EVE Search - Blasters balance post with pictures and stuff

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Blasters balance post with pictures and stuff

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 12:58:00 - [1] Ok as you know blasters are getting some love. They weren't quite complete but a step in the right direction. SiSi has been having its own problems so the changes haven't been ported over to it, so I'm taking another look at the changes. I think it was Rod Blaine that complained that I didn't really explain the reasons behind the changes that well so I'm trying to do it a bit better here. DOT approach Lets just take a look at raw damage over time for a second. Personally I don't think the dot graph makes any sense without the racial bonuses so the graph shows the result with ships bonuses at level 5. As you can see Blasters on a megathron give you the best dot. The 800mm repeating artillery on Tempest isn't far behind but keep in mind that it gets two damage bonuses so when only thinking of damage over time it gets reletively the most increase for each skill level it trains. So with racial battleship at level 4 the difference is a bit larger and this is not factoring reloading time which The mega pulse on an Armageddon don't look to bad, especially considering it has much superior range than the neutron blasters. Lasers kind of have a build in damage bonus that they get at the cost of cap, which is why you could argue that the laser cap bonus is similar to damage bonus for the other turrets and that the energy pulse lasers on an armageddon is kind of like getting two damage bonuses. So although mega pulse lasers look pretty sweet for the armageddon they don't look all that great on the apocalypse. We're really only discussing turret balance here but for completion I've put in the torpedoes on a raven there as well. Now Ships tend to move around in combat so lets put tracking into this. Tracking This is assuming a target with 350m signature radius and transversal velocity of 125m/sec The turrets here look pretty much ok, or at least they look how they should look. Blasters on a mega do the most damage close up followed by artillery and then pulse lasers. Blasters should be better than the other turrets up close so the question is really are they good enough. Blaster boats need to get close to do their killing and unless they are lucky enough to start at 5km away from its opponent it is going to need to make that hard sprint towards its opponent, where its taking damage, not doing damage and wasting cap. Its only consolation is that when it gets close its guns do more damage over time and track better. The only problem is that blasters usually web their targets, if the blaster boat is webbed in return. As you might imagine then two webbed battleship hit each other pretty easily so the tracking advantage on the blasters is pretty much gone. Blasters still do more damage but probably not enough to compensate for the damage it took in the way in. Why am I ranting about webbers? I'm just saying that even with wastly improved tracking blasterboats will still have issues. Ok I might imagine that some of you might be screaming now "OMG ISN'T HE GONNA COMMENT ON TEH TORPEDOES!!!!111". Well I think it starting to dawn on some people why Torpedo raven is so powerful. In a battleship fight the speed of the opponents ship doesn't really factor in for torpedoes. In fact the target needs to go over 1000m/sec before you start to see a damage reduction on torpedoes because of targets speed. On the other hand then signature radius affects torpedoes much worse than turrets and the torpedo user can't simply slow its target down to compensate, it needs to use target painters which are far less effective for missile users than webifiers are for turret users. Moral of story, missiles are different than turrets. Doesn't change the fact that by only looking at this graph then I'd put my money on the Raven but that doesn't have so much to do ... _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 12:58:00 - [2] Blasters. Fitting Lets take a look at grid first. 7 neutron blaster cannons II take up 16 541 MW ignoring the advanced weapon upgrade skill. With engineering level 5 the megathron has 19 375MW to play with so that leaves 2 834MW. Using the same logic on mega pulse lasers on armageddon and apocalypse we find out that Apoc has 5125MW and Armageddon has 1 375MW. Gridwise I think blasters are fine, it is somewhat easier to fit mega pulse on an apoc but it doesn't really do the same damage as blasterthron, and although arma gets pretty close to the damage output its a bit harder to fit than mega. CPU Using the same logic as with the grid then megathron with blasters has 204.5 tf left, apoc 254 tf and arma 191.5 tf. This is with the 10% reduction in cpu. I guess the cpu left is a bit low. Giving it a 15% reduction gets it down to 62tf which it leaves it with 253.5 tf left which is pretty similar to apocalypse with mega pulse lasers. Cap I said I would lower the cap by 15%. Ignoring bonuses then that brings neutron blasters down to 2.8 cap/sec. Mega pulse laser with amarr battleship level 5 use 2.53 cap/sec. Ok I'll admit it maybe a was a bit to conservative since I would think even at level 5 neutron blasters should still use less cap/sec than megapulse lasers. Reducing it to 25% lowers it to about 2.5 which is about the same as mega pulse lasers and 30% brings it down to 2.3 cap/sec. So what does that mean. Well the cap need will be reduced further, probably by 30% rather than 25%. CPU need decreased by about 15% instead of 10%. Tracking very possibly boosted a bit but it's hard to pin down a number and it really won't fix everything about blasters. So this was a little glimpse into my twisted mind, flame away. p.s. Happy Birthday _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:42:00 - [3] Originally by: Ithildin Tuxford, can you do the CPU and Powergrid comparisons again, but this time fit an MWD on the Megathron and nothing else on the Geddon/Apoc. They've got the range for not needing an MWD, the Megathron doesn't. But the megathron really has the advantage with an mwd since its can control the range. Anyways the tech 2 mwd takes 1375 MW and 75tf. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:44:00 - [4] Originally by: GoGo Yubari Also, somehow using 800mm autocannons as a comparison seems iffy. They suck, you know. They still do more damage over time than dual 625mm although when you factor in the reloading just barely and further factor in the human response probably worse than the dual 625mm. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:52:00 - [5] Originally by: GoGo Yubari Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: GoGo Yubari Also, somehow using 800mm autocannons as a comparison seems iffy. They suck, you know. They still do more damage over time than dual 625mm although when you factor in the reloading just barely and further factor in the human response probably worse than the dual 625mm. And though the figure gives them nice tracking nearby, they really hit everything but the target. Nevertheless, they end up being the least used autocannons. Of course noone uses them. If you can choose between two weapons that do the same damage but one is easier to fit then of course you choose the one that is easier to fit. But for looking at dot not factoring in reload or fitting I can just as well use 800mm. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:00:00 - [6] By my numbers megathron is the second lightest tech 1 battleship with the third highest base speed. So apart from Typhoon and Tempest its the fastest one with mwd. So even when the arma or apoc fit an mwd mega still dictates the range. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:22:00 - [7] Originally by: Xune Originally by: Tuxford By my numbers megathron is the second lightest tech 1 battleship with the third highest base speed. So apart from Typhoon and Tempest its the fastest one with mwd. So even when the arma or apoc fit an mwd mega still dictates the range. it might be.. but still the differance is to low realy.. if ou ask me the vindicator got the right acceleration/agility... mega should get the same. Vindicator has the same velocity as a mega but the is heavier. Of course I can just go ahead and increase the mass on the mega if you want that I know it is not much of a difference but given that both ships have the same stuff fitted (mwd, webber) then the armageddon can't get away from the mega once its in range. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:29:00 - [8] Originally by: Ithildin The Vindicator has about 33% better agility than any other battleship. Damnit I specifically looked for the agility. Seems weird though I would have just given it less mass. It is more agile than mega but does travel slower with an ab or mwd though. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:30:00 - [9] Originally by: Vortex Freeman Did you forget the railguns?!?!?!?!?!? I'd very much like to see how they compare, why leave them out? Because I'm balancing blasters not railguns. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:39:00 - [10] Originally by: Vortex Freeman Edited by: Vortex Freeman on 06/05/2006 14:33:45 Originally by: Tuxford Because I'm balancing blasters not railguns. Yes but balancing compared to what? Sure rails are very different but it'd still be interesting to see how they compare and you did put torps in there. The torps are really close range weapon. Well close range weapon with 80km range. Railguns really have no relevance in this graph. They have much superior range but do a lot less damage. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:45:00 - [11] Originally by: Nyphur Try compounding that DOT graph with skills and modules. Things that start off with higher base damage per second end up gaining more benefit in raw damage/second from skills and modules since all the percentage damage bonuses multiply with each other. These graphs are all assuming perfect skills. Like you said some get more out of their ships skill than other. For example Tempest gets a rate of fire and damage bonus while the mega gets damage and tracking bonus. So at level 2 the dot looks a lot crappier for the tempest pilot than the megathron pilot. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:46:00 - [12] Originally by: Phelan Lore Originally by: Tuxford Of course noone uses them. If you can choose between two weapons that do the same damage but one is easier to fit then of course you choose the one that is easier to fit. /highjack So does this mean that you are looking into upping projectile ammo capacity, or decreasing reload time? Why does everyone ignore the nerfing way. I could just as well reduce the ammo capacity of the lower tier autocannons. runs away before the real flame starts _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.08 10:47:00 - [13] Originally by: Meridius Umm those graphs look off for mega pulse o,- Those look like pre-nerf mega pulse ranges... Actually I believe you're right. Updated the two pictures. _______________

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