EVE Search - Tux's Dev Blog (Minmatar related and otherwise)

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Tux's Dev Blog (Minmatar related and otherwise)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Grimpak	Posted - 2006.05.22 18:19:00 - [31] Originally by: SengH I dunno, a ROF increase would be very hard to balance as any upgrade that would make a difference would make them overpowered . Someone needs to do a 3 axis graph of tracking speed vs dps vs range because even though the tracking on artys still suck compared to all other guns, the increased ROF would give them a higher chance to hit. We dont want to turn them into mini-machariel guns. well... an overpowered minmatar gun is something that I never saw if you ask me ------- Originally by: Abdalion Originally by: Jebidus Skari What, in EVE, is a Tyrant? Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
SengH	Posted - 2006.05.22 18:25:00 - [32] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: SengH I dunno, a ROF increase would be very hard to balance as any upgrade that would make a difference would make them overpowered . Someone needs to do a 3 axis graph of tracking speed vs dps vs range because even though the tracking on artys still suck compared to all other guns, the increased ROF would give them a higher chance to hit. We dont want to turn them into mini-machariel guns. well... an overpowered minmatar gun is something that I never saw if you ask me pre- castor 1400s ... back when there was no such thing as tracking ingame. Imagine 1400s that always hit lol...
Nafri	Posted - 2006.05.22 18:41:00 - [33] Originally by: SengH Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: SengH I dunno, a ROF increase would be very hard to balance as any upgrade that would make a difference would make them overpowered . Someone needs to do a 3 axis graph of tracking speed vs dps vs range because even though the tracking on artys still suck compared to all other guns, the increased ROF would give them a higher chance to hit. We dont want to turn them into mini-machariel guns. well... an overpowered minmatar gun is something that I never saw if you ask me pre- castor 1400s ... back when there was no such thing as tracking ingame. Imagine 1400s that always hit lol... costed me tons of frigates Summertime - Campingtime!
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.05.22 19:01:00 - [34] for 1200 vs 1400 i don't think the 10% boost is so bad... it should put the difference in dps between them at around 5% (i think was over 10% before) considering they are easier to fit i think they are now quite comparable... probably more balance will be needed but imo was a step in the right direction
Grimpak	Posted - 2006.05.22 19:07:00 - [35] Originally by: SengH Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: SengH I dunno, a ROF increase would be very hard to balance as any upgrade that would make a difference would make them overpowered . Someone needs to do a 3 axis graph of tracking speed vs dps vs range because even though the tracking on artys still suck compared to all other guns, the increased ROF would give them a higher chance to hit. We dont want to turn them into mini-machariel guns. well... an overpowered minmatar gun is something that I never saw if you ask me pre- castor 1400s ... back when there was no such thing as tracking ingame. Imagine 1400s that always hit lol... oh man I forgot that... ....almost 2k wreckings in frigs and shuttles and pods and stuff... ...oh the days ------- Originally by: Abdalion Originally by: Jebidus Skari What, in EVE, is a Tyrant? Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
Imode	Posted - 2006.05.22 19:19:00 - [36] Reducing ammo usage for AC's is a toughy. You'd have to increase the damage and reduce the ROF, all of which begins to take away from the autocannon feel. Maybe an m3 reduction in ammo is needed here? As for defender missiles, how about making it a mid slot 'always on' type of mod instead of having to click it whenever missiles are fired then shortly after turns itself off. ____________________________ Signature file size to large, please keep it under 24000 bytes - Petwraith How's this? -imo
Tyler Lowe	Posted - 2006.05.22 19:45:00 - [37] Edited by: Tyler Lowe on 22/05/2006 19:51:16 Originally by: Tuxford ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nosferatus/Energy Neutralizers Bigger = better when it comes to nosferatus. That might not necessarily be a bad thing but the only way to counter a nos is by using a nos, so a frigate can't sacrifice some of its slots to defend itself from a battleship's nosferatus. Personally, I'd want to see some counter-nosferatu mods rather than adding "tracking" to it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- I figure a weapon resolution rather than a tracking mod would work with these. Large NOS would have a resolution similar to large turret weapons, greatly reducing the amount of cap they would drain from a frigate. Combined with a stacking penalty so that targeting a single ship with more than two NOS is pointless, the range limitations NOS already suffer, and that starts to look like a balanced weapon to me, one which is still worth using a highslot or two on, but not a single mod that dictates the outcome of battle. When a missle launcher is loaded with defenders, their default condition should be launch. I could definately see a mid slot module that did just that: required a small activation cost, and autofired defender missiles. Turret disruption works well, there should be some sort of missle defense as a viable option IMO. You could select auto repeat or not with such a mod. edit. I think Imode is on the right track with an M3 reduction in projectile ammo, but the large AC's could still use a bump up in damage. They really are a bit lame right now.
Nafri	Posted - 2006.05.22 20:08:00 - [38] Originally by: Ath Amon for 1200 vs 1400 i don't think the 10% boost is so bad... it should put the difference in dps between them at around 5% (i think was over 10% before) considering they are easier to fit i think they are now quite comparable... probably more balance will be needed but imo was a step in the right direction problem is, the only good point about 1400 is their alphastrike, 1200 dont have it so thy are pointless Summertime - Campingtime!
Wilfan Ret'nub	Posted - 2006.05.22 20:22:00 - [39] Originally by: Imode Reducing ammo usage for AC's is a toughy. You'd have to increase the damage and reduce the ROF, all of which begins to take away from the autocannon feel. Maybe an m3 reduction in ammo is needed here? Yes, that's probably the best idea. Decreasing ammo volume would make reloads less often (thus increasing long-term DPS a bit) AND free up the cargo hold (so mission runners don't have go dock for more ammo all the time). Then Tux could also reduce the mineral cost and build times on the proj. ammo BPOs to bring it all in line. Though I don't really see that happen, as the "OMG no cap!!!11oneeleven" crowd would completely lose it at that point. As for defenders, making them mid slot would turn them into just another flavor of tracking distuptor. OTOH fixing them as missile launcher ammo could lead to "Caldari standoff" - two Ravens doing negligible damage by shooting down each other's missiles, each one waiting for the other to swap defenders out...
SengH	Posted - 2006.05.22 20:26:00 - [40] tbh he could have just said minnie guns have been given a flat decrease of 2-3 cap and that would have gone down much better :P and the non minnie whiners would be silent.

Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.05.22 20:38:00 - [41] Originally by: Nafri Originally by: Ath Amon for 1200 vs 1400 i don't think the 10% boost is so bad... it should put the difference in dps between them at around 5% (i think was over 10% before) considering they are easier to fit i think they are now quite comparable... probably more balance will be needed but imo was a step in the right direction problem is, the only good point about 1400 is their alphastrike, 1200 dont have it so thy are pointless yes i agree with that, but i think here the problem is no more 1400 vs 1200 but proj vs other weapons as said in another post i think that proj need generally some love as the thing that makes them "feel" balanced is imo the tempest having both a dmg and a rof bonus vs other turret BS having just 1 dmg mod... in this situation a tempest can have both a good alpha and a decent overall dps, but my fear is that when we will start to see other BS with dmg/rof mods the gain in alpha will not be worth compared the overall DPS loss.
Rexy	Posted - 2006.05.22 22:32:00 - [42] given that artillery tracking is pretty poor to begin with there would only be two reasons to fit lower tier howhitzers. they either do better dps then the longer ranged, better alpha strike top range versions or have a seriously improved tracking.the lower tier howwy's are easy enough to fit imho, but just not worth it, i'll have to see how this 10% damage boost works out, but i doubt it's worth it still. given that dps is still poor you want alpha strike anyway with howwie's, wich pretty much rules out the lower tiers then.
KIvante	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:06:00 - [43] I have been at eve for about 2 years now and i don't train other races ships or weapons. So as you can imagine I can fly minni with a little more ease than a one year old character. Ya know what floors me is the fact that i still can't do anything as good as others of other races that have played for 6 months. Alpha strike is a stupid approach, lets face it alpha stike does not win battles it makes you a candidate for large roaming gangs. Why you say? cause you are as good as dead on your own. NO tank = subpar gank, Tank = wanabee gank raven or apoc and damn low dps. So where is the love for us? Well the devs are to scared to tackle a minni over haul and fix what is far to broken to tweak. I like Testy Mctest this is a level headed man or woman with thier head on right. Watch this persons appraoch to things and you soon see who the RL dev should be :P All Testy Mctesty ideas /signed
KIvante	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:25:00 - [44] One other thing, when they finally set up the empire wars are we suppose to fight other races with there ships to make it a good match?
Cmd Woodlouse	Posted - 2006.05.22 23:38:00 - [45] Originally by: Sarmaul Originally by: Chain Gang Quote: Defender Missiles I know, not really EWAR, but kind of gives you the same results as a tracking disruptor. These don't really work right now. The only missiles that aren't too fast for them to hit are torpedoes and torps need 3 Defenders to take them out. I've been fiddling with stuff like increasing explosion range and I think I have formulated a cunning plan to fix them. Give the missiles users "Defender Projectile", "Defender Rail" and "Defender Laser" missiles .... The game needs to be balanced ..... tracking disruptors, idiot rofl, owned! Sarmaul pwns tbh --------------------------------
Sebroth	Posted - 2006.05.23 10:36:00 - [46] Originally by: Ath Amon ... yes i agree with that, but i think here the problem is no more 1400 vs 1200 but proj vs other weapons as said in another post i think that proj need generally some love as the thing that makes them "feel" balanced is imo the tempest having both a dmg and a rof bonus vs other turret BS having just 1 dmg mod... in this situation a tempest can have both a good alpha and a decent overall dps, but my fear is that when we will start to see other BS with dmg/rof mods the gain in alpha will not be worth compared the overall DPS loss. if in future (as i hope) the overall dps of proj will be boosted a bit (maybe when t3 bs will be introduced :P) i think that even 1200 will become worth... ... The problem with boosted proj is that they dont use much cap (soon non at all). If you boost the proj base dmg to close to the other weapon systems you will soon see every apoc pilot using proj and super tanks, some already do. So thats why the devs using the ship bonuses to balance my guns :/
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.05.23 16:31:00 - [47] Originally by: Sebroth Originally by: Ath Amon ... yes i agree with that, but i think here the problem is no more 1400 vs 1200 but proj vs other weapons as said in another post i think that proj need generally some love as the thing that makes them "feel" balanced is imo the tempest having both a dmg and a rof bonus vs other turret BS having just 1 dmg mod... in this situation a tempest can have both a good alpha and a decent overall dps, but my fear is that when we will start to see other BS with dmg/rof mods the gain in alpha will not be worth compared the overall DPS loss. if in future (as i hope) the overall dps of proj will be boosted a bit (maybe when t3 bs will be introduced :P) i think that even 1200 will become worth... ... The problem with boosted proj is that they dont use much cap (soon non at all). If you boost the proj base dmg to close to the other weapon systems you will soon see every apoc pilot using proj and super tanks, some already do. So thats why the devs using the ship bonuses to balance my guns :/ i understand what you mean but i'm not saying to make proj uber, with highest alpha and dps i just wish they where a bit closer to other weapons in overall dps and for T2 to be able to deal all 4 damage types (as this is one of the supposed advantage of proj) also i don't see the apoc as a problem, as it will still lack the dps that other ships get due to their bonuses.
Faeden Pain	Posted - 2006.05.23 16:55:00 - [48] Originally by: Tyler Lowe I think Imode is on the right track with an M3 reduction in projectile ammo, but the large AC's could still use a bump up in damage. They really are a bit lame right now. Definitely. A reduction size of the projectile ammo will not have any appreciable effect on arty cannons (their RoF is soo damn slow it would take 2 weeks to go through an entire hold full of ammo as it is) But it is desperately needed for the autocannons. I drank WHAT?!!?!.....Socrates
El Alamein	Posted - 2006.05.23 17:09:00 - [49] why do projectiles get zero cap usage?? ive never heard any minimittar pilots complain about cap before. -----------------------------------
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.05.23 17:52:00 - [50] Originally by: El Alamein why do projectiles get zero cap usage?? ive never heard any minimittar pilots complain about cap before. We get bad cap on ships to balance it out. Unfortunately, this isn't balance - we just get screwed over in another way. Also, let me point out that my issue with ammo usage isnt about how much you can fit in the guns. Tux is already aware of that. For a race that is already gimped for PvE, making us spend more money than anyone else on ammo isn't nice. In addition, it's not nice having to go and refill your hold with ammo every 2 minutes either. I do think that rather than increasing capacity size for projectile weapons, decreasing ammo size would be a better idea. They did it for missile users and they're fine now, only fair that we get it too. Accompanied by either a decrease in rof for ACs or a decrease in manufacturing costs, this would be a fair change, imo. Testy's Eve Blog - Updated 22/05/06!

Beringe	Posted - 2006.05.23 18:28:00 - [51] Originally by: SengH pre- castor 1400s ... back when there was no such thing as tracking ingame. Imagine 1400s that always hit lol... Also, back in the first few months of release (but after the first laser fix), 425mm protos were king. ------------------------------------------- "Never underestimate the power of language." --Daitan Beringe, honorary director in charge of bottles--
Reatu Krentor	Posted - 2006.05.23 18:39:00 - [52] Originally by: Testy Mctest Originally by: El Alamein why do projectiles get zero cap usage?? ive never heard any minimittar pilots complain about cap before. We get bad cap on ships to balance it out. Unfortunately, this isn't balance - we just get screwed over in another way. Also, let me point out that my issue with ammo usage isnt about how much you can fit in the guns. Tux is already aware of that. For a race that is already gimped for PvE, making us spend more money than anyone else on ammo isn't nice. In addition, it's not nice having to go and refill your hold with ammo every 2 minutes either. I do think that rather than increasing capacity size for projectile weapons, decreasing ammo size would be a better idea. They did it for missile users and they're fine now, only fair that we get it too. Accompanied by either a decrease in rof for ACs or a decrease in manufacturing costs, this would be a fair change, imo. Had similar thought, decrease ammo size, right now 1 round of EMP L is 0.1m¦, compare that to a cruise missile(0.1m¦ as well). My take is perhaps different, the balance for the turrets is a bit off imo. Balance cap use and ammo use with eachother. Make lasers high cap use weapons but with low/extremely low ammo use, hybrids average cap and ammo use and minmatar low/extremely low cap use but high ammo use. Pair this up with a overall reduction of the ammo size (so more can be carried). This does mean that minmatar would be more dependant on a good supply of ammo, but is that so different from now? - phew! dodged the mods on this sig!
Eximius Josari	Posted - 2006.05.23 18:45:00 - [53] What about making the lower tier Artillary the DPS cannon and keep the larger bore guns for alpha striking? Maybe double the 250, 650, and 1200 clips, then buff RoF by 50%, and reduce the damage mod by 15%. Click Above
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.05.23 18:57:00 - [54] Originally by: Eximius Josari What about making the lower tier Artillary the DPS cannon and keep the larger bore guns for alpha Thats what we were suggesting. But realistically, it wouldnt happen; unless the smaller categories had higher DPS than the bigger categories, than they'd still not be worth fitting. What the devs are failing to realise is that all artillery are good for is alpha strike damage. Hence, a smaller size of artillery will always be useless unless it does something radically different from the other size. I dont see why this is a problem though; missiles are radically different from guns, our artillery is different from other weapons in that we only get two sizes, so why not make them different by making smaller sizes high dps, lower alpha strike - somewhere between ACs and arties? Testy's Eve Blog - Updated 22/05/06!


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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