmatar arty and autocanons can hit targets at 100km distance
but if u talk about hybrids to give them such an ability it gets monstrous
the fallof bonus on tracking enchancers should be reduced to 15% the same as optimal bonus is
and projectiles would loose there OP status and would be more balanced to other turret systems
THE TRACKING ENCHANCERS WITH 30% FALLOF BONUS ARE COUSING ALL THE BALANCE PROBLEMS |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 17:05:00 -
[1667] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:what is strange that both minmatar arty and autocanons can hit targets at 100km distance
but if u talk about hybrids to give them such an ability it gets monstrous yup because hybrids needs cap and cant change dmg type ... oh wait... it is also strange that the null fix made blaster to be able to do comarable dmg to ac-s at point range , but somehow it is op , so if a weapon system which does the same dmg and needs cap and only therm+kinect dmg type is op , what does that make ac-s? super imba op? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 17:22:00 -
[1668] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:what is strange that both minmatar arty and autocanons can hit targets at 100km distance
but if u talk about hybrids to give them such an ability it gets monstrous yup because hybrids needs cap and cant change dmg type ... oh wait... it is also strange that the null fix made blaster to be able to do comarable dmg to ac-s at point range , but somehow it is op , so if a weapon system which does the same dmg and needs cap and only therm+kinect dmg type is op , what does that make ac-s? super imba op?
And this is to say nothing of the minmatar ships STILL able to speed away if things go sour, while Gallente ships have no defense to speak of.
It's been a LONG time since a dev posted in here. What's going on?
CCP, the proposed Null changes are good, but they do not make the hybrid platform viable. Gallente ships still need some kind of passive defensive mechanic to compete with superior speed of minmatar and superior tanks of Caldari and Amarr. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 17:28:00 -
[1669] - Quote
my sugestion would be to the final balance fix
to give blasters the 1,4 bonus on null and then to reduce the fallof bonus on traking enchancers to somewhere about 20% reduce arty alpha and give some of it to railguns
and take a look how it develops in the next few months becouse projectiles are already kiking even the fleet abadon out of the top 20 list and thats an alarming indication that u have a huge problem there with projectiles
even the alltimes number one drake is now at the second place overpowered by projekltiles
http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20 |
Jerick Ludhowe
Purification of Eden XIN DOA'ED
54
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 18:40:00 -
[1670] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote: and ships which are somewhat strange will still be strange like eos, astarte....
Command ships as a whole need a good looking at by CCP. The advantage that field commands get over tier2 bcs is rather minimal when looking at the cost and dead end sp investment that the command ships require. The fact that t3s make better off grid boosters than the fleets commands is just icing on the cake.
As far as null changes go... It will certainly have a significant change on medium and large blaster pvp. It will essentially boost dps by a rather significant margin in most close range pvp engagements.
|
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 22:42:00 -
[1671] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:thoth rothschild wrote: and ships which are somewhat strange will still be strange like eos, astarte....
Command ships as a whole need a good looking at by CCP. The advantage that field commands get over tier2 bcs is rather minimal when looking at the cost and dead end sp investment that the command ships require. The fact that t3s make better off grid boosters than the fleets commands is just icing on the cake. As far as null changes go... It will certainly have a significant change on medium and large blaster pvp. It will essentially boost dps by a rather significant margin in most close range pvp engagements.
Eh.
In my eyes, the same disparities can be found in command ships:
Sleipnir: simply awesome Claymore: top notch for skirmishing, if you're willing to go to such lengths (strange how this fits the skirmish philosophy) Aboslution: not bad! Damnation: top notch for armor fleets (strange how amarr BS fleets work so well with this) Nighthawk: eh Vulture:eh (at least it gives bonuses to shield tanks, making SOME sense) Astarte: nauseating Eos: WTF? Information warfare? Why does this ship even exist anymore?
Note the top two, Minmatar/Amarr, make great use of their native t2 resists to provide dominating omni tanks. This ALONE makes them the better choices. Everything else is just average or downright deplorable. I can't think of a single reason to use an Astarte or Eos. Hrm, I remember saying the same thing about hybrids! Noticing a trend? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 23:17:00 -
[1672] - Quote
well every time a newbie asked me what to train, i told them minmatar
and if they start arguing how they imagine other races to be better i just say shut up, and do what grown ups are telling u
so u see the trend soon, after the most pilots trained for minmatar we have to rename the game from eve-online into winmatar-online
me mayself only 3 months left till perfect minmatar pilot |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 23:45:00 -
[1673] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:well every time a newbie asked me what to train, i told them minmatar and if they start arguing how they imagine other races to be better i just say shut up, and do what grown ups are telling u so u see the trend soon, after the most pilots trained for minmatar we have to rename the game from eve-online into winmatar-online me mayself only 3 months left till perfect minmatar pilot
Well, when I started I was told that every Race is equal and that I should go with Gallente if I like the design. Drones are good for PVE and Blasters do kickass damage and are great for PVP. CPP should educate their game masters better becouse to me it seems they have no idea about this game. Also I should ask CPP to reimburse my SP I spend into total crap. Only good thing is that I realized the problem early enough to cross train to caldari so I can use at least Tengu for WH and Drake for almost everything else ;)
If a newbee would ask me what to do I would tell him to go for Winmatar or Caldari. Caldari is a good choise for missions and WH becouse Drake and Tengu are best ships for that. Winmatar, well we all know what Winmatar is good for ;) Amarr... ... I have no experience with Amarr. Gallente? If you want to Haul and you need a cheap and huge hauler the Indy 5 is your choise. Everything else is just a waste to train. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 09:39:00 -
[1674] - Quote
the thanatos was a nice pve ship but after the plex nerf it got kinda useless too
so yeah im also for a full reimbursting of the galente SP |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 12:20:00 -
[1675] - Quote
Is this thread still alive?
Lol impressive.
|
Ryans Revenge
League of Legends
41
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 12:40:00 -
[1676] - Quote
Are Devs still paying attention to this?
I personally think the main problem with blasters is that they aren't face **** enough up close. I don't believe they need to be turned into falloff acs. A lot of people will cry at this but to me it makes sense that a gallente ship should be able to be a glass cannon. Get in close and rip them apart before they stand a chance to rip yourself apart. This happens to a certain extent but not to the extent it should, ac's are still as powerful as blasters up close. AC's should still be the medium range powerhouse. But blasters should make people FEAR you getting at 0 to them. Not just be a little scared until they put that neut on you. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 12:54:00 -
[1677] - Quote
Ryans Revenge wrote:Are Devs still paying attention to this?
I personally think the main problem with blasters is that they aren't face **** enough up close. I don't believe they need to be turned into falloff acs. A lot of people will cry at this but to me it makes sense that a gallente ship should be able to be a glass cannon. Get in close and rip them apart before they stand a chance to rip yourself apart. This happens to a certain extent but not to the extent it should, ac's are still as powerful as blasters up close. AC's should still be the medium range powerhouse. But blasters should make people FEAR you getting at 0 to them. Not just be a little scared until they put that neut on you.
the term glass canon comes not from short range skirmishes
but very long range massive damage, breaks if got targeted it dosnt apply to galente blasters at all
but u can perfectly call arty a glass canon with a good tank :)
and projectiles are not middle range they can easily hit targets up to almost 250-300km
so plz do some research |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 17:40:00 -
[1678] - Quote
Totally rework turret based weapons.
1 New relationship between tracking and transversal velocity. If a hostile ships transversal is greater than your guns tracking then you miss 100% of the time. If it is equal to or greater then you might hit and proceed to part two of the calculation.
2 Projectile weapons are given an apparent velocity and thus flight time. no need to make them physical entities in the game like missiles just do it virtually. This would be where a new calculation based on the aggressors motion prediction, targets evasive manoeuvre, ship signature and projectile flight time should be used. The output should be a sliding value between 0 and 1. Then you have a random number multiplier to let big ships occasionally hit smaller ones to a point but when they do it's catastrophic. i.e. you miss 499 times but the 500th and only hitting shot is a kill.
Unfortunately due to physics Amarr ships should get a value or 1 here as lasers flight time would be near instantaneous but it would be realistic. might need to alter Amarr weapons to make this balanced.
On different classes of ship this would have a massive impact on applied DPS. frig classed hull might need to shift 20-30m to miss a shot and being a nimble ship this would be easy, where as a Titan needs to move 15Km in 3 or 4 seconds, which is not going to happen. It also changes how damage is applied. as you get closer to an enemy damage goes up and up and up as the time component of the evasive manoeuvre V motion prediction part of the equation is reduced but get too close and you cross the tracking tipping point and suddenly DPS is zero.
This lets weapons keep their current ranges as AC would be short barrel low velocity projectiles so even though they can shoot out to massive distances it's easy to avoid the rounds. where as artillery are going to be long barrel higher velocity projectiles and much more difficult to get out the way of. Rails would have higher still velocities and be harder to avoid and beams near instant and almost impossible to avoid unless you say write in a detectable fire time to energy weapons thus building in a time to the evasion equation.
|
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 17:51:00 -
[1679] - Quote
1. No. Although Angular velocity could/should have varying d/dt (x, y, z) speeds.
2. Maybe. I like the part where skills come into play. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 18:42:00 -
[1680] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Is this thread still alive? Lol impressive.
It is alive becouse the problem is not solved and there is no feedback from CPP. I will post here until: - the problem is solved or - we get good feedback or - I'm pissed so I unsub and leave this game and company forever. |
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 22:54:00 -
[1681] - Quote
Crucible 1.1: 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
This is all we get after 85 pages of head banging !!!!
Please give up all. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 23:07:00 -
[1682] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Crucible 1.1: 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
This is all we get after 85 pages of head banging !!!!
Please give up all.
Impressive.
But I'll still not change my Vaga/Munin for Diemos/Ishtar in null sec and wouldn't prob do it in low sec, high sec doesn't matter when you fly Gallente since everything is almost perfect for them to succeed, hugs at gates/undocks neutral reps etc, yey such funny stuff. But I'll still have some Gallente crap in my hangar for sure, just for lulz.
The thing started bad, it's not running good and I get the feeling it's not ready to change since I can almost bet on some Minmatar boost very soon before rails are worthy for whatever or that blasters become really decent to use/fit |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 23:37:00 -
[1683] - Quote
What is really disapointing is the way CPP threads its paying clients! They do not communicate and they do not listen to the community. They do crap and then the CEO promisses that they will do better in future. Then they promise a lot of ****, exiting extensions for sommer and winter upgrades, also some balance changes and finally they promisse to balance hybrids. Now when I look back at what CPP has promised and what they hold then it is just disapointing. They do changes on Sisi and they even can not post one little sentence here in this thread, NOTHING!
I have never seen such a stupid company that f... its paying client like this company does. I'm not going to wait years, there are a lot of other nice games out there and also a few similar to EVE.
This said I'm going to unsub, I will let my account go for the time it is payed, should be a few weeks. If I do not see improvement in CPPs behaviour I will just leave this game.
This whole thread is REDICULOUS!
Compared to other games in EVE you have to fu..ing work for weeks to be able to afford a nice ship or you buy plex and you pay real money for it. The ABSOLUTE MINIMUM ONE CAN EXPECT IS A AT LEAST HALF BALANCED GAME FOR OUR EFFORDS AND OUR MONEY and not this OP MINMATAR **** and STUPID GAL SHIPS NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER RACES BECOUSE OF STUPID PHILOSOPHY HAVING SLOW SHIPS AND SHORTEST RANGE! Even a 12 years old kid knows that this can't work.
The only changes we have seen in 12 month are useless stupid captains quarters and now some fancy shaders but the nebulas look **** in my opinion. It was better before the update.
Sorry for this harsh words but this whole thread is R E D I C U L O U S ! ! ! |
Toxic Raioin
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 00:19:00 -
[1684] - Quote
Hamox wrote:What is really disapointing is the way CPP threads its paying clients! They do not communicate and they do not listen to the community. They do crap and then the CEO promisses that they will do better in future. Then they promise a lot of ****, exiting extensions for sommer and winter upgrades, also some balance changes and finally they promisse to balance hybrids. Now when I look back at what CPP has promised and what they hold then it is just disapointing. They do changes on Sisi and they even can not post one little sentence here in this thread, NOTHING!
I have never seen such a stupid company that f... its paying client like this company does. I'm not going to wait years, there are a lot of other nice games out there and also a few similar to EVE.
This said I'm going to unsub, I will let my account go for the time it is payed, should be a few weeks. If I do not see improvement in CPPs behaviour I will just leave this game.
This whole thread is REDICULOUS!
Compared to other games in EVE you have to fu..ing work for weeks to be able to afford a nice ship or you buy plex and you pay real money for it. The ABSOLUTE MINIMUM ONE CAN EXPECT IS A AT LEAST HALF BALANCED GAME FOR OUR EFFORDS AND OUR MONEY and not this OP MINMATAR **** and STUPID GAL SHIPS NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER RACES BECOUSE OF STUPID PHILOSOPHY HAVING SLOW SHIPS AND SHORTEST RANGE! Even a 12 years old kid knows that this can't work.
The only changes we have seen in 12 month are useless stupid captains quarters and now some fancy shaders but the nebulas look **** in my opinion. It was better before the update.
Sorry for this harsh words but this whole thread is R E D I C U L O U S ! ! !
i know some people may laugh off that post but putting CCPs balls near the fire like every other mmo company is a GOOD thing. Good start ccp but lots left to do. |
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O.
35
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 00:34:00 -
[1685] - Quote
I really wish that they would give us some dev feedback or communicate on this forum about Hybrid balance. Hell, the design intent behind hybrids isn't even exactly clear (Example, extending null range, making it more homogeneous with the other turret systems)
IE you have a hole in the hull of your boat and its slowly filling up with water. So you use a bucket to get rid of the water initially. But you can't keep up and the boat is slowly sinking. So instead of trying to plug that hole you get a bigger bucket. Yes it will work and it does keep the ship from sinking, but theres still a damn hole in the boat. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 11:15:00 -
[1686] - Quote
must..... bump..... this... post..... |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 12:33:00 -
[1687] - Quote
but i dont get it how do the Dev`s do there math and call it balance when Maelstrom fitted with autocanons and Hail ammo have 10km more effective range then a blaster Rock with Null ammo and only 10% less dps then a blaster megathtron with void ammo so the maelstrom can do effective damage from 40 km away to the megathron and the megathron has to fly about 32km towards it so it can start to do damage with only 100 dps more and before it from about 30km away he can use null ammo with about 300dps less then autocanons
damn there should be all the alarms sounding that something is completly out of balance and the only response was now to add 15% more range to null
cammon, dont u see, thats what ur doing is a joke
at least reduce the fallof bonus on the traking enhancers to 15-20%
and then take another month to review how those changes are affecting the game |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 13:25:00 -
[1688] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:but i dont get it how do the Dev`s do there math and call it balance... ... at least reduce the fallof bonus on the traking enhancers to 15-20%
Even the TE have been mentioned here a couple of times. The AC will always get more out of the TE.
Medium Neutron Blaster Falloff: 5 km 425 AC Falloff: 9,6 km
Large Neutron Blaster Falloff: 10km 800mm AC FAlloff: 19,2 km
TE II gives you 30%:
The MNG gets: + 1.5 KM The 425 gets: 2,88 km
The LNB gets: + 3,3 km The 800mm gets 5,76
Changing TE to 10% doesn't chance the fact that AC will alwas get more out of the module than the blaster becouse it is better in that aspect BY DESIGN! The Blaster boat needs to fit 2 TE to get the same effect like the AC boat with one TE, meaning the Blaster Boat looses one extra low slot that it doesn't have becouse it needs it tank to survive its 20 minutes journey to get into weapon range. This is only one example of many examples but I do not care about the inbalance, we all know it is there and they are working on the balance. What really disturbes me is this company CPP. They should go into politics becouse politicians also promise a lot but don't do anything once voted.
Where is all that great stuff you have promised to us?
The only thing we have right now is this silly video "I was there" where you make marketing promises again but your video is out of reallity. You better should have spent the money in some Devs extra for balancing instead of some artist creating a fictive video... |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 15:45:00 -
[1689] - Quote
it's not just TE that are over powered, there are a lot of low slot mods that now massively outperform their mid slot counterpart.
This happened when scripts were introduced. So many mid slot modules didly just loose one of their stats by having to choose which of their two functions they would use to it's full extent. The function they use was also reduced so the mods effectiveness was almost quartered. This was a big boost to Mini and Caldari and a stealth nerf to Amarr/Gallante. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.15 08:48:00 -
[1690] - Quote
i have been messing around with the deimos and am almost liking it... with the null changes... i am shooting just over 28km (would prefer to reach out to 32km)
tbh i think the 6th highslot goes unused most of the time and would be much better situated as a 4th mid slot... (which would allow for either more tracking comps or i could go for nano/shield setup)
plus please add more base PG... just enough so i dont have to fit TWO pg rigs... (1 is ok if you want neutrons) that way i can put on a ex rig...
it also needs more cpu for the added 4th mid slot...
i am pushing over 2100m/s with heat on and 650 dps with heat and 79 of that is from warrior II...
[Deimos, Deimos fit]
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M [Empty High slot]
10MN MicroWarpdrive II Warp Disruptor II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range
Tracking Enhancer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Ancillary Current Router I
|
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 19:23:00 -
[1691] - Quote
Could someone from CCP please detail current SiSi hybrid changes regarding null and possibly:
1) railguns, medium-sized fittings seems to need further tweaking, as does damage at the medium and large levels 2) any plans to provide hybrid ships some kind of defensive mechanic
Since we're on the topic: if Null changes are in SiSi, shouldn't this thread be re-stickied?
The lack of communication is vexing.
Thanks |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 21:23:00 -
[1692] - Quote
The Null changes are as follows: 1.25x optimal bonus changed to 1.4x 1.25x falloff bonus changed to 1.4x
Yes, medium rails need work. But in all seriousness Hybrids are pretty damn awesome now. If you're having trouble grasping that, you're pretty bad at using hybrids. CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 21:40:00 -
[1693] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:The Null changes are as follows: 1.25x optimal bonus changed to 1.4x 1.25x falloff bonus changed to 1.4x
Yes, medium rails need work. But in all seriousness Hybrids are pretty damn awesome now. If you're having trouble grasping that, you're pretty bad at using hybrids.
Are you capable of making a post without insulting the people whom you're supposed to represent?
I am aware of the SiSi changes. My immediate concern is why there wasn't a dev post in these forums notifying anyone about it, and as you said, if hybrids need more work, then what else is in store? |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 22:21:00 -
[1694] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Yes, medium rails need work. But in all seriousness Hybrids are pretty damn awesome now. If you're having trouble grasping that, you're pretty bad at using hybrids.
Time will show if the weapon system and the plattform can compete with the other systems, especially Minmatar. May I quote you in a few months? Off course only if I'm still playing this game by then.
I do not really believe that Hybrids are "pretty damn awesome" now. Maybe at gate camping or in some WH situations but thats it. But as I said, time will show if you are right.
Edit: I just wonder what ACs are. They need less CPU and PG, their plattforms can fit more TEs easily and also they will benefit more from each TE, they do not need cap, do almost the same damage as Blasters with far more range and can choose damage time. Thats what I would call "pretty damn awesome". |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 22:38:00 -
[1695] - Quote
You won't see a huge increase in Gallente or falloff in Minmatar preference (no pun intended), but that has more to do with the current state of the game and the lack of players committing to fights. People will always prefer to run away when they can, and alpha fleets will alphas trump ROF, and as a result Minmatar will still remain popular. This doesn't mean Hybrids are worse than Projectiles, that simply means that the Hybrid playstyle is less popular than the crap that Minmatar promotes.
What the Hybrid changes have done is make those weapons the proper high damaging sluggers they are intended to be. If someone comes into range, Hybrids will (now) always have a clear damage advantage unlike, prior to the patch, where Autocannons were roughly on par.
Also, blasters with Void ammo actually track well enough now to use. The tracking difference is 5% worse than regular Antimatter used to be, making it pretty good against bigger/slower targets. When you factor in the ammo actually taking half the cargo space, you can now carry an extra set of ammo without having to sacrifice your main stashes of ammo or cap.
With the Null changes, blasters are ensured to still have some bite beyond point-blank range. The changes are even more evident on the larger ships and those which can fit Neutron blasters.
And for the record, I haven't been part of a gate camp for well over a year, and I've not even been in a fleet for 8+ months. All my pvp is primarily blaster-equipped Gallente done solo. CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 22:58:00 -
[1696] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote: Yes, medium rails need work. But in all seriousness Hybrids are pretty damn awesome now. If you're having trouble grasping that, you're pretty bad at using hybrids.
Uff, finally a spot of sanity among obscurantism.
What's your view on further work upon rails, by the way? I'm a firm believer they are absolulety ok already. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 23:33:00 -
[1697] - Quote
I think it has more to do with Artillery and Scorch being so damn awesome than rails actually being *bad*. The same applies at all levels of pvp. Tachyons are pretty good, but Artillery is almost always preferred. When it comes to small weapons, nobody even bothers with beams and small rails are actually decent, but still less preferred compared to Artillery.
CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 23:38:00 -
[1698] - Quote
you know how there is in the atributes shots per volley? well it would be neat if ammo like void shot two shots per volley but had a reduced rate of fire by like 25% or something like that...
that way blasters could act like close range arties...
as for rails... personally i would like to see thier rate of fire increased and cap activation cost decreased to compensate...
this would then inverse gal/caldari fighting montra in comparision to energy/projectiles... |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 23:46:00 -
[1699] - Quote
As far as actual damage application goes, all the long range weapons are pretty similar. The differences are all in the ROF & Damage mod.
For example, 720mm Artillery has 3x the damage mod & ROF compared to 250mm Railguns. However, the Railgun does the same amount of damage (on paper) in the amount of time it takes the Artillery to cycle it's next shot. Artillery has a major advantage because if you mass enough ships you can easily alpha people through their tanks, and this is extremely relevant in large fleets. In fact, much of 00 fights consist of these types of engagements. So it doens't matter how much *better* medium rails become, as they've already got better range and tracking and equal damage, Artillery will always be the premier choice. CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.16 23:57:00 -
[1700] - Quote
another idea would be reducing the sig resolution of rail guns... so they can get a higher number in the chance to hit formula thus making more high damage type hits on smaller targets... this could give rails the ability to take on smaller ships type fleets at long range...
so you would use the arties to take on the big buffer stuff and use the rails to kill the smaller stuff... |
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 00:14:00 -
[1701] - Quote
Wouldn't matter, because at that range the high number of players that are usually associated with "long range" fights will overwhelm the target despite signature size. CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 00:27:00 -
[1702] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:You won't see a huge increase in Gallente or falloff in Minmatar preference (no pun intended), but that has more to do with the current state of the game and the lack of players committing to fights. People will always prefer to run away when they can, and alpha fleets will alphas trump ROF, and as a result Minmatar will still remain popular. This doesn't mean Hybrids are worse than Projectiles, that simply means that the Hybrid playstyle is less popular than the crap that Minmatar promotes.
What the Hybrid changes have done is make those weapons the proper high damaging sluggers they are intended to be. If someone comes into range, Hybrids will (now) always have a clear damage advantage unlike, prior to the patch, where Autocannons were roughly on par.
Also, blasters with Void ammo actually track well enough now to use. The tracking difference is 5% worse than regular Antimatter used to be, making it pretty good against bigger/slower targets. When you factor in the ammo actually taking half the cargo space, you can now carry an extra set of ammo without having to sacrifice your main stashes of ammo or cap.
With the Null changes, blasters are ensured to still have some bite beyond point-blank range. The changes are even more evident on the larger ships and those which can fit Neutron blasters.
And for the record, I haven't been part of a gate camp for well over a year, and I've not even been in a fleet for 8+ months. All my pvp is primarily blaster-equipped Gallente done solo.
Sorry, double post. |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 00:27:00 -
[1703] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:You won't see a huge increase in Gallente or falloff in Minmatar preference (no pun intended), but that has more to do with the current state of the game and the lack of players committing to fights. People will always prefer to run away when they can, and alpha fleets will alphas trump ROF, and as a result Minmatar will still remain popular. This doesn't mean Hybrids are worse than Projectiles, that simply means that the Hybrid playstyle is less popular than the crap that Minmatar promotes.
What the Hybrid changes have done is make those weapons the proper high damaging sluggers they are intended to be. If someone comes into range, Hybrids will (now) always have a clear damage advantage unlike, prior to the patch, where Autocannons were roughly on par.
Also, blasters with Void ammo actually track well enough now to use. The tracking difference is 5% worse than regular Antimatter used to be, making it pretty good against bigger/slower targets. When you factor in the ammo actually taking half the cargo space, you can now carry an extra set of ammo without having to sacrifice your main stashes of ammo or cap.
With the Null changes, blasters are ensured to still have some bite beyond point-blank range. The changes are even more evident on the larger ships and those which can fit Neutron blasters.
And for the record, I haven't been part of a gate camp for well over a year, and I've not even been in a fleet for 8+ months. All my pvp is primarily blaster-equipped Gallente done solo.
Really? How can you say that there are a lack of players committed to fights? Seriously? If that were the case then every fleet would be two sides running away from each other all the time. That's not what is going on at all. Lots of people committed to getting into fights. The kill board shows that every day. The reason why people fly minmatar is that they rock. Easy fitting, whether long or short range. Shield or armor. Fast, nimble, massive damage, selectable damage type, neut's don't stop their guns, small sig radius, etc etc. How many empty slots do you see on a minnie ship? NONE. How many on a Gal ship, often a wasted high slot. WHY? Because you can't fit it! 1/2 of the problem right there.
Just look at the Talos and max gank it with rails. Then compare it against a similarly equipped Oracle or Tornado. And you can say rails are great? really? Rails on the Talos? Why not? You can easily fit AC's or Arty on Minmatar. Why not Gallente? Its also easy to fit the largest guns of any class (small, medium, large) on Min ships and still have plenty grid/cpu left over for whatever you want. Try fitting the largest guns of a class on Gal but you quickly run out of fitting. Why? At the end of the day, you work hard to fit out that gallente rail boat, and it still doesn't come close to performing like a minnie.
Void? Hail gets massive boost, nothing for void? Bottom line, why would anyone design a weapon/ammo type meant to be used in close range that 1) has a tracking penalty and 2) has cap usage? That's just stupid. Blasters should use ZERO CAP and have instant ammo changes. Races that fly at distance (amarr) should have the 10 second crystal time switch) and min should have to burn cap. But whatever.
Bottom line, there is really no reason to fly gallente over other platforms which provide so much more flexibility, performance, and results. I think the player base is very committed to fights, and are very adept at doing what they desire most - to win. No one will fly a boat that must commit to each fight 100% of the time and just find itself neuted, webbed, scram'd, and blown up over and over while their minmatar/caldari brothers zip about. Look, the stats prove it. No one is flying/using rail/blaster boats in any numbers, not because they are afraid of the fight, its because they are using the best ships to get the job done. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 00:48:00 -
[1704] - Quote
I think you missed the mark a little bit. Minmatar are chosen because they are fast, agile, and can do damage from range. All qualities which have massive benefit when your enemy can't keep you pinned & the fight goes **** up. When it's time to bail Minmatar have the advantage because of the qualities you've described. That is the reason for lack of commitment.
I don't want to lose my ship every time, so I'm going to simply bail when the odds are no longer in my favour. It doesn't matter what you do to the ships, you can make them weaker and you can make them tank less, but as long as Minmatar have that GTFO ability and range advantage they will be flown more.
It's not because Minmatar are the best for getting the job done (they aren't), it's that they are best at doing said job without being caught in the shitstorm that always comes up. The other races shouldn't be trying to be like Minmatar. Nano is simply a play style, and not every race needs to be good at it.
IMO Hail shouldn't have got a boost. Conflag & Void are indeed left behind when you look at the stats. At the same time though, Blasters got a 20% tracking boost and reduced cap usage. These changes solve most of Voids problems which makes its tracking and cap usage only slightly worse than normal antimatter prior to Crucible.
And in regard to your Talos/Tornado comparison. You couldn't possibly be more wrong. The Tornado is not only harder to fit, but has worse damage projection than rails. Want more range? You loose a ton of damage, unlike railguns. You can easily fit Neutrons to a Talos or Naga. The only reason the Tornado is more popular is because of Alpha & Speed. That's it. Get your facts straight because it's the same reason why Artillery is chosen over everything else. CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 13:03:00 -
[1705] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:i have been messing around with the deimos and am almost liking it... with the null changes... i am shooting just over 28km (would prefer to reach out to 32km)
tbh i think the 6th highslot goes unused most of the time and would be much better situated as a 4th mid slot... (which would allow for either more tracking comps or i could go for nano/shield setup)
plus please add more base PG... just enough so i dont have to fit TWO pg rigs... (1 is ok if you want neutrons) that way i can put on a ex rig...
it also needs more cpu for the added 4th mid slot...
i am pushing over 2100m/s with heat on and 650 dps with heat and 79 of that is from warrior II...
[Deimos, Deimos fit]
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M [Empty High slot]
10MN MicroWarpdrive II Warp Disruptor II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range
Tracking Enhancer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Yes it's a little better until you face more than one ship and one of them is double neut cane (frequent), theoretical dps seems interesting but neuted your dps is 0 ! -your opponent fitted with civilian autocanons will finish to kill you if you dish 0dps because of this.
While the 425mm/HAM's Munin is really not far from his theoretical 850dps, while being slower than vaga is still faster/agile than Diemos and has less fitting issues.
So in what I'm concerned unless we have only armor logis I will not change from Cynabal/Munin/vaga/Cane
Deimos is still subpar choice, far too fragile because neuts are his worst enemy, and that crappy high utility slot is worthless to use unbonused NOS (distance/effectiveness) witch will never happen since it's Amarr bonus, plus would use more of the already insufficient power grid.
The guy above tell it well, Minie are not the best at dishing dps for example since now any blaster set up will out perform on paper and IG numbers Autos, the thing is that Minies are the best at applying their dps and the best at avoid taking dmg/gtfo. This morning, had cynabal under scram/60% web taking his skin off with void L like a window licker and .... under web+scram+neut he managed to gtfo thx to base speed...man what now? -everytime I get out now I ill exclusively date my navy mega with double web/scram because I might find one Cynabal?? c'mon...
Tornado? -well he tells my 50km+base point "hi, I can mwd 100km away from you in less than 10sec and still shoot you... Rapier? -again double web on you, watch carefully the window you see another window licker doing /finger to you, there's nothing, absolutely nothing you can do. They have far too much bonus/abilities to gtfo with almost 0 effort compared to any gallente/amarr/calamari stuff |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 13:31:00 -
[1706] - Quote
-1) I think many minmatar ships out perform Gallente ships in the close fight as well. I've run into plenty single and double plated Hurricanes that have significant tank, still faster than their equivalent Gal ship even with trimarks, the small sig radius really shines when they armor tank, and still are able to project damage out sooner and with authority in close. Obviously not quite the DPS of a Gal ship, but considering how soon they are able to start applying the damage on their way into target is a huge help. Also, as primaries rapidly change and ships pop, they are able to more effectively switch targets and still apply damage more often than a Gal ship which has to limp toward the target. Now, I will say that I think the changes to Null will definitely help this. But of course, Min is still the best choice for close in fighting because I can Neut a hurricane all day long and he can still shoot when he fights in close. No way a "close in brawler" race should be burning CAP, period. The reduction is nice, but it needs to go away all together. This would be particularly handy for small ships that die to neuts/drone combination on bigger ships. If gal frigs could still shoot at the drones while webbed/scramed/neuted it would make them much more survivable.
-2) Tornado/Talos- comparing a Arty fit Tornado with 1400's and a Talos with 425 rails, both all gank and no tank (other than a DCU II on both), all level V characters, both using two sensor boosters: Tornado: 11622 alpha w/ 701 dps using Republic Fleet EMP (range 35+71) - 3 gyro's, 1 TE, 2 Tracking computers, 2 ACR and collision accelerator in rigs. Talos: 4118 alpha w/ 782 DPS using Caldari Navy Antimatter (range 51+49)- 3 mag stabs, 1 TE, 1 tracking computer, 1 Hybrid locus, 1 hybrid collision accelerator and a polycarbon housing. I have to use a 3% CPU implant to make this fit work.
Now you can play around with the ammo types but this is a roughly fair comparison for engagements in the 50-60 km range which is where I've been seeing most these ships engage at. So yes, you are right, the Talos has more DPS, but frankly hardly a difference (81), especially when you then compare that to the alpha strike comparison. So to say that rails are fixed to me is mostly a joke. I will grant you that you have more chances to hit with hybrids and that can make a difference, but that is negated by the use of multiple tornado's to lower the consequences of misses. And when they hit, few thing can stand up to that Alpha. So yes, I still say that rails suck.
(I did not figure the Talos' drones into the dps equation, by the way, as for these types of engagements they are not really used except if a frig gets in close or ecm drones for GTFO. But as I've been watching these pop many frigs, interceptors etc on their way in (yes, even spiraling in) that's not too frequent. While they don't get much damage in on them, their numbers and a couple of target painters make most things pop to these ships.) |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 16:24:00 -
[1707] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:I think you missed the mark a little bit. Minmatar are chosen because they are fast, agile, and can do damage from range. All qualities which have massive benefit when your enemy can't keep you pinned & the fight goes **** up. When it's time to bail Minmatar have the advantage because of the qualities you've described. That is the reason for lack of commitment.
I don't want to lose my ship every time, so I'm going to simply bail when the odds are no longer in my favour. It doesn't matter what you do to the ships, you can make them weaker and you can make them tank less, but as long as Minmatar have that GTFO ability and range advantage they will be flown more.
It's not because Minmatar are the best for getting the job done (they aren't), it's that they are best at doing said job without being caught in the shitstorm that always comes up. The other races shouldn't be trying to be like Minmatar. Nano is simply a play style, and not every race needs to be good at it.
IMO Hail shouldn't have got a boost. Conflag & Void are indeed left behind when you look at the stats. At the same time though, Blasters got a 20% tracking boost and reduced cap usage. These changes solve most of Voids problems which makes its tracking and cap usage only slightly worse than normal antimatter prior to Crucible.
And in regard to your Talos/Tornado comparison. You couldn't possibly be more wrong. The Tornado is not only harder to fit, but has worse damage projection than rails. Want more range? You loose a ton of damage, unlike railguns. You can easily fit Neutrons to a Talos or Naga. The only reason the Tornado is more popular is because of Alpha & Speed. That's it. Get your facts straight because it's the same reason why Artillery is chosen over everything else. you are so wrong
minmatar has comparable range ehp dmg vs other races while being way faster and small thats the problem they dont give up anything to be faster/smaller, thats why ppl fly them
Minmatar is the best for getting the job done in nearly everything. Yeah other races shouldnt take over "nano playstyle" and you forgot matar should not take over others races like snipe from caldari , and close range from gallente and good alltogeather like amarr but currently matar does that. Imba as hell.
Oh hail gives much more then the rest , whats that i call that a stealth matar buff, somehow every expansion is full of those... Arti is choosen cause it needs no cap , choosable dmg type , and huge alpha , still just a very very little less dps than rails , and same range. Broken!!!
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
419
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 17:02:00 -
[1708] - Quote
@Mariner What did I literally just say. Artillery will always be the premier choice because of alpha. Railguns have more range, more tracking, and more damage over time. They are used because of alpha. Period. The Hurricane is a bit of a special snowflake as far as Battlecruisers go. It's far too fast for its abilities, and IMO has too much grid. And no, it really isn't the best at brawling. The mere suggestion made me choke on my drink.
@Naomi Minmatars range/dps gap has been closing, and it's become even smaller after the changes to Null. They are faster, and when fit for range, they are weaker. They are also smaller by a tiny margin largely because that *advantage* is negated as soon as you nano the ships with shields (battleships & caps gain the most). Minmatar isn't ideal for brawling anymore, they aren't ideal for actual RANGE sniping beyond alphaing targets.
As I've been saying, there is nothing wrong with the new Hybrids, they are very good. Medium rails are also not bad but get overshadowed by Artillery & alpha. There is no way for Rails will ever replace Artillery as long as alpha is so massive. End of story. CSM Candidate & PVP Samurai RE-ELECT PROM4CSM7 www.promsrage.com |
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
157
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 17:08:00 -
[1709] - Quote
Rails and Beams (with the exception of Tachyons) are fairly close. Artillery and Tachyons are the outliers, not Rails.
That said Artillery and Tachyons are probably closer to what long range turrets should be like than the other way around. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:28:00 -
[1710] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Rails and Beams (with the exception of Tachyons) are fairly close. Artillery and Tachyons are the outliers, not Rails.
That said Artillery and Tachyons are probably closer to what long range turrets should be like than the other way around.
Thing is that dps as it is seen by people (raw numbers) it's "always" bigger on rails than Arty witch they use s argument to afirm rails are fine.
In reality some intelligent people have already ran the numbers, made excellent graphics and clearly shows to someone able to understand those graphics after just a few shots (between 5 and 10 depending on skills/fit etc) Alpha it's simply superior to EVERYTHING and there's nothing you can do to change this unless very big game core changes witch will never happen.
First you have distance engagement being just plain equal for whatever engagement type, because warp to blah blah, grid blah blah and full of blah blah, result, no one shoots no one after 100km or it's a frackinf FC mistake actually.
Then once everyone fights in the same range you need stuff that gives you for your time spent behind your stupid screen watching stupid pixels, well matar wins, if some people don't think so they're either ignorants or just arrogants incapable to see the vidence it self under their nose. |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:50:00 -
[1711] - Quote
the traking enchancers fallof modifier needs to be nerfd to 15% - 20% and add a script to traking computers with fallof mod maybe
and arty needs to loose some alpha and rails gain some alpha but not an equal number an all turret classes small, medium and large need to be looked at seperatly cuz small hybrids are more then fine maybe a bit too fine :) |
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 06:47:00 -
[1712] - Quote
I think that blaster DPS is fine but needs a better optimal range. Take for example an Abaddon in comparison. It does near the same DPS as a Megathron would with Pulse lasers, only difference is that it can shoot 60KM. I don't see much fairness in that. TL;DR so I do not have to have a long and drawn out rant: Give blasters better optimal and falloff, Please. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
170
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 07:26:00 -
[1713] - Quote
Naga sucks, talos over powered. Buff naga. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 07:32:00 -
[1714] - 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. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 07:44:00 -
[1715] - Quote
de4deye wrote:I think that blaster DPS is fine but needs a better optimal range. Take for example an Abaddon in comparison. It does near the same DPS as a Megathron would with Pulse lasers, only difference is that it can shoot 60KM. I don't see much fairness in that. TL;DR so I do not have to have a long and drawn out rant: Give blasters better optimal and falloff, Please.
This will resolve the issue....
For Blasters increase the Turret optimal by 20% and Falloff by 30% rather than tweaking the ammo. Hybrids (blasters) lack RANGE against Lasors/projectiles. Therefore they are not used in fleets against other DPS platforms. It may be fine for skirmish but skirmish is a totally different battle type.
Hybrids (Rails) lack DPS against Lasors/Projectiles even if they got range they need 20% increase to their damage multiplier since the damage types of Thermal and Kinetic have high base resists. |
Mikal Morataya
31
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 08:51:00 -
[1716] - Quote
de4deye wrote:I think that blaster DPS is fine but needs a better optimal range. Take for example an Abaddon in comparison. It does near the same DPS as a Megathron would with Pulse lasers, only difference is that it can shoot 60KM. I don't see much fairness in that.
The thing is the Abaddon is very cap heavy with lasers, more so than the Mega with blasters. Reading these threads sometimes makes me smile and its like a MAKE MY RACE ULTIMATE AT ALL. If you really like the Abaddon, train for it. That's the beauty of Eve. It's interesting lots of null fleets fit Arty to the Abandon, as has been mentioned Arty is king.
As for blaster boats suffering at the hand of nuets, won't someone think of the laser boats. :)
Let's just give hybrids the range and alpha of Arty, the instant ammo load of lasers, all dmg types, the killing power it has up close and force all pilots to fly Gallente :) |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 12:02:00 -
[1717] - Quote
Mikal Morataya wrote:de4deye wrote:I think that blaster DPS is fine but needs a better optimal range. Take for example an Abaddon in comparison. It does near the same DPS as a Megathron would with Pulse lasers, only difference is that it can shoot 60KM. I don't see much fairness in that. The thing is the Abaddon is very cap heavy with lasers, more so than the Mega with blasters. Reading these threads sometimes makes me smile and its like a MAKE MY RACE ULTIMATE AT ALL. If you really like the Abaddon, train for it. That's the beauty of Eve. It's interesting lots of null fleets fit Arty to the Abandon, as has been mentioned Arty is king. As for blaster boats suffering at the hand of nuets, won't someone think of the laser boats. :) Let's just give hybrids the range and alpha of Arty, the instant ammo load of lasers, all dmg types, the killing power it has up close and force all pilots to fly Gallente :)
Ho you will excuse us for thinking that a pulse harby able to fully shoot/dms at 45km that manages to be neuted even by a t1 battleship (28km with faction neut), then the harby pilot really sucks.
|
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 13:58:00 -
[1718] - Quote
Mikal Morataya wrote:de4deye wrote:I think that blaster DPS is fine but needs a better optimal range. Take for example an Abaddon in comparison. It does near the same DPS as a Megathron would with Pulse lasers, only difference is that it can shoot 60KM. I don't see much fairness in that. The thing is the Abaddon is very cap heavy with lasers, more so than the Mega with blasters. Reading these threads sometimes makes me smile and its like a MAKE MY RACE ULTIMATE AT ALL. If you really like the Abaddon, train for it. That's the beauty of Eve. It's interesting lots of null fleets fit Arty to the Abandon, as has been mentioned Arty is king. As for blaster boats suffering at the hand of nuets, won't someone think of the laser boats. :) Let's just give hybrids the range and alpha of Arty, the instant ammo load of lasers, all dmg types, the killing power it has up close and force all pilots to fly Gallente :)
Now, now, calm down. I can fly an abaddon, along with every other races BS, Hac, what have you. Abaddons are heavy on cap no derp, I'm not talking about that, as blasters are high on cap usage too - it makes no real argument. The only null fleets that fit arty to abaddons are the noobs who trained for a Maelstrom and were forced to use an abaddon and cannot use T2 Pulses, As the T2 Arty will do more DPS than T1 pulse lasers. I am not a ranting noob, like some, who doesn't know what they are talking about and saying to "BUFF MY RACE" - Gallente isn't my "Race" as they suck something aweful since a couple years back. The Only ship that any sane Gallente pilot will fly is an Ishtar. I will disregard your non productive rant and assume that you are just a noob who has nothing better to do. I stick by what I said, Blasters need a Falloff and Optimal range buff to them and their ammo types should not have such restrictive range bonuses.
-de4d |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 15:46:00 -
[1719] - Quote
after posting and loosing a long post to the forum gang i won't type it again |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 15:50:00 -
[1720] - Quote
always Ctrl+C before posting if its gone Ctrl+V :) |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 16:58:00 -
[1721] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:the traking enchancers fallof modifier needs to be nerfd to 15% - 20% and add a script to traking computers with fallof mod maybe
and arty needs to loose some alpha and rails gain some alpha but not an equal number an all turret classes small, medium and large need to be looked at seperatly cuz small hybrids are more then fine maybe a bit too fine :)
Exactly what everyone said from the begining, small rails/blasters were ok, only ships needed some tweaks. Now we have a 75mm T2 Gatling+spike Enyo that NEVER misses his target flying at +/-5km/s hitting his target at +/- 30km with 200dps+/- .... c'mon...wtbh? |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 17:18:00 -
[1722] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Ho you will excuse us for thinking that a pulse harby able to fully shoot/dms at 45km that manages to be neuted even by a t1 battleship (28km with faction neut), then the harby pilot really sucks. Please show me this mythical pulse harbinger with 45km optimal.
Since harbingers have to use focused medium pulses due to gimped fitting, mine only has a 20km optimal with scorch. Hell, my legion with heavy pulses only hits to 34km. 45km is the optimal for abaddons with mega pulses, not this fairy tale 60km number that gets kicked around.
I find it funny how everyone who complains that scorch is OP actually has no idea what ranges scorch actually hits at. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 17:23:00 -
[1723] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Ho you will excuse us for thinking that a pulse harby able to fully shoot/dms at 45km that manages to be neuted even by a t1 battleship (28km with faction neut), then the harby pilot really sucks. Please show me this mythical pulse harbinger with 45km optimal. Since harbingers have to use focused medium pulses due to gimped fitting, mine only has a 20km optimal with scorch. Hell, my legion with heavy pulses only hits to 34km. I find it funny how everyone who complains that scorch is OP actually has no idea what ranges scorch actually hits at.
Don't you know that the only ships that count are those shield fitted so they can use lows for dps mods?
Everything else is for noobs, sry I will not discuss with you any longer you lack of bit vet attitude
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 17:24:00 -
[1724] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Don't you know that the only ships that count are those shield fitted so they can use lows for dps mods? Everything else is for noobs, sry I will not discuss with you any longer you lack of bit vet attitude Touche. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 18:52:00 -
[1725] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Ho you will excuse us for thinking that a pulse harby able to fully shoot/dms at 45km that manages to be neuted even by a t1 battleship (28km with faction neut), then the harby pilot really sucks. Please show me this mythical pulse harbinger with 45km optimal. Since harbingers have to use focused medium pulses due to gimped fitting, mine only has a 20km optimal with scorch. Hell, my legion with heavy pulses only hits to 34km. 45km is the optimal for abaddons with mega pulses, not this fairy tale 60km number that gets kicked around. I find it funny how everyone who complains that scorch is OP actually has no idea what ranges scorch actually hits at.
Let me elaborate. To find out your effective range on your ship that you will hit good damage at, you Add up your Falloff+Optimal range. 60Km is the range an abaddon reaches for a pilot with moderate skills and 2 tracking computers with no scripts, as is a standard hellcat fitting. A Good pilot will hit around 75+km. If you are only able to hit 45km with an abaddon, you are both fitting wrong and have poor skillpoints. |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:01:00 -
[1726] - Quote
de4deye wrote:Let me elaborate. To find out your effective range on your ship that you will hit good damage at, you Add up your Falloff+Optimal range. 60Km is the range an abaddon reaches for a pilot with moderate skills and 2 tracking computers with no scripts, as is a standard hellcat fitting. A Good pilot will hit around 75+km. If you are only able to hit 45km with an abaddon, you are both fitting wrong and have poor skillpoints. If you want to get technical, it's optimal + (2 * falloff). At optimal + falloff, you're doing 50% damage. Everyone is quoting the Abaddon's paper DPS from EFT, which drops off once optimal is exceeded. WIth max skills, an Abaddon pilot with scorch has a 45km optimal. With 2 tracking computers, it's 52km. Loading range scripts bumps that up to 58km.
Also, you need tons of logi to support Abaddons since they cap themselves out REALLY quickly. How many cap transfers are required to keep arty fleets firing? Yeah. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:06:00 -
[1727] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:de4deye wrote:Let me elaborate. To find out your effective range on your ship that you will hit good damage at, you Add up your Falloff+Optimal range. 60Km is the range an abaddon reaches for a pilot with moderate skills and 2 tracking computers with no scripts, as is a standard hellcat fitting. A Good pilot will hit around 75+km. If you are only able to hit 45km with an abaddon, you are both fitting wrong and have poor skillpoints. If you want to get technical, it's optimal + (2 * falloff). At optimal + falloff, you're doing 50% damage. Everyone is quoting the Abaddon's paper DPS from EFT, which drops off once optimal is exceeded. WIth max skills, an Abaddon pilot with scorch has a 45km optimal. With 2 tracking computers, it's 52km. At 65km with max skill and 2 TCs, you're doing half damage. So basically, you're wrong.
So you have flown abaddon in large fleets that are hellcat fitted how many times? I'm sorry that you have no idea what you are talking about and are under the illusion of intelligence, but would you please let people who actually can fly these ships and have flown them and against them many times talk about them. Rather than posting as an EFT warrior who has most likely 0 experience with the ships he is talking about. Just please take your inner thoughts and express them to your brain alone, then rethink again before you repost - otherwise, silence your heretic tongue.
I see in your edit you said that they need cap transfers. Abaddons fit cap boosters to them to keep their cap up, which lasts longer than 90% of the fights I've been in with an abaddon. An abaddon only resorts to cap transfers after it has been in multiple engagements or has ran out of cap boosters due to an engagement that lasted too long.
I'm not trying to down you, It is only that you are simply wrong and are arguing for the sake of argument. |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:08:00 -
[1728] - Quote
de4deye wrote:[So you have flown abaddon in large fleets that are hellcat fitted how many times? I'm sorry that you have no idea what you are talking about and are under the illusion of intelligence, but would you please let people who actually can fly these ships and have flown them and against them many times talk about them. Rather than posting as an EFT warrior who has most likely 0 experience with the ships he is talking about. Just please take your inner thoughts and express them to your brain alone, then rethink again before you repost - otherwise, silence your heretic tongue. Dude, you are terrible. Your reply was the equivalent of "NO U". Try using facts next time. It makes you look like less of a ****. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:16:00 -
[1729] - Quote
de4deye wrote:[I'm not trying to down you, It is only that you are simply wrong and are arguing for the sake of argument. Pot, meet kettle.
I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:21:00 -
[1730] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:de4deye wrote:[So you have flown abaddon in large fleets that are hellcat fitted how many times? I'm sorry that you have no idea what you are talking about and are under the illusion of intelligence, but would you please let people who actually can fly these ships and have flown them and against them many times talk about them. Rather than posting as an EFT warrior who has most likely 0 experience with the ships he is talking about. Just please take your inner thoughts and express them to your brain alone, then rethink again before you repost - otherwise, silence your heretic tongue. Dude, you are terrible. Your reply was the equivalent of "NO U". Try using facts next time. It makes you look like less of a ****. EDIT: Oh, you're a drake blob pilot. Now I get why you hate the abaddon so much. But please, continue to "educate" us. from your killboard, I see you are an amarr pilot. However you only fly legions 9/10 times it seem and rarely ever touched an abaddon and it has only been in small skirmishes. I fly all ships that the fleet calls for, be it Drakes, Abaddons, Guardians, Scimitars, Basilisks, Falcon, Carrier, or Dread.
Before you continue, I'd like you to know that I do not want Amarr to be nerfed at all, they are fine and nerfing anything is a bad idea. I am only saying that Blasters need a generous optimal and falloff buffing. I lvoe the abaddon, I fly it alot. Recently fleets have been calling for Alpha fleets and Heavy Skirmish sheild fleets more often than Abaddon and guardian fleets. I have no bias toward any race, I just understand that Blasters are gimpy compared to everything else.
|
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:25:00 -
[1731] - Quote
de4deye wrote:I am only saying that Blasters need a generous optimal and falloff buffing. My concern with buffing blaster range so that it can hit at mega pulse range is the already superior damage and tracking of blasters. If blasters get what would likely be a 2x range buff, would tracking and damage be nerfed?
I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:42:00 -
[1732] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:de4deye wrote:I am only saying that Blasters need a generous optimal and falloff buffing. My concern with buffing blaster range so that it can hit at mega pulse range is the already superior damage and tracking of blasters. If blasters get what would likely be a 2x range buff, would tracking and damage be nerfed?
Really I wouldn't mind a damage reduction since that would be fair. Tracking is fine as it is now. |
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 19:48:00 -
[1733] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:Kahz Niverrah wrote:de4deye wrote:I am only saying that Blasters need a generous optimal and falloff buffing. My concern with buffing blaster range so that it can hit at mega pulse range is the already superior damage and tracking of blasters. If blasters get what would likely be a 2x range buff, would tracking and damage be nerfed? Really I wouldn't mind a damage reduction since that would be fair. Tracking is fine as it is now.
Yeah, Damage isn't the problem for blasters - Getting in range to do your damage is so tricky that it isn't worth it. Hence why no one flys Gallente anymore. Considering that just about every other race is "Sit back and shoot, Orbit at range", Gallente must approach with no transversal and take all kinds of hellfire. As I said, I simply will not fly any Gallente ship except for an Ishtar, it is just not worth the effort.
Refer to the top 20 ships used this month: (Eve-Kill Stats are generated from 2012-01-1 to 2012-01-18)
1 Drake 109549 2 Maelstrom 79771 3 Tengu 76807 4 Hurricane 64196 5 Abaddon 45218 6 Armageddon 39188 7 Tornado 27983 8 Scimitar 22620 9 Tempest 22342 10 Zealot 18700 11 Sabre 17940 12 Huginn 14834 13 Cynabal 13142 14 Loki 12404 15 Hound 12089 16 Manticore 11780 17 Vagabond 11334 18 Rapier 10987 19 Lachesis 10954 Oh look, A Gallente ship! It doesn't use blasters tho... 20 Rifter 10500
TL;DR: Caldari is good for a Drake and a Tengu Amarr is good For Abaddons, Geddons, and Zealots(Ahax) Minmatar is good for everything Gallente is good for nothing
If you say that blasters do not need a buff, I say "Drugs are bad, Mmkay?". |
Xtover
Macabre Votum Against ALL Authorities
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 20:48:00 -
[1734] - Quote
There's the vindi, but only if you don't mind risking a 1.5bil ship...
(then again it is half minmatar...) |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 21:12:00 -
[1735] - Quote
Xtover wrote:There's the vindi, but only if you don't mind risking a 1.5bil ship...
(then again it is half minmatar...)
poor vindi the price has been speculated so high
and hybrids still suck |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 22:12:00 -
[1736] - Quote
Hey, we now have the Gal Frigs :) By the way: Didn't a lot people say long time ago that small Blasters are fine and that generall changes to all Blasters and Ammo might be a bit too much for them? I just thought about it and it is a bit funny how the community predicts situations and CPP doesn't listen. Now what might happen: In a few weeks they realize that medium hybrids needs some more love but instead of changing medium weapons they just boost Null and Void in generall and improve small Blasters once more.
I still wonder why changes are made to the Ammo in generall instead of looking at the weapons directly and balancing small, medium and large independently. Wouldn't this make more sense? Just asking... |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
73
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 22:20:00 -
[1737] - Quote
People who think the "Top 20" list is meaningful make me happy. If it were not for the hordes of people who fail to take an applied statistics course during thier lifetimes, I would not have a job irl.
ty :hugs: |
de4deye
Mortis Angelus Northern Coalition.
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 23:09:00 -
[1738] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:People who think the "Top 20" list is meaningful make me happy. If it were not for the hordes of people who fail to take an applied statistics course during thier lifetimes, I would not have a job irl.
ty :hugs:
All this shows is that they are not in demand for fleet at all - Not that they are not used in general. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:33:00 -
[1739] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:de4deye wrote:I am only saying that Blasters need a generous optimal and falloff buffing. My concern with buffing blaster range so that it can hit at mega pulse range is the already superior damage and tracking of blasters. If blasters get what would likely be a 2x range buff, would tracking and damage be nerfed?
People stop your paranoia plz, no one serious wants to have pulse range or AC's range and more dmg, we (the serious ones if you want it) ask enough range and dmg at med fight range witch is 30/35km max, just enough to fear the crap out of meta gamers with faction points witch only pleasure is like self sex, pointing you at long range (faction point 30km) where you can do nothing at all and slowly kill you.
So if you're one of those or an 8 years old little boy/girls I understand this will hurt your tralala. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:45:00 -
[1740] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:People who think the "Top 20" list is meaningful make me happy. If it were not for the hordes of people who fail to take an applied statistics course during thier lifetimes, I would not have a job irl.
ty :hugs:
Statistics and people masturbating their brains with are useless to humanity, they're the first ones to hide underground when thing go wrong, they can barely survive if their car engine is broken in the middle of no where ...
Now, people using those with good intentions and giving humanity tools to become better, those actually have some nobel prices. Everything else is just cave people trying to dominate their neighbor with words a new V12 and tons of crap their future grave doesn't care at all...neither I.
If only painful/slow deadly hills were intelligent and could choose their target...I'd like to be the one that liquefies their victim from the inside in a horrible pain
Halala... |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 11:45:00 -
[1741] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:People who think the "Top 20" list is meaningful make me happy. If it were not for the hordes of people who fail to take an applied statistics course during thier lifetimes, I would not have a job irl.
ty :hugs:
well i had a course on applied statistics and i must say most of ur rl job is as usefull as wet toilet paper
but on the top 20 list u have a 100% coverage and most of eve players aint dumb ( i rather dont say all cuz there is always a black sheep hiding somwhere )
they choose to use something in certain situations becouse it has an advantage over other ships and for an expirienced eve player the top 20 list can tell everything where certain ships are being used and why they replaced a ship that had exactly the same task
so ur comment is nothing more then an outburst of half backed knowladge |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 13:00:00 -
[1742] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:People stop your paranoia plz, no one serious wants to have pulse range or AC's range and more dmg, we (the serious ones if you want it) ask enough range and dmg at med fight range witch is 30/35km max, just enough to fear the crap out of meta gamers with faction points witch only pleasure is like self sex, pointing you at long range (faction point 30km) where you can do nothing at all and slowly kill you. WIth Null's current 1.25 modifier, a Neutron Mega already does nearly identical dps to a Scorch Abaddon in the 30-35km range. WIth the 1.4 modifier, it will do much more damage. So it sounds like you've gotten your wish? I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 14:40:00 -
[1743] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:People who think the "Top 20" list is meaningful make me happy. If it were not for the hordes of people who fail to take an applied statistics course during thier lifetimes, I would not have a job irl.
ty :hugs: Statistics and people masturbating their brains with are useless to humanity, they're the first ones to hide underground when thing go wrong, they can barely survive if their car engine is broken in the middle of no where ... Now, people using those with good intentions and giving humanity tools to become better, those actually have some nobel prices. Everything else is just cave people trying to dominate their neighbor with words a new V12 and tons of crap their future grave doesn't care at all...neither I. If only painful/slow deadly hills were intelligent and could choose their target...I'd like to be the one that liquefies their victim from the inside in a horrible pain Halala...
until a certain point its quit funny how people dream up the doomsday and how they become the most important and resourcful survivors and heros of the day, recue a woman and seed the earth with human lifestock again
but it looses the funny factor when those people not only feel the urge to share it with the whole world but actually do it |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 16:18:00 -
[1744] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:People stop your paranoia plz, no one serious wants to have pulse range or AC's range and more dmg, we (the serious ones if you want it) ask enough range and dmg at med fight range witch is 30/35km max, just enough to fear the crap out of meta gamers with faction points witch only pleasure is like self sex, pointing you at long range (faction point 30km) where you can do nothing at all and slowly kill you. WIth Null's current 1.25 modifier, a Neutron Mega already does nearly identical dps to a Scorch Abaddon in the 30-35km range. WIth the 1.4 modifier, it will do much more damage. So it sounds like you've gotten your wish?
the only ships it makes a difference on are ones with range bonus for the ships... problem is thats just one for gal and a few for caldari... give the ships better bonus and you will see me stop bitching... |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 22:18:00 -
[1745] - Quote
Abbadon gets a range(optimal + falloff) of 70+ km with Mega Pulse Laser II using Scorch and 2x Tracking Computer (loaded with Optimal Range script)
A megathron manages to reach 47km range(optimal + falloff) with the same fit using NULL L after applying 1.4 multipliers
A rokh manages to reach 57km range(optimal + falloff) with the same fit using NULL L after applying 1.4 multipliers
There is no comparison here.
Buffing NULL is a fail solution to bring Blasters into large fleet fights. We always needed a buff to the base gun range Optimal and Falloff for large and medium blaster turret. Instead we got tracking bonus/a paltry damage bonus/ammo volume reduction/fitting requirement reduction which does nothing to address the main problem that is RANGE. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 23:34:00 -
[1746] - Quote
http://www.fanpop.com/spots/the-simpsons/images/7414384/title/old-man-yells-cloud-photo
10% more dps compared to 200% - 300% less range is a fail at balancing blasters
and yes rails have also slightly more dps on paper but the platforms that carry it and the dealt damage type make it dissapear as most ships have a high kin-thermal resistance and if u fit them for a specific range they deal less dps then there counterparts in the same range group
but yeah on paper they are perfectly fine as long as u do not consider everything else that surrounds it |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 11:23:00 -
[1747] - Quote
You know, after all these pages the I believe the biggest problem with rails and blasters stems from CCP's initial decision to give the same weapon systems to 2 different races with different bonus regimes. If you increase range to make gal work, for example, then the Cal ships become too powerful; Change the tracking and the reverse happens with Gal becoming too powerful. Doesn't matter what you change, one side or the other will be too strong or too weak accordingly. I think that CCP would have to fundamentally break this link between the weapons and the 2 races bonus structure or make both the same to allow balancing to be truly effective, but I honestly can't see that happen. I'm becoming resigned to treating rails as useless and blasters as niche. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 11:29:00 -
[1748] - Quote
and i dont even wont to talk about caldari hybrid platforms cuz the whole concept of them is broken and everyone knows what i mean with that |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 11:35:00 -
[1749] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:You know, after all these pages the I believe the biggest problem with rails and blasters stems from CCP's initial decision to give the same weapon systems to 2 different races with different bonus regimes. If you increase range to make gal work, for example, then the Cal ships become too powerful; Change the tracking and the reverse happens with Gal becoming too powerful. Doesn't matter what you change, one side or the other will be too strong or too weak accordingly. I think that CCP would have to fundamentally break this link between the weapons and the 2 races bonus structure or make both the same to allow balancing to be truly effective, but I honestly can't see that happen. I'm becoming resigned to treating rails as useless and blasters as niche.
or ccp could refink how they give bonuses to ships what i see now is always 5% or 10% steps how about giving bonuses like 6,3827% or 13,11% something like that if its needed to give a fair fighting chance for every race |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 12:31:00 -
[1750] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:People stop your paranoia plz, no one serious wants to have pulse range or AC's range and more dmg, we (the serious ones if you want it) ask enough range and dmg at med fight range witch is 30/35km max, just enough to fear the crap out of meta gamers with faction points witch only pleasure is like self sex, pointing you at long range (faction point 30km) where you can do nothing at all and slowly kill you. WIth Null's current 1.25 modifier, a Neutron Mega already does nearly identical dps to a Scorch Abaddon in the 30-35km range. WIth the 1.4 modifier, it will do much more damage. So it sounds like you've gotten your wish?
Well unless you have trained your skills at lvl 7 mines with lvl5 and 0 TE is barely 26km.
From this point all the rest of your post is...Crap.
Try again.
|
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 12:44:00 -
[1751] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Well unless you have trained your skills at lvl 7 mines with lvl5 and 0 TE is barely 26km. You can't compare blasters without any TE to Hellcat Abaddons that use 2 TCs. With 2 TCs, Neutron Megas loaded with null have a range of 15+26. At 30km, that means they're putting down 806 dps with 2 mag stabs. That's way more DPS then a Hellcat at that range, with superior tracking and less cap issues, and that's with Tranquility's current 1.25 null range mod. With the 1.4 range mod, it will be much more. Blaster cannons in the 30km range will be deadly with the 1.4 range mod. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 13:58:00 -
[1752] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Well unless you have trained your skills at lvl 7 mines with lvl5 and 0 TE is barely 26km. You can't compare blasters without any TE to Hellcat Abaddons that use 2 TCs. With 2 TCs, Neutron Megas loaded with null have a range of 15+26. At 30km, that means they're putting down 806 dps with 2 mag stabs. That's way more DPS then a Hellcat at that range, with superior tracking and less cap issues, and that's with Tranquility's current 1.25 null range mod. With the 1.4 range mod, it will be much more. Blaster cannons in the 30km range will be deadly with the 1.4 range mod.
no they wont |
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 14:25:00 -
[1753] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:no they wont I liked the part where you used facts to support your argument. Better you don't, actually, or else someone may call you an EFT warrior. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 15:25:00 -
[1754] - Quote
im one of those weirdoes who dont really care what others might think of me
and its kinda like hitting a wall couse everything been already said so u just have to reapeat it time after time after time
until it sounds as normal as a cup coffe in the morning |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 16:12:00 -
[1755] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:tEcHnOkRaT wrote:no they wont I liked the part where you used facts to support your argument. Better you don't, actually, or else someone may call you an EFT warrior.
I am a noob but I will try to support tEcHnOkRaT argument with my silly reasons.
Hybrid Blaster Platform: 1) Ideal Situation: Enemy ship comes within 30km of range and the large neutrons can wtfbbq the target(s) given that they are all tackled etc. This is typically true where you are in a blaster boat and you are fighting NPCs that do close range combat. 2) Real Situation: Enemy ships see a blaster boat fleet. They are telling each other "Hey today is our lucky day ! Just maintain 50km range from those ships and we are fine. If the blaster boat switch on their MWD so do you." In this scenario the blaster boat pilot tries to pull out but may not be successfull because they have commited themselves and have got tackled (for example: bubbled).
Now in place of the unfortunate blaster boat put a fleet of amaar battleships with mega pulses. They have great tank/ No problem with short range/ and no problem with long range. Because of their range capabilities they do not need to move fast and can dedicate more mods to create a heavy tank along with superb DPS. Insta ammo switch and also get cap bonuses.
If I were to pick a winning side it would be lasors. What do you think? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 18:29:00 -
[1756] - Quote
im mostly concernd about battleships cuz they need most fixing cruiser hulls are less disatdvantaged but still behind other races
and a gleam abadon is superior to a null megathron in any way possible even with the 1,4 null buff and no one is even mentioning the hyperion cuz the repair bonus is meh worst bonus u can give to a ship people are even trying in some situations rather to shield tank a hyperion even with the armor repair bonus
and to make the dominix usefull they would need to increase the drone damage modificator from 10% to something like 13% - 15% per level and give sentrys the abblity to follow users ship
so yeah galente and caldari have worst battleships in game
what i desire is a complete review of all ships and all races but it wont happen cuz as i see the working morale with a slight change here and a slight change there afterwords buffing somehting that is already almost OP wont bring anything usefull in the near future |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 20:05:00 -
[1757] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote: what i desire is a complete review of all ships and all races but it wont happen cuz as i see the working morale with a slight change here and a slight change there afterwords buffing somehting that is already almost OP wont bring anything usefull in the near future
this is what ccp should do
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 20:52:00 -
[1758] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:[quote=Tanya Powers]... Blaster cannons in the 30km range will be deadly with the 1.4 range mod.
Thats the reason why I say they need to fix small, medium and large seperately. If they only do overall changes to tracking or ammo there will always be the problem that for example: 1. Increase range until medium hybrids are fine and small hybrids will be too strong. 2. Decrease range until small are fine but then mediums will be crap again and a Cane will Kite every Gal Cruiser easily without any chance for the Gal to hit the Cane... 3. Now if large have too much range lets decrease Ammo range again and crap mediums even more?
Why not look at small, fix them, then look at medium, fix them and then take a look at large?
What CPP does seems like put a randomly choosen number and change it. First tracking, then cap usage, then change of ammo size, then Null and Void and whats next? Ammo storage or Falloff? Doesn't matter becouse if you fix one you will screw the other...
Fix them seperately together with the hulls. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 21:02:00 -
[1759] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Kahz Niverrah wrote:[quote=Tanya Powers]... Blaster cannons in the 30km range will be deadly with the 1.4 range mod. Thats the reason why I say they need to fix small, medium and large seperately. If they only do overall changes to tracking or ammo there will always be the problem that for example: 1. Increase range until medium hybrids are fine and small hybrids will be too strong. 2. Decrease range until small are fine but then mediums will be crap again and a Cane will Kite every Gal Cruiser easily without any chance for the Gal to hit the Cane... 3. Now if large have too much range lets decrease Ammo range again and crap mediums even more? Why not look at small, fix them, then look at medium, fix them and then take a look at large? What CPP does seems like put a randomly choosen number and change it. First tracking, then cap usage, then change of ammo size, then Null and Void and whats next? Ammo storage or Falloff? Doesn't matter becouse if you fix one you will screw the other... Fix them seperately together with the hulls.
compared to amar and minmatar the 1,4 null buf is like a drop on a hot stone it changes nothing min/amar have more damage and range with there short range guns then u do with null 1,40 (as stated before it changes nothing for the battleships/cruisers)
unless u manage to go into void range there is no point talking about the null buff and thats the whole reson we are here cuz woid is out of range and nothing has been done to improve it 10m/s speed increase is in my opinion nothing |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 22:32:00 -
[1760] - Quote
Good things:
- This thread is only 2-3 months old and already we are seeing changes made to hybrids to make them more viable. Frankly, this kind of pace is reassuring and I'm very glad this thread even exists. Personally, Null changes are a leap forward for hybrids as a whole, and this single change SHOULD be enough to prevent a Gallente ship from being beat up like a senior citizen in a wheelchair. Honestly, that's great.
BAD THINGS:
- There has been no recent communication from CCP in this thread. The aforementioned Null changes have made it to SiSi, and while these changes look promising, there was no dev-to-player discussion about it at all. In fact, there has been NO discussion between devs and players about the proposed evolution of hybrid buffs since mid-December. The "NeXGate" Scandal and its subsequent and apologetic letter from CCP CEO clearly mentioned lack of communication was the core issue which caused a fissure to expand between the playerbase and CCP. I don't understand how something which happened so recently seems to have already been forgotten.
- The aforementioned Null changes appear to be forward progress for hybrids in medium and large turret combat, but I am worried this blanket change to hybrid ammo will put Gallente frigates in the front-runnings for skirmishing. Frankly, Minmatar have had the crown at so many levels for so long, I don't really care. What I DO care about is the minimal effort in foresight it takes to see this, and its underlying detriment of what many people have called power creep. Power creep is how hybrids got into this mess in the first place, and I don't want to hear about hybrid nerfs 2-3 years from now. Still, seems like this is all being ignored; again, no discussion about this occuring between players and CCP.
[*] Despite all of the changes that have, will, or may, occur to hybrids, there still has been a fundamental misunderstanding by CCP in addressing the overall hybrid problem; a proverbial dropping-of-the-ball. Even if hybrids were some mythical godlike weapon, combining all of the benefits of lasers and projectiles, there is still no reason to use hybrids because hybrid ships are BAD. Amarr ships will always cater to fleet combat due to dominant armor effective hit points. Minmatar ships will always cater to skirmishing due to speed. Even more so, Amarr ships CAN perform in skirmish due to instant-crystal-swap which compliments the dynamic changes in range during a dogfight, and Minmatar ships CAN perform in fleet combat because artillery provides alpha. Caldari don't quite fit in the picture, but they do get ECM, drakes, and tengus, each of which is a solid, niche performer in its own right. Gallente ships do not participate in this rock-paper-scissors contest at any level. You MUST give Gallente ships something which appeals to pilot before the pilot even flies into combat. Give them insane agility. Give them more speed. Give them stronger scan res or signal strength, but for the love of god GIVE THEM SOMETHING! To ignore this would be no different than throwing all hybrid buff efforts in the garbage because no one wants to fly a ship which isn't the king of SOME hill.
|
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 22:57:00 -
[1761] - Quote
hear hear the players can see why and how but ccp dosnt wont to acknowlage |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 23:56:00 -
[1762] - Quote
Magosian wrote:BAD THINGS:
There has been no recent communication from CCP in this thread. The aforementioned Null changes have made it to SiSi, and while these changes look promising, there was no dev-to-player discussion about it at all. In fact, there has been NO discussion between devs and players about the proposed evolution of hybrid buffs since mid-December. The "NeXGate" Scandal and its subsequent and apologetic letter from CCP CEO clearly mentioned lack of communication was the core issue which caused a fissure to expand between the playerbase and CCP. I don't understand how something which happened so recently seems to have already been forgotten...[/b][/u][/list]
The GOOD thing is: We now know definitely that mentioned letter just was marketing blablah! |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 03:29:00 -
[1763] - Quote
hmm how about changing the way heat works on hybrids? instead of firing one charge per volley you shoot two? (since hybrids use plasma you just shove in more in the case for blasters and stack two shots for rails) so pretty much when heat is on you are doubling your dps and alpha... i think this could be the "je ne sais quoi" that would make hybrids "winsauce".... |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 09:44:00 -
[1764] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Magosian wrote:BAD THINGS:
There has been no recent communication from CCP in this thread. The aforementioned Null changes have made it to SiSi, and while these changes look promising, there was no dev-to-player discussion about it at all. In fact, there has been NO discussion between devs and players about the proposed evolution of hybrid buffs since mid-December. The "NeXGate" Scandal and its subsequent and apologetic letter from CCP CEO clearly mentioned lack of communication was the core issue which caused a fissure to expand between the playerbase and CCP. I don't understand how something which happened so recently seems to have already been forgotten...[/b][/u][/list] The GOOD thing is: We now know definitely that mentioned letter just was marketing blablah!
Not entirely true. Take CCP Ytterbium for example - he manages to take the time to respond in those threads where he has oversight of the task in hand. This seems to be a problem with CCP Tallest - he is ridiculously bad at communicating. At the very least, if he can't bear to talk with us he should have someone else do it for him. His behaviour in this regard is appalling.
|
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 10:50:00 -
[1765] - Quote
There's 90 page of "this works" and then followed by "that doesn't work". There's a history of autocannons being overpowered by paying attention to "howmost people think they should be". Then we have winmatar online. Ergo, no responses means that the person in question took a step out (he did went on a vacation) and found a threadnought filled with pointless argumentation about people who think they know but might nor really know.
And I fly blasters. All i want is more speed to catch a cynabal. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 10:55:00 -
[1766] - Quote
Nikuno wrote: Not entirely true. Take CCP Ytterbium for example - he manages to take the time to respond in those threads where he has oversight of the task in hand. This seems to be a problem with CCP Tallest - he is ridiculously bad at communicating. At the very least, if he can't bear to talk with us he should have someone else do it for him. His behaviour in this regard is appalling.
Not even close to how appalling are clueless tards who, while even unable to post with their mains (ashamed of themselves, apparently), dare to make arrogant demands which are bound to make hybrids no less than OP.
CCP's doing just fine in terms of sheer hybrid stats. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 11:25:00 -
[1767] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Nikuno wrote: Not entirely true. Take CCP Ytterbium for example - he manages to take the time to respond in those threads where he has oversight of the task in hand. This seems to be a problem with CCP Tallest - he is ridiculously bad at communicating. At the very least, if he can't bear to talk with us he should have someone else do it for him. His behaviour in this regard is appalling.
Not even close to how appalling are clueless tards who, while even unable to post with their mains (ashamed of themselves, apparently), dare to make arrogant demands which are bound to make hybrids no less than OP. CCP's doing just fine in terms of sheer hybrid stats.
this speciment seems sometimes to be funny |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 13:15:00 -
[1768] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Nikuno wrote: Not entirely true. Take CCP Ytterbium for example - he manages to take the time to respond in those threads where he has oversight of the task in hand. This seems to be a problem with CCP Tallest - he is ridiculously bad at communicating. At the very least, if he can't bear to talk with us he should have someone else do it for him. His behaviour in this regard is appalling.
Not even close to how appalling are clueless tards who, while even unable to post with their mains (ashamed of themselves, apparently), dare to make arrogant demands which are bound to make hybrids no less than OP. CCP's doing just fine in terms of sheer hybrid stats.
We have changes on Sisi without any comment. I do not care about hybrids anymore but lets take the marketing blablah letter of the CEO. Is it too much to just make ONE f... post like: "We have changed on Sisi blabla from 1.25 to blabla 1.4 blabla to see how it comes out blabla..." Would have taken them (Tallest or who ever) about 5 minutes of time.
Instead nowbody knows how this story will go on. NOBODY! Is this thread worth our time? Are hybrids worth our time? Is this company worth our time? Is this game worth our time? This is by far the worst threating of customers / community that I have ever seen. And then there is the CEO letter.
This leads me to the conclusion: The CEO letter is not only MARKETING BLABLAH, it is also a prove that the CEO thinks his clients are stupid idiots who believe everything and for whom stupid marketing blablah in form of a letter is enough to make them happy again. He propably believes that this letter is enough for the moment and in a few months the community will forgot everything so they can start from beginning.
So yes, I do not care about hybrids anymore or the overall balancing becouse I believe they will never do it. All they can do is MARKETING BLABLAH, create some stupid videos like "I was there", give us Captains quarters nobody really needs and introduce a new shop where you can buy useless crap for Aurums becouse they want to make more money with selling plex. Instead they should improve the game experience and balance their ******* broken crap to attrackt more players and keep them longer to the game. But instead of intelligent decisions we only see MARKETING BLABLAH and crap. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 00:35:00 -
[1769] - Quote
I just found this in passing:
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3381
The very first bullet addresses the potential power creep of Null ammo with respect to turret size. They don't mention any details of the variation, so it's still up in the air, but at least it shows the devs are aware of possible power creep from a blanket change.
I stand by my original statement: those kinds of changes should have been mentioned here, in a dev sanctioned/created thread, along with the DETAILS of such changes. Tuesday is right around the corner and I simply don't have the time to test this stuff on SiSi :(
At any rate, I'm looking forward to Null ammo now. Well done, CCP. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 08:10:00 -
[1770] - Quote
With the current state of large/medium blaster and large/medium rails there is proof enough that the so called hybrid rebalance is a big fail.
Only 3 alliances have used rail fit ROKH with more fail than success. Which proves that even the seasoned(insert other adjectives as elite, veteren, etc) players have found it uncompetitive to either abbadon/tengu/mael/drake/cane/zealot.
I have seen some hybrid platform HACs been used (from dotlan) and fail easily against a kiting BC fleet. This was a for gone conclusion anyway.
The null buff do not affect much but in a range of 1-4 kms max. Being good at PVP will not make the guns perform any better. This I am only stating facts about fleet battles and PVE not Skirmish.
If being worse makes you happy then what can I say. |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 11:24:00 -
[1771] - Quote
if after the null buff is nothing to come then u can only petition for galente / caldari sp reimburstment |
Af'ilia
The Directorate
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 11:43:00 -
[1772] - Quote
I can hyrbrid fit an omen and get more dps out of it than pulse.
What. The. ****. I think you re-balanced a little too much... |
Af'ilia
The Directorate
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 11:45:00 -
[1773] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:With the current state of large/medium blaster and large/medium rails there is proof enough that the so called hybrid rebalance is a big fail.
Only 3 alliances have used rail fit ROKH with more fail than success. Which proves that even the seasoned(insert other adjectives as elite, veteren, etc) players have found it uncompetitive to either abbadon/tengu/mael/drake/cane/zealot.
I have seen some hybrid platform HACs been used (from dotlan) and fail easily against a kiting BC fleet. This was a for gone conclusion anyway.
The null buff do not affect much but in a range of 1-4 kms max. Being good at PVP will not make the guns perform any better. This I am only stating facts about fleet battles and PVE not Skirmish.
If being worse makes you happy then what can I say.
Not all pvp involves 0.0 warfare tactics of fielding 500 bs, 400 hacs, and 200 randoms on a field at once.
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 11:53:00 -
[1774] - Quote
Af'ilia wrote:Dare Devel wrote:With the current state of large/medium blaster and large/medium rails there is proof enough that the so called hybrid rebalance is a big fail.
Only 3 alliances have used rail fit ROKH with more fail than success. Which proves that even the seasoned(insert other adjectives as elite, veteren, etc) players have found it uncompetitive to either abbadon/tengu/mael/drake/cane/zealot.
I have seen some hybrid platform HACs been used (from dotlan) and fail easily against a kiting BC fleet. This was a for gone conclusion anyway.
The null buff do not affect much but in a range of 1-4 kms max. Being good at PVP will not make the guns perform any better. This I am only stating facts about fleet battles and PVE not Skirmish.
If being worse makes you happy then what can I say. Not all pvp involves 0.0 warfare tactics of fielding 500 bs, 400 hacs, and 200 randoms on a field at once.
i never heard of such a tactic if u have 500 BS u have also a logistics squad and some heavy interdictors if u go hac u also have some logistics interceptors and interdictors
but u will never see something wath u just described especially 200 randoms there are no randoms in a fleet everything is tought trugh and if u dont fallow prosedure u will just get kiked out of the ally |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 12:04:00 -
[1775] - Quote
Af'ilia wrote:I can hyrbrid fit an omen and get more dps out of it than pulse.
What. The. ****. I think you re-balanced a little too much...
if u think this would be so great then just go fit one get some kills in ur OP Omen of doom fitted with void blasters
after that if u live to tell us storys how great it was someone might even listen insted loughing after reading the 6 first words
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 13:30:00 -
[1776] - Quote
Af'ilia wrote:I can hyrbrid fit an omen and get more dps out of it than pulse.
What. The. ****. I think you re-balanced a little too much...
Troll spotted.
Do you even realize Pulse Myrmidon or Auto Canons Myrmidon is preferred to Hybrids Myrmidon and both with shield buffer dish way far more dps than any Hybrids/armor tank set up? -at least until this last buff that might well for once change this stupid situation.
You should train your laser skills after lvl1 or just stop trolling?
Side note about small hybrids:
Small hybrids were already not bad, not the kings of the hill but quite good, ships needed buffs for sure but small hybrids were fine. Now we can have frigates with weapons shooting as far as battleships short range weapons (30km+/- with gatlings but even more with 125mm), this is ridiculous. No small weapon short range at least should be capable of hit something beyond scram range (8.5 to 13km), and long range past 15/17km.
Then I just look at my Daredevil with light Neutrons and read again his bonus "200% hybrids damage" ...
Really CCP, you don't listen (read) a crap of what we just say (write]. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 15:48:00 -
[1777] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Af'ilia wrote:I can hyrbrid fit an omen and get more dps out of it than pulse.
What. The. ****. I think you re-balanced a little too much... Troll spotted. Do you even realize Pulse Myrmidon or Auto Canons Myrmidon is preferred to Hybrids Myrmidon and both with shield buffer dish way far more dps than any Hybrids/armor tank set up? -at least until this last buff that might well for once change this stupid situation. You should train your laser skills after lvl1 or just stop trolling? Side note about small hybrids: Small hybrids were already not bad, not the kings of the hill but quite good, ships needed buffs for sure but small hybrids were fine. Now we can have frigates with weapons shooting as far as battleships short range weapons (30km+/- with gatlings but even more with 125mm), this is ridiculous. No small weapon short range at least should be capable of hit something beyond scram range (8.5 to 13km), and long range past 15/17km. Then I just look at my Daredevil with light Neutrons and read again his bonus "200% hybrids damage" ... Really CCP, you don't listen (read) a crap of what we just say (write].
The problem with the small blasters was mentioned in the very beginning of this thread BEFORE all this changes (and btw is a good proof that we do not want an OP blaster ship, it is CCP who fails all the time). Also it was mentioned that those changes will not balance anything at medium and large blasters. May I remind you that CCP CEO wanted to listen more to.... .... ah forgett it... |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 19:29:00 -
[1778] - Quote
http://killboard.the-godfathers.com/index.php/kill_detail/180828/
Nice to see someone decided to try a thorax fleet. We engaged at zero on a gate, we were all arty/beam fit. Sad thing isn't the outcome, which was a bit lopsided, but that only half of these guys even considered it worth fitting hybrids to their ships. The rest felt that projectiles would obviously be better - and if that doesn't say something about the state of hybrids then nothing does |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 20:05:00 -
[1779] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:http://killboard.the-godfathers.com/index.php/kill_detail/180828/ Nice to see someone decided to try a thorax fleet. We engaged at zero on a gate, we were all arty/beam fit. Sad thing isn't the outcome, which was a bit lopsided, but that only half of these guys even considered it worth fitting hybrids to their ships. The rest felt that projectiles would obviously be better - and if that doesn't say something about the state of hybrids then nothing does
What I find even more convincing is the sheer amount of tornados on the left side....
Yea, I need about half a second to figure out why.... |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 20:06:00 -
[1780] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:http://killboard.the-godfathers.com/index.php/kill_detail/180828/ Nice to see someone decided to try a thorax fleet. We engaged at zero on a gate, we were all arty/beam fit. Sad thing isn't the outcome, which was a bit lopsided, but that only half of these guys even considered it worth fitting hybrids to their ships. The rest felt that projectiles would obviously be better - and if that doesn't say something about the state of hybrids then nothing does
everyone knows it exept some newbies who think void blasters with there imense dps are good for anything just when u try using them the actual dps goes down to zero
and ccp's solution for it was to increase the null range by 15% to me it looks like a bad joke, like they would say put ur galenete up ur ...........
as there is no communication, no coments on what are there further plans towards galenete rebalancing, nothing things seem to be "normal" again, just like before the ccp ceo letter
|
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 20:11:00 -
[1781] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Nikuno wrote:http://killboard.the-godfathers.com/index.php/kill_detail/180828/ Nice to see someone decided to try a thorax fleet. We engaged at zero on a gate, we were all arty/beam fit. Sad thing isn't the outcome, which was a bit lopsided, but that only half of these guys even considered it worth fitting hybrids to their ships. The rest felt that projectiles would obviously be better - and if that doesn't say something about the state of hybrids then nothing does What I find even more convincing is the sheer amount of tornados on the left side.... Yea, I need about half a second to figure out why....
so the drakes get nerfed soon and u will get a all out minmatar diversity in low and null sec roams
i would say the ccp devs are doing a great job |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 20:35:00 -
[1782] - Quote
thorax , thorax thorax....
mcum.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&adjacent&kll_id=12209821 |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 21:55:00 -
[1783] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:thorax , thorax thorax....
mcum.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&adjacent&kll_id=12209821
lol, so you met some of these delusional fools too? I have no idea why anyone suddenly thought a thorax was a viable fleet ship - must have been reading and believing CCP's propaganda
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 22:09:00 -
[1784] - Quote
yeah "the hybrid rebalance hoax" |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 22:14:00 -
[1785] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:thorax , thorax thorax....
mcum.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&adjacent&kll_id=12209821 lol, so you met some of these delusional fools too? I have no idea why anyone suddenly thought a thorax was a viable fleet ship - must have been reading and believing CCP's propaganda
i would have liked to see those thorax with 250's with jav in with te's and shield extender with shield rigs... with a nano on for ***** with vespa ecm drones... might have been a diff fight...
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 22:24:00 -
[1786] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote: so the drakes get nerfed soon and u will get a all out minmatar diversity in low and null sec roams
i would say the ccp devs are doing a great job
The only thing I do not understand is why CCP transforms EVE into Winmatar Online. Anybody has any ideas? |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 00:58:00 -
[1787] - Quote
this is how the thorax should have been fit... just cuss you killed noobs in them does not mean they blow...
if anything increase base pg so i can bump up to 250's....
[Thorax, Thorax fit]
200mm Railgun II, Javelin M 200mm Railgun II, Javelin M 200mm Railgun II, Javelin M 200mm Railgun II, Javelin M 200mm Railgun II, Javelin M
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Large Shield Extender II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Vespa EC-600 x5 |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 10:23:00 -
[1788] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Nikuno wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:thorax , thorax thorax....
mcum.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&adjacent&kll_id=12209821 lol, so you met some of these delusional fools too? I have no idea why anyone suddenly thought a thorax was a viable fleet ship - must have been reading and believing CCP's propaganda i would have liked to see those thorax with 250's with jav in with te's and shield extender with shield rigs... with a nano on for ***** with vespa ecm drones... might have been a diff fight...
But this is where you miss the point - the vast majority of the players in Eve know that hybrids don't work and so they look for every other possibility and that inevitably brings them back to how ridiculously good projectiles are. So we get projrctiles on Myrmidons, projectiles on Feroxes, projectiles on Abaddons, projectiles in every damned place they shouldn't be !! Make projectiles use cap. One small change. Then things would change; but as it stands right now any weapon system that has every advantage possible in-game will always be chosen over it's rivals, and this is what you see in practice. Best weapons on the best ships, and everything else becomes redundant. If it wasn't for scorch, and scorch alone, even lasers wouldn't be used. |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
61
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 13:04:00 -
[1789] - Quote
Indeed the fact Hybrids use Cap, in the range of energy neutralizers and nosferatus, coupled with slowboating and armor tanking, even if active, are a great penalty that makes projectiles, with the no cap, greater falloff, selectable ammo type better. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 16:22:00 -
[1790] - Quote
anyone here who travels to iceland anytime soon? that person could stop by tallest's place and give him a little kick. or emphasize the importance of a more innovative approach than number crunching.
im still voting for:
testing(means more than one week on testserver and a dialog) an autocannon - blaster-stats swap, making blasters the falloff weapon and ac's the shotguns with ultra short range. this would of course imply, that further balancing regarding the ships may be necessary. plus a nice hybrid ammo revamp (maybe separate blaster and rail ammo)
or
rethink the credo of blaster (and rail while one is at it) platforms, and get rid of the arrow in the armored guy's knee. maybe rethink the old racial credos in general (since the environment has obviously changed?) involves obviously a lot of balancing of ships.
every thing shorter than something like the ideas above will not be solve the general problem. but so far nothing new i guess? |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 18:17:00 -
[1791] - Quote
dont treathen the ccp staff plz
they are still doing agreat job with eve infact eve is the only game on the market worth playing becouse of its complexity and mostly adult player base
they could just pay more attention to combat and race balance so it wouldnt matter what race are u flying and u could chooce them entirely on what shipsdesigns u like most
but its ok to let some steam blow out becouse things can always be better then they are now |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 18:39:00 -
[1792] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:dont treathen the ccp staff plz
i dont think some annoying *poke*age will do some serious harm. and i certainly didnt expect me to be threatening. after all we need tallest to be .. intact, so that he can do his job
tEcHnOkRaT wrote: they could just pay more attention to combat and race balance so it wouldnt matter what race are u flying and u could chooce them entirely on what shipsdesigns u like most
well there should remain some distinguishable features for each race. different flavors. important is, that teh flavorz even out in the end/ on the large scale. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 19:01:00 -
[1793] - Quote
it would be a great thing to refink the role of galente but also the caldari are getting a bit useless, they are no more the kings of pve only the shield tanking active as well as passive is saving there role |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 10:15:00 -
[1794] - Quote
CCP Talest did promise everybody a full, detailed Dev blog on the subject of blasters in Januar. Lucky for him we still got 1 week left for him to keep that promise.
I'm still a little dissapointed about the T1 ammunition going unnoticed, but hopefully it's just Hilmar forcing the team to focus more on ships than weapons after the first balance because it looks better for CCP.
Also Blasters are actually fine as they are, however autocannons could easily handle a tracking nerf just to give them some kind of disadvantage. AC's huge falloff while having the good tracking really puts a hurt on smaller ships - I nearly lost an interceptor at 25-30km range and full speed transversal the other day to 3 ships with 425mm autocannons...
Pinky |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 13:18:00 -
[1795] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:CCP Talest did promise everybody a full, detailed Dev blog on the subject of blasters in Januar. Lucky for him we still got 1 week left for him to keep that promise.
I'm still a little dissapointed about the T1 ammunition going unnoticed, but hopefully it's just Hilmar forcing the team to focus more on ships than weapons after the first balance because it looks better for CCP.
Also Blasters are actually fine as they are, however autocannons could easily handle a tracking nerf just to give them some kind of disadvantage. AC's huge falloff while having the good tracking really puts a hurt on smaller ships - I nearly lost an interceptor at 25-30km range and full speed transversal the other day to 3 ships with 425mm autocannons...
Pinky
Yeah true we are waiting for Talest Blog !
I found Talos is OK. Same with BIG BLASTERS on Vindicator Or Mega or Even Domi.
Rails are where they are = nowhere :). Only on NAGA maybe.
Alpha fleets are still the best coz numbers and this game is all about numbers. I think the best idea is sorry to say coz im also Winmatar pilot but best idea is to nerf Mattar. sad but true
BTW. this topic is record ? 54K and 1000+ posts ? LOL |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 13:42:00 -
[1796] - Quote
if the matar nerf would come in question then only there range should be nerfd maybe some of there alpha nothing more
so they are only good in low to middle range cuz now, even with autocanons they can still hit at 100km distance and arty can shoot further then rails
i think for the time being best solution would be to nerf traking enchancers fallof bonus to 15%-20% and to observe what happens in the next few months
if needed some more adjustments should be done after that
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 14:40:00 -
[1797] - Quote
Reducing the fall-off on tracking enhancers = Yes plz (That was even a reply when they specifically asked for feed back on tracking enhancers)
But we also have a long list of other things that CCP never replied to yet:
- T1 ammo being a mess with weird cap bonuses and too small range increments etc
- Hybrids should be able to better select thermal or kinetic damage on all ranges.
- Energy weapons should be able to do the same with EM and thermal.
- Railguns not being unique enough (especially medium size)
- Gallente ships needing faster acceleration to their max velocity
- Minmatar ships needing slower acceleration to their max velocity
- Autocannons still having too many advantages - Maybe reduce tracking and force expl damage to all ammo
- Reduce artilley alpha to make the gap between hybrids/energy and projectiles less prominent
This list is ofcourse not everything as we have tons of suggestions and feedback CCP haven't reacted on yet.
It's obviously not as urgent as it has been. Face it the first implementation were actually halfway to be a good solution just lacking the final touch of details. Many people including myself would love to have the subject done so we can go back and enjoy a balanced game where minmatar ships with projectiles have the advantage in fitting reqs, raw damage (ACs), Alpha strike (Arty), damage selection, no cap use, damage projection, Tracking (ACs) and ship bonuses supporting them additionally...
Pinky |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 14:49:00 -
[1798] - Quote
pinky maybe u should place this list on a new post
and ask for player support to sighn it
and btw the new assoult ships are awesome especialy enyo
i think its a good thing that the resource prise represents ships usability but it shouldnt be done only for one shipclass but for the entire shiptree |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 20:09:00 -
[1799] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Nikuno wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:thorax , thorax thorax....
mcum.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&adjacent&kll_id=12209821 lol, so you met some of these delusional fools too? I have no idea why anyone suddenly thought a thorax was a viable fleet ship - must have been reading and believing CCP's propaganda i would have liked to see those thorax with 250's with jav in with te's and shield extender with shield rigs... with a nano on for ***** with vespa ecm drones... might have been a diff fight...
It wouldn't, yes you could hit for far distances but with uber what 250 dps? ...
Hybrids haven't bean fixed, they have just started to scratch the top of the iceberg we're announcing now for years. They don't listen and what happens?
Wait a few weeks before you start read tears on this very same forum because small blasters are face raping everything. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 20:16:00 -
[1800] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:CCP Talest did promise everybody a full, detailed Dev blog on the subject of blasters in Januar. Lucky for him we still got 1 week left for him to keep that promise.
I'm still a little dissapointed about the T1 ammunition going unnoticed, but hopefully it's just Hilmar forcing the team to focus more on ships than weapons after the first balance because it looks better for CCP.
Also Blasters are actually fine as they are, however autocannons could easily handle a tracking nerf just to give them some kind of disadvantage. AC's huge falloff while having the good tracking really puts a hurt on smaller ships - I nearly lost an interceptor at 25-30km range and full speed transversal the other day to 3 ships with 425mm autocannons...
Pinky
You are a very lucky guy, if you ever cross my autos cane with your friggi never stay closer than 40km, my barrage can put the misery on you at that distance with not much trouble, under this distance you're just dead but you don't know it yet.
Autocanons with max lvl5 support skills, 2 te's 2 gyros+ship bonus DON'T have ANY issue to track small or large stuff from 0 to max range. Now you want to try against my 220 Vulcans Vagabond?
|
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 10:45:00 -
[1801] - Quote
let's be honest. I do fly what currently is the best cost vs isk solution for my current plans and situation. the only reason i put more than 2 minutes into this thread is because i wanted to fly soemthin different from time to time. For younger players this is something they might not support with only < 40 mio sp in their heads.
At least the vindicator is now the untouched king of the hill in station camping warefare. It was before but now for sure :D After these changes the bad gallente ships still suck and the good ones are nearly op now.
That shows me that the core problem was not related to the weapon platform or ammo itself but that it was tied to the ship hulls AND modules AND tanking system very very closely.
I highly recommend taking a look at tracking enhancers if you only like to touch numbers and still refuse to do more design work. changing numbers on tracking enhancer might bring the easiest balance you can get in eve but be aware that minmatar might no longer be popular after that. I don't care there's always a king and a new one will follow till the end of time. |
Af'ilia
The Directorate
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 11:56:00 -
[1802] - Quote
Heres my 2isk...
When I can fit an omen with blasters and get more dps than pulse...
There is a balancing issue. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 13:44:00 -
[1803] - Quote
Af'ilia wrote:Heres my 2isk...
When I can fit an omen with blasters and get more dps than pulse...
There is a balancing issue.
then try flying it and u will see how useless this dps is
well exept those weird undocking games
u put way to mutch trust on eft and ignore the common battlemechaniks that are being used in game |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 17:43:00 -
[1804] - Quote
here is a nerf for arties... usually in the real world artilitery are meant to do mass damage over a specific area... but in the game arties do mass damage over a small area... why not increase the base sig resolution of the guns... make large arties sit at 550 sig and so on... this would decrease thier end game number on the chance to hit formula and make other weapon systems to competitive damage? |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 18:06:00 -
[1805] - Quote
Af'ilia wrote:Heres my 2isk...
When I can fit an omen with blasters and get more dps than pulse...
There is a balancing issue.
Forgive me, but I just can't help myself.
Battleclinic says you haven't logged a kill since April of 2010. That was nearly two years ago.
It also says your lifetime record is 59 and 73; not exactly impressive.
Of your 73 losses, you have ONE logged Gallente ship loss: a logi-fit Exequeror. So there is no available history showing you've used hybrids or Gallente ships in pvp, ever, at least not in a capacity where you were stripped of gang members who did your job for you.
Yet you come in here, cross-fit hybrid weapons on an amarr ship, and suggest hybrids are fine or overpowered because you see higher dps numbers?
Hybrids in the med and large sizes still need lots of help. You'd know this if you actually used them. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 18:48:00 -
[1806] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Af'ilia wrote:Heres my 2isk...
When I can fit an omen with blasters and get more dps than pulse...
There is a balancing issue. Forgive me, but I just can't help myself. Battleclinic says you haven't logged a kill since April of 2010. That was nearly two years ago. It also says your lifetime record is 59 and 73; not exactly impressive. Of your 73 losses, you have ONE logged Gallente ship loss: a logi-fit Exequeror. So there is no available history showing you've used hybrids or Gallente ships in pvp, ever, at least not in a capacity where you were stripped of gang members who did your job for you. Yet you come in here, cross-fit hybrid weapons on an amarr ship, and suggest hybrids are fine or overpowered because you see higher dps numbers? Hybrids in the med and large sizes still need lots of help. You'd know this if you actually used them. Your statistics doesn't look impressive either, - 155 kills with a load of them being farmers - yet you have claims to be an expert in such a complex area as weapon balance. You can fly Gallente as much as you want, but lack of experience with other races combined with poor stats at Gallente themselves removes a great deal of validity from your words.
As someone with much more intense PvP record I find your general conclusion in the last line to be utterly clueless. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 19:33:00 -
[1807] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Magosian wrote:Af'ilia wrote:Heres my 2isk...
When I can fit an omen with blasters and get more dps than pulse...
There is a balancing issue. Forgive me, but I just can't help myself. Battleclinic says you haven't logged a kill since April of 2010. That was nearly two years ago. It also says your lifetime record is 59 and 73; not exactly impressive. Of your 73 losses, you have ONE logged Gallente ship loss: a logi-fit Exequeror. So there is no available history showing you've used hybrids or Gallente ships in pvp, ever, at least not in a capacity where you were stripped of gang members who did your job for you. Yet you come in here, cross-fit hybrid weapons on an amarr ship, and suggest hybrids are fine or overpowered because you see higher dps numbers? Hybrids in the med and large sizes still need lots of help. You'd know this if you actually used them. Your statistics doesn't look impressive either, - 155 kills with a load of them being farmers - yet you have claims to be an expert in such a complex area as weapon balance. You can fly Gallente as much as you want, but lack of experience with other races combined with poor stats at Gallente themselves removes a great deal of validity from your words. As someone with much more intense PvP record I find your general conclusion in the last line to be utterly clueless.
When did I ever make that claim? And I have plenty of experience with other races; I'm not sure what let you to believe I don't. I do not have the luxury of corp intel or corp backup. I choose my fights as I see fit. Wear my shoes, then talk.
The point is, someone who has no record of using hybrids is commenting on them. You can change the focus to me if you'd like, but my record is irrelevant.
EDIT: Incidentally you are ALSO in that group of people who neglects to use hybrids. Don't be a fool like the other guy and give some facade that you know why this thread should or should not exist. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
651
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 20:09:00 -
[1808] - Quote
This thread is there for a sole reason of competent players warning CCP about performing excessive steps on hybrids alone instead of treating the whole balance as a complex matter, where things like hulls, rigs, mods and so on also do have their role in making something superior or inferior.
Stating that 'med and large hybrids still need a lot of help' is getting us away from that.
Seriously, dude. Do you really believe I'm worse than you at PvP or that I hate Gallente or something equally absurd? I just don't get your point in arguing in the first place. Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 20:30:00 -
[1809] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:This thread is there for a sole reason of competent players warning CCP about performing excessive steps on hybrids alone instead of treating the whole balance as a complex matter, where things like hulls, rigs, mods and so on also do have their role in making something superior or inferior.
Stating that 'med and large hybrids still need a lot of help' is getting us away from that.
Seriously, dude. Do you really believe I'm worse than you at PvP or that I hate Gallente or something equally absurd? I just don't get your point in arguing in the first place.
I have stated several times that the ships should be looked at just as much as the turrets themselves. Regardless of the root cause, medium and large hybrids suffer the most. There is a MONUMENTAL difference between using small blasters versues medium and large blasters.
I'm not comparing pvp records. I don't believe you hate Gallente. I never did or say either of those things. All I'm saying is that I've used all three sizes of hybrids in pvp and there is a noticable difference. Your record shows you have not spent the time to understand this. Same goes for Af'ilia.
Market values for Astarte vs Sleipnir is further indication of what I am saying. eve-kill.net's top-20 rankings of ships and weapons used further shows this is true. This very thread is littered with the same complaints from dozens of players. Whether or not "med and large hybrids still need a lot of help," as a statement, moves us away from how the problem should be solved doesn't mean it's a false statement. There is plenty of evidence to show it has merit.
Changes to null ammo is a step in the right direction. More is needed. If you're saying the focus should be on the ships, or something OTHER than the turrets, ok great. I've said the same thing several times in this thread already. At any rate, hybrids and hybrid platforms used in pvp are literally in the single-digit percentiles in the grand scheme of things, and that's what I'd like to see ultimately changed.
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 20:34:00 -
[1810] - Quote
Any reason why hybrid guns need to use cap ??? Projectile guns can do the same more or less but without cap need. Thats something should be looked at too. Maybe all hybrid ships base cap regen increased by 30-40% to comensate , so they are still not neut proof, but dont get behind projectile ships in cap dependancy ,as we know arties not only used due to imba alpha,but must better cap stability too as it lets ships to mwd more ( as winmatar ships already the fastest) which gives better control of range--> wins fights
Just a hint : tornado with arti range fit can mwd+fire for 9m from full cap and naga/talos can only do that for 3m :I completly uncalled disadvantage what isnt compensated by anything
maybe could be made that when firing hybrids cap recharge is lowered like 5%/turret |
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 20:45:00 -
[1811] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Any reason why hybrid guns need to use cap ??? Projectile guns can do the same more or less but without cap need. Thats something should be looked at too Obvious troll post incoming:
I propose all Gallente ships give up one of their damage bonuses in favor of a capacitor use bonus, like laser boats.
End troll post. But seriously, maybe just remove some of the overwhelming reasons to use projectiles instead of hybrids and lasers. Just sayin'. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 20:53:00 -
[1812] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Any reason why hybrid guns need to use cap ??? Projectile guns can do the same more or less but without cap need. Thats something should be looked at too Obvious troll post incoming: I propose all Gallente ships give up one of their damage bonuses in favor of a capacitor use bonus, like laser boats.End troll post. But seriously, maybe just remove some of the overwhelming reasons to use projectiles instead of hybrids and lasers. Just sayin'.
well i started a thread months ago to give some disadvantages to projectiles but the casual playerbase(winmatar pilots) want to keep their easy difficulties and qq-ed against it , so only thing remained is to boost the hybrids and maybe lasers :P
oh btw dont you find it strange that every advantages other races get is from the bonuses , and still minmatar gets "free" better speed/signature, like a hidden bonus for most of their ships |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 19:21:00 -
[1813] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:oh btw dont you find it strange that every advantages other races get is from the bonuses , and still minmatar gets "free" better speed/signature, like a hidden bonus for most of their ships
Maybe CCP's CEO felt in love with the Minmatar culture |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:07:00 -
[1814] - Quote
Hello all. Good times....
Rank Ships Kills 1 Drake 184015 2 Maelstrom 122055 3 Tengu 107609 4 Hurricane 93759 5 Abaddon 68809 6 Armageddon 47606 7 Tornado 42132 8 Scimitar 34675 9 Tempest 33565 10 Sabre 26533 11 Huginn 24567 12 Zealot 23110 13 Hound 20398 14 Cynabal 20227 15 Loki 18110 16 Manticore 17710 17 Lachesis 17693 18 Oracle 17454 19 Nyx 17362 20 Rapier 16969
Total ships used in top 20: 954358 Total kills involving a Gallente ship: 35055
So, two of the top twenty ships, which account for LESS THAN 4% (3.67%) of the kills listed here, involve Gallente. One is a supercarrier and one is Recon/Ewar; NEITHER are gunboats.
Moving on....
Rank Weapons Kills 1 Heavy Missile Launcher II 106667 2 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II 34481 3 425mm AutoCannon II 33904 4 Mega Pulse Laser II 29749 5 200mm AutoCannon II 19433 6 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II 16260 7 150mm Light AutoCannon II 16103 8 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II 15491 9 720mm Howitzer Artillery II 13954 10 Heavy Pulse Laser II 12966 11 800mm Repeating Artillery II 11814 12 'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher 8346 13 425mm Railgun II 7117 14 1400mm Prototype Siege Cannon 6011 15 'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I 5728 16 Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I 5590 17 Light Neutron Blaster II 5493 18 1400mm Gallium Cannon 5300 19 Heavy Neutron Blaster II 5283 20 Neutron Blaster Cannon II 4937
Total kills by weapon-type in the top 20: 348524 Total kills involving a hybrid turret: 22830
Of all involved weapon types used in the top 20, hybrids comprise less than 7% (6.55%)......jesus, where do I start???
- railguns only show up once
- all blasters COMBINED are used less than the smallest and weakest projectile turret on the list: 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II
- there are FOUR tech 1 weapon systems, ALL OF WHICH have more presense than the T2 blasters listed
- the ONE Gallente claim-to-fame, a.k.a. drones, makes no appearance DESPITE this stat potentially being padded as most of the top-20 ships have drone bays
And before you say it, no, Null ammo is not going to change this. Crucible has been out for a while now with no change in hybrid or hybrid platform popularity. This thread absolutely deserves to be re-stickied and CCP devs need to re-engage the playerbase on how to further address this failed attempt at balancing hybrids as they need further tweaking or a total rework. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 00:36:00 -
[1815] - Quote
to have a good combat ship u need the corect balance between damage and ehp ship speed, locking time and traking, effective shooting range, agility and signature radius
and to be honest gallente still have nothing usefull in this category its imposible to fit a galente ship that would be useful in more then only one specific task (high sec ganking, undock games) if u go for damage u lack everything else or fit a ship that has armor repair bonus with shields
amar have some ships that are above avarage caldari have tengu and the drake (drake only becouse its cheap and there is nothing else for them to choose exept the expensive tengu) minmatar have alot of great ships to choose from
that is a fail at balancing the game when only a few amar and many minmatar ships have something usefull to offer |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 17:30:00 -
[1816] - Quote
Just some random thoughts:
Hybrids do perform at the frigate level
- typical high speeds of the frigate class IN ADDITION TO typical high agility make closing the gap on unsuspecting ships fairly easy to do, ESPECIALLY when overloading prop modules. The gallente blaster philosophy works for frigates because there is sufficient speed and acceleration on high-speed, low-mass ships to execute it.
- most frigate-sized weapons have an effective range on par with or under warp scramber and webber ranges. This makes hybrids incredibly more useful in the world of frigate combat.
- drone speeds exceed most MWD-propped, nano'd frigates. Obviously there are exceptions, but for the most part, small drones don't have a problem keeping up with frigates in combat.
Conversely, hybrids do NOT perform at the cruiser/BC/BS level
- the ranges of propulsion-inhibiting tackle (warp scrams and webs, NOT disruptors) does not scale with weapons systems once in the medium and large classes. This is in tandem with blaster ranges ALSO not properly scaling with other weapon systems. Hybrids suffer twofold because of this (yes, even after the Null buffs)
- as ships get bigger, attainable speeds drop, but more importantlly, acceleration takes an incredible hit as ship mass increases. To this day, executing the blaster philsophy on anything larger than a destroyer is an absolute nightmare unless you're fighting on a structure/station or have a "warp to 0" option on your target.
Conclusions
- scaling/buffing propulsion-inhibiting tackle seems like a good idea for about 5 seconds, until you realize ALL ships and turrets would benefit from this change, thus fixing nothing.
- should further hybrid balancing changes take place (and I hope to god they do because they're still needed), pay patricular attention to what changes in the realm of frigate combat, as hybrids could easily become the powerhouse with even the slightest of changes.
- why not significantly buff the agility of Gallente and Caldari hybrid-bonused ships? And I'm not talking about that 3-5% crap from crucible, I'm talking 10-20%. This would provide a means to execute the blaster philosophy on larger ships as it counters propulsion penalties calcuated when props are running. It would significantly boost acceleration. It would curb penalties incurred from armor rigs and armor plates. The whole idea is: take my earlier description of hybrid-frigate combat and bring that capability to the larger ships.
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 18:19:00 -
[1817] - Quote
a significant increase of agility and decresed mass for galente hybrid using ships might do the trick but it wouldnt help the caldari hybrid ships they need aditionally a significant increase of optimal or a minimal increase of damage or a little bit of both
but those changes are only needed for medium/large hulls |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 18:24:00 -
[1818] - Quote
No, the real question is: Does CCP seriously want to balance anything or do they just want to gain some time so we stay with the game an pay. All tactics to hold Gal pilots to the game and not to annoy other players and large corps who have their "style of success".
No reply from Tallest, even nothing regarding the latest Null changes, just nothing. Nobody knows if there will be more changes or if this is it. A huge communication fail from CCP as usual. But this time it hurts becouse after the promisses from the CEO with his marketing blablah letter people really expected some changes. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.28 13:08:00 -
[1819] - Quote
Hamox wrote:No, the real question is: Does CCP seriously want to balance anything or do they just want to gain some time so we stay with the game an pay. All tactics to hold Gal pilots to the game and not to annoy other players and large corps who have their "style of success".
No reply from Tallest, even nothing regarding the latest Null changes, just nothing. Nobody knows if there will be more changes or if this is it. A huge communication fail from CCP as usual. But this time it hurts becouse after the promisses from the CEO with his marketing blablah letter people really expected some changes. Well only thing to do is sell chars and freeze acc :P good luck with boring winmatar online |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.28 18:46:00 -
[1820] - Quote
Also consider introducing a mechanism that allows pilots to remove drawback completely. Armor rigs are absolutely stupid on any ship who hopes to get in range of a target who has higher base speed in the first place. Say, 20% reduction to drawback per trained level of rigging, obviously 100% reduction at level V?
It's sensible and logical, and drawbacks never really made any sense anyhow. |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.28 20:08:00 -
[1821] - Quote
the last few days i been playing around with eft and i must say the galente hybrid dps looks really great
but when i combine it with tank, speed and range, i just cant find anything usefull the backdraws are simply too great when u try to have a usefull mix anything that goes beyond void / jevelin range is by far inferior to min/amar
and it leaves galente only a small niche in gameplay but if u give them more damage, range or speed it would make them OP
so really to increase galente acceleration is the only option left without making them OP
and as for the drone boats they need a small increase in drone damage and the sentrys need the ability to follow users ship, nothing more
caldary hybrid using ships are a comletly diferent problem as the 10% optimal to ship bonus is not enough for anything fitted blasters still lack the range and damage and railguns are outdamaged by anything else
i see caldari hybrids as completly broken |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.01.28 22:11:00 -
[1822] - Quote
qwick fix for caldari would be remove the optimal range bonus and replace with a rate of fire bonus... dps will go up 33%... |
Ninevite
Shiva Initiative Mercenaries
18
|
Posted - 2012.01.29 05:53:00 -
[1823] - Quote
CCP isn't even reading this because they don't give a ****, they just make these threads to give the impression that they are listening and to make you pay for a few months more waiting and hoping for CCP to pull their head out of their asses |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2012.01.29 11:27:00 -
[1824] - Quote
Ninevite wrote:CCP isn't even reading this because they don't give a ****, they just make these threads to give the impression that they are listening and to make you pay for a few months more waiting and hoping for CCP to pull their head out of their asses this sollution -> stop paying |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.29 11:45:00 -
[1825] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Ninevite wrote:CCP isn't even reading this because they don't give a ****, they just make these threads to give the impression that they are listening and to make you pay for a few months more waiting and hoping for CCP to pull their head out of their asses this sollution -> stop paying
This I have done 3 weeks ago. I have 900M ISK and a few ships. I will sell this ships so I can afford 2 Plex, giving me 2 additional month. If things don't change in that time I will just quit EVE. I explained the reasons very clearly when I unsubed: - CCP communication is a big fail - Hybrids balance is a fail - Overall balance is a fail - CCP communication is a big fail again - Name should be changed to Minmatar online instead of EVE - CCP communication is an epic fail - CCP treats his customers like stupid idiots
I think this is the only way. They have to feel it on the income.
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.29 14:06:00 -
[1826] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Also consider introducing a mechanism that allows pilots to remove drawback completely. Armor rigs are absolutely stupid on any ship who hopes to get in range of a target who has higher base speed in the first place. Say, 20% reduction to drawback per trained level of rigging, obviously 100% reduction at level V?
It's sensible and logical, and drawbacks never really made any sense anyhow.
I agree with the whole problem with Gallente getting into range issues. However, I think there will be 2nd and 3rd order effects of doing what you propose. If you get rid of the draw back to armor rigs, sure it will help Gallente ships, but it will also help all other ships. Particularly the Hurricane. Can you imagine a armor tanked hurricane that is just as fast as a current shield tanked version? With its already very small sig radius that will become the preferred close in killer because it will be faster, tank more, still put out dps regardless of neuting etc etc. So, I submit that changes to rigs/drawbacks are not the answer. The answer must be found in changing the base stats to Gallente hulls.
No easy solution, though we are all on the same side. What would you think of Gallente ships able to come out of warp faster than any other ship. I'm all about having to do the work to get a punt/warp in on a target. But the problem is by the time you land and decelerate out of warp and begin the targeting process, the target has burned out of scram/web range even with a perfect interdiction maneuvers boost. Perhaps if gallente ships could do that warp braking/acceleration to max warp speed faster then the chances of getting a hard and heavy tackle on the target would go up significantly. Overall I think Gallente needs some ships boosted for heavy tackle. Like the Brutix with a big boost to scram (and scram only) range. Some where near 20km's with perfect skills and interdiction maneuvers boost. Give the myrm a similar boost to web range. Make those two ships work together to get heavy tackle on all these kiters, but the key will have to be higher scan resolution and a much faster braking out of warp.
There is no way to make Gallente so fast as to be a chasing kiters without screwing up the whole game. Smart tactics and team work will be required, but as it stands right now the mechanics don't exist to really counter kiting even with perfect punts. (sure you get warp disrupter, but that's near worthless particularly against these tier 3 bc's.) |
RackotPrime
CONCORD OF UKRAINE Flame Bridge
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 07:25:00 -
[1827] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Magosian wrote:Also consider introducing a mechanism that allows pilots to remove drawback completely. Armor rigs are absolutely stupid on any ship who hopes to get in range of a target who has higher base speed in the first place. Say, 20% reduction to drawback per trained level of rigging, obviously 100% reduction at level V?
It's sensible and logical, and drawbacks never really made any sense anyhow. I agree with the whole problem with Gallente getting into range issues. However, I think there will be 2nd and 3rd order effects of doing what you propose. If you get rid of the draw back to armor rigs, sure it will help Gallente ships, but it will also help all other ships. Particularly the Hurricane. Can you imagine a armor tanked hurricane that is just as fast as a current shield tanked version? With its already very small sig radius that will become the preferred close in killer because it will be faster, tank more, still put out dps regardless of neuting etc etc. So, I submit that changes to rigs/drawbacks are not the answer. The answer must be found in changing the base stats to Gallente hulls. No easy solution, though we are all on the same side. What would you think of Gallente ships able to come out of warp faster than any other ship. I'm all about having to do the work to get a punt/warp in on a target. But the problem is by the time you land and decelerate out of warp and begin the targeting process, the target has burned out of scram/web range even with a perfect interdiction maneuvers boost. Perhaps if gallente ships could do that warp braking/acceleration to max warp speed faster then the chances of getting a hard and heavy tackle on the target would go up significantly. Overall I think Gallente needs some ships boosted for heavy tackle. Like the Brutix with a big boost to scram (and scram only) range. Some where near 20km's with perfect skills and interdiction maneuvers boost. Give the myrm a similar boost to web range. Make those two ships work together to get heavy tackle on all these kiters, but the key will have to be higher scan resolution and a much faster braking out of warp. There is no way to make Gallente so fast as to be a chasing kiters without screwing up the whole game. Smart tactics and team work will be required, but as it stands right now the mechanics don't exist to really counter kiting even with perfect punts. (sure you get warp disrupter, but that's near worthless particularly against these tier 3 bc's.) nerf minmatar speed and change armor rig penalty, in armor tank minmatars will lose damage, range ans agility, so there no problems at all
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 09:00:00 -
[1828] - Quote
RackotPrime wrote:Mariner6 wrote:Magosian wrote:Also consider introducing a mechanism that allows pilots to remove drawback completely. Armor rigs are absolutely stupid on any ship who hopes to get in range of a target who has higher base speed in the first place. Say, 20% reduction to drawback per trained level of rigging, obviously 100% reduction at level V?
It's sensible and logical, and drawbacks never really made any sense anyhow. I agree with the whole problem with Gallente getting into range issues. However, I think there will be 2nd and 3rd order effects of doing what you propose. If you get rid of the draw back to armor rigs, sure it will help Gallente ships, but it will also help all other ships. Particularly the Hurricane. Can you imagine a armor tanked hurricane that is just as fast as a current shield tanked version? With its already very small sig radius that will become the preferred close in killer because it will be faster, tank more, still put out dps regardless of neuting etc etc. So, I submit that changes to rigs/drawbacks are not the answer. The answer must be found in changing the base stats to Gallente hulls. No easy solution, though we are all on the same side. What would you think of Gallente ships able to come out of warp faster than any other ship. I'm all about having to do the work to get a punt/warp in on a target. But the problem is by the time you land and decelerate out of warp and begin the targeting process, the target has burned out of scram/web range even with a perfect interdiction maneuvers boost. Perhaps if gallente ships could do that warp braking/acceleration to max warp speed faster then the chances of getting a hard and heavy tackle on the target would go up significantly. Overall I think Gallente needs some ships boosted for heavy tackle. Like the Brutix with a big boost to scram (and scram only) range. Some where near 20km's with perfect skills and interdiction maneuvers boost. Give the myrm a similar boost to web range. Make those two ships work together to get heavy tackle on all these kiters, but the key will have to be higher scan resolution and a much faster braking out of warp. There is no way to make Gallente so fast as to be a chasing kiters without screwing up the whole game. Smart tactics and team work will be required, but as it stands right now the mechanics don't exist to really counter kiting even with perfect punts. (sure you get warp disrupter, but that's near worthless particularly against these tier 3 bc's.) nerf minmatar speed and change armor rig penalty, in armor tank minmatars will lose damage, range ans agility, so there no problems at all
why not just remove minmatar completely? .. srsly dude .. troll somewhere else.
to the issue at hand: well im still no expert, but the longer this whole issue festers around the more i believe blaster ships need to be the fastest ships. i don't know about that agility though. shouldn't be the kiters more agile but not quite as fast as the brawler, for the brawler just wants to get into the thick of battle while the kiter likes to wiggle himself out of the way? i always thought of the brutix as the bull charging like hell and not as the ballerina...
|
RackotPrime
CONCORD OF UKRAINE Flame Bridge
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 10:27:00 -
[1829] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: i always thought of the brutix as the bull charging like hell and not as the ballerina...
whit no speed penalty from rigs brutix are really became a bull, and be more able to get in blaster range winmatars afraid to loss "win" button? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 11:37:00 -
[1830] - Quote
its agility and acceleration, what blaster ships need now |
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 12:39:00 -
[1831] - Quote
RackotPrime wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: i always thought of the brutix as the bull charging like hell and not as the ballerina...
whit no speed penalty from rigs brutix are really became a bull, and be more able to get in blaster range winmatars afraid to loss "win" button?
gallente bittervet that desperate to gain a "win button" ? do you care to elaborate your ingenious plan in making rig penalties only for minmatar?
@technokrat: i see how the agility (and acceleration) would help in that moment shortly after the warp in. but it will do nothing for gtfo or chasing down that pesky cane, holding you at arms lenght
it is blaster boats for shock trooper combat then?
|
RackotPrime
CONCORD OF UKRAINE Flame Bridge
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 14:10:00 -
[1832] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:RackotPrime wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: i always thought of the brutix as the bull charging like hell and not as the ballerina...
whit no speed penalty from rigs brutix are really became a bull, and be more able to get in blaster range winmatars afraid to loss "win" button? gallente bittervet that desperate to gain a "win button" ? do you care to elaborate your ingenious plan in making rig penalties only for minmatar? @technokrat: i see how the agility (and acceleration) would help in that moment shortly after the warp in. but it will do nothing for gtfo or chasing down that pesky cane, holding you at arms lenght it is blaster boats for shock trooper combat then? who is trolling now?
Quote:change armor rig penalty as for agility, mass and sig - it's all different story |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 15:20:00 -
[1833] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Magosian wrote:Also consider introducing a mechanism that allows pilots to remove drawback completely. Armor rigs are absolutely stupid on any ship who hopes to get in range of a target who has higher base speed in the first place. Say, 20% reduction to drawback per trained level of rigging, obviously 100% reduction at level V?
It's sensible and logical, and drawbacks never really made any sense anyhow. I agree with the whole problem with Gallente getting into range issues. However, I think there will be 2nd and 3rd order effects of doing what you propose. If you get rid of the draw back to armor rigs, sure it will help Gallente ships, but it will also help all other ships. Particularly the Hurricane. Can you imagine a armor tanked hurricane that is just as fast as a current shield tanked version? With its already very small sig radius that will become the preferred close in killer because it will be faster, tank more, still put out dps regardless of neuting etc etc. So, I submit that changes to rigs/drawbacks are not the answer. The answer must be found in changing the base stats to Gallente hulls. No easy solution, though we are all on the same side. What would you think of Gallente ships able to come out of warp faster than any other ship. I'm all about having to do the work to get a punt/warp in on a target. But the problem is by the time you land and decelerate out of warp and begin the targeting process, the target has burned out of scram/web range even with a perfect interdiction maneuvers boost. Perhaps if gallente ships could do that warp braking/acceleration to max warp speed faster then the chances of getting a hard and heavy tackle on the target would go up significantly. Overall I think Gallente needs some ships boosted for heavy tackle. Like the Brutix with a big boost to scram (and scram only) range. Some where near 20km's with perfect skills and interdiction maneuvers boost. Give the myrm a similar boost to web range. Make those two ships work together to get heavy tackle on all these kiters, but the key will have to be higher scan resolution and a much faster braking out of warp. There is no way to make Gallente so fast as to be a chasing kiters without screwing up the whole game. Smart tactics and team work will be required, but as it stands right now the mechanics don't exist to really counter kiting even with perfect punts. (sure you get warp disrupter, but that's near worthless particularly against these tier 3 bc's.)
Yes indeed. My suggestion to remove drawback was something I posted late at night without providing much detail, so my apologies. Perhaps it would make more sense if I also clarified: remove drawback from rigs WITH THE EXCEPTION OF BUFFER RIGS!
This does a few things:
1) makes sense: obviously with buffers, you are either slapping more metal on your ship or thickening the "band" of shields around your ship, so...duh 2) conversely, adding a device to make nanobots repair faster or more efficiently is PROBABLY not adding a whole lot of mass to the ship; hell, it's something that could probably fit in your cargo bay. Same goes for any shield "device" which also makes shield repair more efficient. 3) My suggestion was in addition to a hybrid platform agility buff....a BIG ONE
Probably the best clarification I can provide is I'm trying to think of methods which allow Gallente to retain local rep bonuses. I do like the idea that armor repair actually works and would hate to see the bonus go. Fact of the matter is, in the grand scheme of things, local rep is simply a tool for the solo hermit. So who knows....
And to comment on your suggestions, I wouldn't mind seeing them at all, but if they were to be implemented, they are clearly bonuses to makeup for such a crappy weapons platform. I'd rather they just fix the turrets. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 15:28:00 -
[1834] - Quote
Something should be done to rigs for sure... I would suggest changing the velocity penalty to affect lock range, scan resolution, sensor strength or some of the other stats that are important, but not as crucial as ship velocity. But then this isn't the only issue with rigs tbh
Pinky |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 16:18:00 -
[1835] - Quote
RackotPrime wrote:who is trolling now? Quote:change armor rig penalty as for agility, mass and sig - it's all different story
well, still you. because leaving out the essential part of your original trollpost does not detroll you. for example, original post: "you're quite good at trolling" later on quoted: "you're quite good" - how could you have gotten the idea of me calling you a troll?
;) and now i'm a troll too. yey.
rigs should be the last thing beeing brought into the balancing atm because: they open up a lot of possibilities which making the attempt of creating balance nearly impossible. one should balance ships, weapons (bringing projectiles back into line, making hybrids more desireable) and tanking first (aktive <-> passive - is there atm reason to fit something else than meta4 plates? or to use something smaller than 200mm?) should be quite a task.
once that is done one can look at rigging (and imps for that matter) again and do it without destroying the newly won balance.
funny fact: minmatar are the big success because they are "designed" to be versatile. people fill that lack of purpose with their own intentions and creativity, finding lots of viable setups just take the cane as the best example). maybe it should be explored how the other races could give more room for being creative and actually being rewarded for that with viable setups. without destroying the flavor of each race. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 21:29:00 -
[1836] - Quote
Guys, seriously, stop that brainstorming. You really think CCP is reading this? And if so, you really think CCP is going to implement something of this?
Try to post something more "realistic", where realistic means stuff that CCP will possibly implement the next few years, like: - 10% less minerals for Hybrid ammo so the ammo gets cheaper and so it can help Gallente becouse of those thousands of shoots that don't hit anything, at least you save some money now on ammo! - A few additional % range for Null so we have finally overpowered Gallente Frigs, then after a few weeks we Nerf Null massively to the state prior all of this changes! - 2% more PG for all Gallente ships so Die-Most will still have one unused high slot but that is the price for using good weapons i guess... - 5% more structure hitpoints for Gallente ships as a effective 3rd defense line (in case diemost needs some target help and has therefore crap armor). + 1,5% to Armor Kinetic Ressistance so Galllente can hold longer vs Tengu with nasty kinetic missles (Caldari is the main enemy for Gallente!). + 2% to Shield Kinetic Ressistance just to make sure the Armor idea vs Tangu works also for the shild Myrm with ACs
And as THE final passive bonus to Gallente to make the ships worth flying it: + 1 max locked target on AS and HACs This is even more awesome than cap free weapons, fastest ships, badass alpha and so on. Hey, you can now lock an additional target on a ship that you will never use for fleet combat... OK but I'm sure creative players will find a way to benefit from this on a 1on1 or a nice setup gate camp. It is up to you to use your creativity like Minmatar pilots do! Go out now and use it!
Ok I know, this suggestions do not fix Gallente, BUT: it is more likely that CCP implements this changes than everything you have suggested ;) |
Ninevite
Shiva Initiative Mercenaries
18
|
Posted - 2012.01.30 23:55:00 -
[1837] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Guys, seriously, stop that brainstorming. You really think CCP is reading this? And if so, you really think CCP is going to implement something of this?
Try to post something more "realistic", where realistic means stuff that CCP will possibly implement the next few years, like: - 10% less minerals for Hybrid ammo so the ammo gets cheaper and so it can help Gallente becouse of those thousands of shoots that don't hit anything, at least you save some money now on ammo! - A few additional % range for Null so we have finally overpowered Gallente Frigs, then after a few weeks we Nerf Null massively to the state prior all of this changes! - 2% more PG for all Gallente ships so Die-Most will still have one unused high slot but that is the price for using good weapons i guess... - 5% more structure hitpoints for Gallente ships as a effective 3rd defense line (in case diemost needs some target help and has therefore crap armor). + 1,5% to Armor Kinetic Ressistance so Galllente can hold longer vs Tengu with nasty kinetic missles (Caldari is the main enemy for Gallente!). + 2% to Shield Kinetic Ressistance just to make sure the Armor idea vs Tangu works also for the shild Myrm with ACs
And as THE final passive bonus to Gallente to make the ships worth flying it: + 1 max locked target on AS and HACs This is even more awesome than cap free weapons, fastest ships, badass alpha and so on. Hey, you can now lock an additional target on a ship that you will never use for fleet combat... OK but I'm sure creative players will find a way to benefit from this on a 1on1 or a nice setup gate camp. It is up to you to use your creativity like Minmatar pilots do! Go out now and use it!
Ok I know, this suggestions do not fix Gallente, BUT: it is more likely that CCP implements this changes than everything you have suggested ;)
I am lol'ing hard because this is a very accurate assessment of what we will probably witness
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 09:20:00 -
[1838] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Guys, seriously, stop that brainstorming. You really think CCP is reading this? And if so, you really think CCP is going to implement something of this?
Try to post something more "realistic", where realistic means stuff that CCP will possibly implement the next few years, like: - 10% less minerals for Hybrid ammo so the ammo gets cheaper and so it can help Gallente becouse of those thousands of shoots that don't hit anything, at least you save some money now on ammo! - A few additional % range for Null so we have finally overpowered Gallente Frigs, then after a few weeks we Nerf Null massively to the state prior all of this changes! - 2% more PG for all Gallente ships so Die-Most will still have one unused high slot but that is the price for using good weapons i guess... - 5% more structure hitpoints for Gallente ships as a effective 3rd defense line (in case diemost needs some target help and has therefore crap armor). + 1,5% to Armor Kinetic Ressistance so Galllente can hold longer vs Tengu with nasty kinetic missles (Caldari is the main enemy for Gallente!). + 2% to Shield Kinetic Ressistance just to make sure the Armor idea vs Tangu works also for the shild Myrm with ACs
And as THE final passive bonus to Gallente to make the ships worth flying it: + 1 max locked target on AS and HACs This is even more awesome than cap free weapons, fastest ships, badass alpha and so on. Hey, you can now lock an additional target on a ship that you will never use for fleet combat... OK but I'm sure creative players will find a way to benefit from this on a 1on1 or a nice setup gate camp. It is up to you to use your creativity like Minmatar pilots do! Go out now and use it!
Ok I know, this suggestions do not fix Gallente, BUT: it is more likely that CCP implements this changes than everything you have suggested ;)
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... |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo THE SPACE P0LICE
34
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 10:21:00 -
[1839] - Quote
Tallest said a while back that the devs have been, and continue to read the forum, but as we don't work at CCP I'm sure they take all this under advisement. Less communications means they're probably working hard on implementing fixes, so I counsel patience.
Here's another way of looking at the hybrid problem, comparing them to turrets from other races:
Projectiles: * No cap use * Variable damage type, * Good falloff range for AC's * Excellent alpha for arty. * Reload time of 10 seconds
Lasers: * Substantial cap use * Locked into EM/therm damage * Excellent optimal for pulse * Good range for beam lasers, as well as ROF. * No reloading time
Hybrids should fit into the middle of this equation: * Low cap use (check!) * Good optimal and falloff for blasters, but neither stat should be as good as pulse lasers or AC's. The range boost would enable blaster-fit ships to be more effective without having to modify armour tanking as it currently stands for more speed or agility. Damage would be reduced from its current amount, and tracking would go down a little too, but would still be superior to pulse lasers because it's closer ranged, and AC's because they don't use cap, and can vary damage type. * Railguns should be in between beam lasers and artillery in terms of ROF and alpha, and damage needs to be improved for medium and large rails from their current levels (5-10%). PG demands of medium and large rails should be checked to ensure they are comparible to beam and arty platforms like the zealot and apoc. * Reduce the granularity of range options for hybrid ammo, and give the option for 80/20, 50/50 and 20/80 on kinetic/thermal damage as was mentioned previous in this thread, thus providing *some* damage variation. * Reloading time is 5 seconds, a good middle-ground. (check!) * Null ammo would be range-nerfed to keep its current range based on the new baseline range for hybrid ammo.
I don't think armour plates or rigs should be touched, as 'fixing' them for Gallente also benefits Amarr, and they're working pretty well at the moment. Just my 2 cents. Peace. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 11:14:00 -
[1840] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Tallest said a while back that the devs have been, and continue to read the forum, but as we don't work at CCP I'm sure they take all this under advisement. Less communications means they're probably working hard on implementing fixes, so I counsel patience.
Here's another way of looking at the hybrid problem, comparing them to turrets from other races:
Projectiles: * No cap use * Variable damage type, * Good falloff range for AC's * Excellent alpha for arty. * Reload time of 10 seconds
Lasers: * Substantial cap use * Locked into EM/therm damage * Excellent optimal for pulse * Good range for beam lasers, as well as ROF. * No reloading time
Hybrids should fit into the middle of this equation: * Low cap use (check!) * Optimal sub-laser, falloff sub-projectile; combined sub-both (unless Caldari boat, then damage sub-both) * Railguns should be in between beam lasers and artillery in terms of ROF and alpha. Where does it state that rails should again be mediocre? * Reduce the granularity of range options for hybrid ammo, and give the option for 80/20, 50/50 and 20/80 on kinetic/thermal damage as was mentioned previous in this thread, thus providing *some* damage variation. * Reloading time is 5 seconds, a good middle-ground. (check!) * Null ammo would be range-nerfed to keep its current range based on the new baseline range for hybrid ammo.
I don't think armour plates or rigs should be touched, as 'fixing' them for Gallente also benefits Amarr, and they're working pretty well at the moment. Just my 2 cents. Peace.
Tweaked your post.
Given the massive predominance of Minmatar ships, I have no objection to Amarr ships getting a little love as part of a rig change. Ideally all 4 races should have something to offer a fleet. If that meant Gallente excelled at frigate level action, while Minmatar dominated battlecruiser levels, Amarr dominated medium range BS levels and Caldari dominated long range BS levels, then at least we'd have variety. All races should have valid T2 variations at all levels. Close range BS are unlikely to make much of a return in force any time soon simply because of the overwhelming advantage of going for the mid ranged option with BS being so slow.
|
|
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo THE SPACE P0LICE
34
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 13:22:00 -
[1841] - Quote
Nikuno wrote: Tweaked your post.
Some fine tweaking there. The thing with making railguns in-between beams and arty is that the choice seems to be between alpha and ROF. Personally I'm fine if rails are basically identical to arty, but it makes sense to have more variation between weapons. Certainly the dominance of alpha (and matari artillery boats) would dictate that beams and rails should be the same in order to compete - perhaps having rails do more damage but having a higher rate of fire and less alpha is the way to go, but I'm pretty sure I just wrote that earlier. |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 14:57:00 -
[1842] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:its agility and acceleration, what blaster ships need now Ah, here come at last:) Completely agree. As mentioned in various post of this topics it's not enough to tune only guns. we must look in whole concept of hybrid ships. I will not repeat myself, but agility and acceleration is what needed for hybrid platforms. Small ok, but medium and large requiring complex tuning.
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 23:30:00 -
[1843] - Quote
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! :) |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 04:15:00 -
[1844] - Quote
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! :)
there is an infinit number of januarys in the future |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 08:50:00 -
[1845] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT 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! :) there is an infinit number of januarys in the future
I thought the world is ending on dec 21st. 2012. You destroyed my view of the world entirely :( |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 12:49:00 -
[1846] - Quote
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....
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 13:47:00 -
[1847] - 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. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 22:43:00 -
[1848] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: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....
Hmmm, now that I'm allowed to be a pessimist I don't like anymore. Let's be an optimist and find 3 positive reasons why propably we have no post from Tallest: 1. Maybe Tallest has posted in time but has been ganked by the forum, happens now and then :P 2. Maybe he can travel back in time and will post soon in January 2012! 3. Maybe he plans a big surprise for us and prepares an epic happy end? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 05:17:00 -
[1849] - Quote
Hamox wrote: 2. Maybe he can travel back in time and will post soon in January 2012!
nah time travel works only in movies
and i hope we are not some part of a huge movie setup here |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 10:24:00 -
[1850] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Something should be done to rigs for sure... I would suggest changing the velocity penalty to affect lock range, scan resolution, sensor strength or some of the other stats that are important, but not as crucial as ship velocity. But then this isn't the only issue with rigs tbh
Pinky
Not scan resolution tbh, gallente are already slow at targeting as they are at moving, you can get insta poped by a gang or arty Tornados before you can ever target one of those.
Megathron with 2 sebos scripted scan resolution goes around 250 res, Arty Tornado 750. Do you see the difference? |
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 12:29:00 -
[1851] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: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....
Hmmm, now that I'm allowed to be a pessimist I don't like anymore. Let's be an optimist and find 3 positive reasons why propably we have no post from Tallest: 1. Maybe Tallest has posted in time but has been ganked by the forum, happens now and then :P 2. Maybe he can travel back in time and will post soon in January 2012! 3. Maybe he plans a big surprise for us and prepares an epic happy end?
if he could travel back in time, the post should be here already. only he would know he travelled back. this leaves us with the possibilities: 1. his new hybrid changes anger somehow the mighty, badass a.i. which controls eve gate and only flies winmatar kiting ships, so his posts get ganked all the time 2. he is currently reinventing the eve combat system and its math.
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 12:48:00 -
[1852] - Quote
You guys are like a teenager getting stood up the night of the prom, trying to rationalize how something must have happened to your date. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 15:30:00 -
[1853] - Quote
it seems everything is working as intended and now hush u go, complete ur training on minmatar and after that u can train amar the rest is for the numbers
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 15:40:00 -
[1854] - Quote
Kahz Niverrah wrote:You guys are like a teenager getting stood up the night of the prom, trying to rationalize how something must have happened to your date.
LMAO! |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 16:35:00 -
[1855] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Stuff Not scan resolution tbh, gallente are already slow at targeting as they are at moving, you can get insta poped by a gang or arty Tornados before you can ever target one of those. Megathron with 2 sebos scripted scan resolution goes around 250 res, Arty Tornado 750. Do you see the difference?
I'm trying not to be rude but at the same time I'm hungry... If you compare the scan resolution from a BATTLESHIP class SHORT RANGE vessel designed to require dedicated tacklers with a recently introduced MEDIUM sized ship with RETARDEDLY OVERPOWERED and PREBUFFED stats as an argument to something I vaguely suggested you are doing it wrong.
But as said it was only a vague suggestion. It still has to be a drawback and if you are armor tanking you can just fit sensor boosters. How much will the draw back on scan resolution be for 3 x rigs with the above suggestion? 30% before skills? 15% with maxed skills? Does the drawback stack so it's closer to 12,5%? Anyway you'll notice the lack of speed a lot, but I doubt scan resolution will matter a lot for most armor tankers...
Especially if CCP realize how much Minmatar need to have slower acceleration and worse agility.
Pinky |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 14:39:00 -
[1856] - Quote
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3407
Interesting stats there from CCP.
Highest production for frigate? Minmatar > Caldari Highest production for destroyer? Minmatar > Gallente Highest production for cruiser? Minmatar > Caldari Highest production for battlecruiser? Caldari > Minmatar Highest production for battleship? Minmatar > Amarr
If production figures combined with killboard stats of -
RankShipsKills 1Drake12681 2Hurricane7160 3Oracle5858 4Maelstrom5741 5Tengu5374 6Tornado5336 7Sabre2322 8Naga1952 9Cynabal1825 10Abaddon1824 11Scimitar1788 12Rokh1652 13Rifter1636 14Hound1626 15Thrasher1578 16Manticore1444 17Sleipnir1376 18Rapier1335 19Capsule1308 20Vagabond1269
- don't point convincingly to an overpowered Minmatar problem then I really have no idea what people require to comprehend this. If you combine the production ratios with the destroyed ratios from the stat devblog then you'll also notice that not only are Minmatar ships outproducing Gallente, but they're out-surviving them too by a hefty margin, close to 50% better survivability on those stats.
So, tl;dr - Gallente kill less than Minmatar, die more often than Minmatar, and consequently are produced less presumably due to lack of popularity through their many and continuing failings. If the players see this, why doesn't CCP? Or if CCP does see this why hasn't Tallest communicated how he sees this being resolved?
|
Kahz Niverrah
Viziam Amarr Empire
182
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 15:13:00 -
[1857] - Quote
Nikuno wrote:Or if CCP does see this why hasn't Tallest communicated how he sees this being resolved? We may have passed the point of no return, in CCPs eyes. So many players have migrated to Matari that a nerf at this point would generate a whine so loud it would pierce Jesus' eardrums. I don't think a drastic nerf is really needed to bring things in line, though. Restricting projectile damage to kin/exp would go a long way to promoting the use of other weapons systems. I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 15:27:00 -
[1858] - Quote
i think they are done with gallente and now focus on the issues listed in the csm minutes and the fan fest. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
45
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 17:20:00 -
[1859] - Quote
Right now I'd say give medium blasters a base 1.5km optimal boost and blasters are sorted. The ships are still an issue for time-to-target and I still think that a combination of tweaking ship speed/agility a little more and/or changing the penalty to armour rigs is the way to address this.
I still think rails, large and medium, are languishing - I also believe that the mistake of giving these to caldari and gallente with contrasting bonuses will continue to render them ineffective. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 17:31:00 -
[1860] - Quote
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 |
|
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 17:45:00 -
[1861] - 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. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 18:54:00 -
[1862] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:i think they are done with gallente and now focus on the issues listed in the csm minutes and the fan fest. I know I'm repeating myself but CPP's communication is the epic fail of this century... |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.02.03 20:36:00 -
[1863] - Quote
Hamox wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:i think they are done with gallente and now focus on the issues listed in the csm minutes and the fan fest. I know I'm repeating myself but CPP's communication is the epic fail of this century...
Definitely.
Hello, CCP? Paying customer here wanting to help improve your product: Minmatar Online.
Hello? |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 06:38:00 -
[1864] - Quote
it would be really nice to know what ccp intends to do next to balance ships cuz after the drake nerf everyone will be using minmatar and tengu |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 20:18:00 -
[1865] - Quote
CCP hs promised to read this thread... @ CCP: If you read this, please reply, one short sentence is enough. Just so that we know you are still there. |
To mare
Advanced Technology
20
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 08:10:00 -
[1866] - Quote
they read this thread and recently they even boosted null wich is totally awesome now the only thing that is a bit weak on hybrid side are maybe medium rails wich are only used for snipers HACs and the problem there is more on the ships that have to use them than the weapon the eagle is bad and the deimos is not designed for that role |
Luscius Uta
Killers of Paranoid Souls
10
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 11:29:00 -
[1867] - Quote
I like the null boost, but I think that a spike boost is also necessary as it's got absurdly long range at the cost of rather low damage, which makes faction ammo still superior in most cases. I'm sure that most people would trade lower range for better damage, for example I would reduce the optimal bonus to 40-50% and increase the damage by 20-25%.
Next thing about rails is that 150/250/425mm rails are not superior enough to their 125/200/350mm equivalents to justify fitting compromises (assuming you can't fit them without compromises, of course), so a 3-5% RoF increase would come handy. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 13:29:00 -
[1868] - Quote
The tier 3 guns have never been supposed to be far superior too their tier 2 guns... They are offering a little better range and dps in return for higher fitting, more cap usage and worse tracking. This game would get pretty boring if only the top tier guns were usefull and in my opinion the 3 top tier short range systems have too good tracking with the tier 1 systems having too little dps and tracking compared.
Pinky |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 22:11:00 -
[1869] - Quote
To mare wrote:they read this thread and recently they even boosted null wich is totally awesome now the only thing that is a bit weak on hybrid side are maybe medium rails wich are only used for snipers HACs and the problem there is more on the ships that have to use them than the weapon the eagle is bad and the deimos is not designed for that role
Why is it the the Diemost has to be pidgeon holed like that? Not designed for that role? I agree with you, but I'm sick of that problem with Gallente ships. You have no problem making a Hurricane a close in killer with AC's. You have no problem making a Hurricane a very effective long range killer with Arty. But try that with a Brutix, or a Mrym, or a Ishkur or a Diemost etc etc. Gallente ships and rails need some work so that either option is available. The platforms should be flexible enough to fully support a wide range of fits in my opinion. I don't know, I'm just going to stop trying to be creative to make Gallente work and go winmatar. |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 05:42:00 -
[1870] - Quote
its funny how all those trades boughtout all vindicators to practicly double there prise and now realize that it wont work out and the price is falling again
so yeah winmatar is the way to go |
|
To mare
Advanced Technology
20
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 08:01:00 -
[1871] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:To mare wrote:they read this thread and recently they even boosted null wich is totally awesome now the only thing that is a bit weak on hybrid side are maybe medium rails wich are only used for snipers HACs and the problem there is more on the ships that have to use them than the weapon the eagle is bad and the deimos is not designed for that role Why is it the the Diemost has to be pidgeon holed like that? Not designed for that role? I agree with you, but I'm sick of that problem with Gallente ships. You have no problem making a Hurricane a close in killer with AC's. You have no problem making a Hurricane a very effective long range killer with Arty. But try that with a Brutix, or a Mrym, or a Ishkur or a Diemost etc etc. Gallente ships and rails need some work so that either option is available. The platforms should be flexible enough to fully support a wide range of fits in my opinion. I don't know, I'm just going to stop trying to be creative to make Gallente work and go winmatar. no T2 ships are specialized ships and the deimos its not meant to be a sniper in the same way you cant be a sniper with a vagabond or a sacrilege. this leave gall w/o a sniper hac true |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 08:46:00 -
[1872] - Quote
Still waiting for feedback... But tbh Deimos are no worse than other T2 Heavy Assault Ships. Being a short range brawler just gets the living s*** kicked out of you because CCP doesn't want to look into the minmatar ships yet. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 09:20:00 -
[1873] - Quote
Deimos is more part of the
HAC Command Ship Interdictor EEW Frig
problem. These ships struggle with survival. There are as usual some exceptions.
The Gallente Problem is still significant. Range, speed and support of minmatar still favors them in most cases. This might be due to tracking enhancers and armor tanking penalty. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.07 19:14:00 -
[1874] - Quote
Hmm let me think about it: Minmatar has AC for short and Arty for long. Amarr have lazors for short and uber-lazors for long... Caldari have nasty missles for long and assault missles for short range and "in theorie" rails for long... Gallente has Blasters for short and... ... erm... ... well... ...aa, now I know: Drones for long range! :P
You see, problem solved. If you find some irony you can keep it!
Edit: Oh Gallente have also Sentry Drones for uber-long sniping mega damage with Ishtar, so you can use Ishtar for short and long range! Just grab some omnidirectional tracking links :D |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 06:48:00 -
[1875] - Quote
thats a bad choise with sentry drones
ur making urself immobile and most likely u will loose ur main weapons faster the u can destroy ur opponent if u choose to move away
if not ur loosing alot of dps by scooping and releasing them
drone ships need a boost to drone damage and the ability to have sentrys fallow them to be usefull |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 07:27:00 -
[1876] - Quote
it was irony ;) |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 12:14:00 -
[1877] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:I like the null boost, but I think that a spike boost is also necessary as it's got absurdly long range at the cost of rather low damage, which makes faction ammo still superior in most cases. I'm sure that most people would trade lower range for better damage, for example I would reduce the optimal bonus to 40-50% and increase the damage by 20-25%.
Next thing about rails is that 150/250/425mm rails are not superior enough to their 125/200/350mm equivalents to justify fitting compromises (assuming you can't fit them without compromises, of course), so a 3-5% RoF increase would come handy.
How can you say Spike has an absurd distance when it's clearly not the case? -Tremor has the same range bonus+tracking bonus ^^
Double TE/TC +2 Sebo Tornado: target 242km ammo range 238 (meh) Now just look at how many low slots/med you can take in mighty mael to do the same and then tell me spike has insane range because I can make the Mael shoot far enough and with such alpha strike all you would do is
Low dps? -hell yes, freacking yes. Absurd range? -no, I will never agree on this one.
|
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.02.09 21:55:00 -
[1878] - Quote
Hybrids still need help. Allow me to explain why:
- Null should give 50/50, not 40/40, at least for medium and large hybrid turrets. This puts ranges more on par with comparable sizes of scorch and autos loaded with RF ammo coupled with TE falloff bonuses. Proj is still cap-free and can choose damage type, and lasers are still dominant in optimal and provide instant ammo swap, so hybrids are STILL lacking even if you give blasters "even" ranges. Still, it's a step in the right direction.
- Railguns are still lackluster. Increased damage is definitely noticable but I think the core issue is that most hybrid vessels just don't bring anything to the table. If you want to balance hybrids properly, you have to uniquely compliment the vessels designed to use them with some defensive mechanism:
- amarr ships typically provide staggering ehp
- minmatar ships typically provide speed/nano
- caldari ships occasionally provide (read: drake/tengu) respectable cap-free shield-buffer ships (although not significant for hybrid vessels)
- gallente ships provide ZILCH for defense
- survivability issue is exasperated when looking at t2 ships: omnitanking amarr/minmatar t2 ships is a breeze, not so much on t2 caldari/gallente
NO ONE wants to fly a ship that cannot be effectively fit to be "survivable." I can nano the hell out of canes and vagabonds and get all sorts of skirmish options. I can plate the hell out of absolutions and mallers and take one hell of a beating, or even better, wait for my RR buddies to show up, providing them with enough buffer AND resists to make their support elementary. Why would I EVER want to fly a hybrid boat? Where's the incentive? What's the tradeoff for using hybrid turrets, turrets which STILL suffer the most handicaps of any weapon in the game?Hello, CCP? |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
170
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 08:03:00 -
[1879] - Quote
I feel rails and blasters are actually in a good spot for frigate and destroyer sized hulls.
I feel like armor tanking and blasters for cruiser and larger hulls were never really meant to be, which is why i shield tank my hybrid (both caldari and gallente) boats. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 16:33:00 -
[1880] - Quote
Super Chair wrote:I feel rails and blasters are actually in a good spot for frigate and destroyer sized hulls.
I feel like armor tanking and blasters for cruiser and larger hulls were never really meant to be, which is why i shield tank my hybrid (both caldari and gallente) boats.
I end up doing the same thing, and I think it displays the issue very plainly and obviously. Why do hybrid gunboats perform better with shield buffers, yet most of these ships have more low slots than mid slots AND typically get armor rep bonuses which end up not being utilized?
Even a new player can see how Gallente ships and hybrid weaponry are at odds with each other. Why is this so hard to fix? |
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 19:20:00 -
[1881] - Quote
galente frigs are only good becouse they can get in range fast
and the limited slot number dosnt give that mutch of an advantage to other frigs in terms of fitting
so u can clearly see why anything bigger then a destroyer is a fail for galente they cant get fast enough into range and some modules give a bigger advantage to other races then to galente
and the curent ballance is so mutch out of balance that all the ships need to be looked at and not only some few shipclasses or designes
and if some people are talking about the galente role then it was taken by minmatar over the last 5 years short-middle range annihilator and long range sniper yes galente was initially designed for that role but minmatar have been patch after patch put into it and made better at almost anything gallente could do and now with all those new shipdesigns brought up we have lost balance in gameplay
in my few tech 1-2 shoul have similar dps, and only be better in traking and have lesser fitting requierements and tech 1-2-3 or different ship tiers should be only better by a very small % and with higher tier or tech should have some special bonus or a slight increase in some atributes like speed or tank now the differences are so huge that someone flys a tech 1 frigate only for takling or cyno like a throw away ship
there is alot more on my mind but its pointless saying anything here |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 23:52:00 -
[1882] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:there is alot more on my mind but its pointless saying anything here
This sentence is sad but true. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.11 00:52:00 -
[1883] - Quote
it is so easy to get a bitter vet :p
the part which is disheartening is not the bad balance it is the lack of a good well rounded communiication. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.11 13:10:00 -
[1884] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:it is so easy to get a bitter vet :p
the part which is disheartening is not the bad balance it is the lack of a good well rounded communiication.
If you read my last 10 posts you will see that I complain about exactly this! I have mentioned the CEO letter and thing CCP promised to improve like listen more to the community and blablablah. I thought Tallest will post here now and then but it seems I was a dreamer.
The really bad thing is that the majority of the players even doesn't care. Many of them have no idea about the ballancing situation, they don't pvp and if they only fly one faction they can not compare it to the other factions. It needs approx 2 years until they get bored and beginn to seriously cross train to an other faction. Two years they have just paid the monthly fee without any complains. As long as the majority is like this things will not change. CCPs interrest is not to create a great game with perfect balancing. It's interrest is to have enough paying players and to earn money. As long as enough new players come that will again stay 1-2 years everything is fine. The older players however they try to hold with marketing blablah and promisses that they are not going to hold but still they try to implement enough with the minimum effort just to keep them in game. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.11 19:08:00 -
[1885] - Quote
yes i read them and i followed this topic from the very beginning. The supporters are mostly old chars which get bored from flying drakes and canes and alpha maels. The newer palyers do not want to shift their skill training to become viable again and complain heavily.
We who still stay in this thread do know the problems and try to fight for a better game. We spend a lot of time brainstorming discussing and finding new ideas. Yet there is still no one saying thanks for the time . not even thanks for your time but we are done. I don't care if a response would be positive i just like to get any response.
Since page 45 there are only posts about us not getting feedback...... and the number of ppl in this thread decreased because of disheartening and fading illusions. It is only 5 ppl left willing to fight :D |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 00:46:00 -
[1886] - Quote
That's their whole strategy. They want you to get tired and lose interest.
It's a very strange situation when the aggressor is the one using passive resistance. |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo THE SPACE P0LICE
34
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 07:04:00 -
[1887] - Quote
Not sure there's any point to posting here anymore, but I'll say my piece anyway.
There are still fitting issues for medium hybrids, though this can also be fixed by improving cruiser powergrids when ccp goes over those hulls.
The core problem with blasters remains, however - to get to engagement range, one of two things needs to happen: Gallente ships need to become the fastest, or their weapons need to have a range extension. I've said it before and I stand by it; give blasters a +100% optimal range bonus during the next iteration. Having to orbit at 2km to hit reliably for cruisers is a pain. The Null buff was nice, but it's the only thing about blasters that is, and you shouldn't have to train for weeks (or months, for large hybrids) just to get the ammo type that makes blasters a viable option.
Rails need more alpha, as that is so important to the long range sniping ships. Overall, they should be doing more dps than artillery since they need cap. And the tracking on medium and large rails should be increased by 10%, as it's still kinda low when you load javelin rounds for close-in work (compared to gleam). |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 20:56:00 -
[1888] - Quote
We should propably start a new thread parralell to this one where we complain about the CCP communication. Otherwise we just could get "tired" and leave the game... |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus Caldari State Capturing
170
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 06:14:00 -
[1889] - Quote
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. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 06:42:00 -
[1890] - 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? |
|
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 10:58:00 -
[1891] - Quote
a fleet onyx with cloak, cyno and double bubble is doing more damage, has more utility, more tank and more range :) |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo THE SPACE P0LICE
34
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 11:03:00 -
[1892] - Quote
Archare wrote: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? Aww snap!
An extra couple of km base range on blasters isn't going to break caldari blaster boats (they could use more range) and the greater the range on blasters, the more ccp needs to consider their damage and tracking output as well. The point is, any improvement to hybrids benefits both, 'cause caldari hybrid boats need love too (see previous comment) |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
24
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 20:18:00 -
[1893] - Quote
Any ETA when we will actually see a dev that understands how and why blaster pvp did work back in the days and therefore is in the position to actually fix it?
Add a special offer to trade gallente sp for minmatar sp, so everybody would be happy. The guys that hate close range pvp, however somehow managed to put all her SP into that and everybody that loved close range blaster gank pvp by the availability of more soft targets to pew at around and finally getting back her solo/small gang close range mobile after 3 years(hopefully in a at least halve way working condition).
If it doesn't got a "If you can read this, you are dead." sticker in the front and a "Gf, thx for the loot" in the back, it is ****, not worth flying and a waste of DB space. Blaster pvp is **** in the meta game since QR(nerfed form the best damage projection to the worst and utterly gimped by the lack of control over the targets at point blank). You need to start with exactly this to bring gallente ships back into the game instead of washing them down to minmatar 0.5.
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.
The problem is that this gives gallente ships to much range(with blasters), what makes the high dps close range concept pretty much pointless(in my opinion it already did hit this point with the null buff). A far better and role focused fix would be to double the optimal bonus on caldari hybrid ships and nerf null falloff and rail range a bit. This also helps a lot of the caldari ships, since it actually makes the optimal bonus useful for blasters compared to the gallente damage bonus and makes them a fast tracking, medium range turret on this hulls. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 20:25:00 -
[1894] - Quote
problem is i have already maxed out my minnie skills... (did that back on 08 in anticipation of the minnie boost) but i spent the last year maxing out my gallente skills in hope that gal would be boosted in a simular fashion...
perhaps they can give me minning bonus? lol
i think we should start harrasing CCP Punkturis (she is on the same team and seems to enjoy communication with the comunity) |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
1039
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 22:06:00 -
[1895] - Quote
Ed: nevermind. Its just not worth it. Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://vimeo.com/user9887127 Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Bacchanalian
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
28
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 01:10:00 -
[1896] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:25km? Seriously? And how much will it make when bonused and pimped out? 50? I don't see how this is realistic.
As for the risk of being webbed by gallente boats, it's already there. Just don't be stupid and don't stand still - pilot your damn ship instead.
I don't deny some stuff needs tweaking (shield rigs and extenders need to have speed penalties intead of foolish signature ones), but asking for such a long web is just way too much.
You should burn some crosses about it. |
carmelos53
Terror Squad. Wicked Intentions.
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 11:16:00 -
[1897] - Quote
A dev or gm response would be nice around now. Hate to say it Ccp but everyday that goes by more and more people think mr CEO hilmar's letter was just a load of doggy do do :S
Even a simple "we are still working on it" would be nice.... |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 13:38:00 -
[1898] - Quote
this tread seems to be dead already |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.02.17 16:28:00 -
[1899] - Quote
Still here and waiting... Maybe CCP blocked us all or maybe Hilmar ordered Tallest to **** on the customers and focus on something else because Eve is more about being popular rather than creating a balanced sandbox. Afterall CCP invented the strategy of "purposely inbalancing to create change of gameplay". What the... But certainly explains the stats on tier 3 battlecruisers? |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.18 16:56:00 -
[1900] - Quote
i still believe, one needs to adress tallest in a more direct fashion than writing in this thread, because he obviously is not reading it anymore. |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2012.02.18 19:36:00 -
[1901] - Quote
My cynical self never expected much from this thread anyways. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 03:55:00 -
[1902] - Quote
R.I.P. Gallente
|
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 05:07:00 -
[1903] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:R.I.P. Gallente
just wait another 5 years till they try another gallente fix |
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
40
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 10:58:00 -
[1904] - Quote
I really don't understand CCP's carelessness on the subjet of balance. Ships and modules stats are a central part of the game, with huge ramifications and impacts on gameplay.
Just changing a few numbers in a database would make a lot of players happy, want to play more or even resubscribe. Why can't they put ONE serious, full-time person in charge of this is completely beyond me.
I'm really angry. |
mine mi
FW Scuad E C L I P S E
5
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 20:31:00 -
[1905] - Quote
The weapon is half of problem the other half is the ship bonus
7.5% bonus to repair amount itGÇÖs a fail, try with 5% bonus to the rate of fire, like Moros, maybe need to cut some drone bandwidth in exchange Why? The Brutix and the Hyperion have 5 and 6 low slot respectively and need low slot for passive tank
10% bonus to fall off? and you gain what? 4 more Km max. I think the new Assault ship bonus 10% reduction in microwarpdrive signature radius penalty, work better, they could microwarpdrive to the target without be a big diana.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 22:00:00 -
[1906] - Quote
have you used a deimos with null and nuetrons with three TE II? you shoot out to like 30-40 km with blasters...
though you are correct either 10% reduction in sig radius... or my fav 10% reduction in mwd mass adition per level...
as for the 7.5% this would be better if they made internal reps base better reduced the bonus to 5% and made it increase incomming RR and increase base armor level...
that would make it on par with 5% to resists... |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 00:22:00 -
[1907] - Quote
Increasing incoming RR and increasing your buffer on the Hyperion would bring it up to par in fleet battles. |
ClusterFook
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 00:31:00 -
[1908] - Quote
Turns out CCP Tallest had twins and is now on paternity leave, as the leader of the re-balance team (there are 3 total) it has been put on the side burner untill he gets back. So i woul not expect ANY hyrbrid/Gallente changes/ re-balance for at least 6 months if at all.
That said enjoy the Gallente frigs and caps, all else can be done better by Mimmatar/Amarr/Caldari. Balance complete. Med/large hybrids outperformed.
Funny i just saw a Tempest fit putting out about the same DPS, slightly more range (about 45km total), but with 20k more EHP (armor tanked), more utility with mids for webs/sebo/painters ect, than a nuetron blaster shield gank Hyperion (3 mag stabs, 2 TE's). gotta love it. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 08:43:00 -
[1909] - Quote
ClusterFook wrote:Turns out CCP Tallest had twins and is now on paternity leave, as the leader of the re-balance team (there are 3 total) it has been put on the side burner untill he gets back. So i woul not expect ANY hyrbrid/Gallente changes/ re-balance for at least 6 months if at all.
that would explain the silence. again, it would have been nice of ccp to inform us... where did you get that from?
ClusterFook wrote: Funny i just saw a Tempest fit putting out about the same DPS, slightly more range (about 45km total), but with 20k more EHP (armor tanked), more utility with mids for webs/sebo/painters ect, than a nuetron blaster shield gank Hyperion (3 mag stabs, 2 TE's). gotta love it.
thats a really bad arguement. it is just too vague for beeing helpful in terms of balancing issues. first of all, you can't take a dedicated armor tanking ship (hyperion), make it a shield tank and then complain, that there isn't enough space for goodies like e-war and webs. when you field a shield-gank-hyperion you really should bring someone along, who does the tackling and webbing for you. next thing is your dps comparison. did you compare fittings in eft, or was it an encounter in space? how did you know they hat the same dps? may it be that the hyperion used null ammo and the tempest something like republic fusion or hail (but then same dps and a range of 45km sounds very odd)? that would be like a comparison between barrage and void. the damage projection of the blasters will be worse of course but fighting a autocannon (i assume the tempest used ac's?) boat in falloff with blasters seems to be a bad idea to begin with. |
PinkKnife
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
71
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 21:21:00 -
[1910] - Quote
One giant problem, many of the gallente ship bonuses are effectively useless in fleet PVP where self rep is useless.
It is great for solo work, but in fleets, where most combat is done, it is useless.
Proposed fixes: reduction to MWD mass/sig radius per level. increase to drone bandwidth/damage per level increase to velocity per level.
The turrets in themselves I'd say are competitive (almost) the problem now lies in the other half of the equation in that the ships themselves are unfocused and somewhat broken. |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 10:10:00 -
[1911] - Quote
Dammit - this thread dropped to page 2 after the baby news?
It should totally be a sticky until issues are solved |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
177
|
Posted - 2012.02.28 15:43:00 -
[1912] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Dammit - this thread dropped to page 2 after the baby news? It should totally be a sticky until issues are solved
100% agree. I've been asking for this for weeks also.
My faith is waivering, however.... |
Bruno Bummel
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 15:39:00 -
[1913] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:R.I.P. Gallente just wait another 5 years till they try another gallente fix
While we wait this time, please block creation of new "soon frustrated" gallente chars and add a waring to the respective skills. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 12:34:00 -
[1914] - Quote
Well - The hybrids are far from fixed, but I don't hear anyone complaint about blaster dps If you have a hostile blaster megathron landing on you there isn't even time to "It's a TRAAA....." |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 18:50:00 -
[1915] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Well - The hybrids are far from fixed, but I don't hear anyone complaint about blaster dps If you have a hostile blaster megathron landing on you there isn't even time to "It's a TRAAA....."
Well actually my view would be that the Blaster DPS is not too much, given how dificult it is to get into range of a Minin ship, or the superior EHP of comparable Amarr ships blasters dont do that much DPS, possibly not enough, if your prey has 50% more EHP then you should have 50% more DPS to be on par, not 10%.
|
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 13:08:00 -
[1916] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Well - The hybrids are far from fixed, but I don't hear anyone complaint about blaster dps If you have a hostile blaster megathron landing on you there isn't even time to "It's a TRAAA....." There are other things than dps, you know.
For example the fact that you want to be in range fast enough for being able to participate in the fight before you or your opponent dies. You also don-¦t want to be constantly unable to do anything because you are the only one vulnerable to and in range of all that nasty stuff like neut nos scram web and whatever. Other weapon systems either allow to keep out of range of this stuff or can keep going despite the effects of this stuff... or even both.
The ships and the weapons should have design features that support close combat, something that is currently not the case. Without it blasters will remain highly situational, only with such balancing and design changes they can be used outside of their small little niche.
Well, about the first problem: most people -by now- were favoring making gallente the fastest race. But i-¦d like to do a little bit brainstorming if there are other ways to achieve it. Because apparently keeping the minmatar the fastest and most agile race is something ccp insits upon. And therefore alternatives might be needed.
What if we gave every blaster ship cloak bonus. making them able to circumvent the getting into range problem by sneaking up on their opponents , so that they are beginning their fights on top. "You either need less science fiction or more medication."
"Or less medication and more ammo!" |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.03.03 13:47:00 -
[1917] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:[quote=Pinky Denmark]Well - The hybrids are far from fixed, but I don't hear anyone complaint about blaster dps [..] The ships and the weapons should have design features that support close combat, something that is currently not the case. Without it blasters will remain highly situational, only with such balancing and design changes they can be used outside of their small little niche. [..]
i still like the idea of blasters beeing litte cap-boosters....
|
Ogogov
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.04 02:34:00 -
[1918] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Well - The hybrids are far from fixed, but I don't hear anyone complaint about blaster dps If you have a hostile blaster megathron landing on you there isn't even time to "It's a TRAAA....." There are other things than dps, you know. For example the fact that you want to be in range fast enough for being able to participate in the fight before you or your opponent dies. You also don-¦t want to be constantly unable to do anything because you are the only one vulnerable to and in range of all that nasty stuff like neut nos scram web and whatever. Other weapon systems either allow to keep out of range of this stuff or can keep going despite the effects of this stuff... or even both. The ships and the weapons should have design features that support close combat, something that is currently not the case. Without it blasters will remain highly situational, only with such balancing and design changes they can be used outside of their small little niche. Well, about the first problem: most people -by now- were favoring making gallente the fastest race. But i-¦d like to do a little bit brainstorming if there are other ways to achieve it. Because apparently keeping the minmatar the fastest and most agile race is something ccp insits upon. And therefore alternatives might be needed. What if we gave every blaster ship cloak bonus. making them able to circumvent the getting into range problem by sneaking up on their opponents , so that they are beginning their fights on top.
The answer to this is very easy, make Minmatar ships the fastest in terms of top speed by a large margin and the second most maneouverable, however make Gallente ships more agile with lower mass, hence they will accelerate faster and be able to catch anything within a certain radius. |
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
66
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 18:15:00 -
[1919] - Quote
... |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 21:48:00 -
[1920] - Quote
This threat is obsolete.
why?
the dev team has seen the core problems after working on gallente ships. We will now get a redesign of tier/skill and ship role system. We also get new modules
Both had it's origin in this very threat. We demanded new modules. We started talking about basic roles in pvp/pve. We demanded change is good for eve. We might get more than we ever expected now :) |
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 14:51:00 -
[1921] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:This threat is obsolete.
why?
the dev team has seen the core problems after working on gallente ships. We will now get a redesign of tier/skill and ship role system. We also get new modules
Both had it's origin in this very threat. We demanded new modules. We started talking about basic roles in pvp/pve. We demanded change is good for eve. We might get more than we ever expected now :)
Hell yeah ! it will be cool well balanced and the best ! we will see all spaceships in fleets. Drakes and Myrmidons in the same fleet fighting for better tomorrow ! NOT ! |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 15:51:00 -
[1922] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Pinky Denmark wrote:Well - The hybrids are far from fixed, but I don't hear anyone complaint about blaster dps If you have a hostile blaster megathron landing on you there isn't even time to "It's a TRAAA....." Well actually my view would be that the Blaster DPS is not too much, given how dificult it is to get into range of a Minin ship, or the superior EHP of comparable Amarr ships blasters dont do that much DPS, possibly not enough, if your prey has 50% more EHP then you should have 50% more DPS to be on par, not 10%.
Welcome to modern Eve where you can pretty much land directly on targets if you want, and T2 gun users even had NULL range extended... I agree minmatar ships should trade agility/mass with Gallente blasterships, but boosting dps is a minefield of proportions. Add ewar and logistics, and suddenly it doesn't matter how much EHP you have - The DPS ships will have a huge advantage.
Most people in general prefer dps over tank - because you can't replace dps with anything on a straight 1 to 1 basis. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Catholic School for Boys EXPLO. KINETIK und ein wenig THERMAL
14
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 17:42:00 -
[1923] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:This threat is obsolete.
why?
the dev team has seen the core problems after working on gallente ships. We will now get a redesign of tier/skill and ship role system. We also get new modules
Both had it's origin in this very threat. We demanded new modules. We started talking about basic roles in pvp/pve. We demanded change is good for eve. We might get more than we ever expected now :) Hell yeah ! it will be cool well balanced and the best ! we will see all spaceships in fleets. Drakes and Myrmidons in the same fleet fighting for better tomorrow ! NOT !
maybe one could wait how this announcement ( give it a chance ) turns out? when it fails, well still enough time to be a bittervet afterwards. or just quit eve, your choice. beeing all cynical now will not change a thing ;)
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
97
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 12:50:00 -
[1924] - Quote
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 |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.03.09 15:56:00 -
[1925] - 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 |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 18:57:00 -
[1926] - Quote
The bit CCP said they are going to compare the Abaddon with the Hyperion made my heart grow twice its size. |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 19:07:00 -
[1927] - Quote
ClusterFook wrote:Turns out CCP Tallest had twins and is now on paternity leave, as the leader of the re-balance team (there are 3 total) it has been put on the side burner untill he gets back. So i woul not expect ANY hyrbrid/Gallente changes/ re-balance for at least 6 months if at all.
While this is good news for Tallest and I wish him all the best it turns out again that CCP is a bunch of ...
It should not be our problem that Tallest is away now. CCP should replace him until he comes back. They have promissed to fix hybrids, they have promissed to fix the stupid game and they have promised to listen to their community but it seems that Gal Pilots are not part of this community.
I have a bit time left with my plexes, no improvement and no news regarding this topic means for me I leave this game (2nd time but this time forever).
CCP was / is / and will stay forever an ignorant company that does't care about communication too much but instead makes marketing promises that they are not going to hold. |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
67
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 21:30:00 -
[1928] - Quote
this info might be usefull for you :)
Micro Jump Drive I [+|n] medPower [+|n] microJumpDrive [+|n] online [+] capacitorNeed: 946.0 [+] capacity: 0 [+] cpu: 77.0 [+] disallowRepeatingActivation: 1.0 [+] duration: 30000.0 [+] gallenteNavyBonusMultiplier: 0 [+] heatAbsorbtionRateModifier: 0.04 [+] heatDamage: 8.2 [+] hp: 40.0 [+] mass: 0 [+] maxGroupActive: 1.0 [+] metaLevel: 0 [+] moduleReactivationDelay: 120000.0 [+] power: 1375.0 [+] republicFleetBonusMultiplier: 0 [+] requiredSkill1: 4385.0 [+] requiredSkill1Level: 1.0 [+] requiredThermoDynamicsSkill: 1.0 [+] signatureRadiusBonusPercent: 500.0 [+] techLevel: 1.0 [+] volume: 10.0 [+] warpScrambleStrength: -1.0
[+] Mobile Large Jump Disruptor I [+|n] anchorDrop [+|n] anchorLift [+] anchoringDelay: 360000.0 [+] armorHP: 60000.0 [+] capacity: 0 [+] hp: 120000.0 [+] mass: 0 [+] metaLevel: 0 [+] requiredSkill1: 11584.0 [+] requiredSkill1Level: 3.0 [+] requiredSkill2: 3435.0 [+] requiredSkill2Level: 4.0 [+] requiredSkill3: 4385.0 [+] requiredSkill3Level: 3.0 [+] scanLadarStrength: 25.0 [+] shieldCapacity: 40000.0 [+] shieldRechargeRate: 1200000.0 [+] signatureRadius: 450.0 [+] techLevel: 1.0 [+] volume: 585.0 |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.11 21:51:00 -
[1929] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:this info might be usefull for you :)
Micro Jump Drive I [+|n] medPower [+|n] microJumpDrive [+|n] online [+] capacitorNeed: 946.0 [+] capacity: 0 [+] cpu: 77.0 [+] disallowRepeatingActivation: 1.0 [+] duration: 30000.0 [+] gallenteNavyBonusMultiplier: 0 [+] heatAbsorbtionRateModifier: 0.04 [+] heatDamage: 8.2 [+] hp: 40.0 [+] mass: 0 [+] maxGroupActive: 1.0 [+] metaLevel: 0 [+] moduleReactivationDelay: 120000.0 [+] power: 1375.0 [+] republicFleetBonusMultiplier: 0 [+] requiredSkill1: 4385.0 [+] requiredSkill1Level: 1.0 [+] requiredThermoDynamicsSkill: 1.0 [+] signatureRadiusBonusPercent: 500.0 [+] techLevel: 1.0 [+] volume: 10.0 [+] warpScrambleStrength: -1.0
[+] Mobile Large Jump Disruptor I [+|n] anchorDrop [+|n] anchorLift [+] anchoringDelay: 360000.0 [+] armorHP: 60000.0 [+] capacity: 0 [+] hp: 120000.0 [+] mass: 0 [+] metaLevel: 0 [+] requiredSkill1: 11584.0 [+] requiredSkill1Level: 3.0 [+] requiredSkill2: 3435.0 [+] requiredSkill2Level: 4.0 [+] requiredSkill3: 4385.0 [+] requiredSkill3Level: 3.0 [+] scanLadarStrength: 25.0 [+] shieldCapacity: 40000.0 [+] shieldRechargeRate: 1200000.0 [+] signatureRadius: 450.0 [+] techLevel: 1.0 [+] volume: 585.0
I was 4 weeks offline due to a business trip. Did I miss something? I'm confused. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
69
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 01:37:00 -
[1930] - 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. |
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 08:31:00 -
[1931] - Quote
WOW ! This thread is over 70K views now ! nice.
Should we mak a party after 100K ? CCP guys, what you thinking ?
Happy 70.000 Guys ! |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
511
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 10:00:00 -
[1932] - Quote
^ I say make party, when hybrids are buffed again and worth using. I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 17:07:00 -
[1933] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ I say make party, when hybrids are buffed again and worth using.
Word. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
277
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 19:26:00 -
[1934] - Quote
i'm having a party everyday
Nice balancing, not op but competent - good job.
MJD sounds interesting, but probably needs quite a bit of testing, maybe just in time for Inferno.
Hope Tallest gets back to work in time :)
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 18:38:00 -
[1935] - Quote
bump - just want to make sure this lovely thread doesn't die ;)
Or do you guys think hybrid ballancing has been finished? |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 00:31:00 -
[1936] - Quote
pokes thread with stick
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
tEcHnOkRaT
Aliastra Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 01:22:00 -
[1937] - Quote
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9129
so all the fighting for a better balance was not for nothing
and CCP finally understood the necesity of it lets hope they do it right this time |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
40
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 20:05:00 -
[1938] - Quote
The mjd looks pretty terrible if it indeed takes 30s to spool up. not to mention 100km microjump seems kinda stupid considering folks were griping about the charge from 20ish to 5km. not charging at a target from 100. worse than just useless as an offensive module imo |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 23:26:00 -
[1939] - Quote
tEcHnOkRaT wrote:http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9129
so all the fighting for a better balance was not for nothing
and CCP finally understood the necesity of it lets hope they do it right this time
Cool, in about only 3 years the game will finally be balanced, this is (for CCP) very good news ;) |
thoth rothschild
First Aid Emergency Service
68
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 23:45:00 -
[1940] - Quote
Yes the MJD would be great if it would jump me 30 km after 15 seconds. In addition i would like to jump my command ship, hic, heavy assault ship.
For bs fleets a 100km jump looks like a nice fleet tactic manouver. For med scale and some hunting in high or lowsec i'd like a 10mn version with less jump range and less spoolup.
i simply wuld like the idea of some cs jumping on those tengus at the next alliance tournament a 100mn version won't bring much flavor for the alliance tournament.
BTW i demand more tournamants on eve tv ^^ |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
437
|
Posted - 2012.03.18 13:29:00 -
[1941] - Quote
God knows how long they are going to take.
They should just focus entirely on balancing on Inferno 1.5 or whatever. |
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
178
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 22:33:00 -
[1942] - Quote
MJDs do nothing for hybrids. Projectiles are still cap-free and lasers still have dominant optimal. Have we learned nothing from this monstrously atrocious thread? How does introducing a new item suddenly and magically fix the shortcomings of another? Even if MJDs were the magical item that gives blasters the ability to live up to their potential, all that would happen is other ships would fit it to get away. If anything, MJDs will only contribute to a long-range game of cat and mouse, promoting artillery/beams/rails.
I'm sorry, but I don't see why MJDs are even being discussed here. |
Ogogov
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 14:31:00 -
[1943] - Quote
Magosian wrote:I'm sorry, but I don't see why MJDs are even being discussed here.
This. What the hell has a microjump drive got to do with hybrids? Please make a separate thread in Features and Ideas and try to keep this one on topic.
I am disappointed by where the balancing has left hybrids (IE - slightly-less-awful-than-before) but I can also understand that with the announcement of the "game of drones team" (who we have heard worryingly little from in the Dev Blogs), CCP might not be willing to go further.
With Tallest out on paternity leave I'd expect balancing to go absolutely nowhere until next winter. This does make me feel somewhat cheated given how hard the eve community pushed for consistent iterative balancing, and I think CCP needs to either make a statement on the situation or assign another full-time employee to the task. Ship and module balancing is arguably the biggest gameplay component in eve upon which almost every other activity depends. It shouldn't be affected by one guy needing to take time off.
|
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.20 20:39:00 -
[1944] - Quote
Ogogov wrote:Magosian wrote:I'm sorry, but I don't see why MJDs are even being discussed here. This. What the hell has a microjump drive got to do with hybrids? Please make a separate thread in Features and Ideas and try to keep this one on topic. I am disappointed by where the balancing has left hybrids (IE - slightly-less-awful-than-before) but I can also understand that with the announcement of the "game of drones team" (who we have heard worryingly little from in the Dev Blogs), CCP might not be willing to go further. With Tallest out on paternity leave I'd expect balancing to go absolutely nowhere until next winter. This does make me feel somewhat cheated given how hard the eve community pushed for consistent iterative balancing, and I think CCP needs to either make a statement on the situation or assign another full-time employee to the task. Ship and module balancing is arguably the biggest gameplay component in eve upon which almost every other activity depends. It shouldn't be affected by one guy needing to take time off.
Now what have we learned? Better set no expectations into CCP so you don't get disapointed. I could now beginn to talk about the letter, the CEO and his marketing blabla like "listen" to something like the "playerbase" or "community" and "improvement" and "have learn from previous mistakes" and so on. Well, lets just forgett this whole topic. From CCP's point of view we are just a handfull guys complaining and "there will always be a few that are not happy, they will never be happy...". This is the situation. Accept it, get over it, or leave the game. The last one is my advice. Or alternatively enjoy your Enyo and kill something. At least you have one ship now so stfu and be thankfull, could be worse :P |
Gustav Knuttsen
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 19:39:00 -
[1945] - Quote
Guys, I was able to ask question on fan fest - via twitter :) Thank to this guy who ask this question for me ! Cheers bro !
So I was able to ask question on Design Panel - here it is : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pLi1J9YrkM&feature=g-all-u&context=G206e61aFAAAAAAAABAA
Fast forward to 52:35
So yeah - Gallente ships are big issue got problem with tanking and for sure they will be fixed but when ? soon (tm)
Keep "lobbing" for gallente ships guys ! Regards |
Hamox
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 00:23:00 -
[1946] - Quote
Thank you for the link, but I don't believe what he says, "soon" and then he laughts... Giving this thread they have promissed to fix it "with the winter 2011 pack". Well, they didn't. Then there was some blablah about end of Feb 2012... After that Tallest disappeared without any info. Some say he is at parental leave but disapointing that there is nothing from CCP here. Even if he is at parental leave why CCP doesn't replace him with an other Dev who will look at hybrids in the meantime? Even if they consider this topic as finished, why are they not able to give us an answer here?
This entire topic is more marketing blablah than everything else... Same stuff like the CEO letter and all the other stuff they promise but do not hold.
CCP at it's best. |
Galphii
Furnulum pani nolo THE SPACE P0LICE
39
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 01:50:00 -
[1947] - Quote
Gustav Knuttsen wrote:Guys, I was able to ask question on fan fest - via twitter :) Thank to this guy who ask this question for me ! Cheers bro !
Well I guess this counts as a response to this thread at least, which is what we've all wanted. Not the answer I was hoping for tho - the dreaded 'SoonGäó'!
It seems to me though, that they can't properly balance all the ships without addressing this issue, so perhaps as they're going through all the frigs, cruisers etc they will look at what can be done to fix, and when that day comes, I hope they browse through this thread, as there were a lot of good ideas bandied around. |
Archare
SKEET ELITE Sk33t Fl33t
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.30 02:58:00 -
[1948] - Quote
While the it's the another delay with the "soon(tm)" response, i guess it's better than "working as intended"... |
DonHel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2012.04.01 14:45:00 -
[1949] - Quote
As a gallente pilot, I must say... Love it! thanks for getting around to balancing these things out a bit more. awesome work ccp |
Keen Fallsword
The Scope Gallente Federation
63
|
Posted - 2012.04.03 03:34:00 -
[1950] - Quote
Im doing small break from eve and i will back when gallente ships will be ready to roll !! Yeah |
|
|
|
|
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] |