EVE Search - Controlled Burst Change - Would it help Amarr and Gallente ships?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Controlled Burst Change - Would it help Amarr and Gallente ships?

» 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 - 1 post(s)
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:33:00 - [1] Currently there are 2 races that don't need cap to fire weapons. For Caldari Missile users and Matari, this is a big advantage. Amarr and Gallente weapons use cap. A LOT of cap. For a long time this was generally a non-issue as any battle lasting longer than 30 seconds was epic. With several boosts to tanking cap charges battles are now taking longer and longer. This is a Good ThingÖ However, for those of us who use exorbitant amounts of cap to fire weapons such as Lasers (pew pew!) and Blasters (pooh pooh!) this extending of firing time is a double edged sword. Even during some short battles we ran into cap sustainability issues. The lengthening of battles has just exacerbated it. Even with max skills my Amarr ships and my Gallente friends using Blasters (waves to ER blasterthrons) are constantly running on the edge of empty cap. One of the reasons why Nos is so powerful against battleships right now is the knife-edge many balance on in managing thier cap. So my question is thus:Can we boost Controlled Burst to 7.5% per level, or even 10% per level and still retain balance? I think 7.5% would help make adjust to making battles longer. I wouldn't say no to 10%, but I wonder if it would be overpowering. Although I thought changing Projectiles to 0 cap use weapons would make them a lot more powerful but it didn't. Just a bit more user friendly. So how about it? Is a bit of love in order for Controlled Bursts? Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:35:00 - [2] 10% will be greatly needed if they prolong fights. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:47:00 - [3] Edited by: Aramendel on 10/08/2006 20:48:53 Assuming they do not balance this then by changing the energy needed by lasers and hybrid guns. Either that or the other will be required then. If they increase combat duration there will be tons of balace issues anyway. Cargospace will become more of an issue (if combat lasts longer you will need more ammo). Passive tanking will probably become more (too?) powerful. If it effects ratting too it will be effeciently a nerf of that (lower isk/hour). All outfits depending on cap charges will become less viaable (again cargospace). And so on... Not saying that longer combat will be bad, but it will certainly have lots of issues, not all predictable.
Grimpak Gallente Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:50:00 - [4] /agree ------- Originally by: Abdalion Originally by: Jebidus Skari What, in EVE, is a Tyrant? Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
Mr Bondy Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:52:00 - [5] As a lover of both my tachy-geddon and bThron this is idea is fantastic. I agree with the above poster that 10% will be needed if they prolong fights any longer My vote is for 10% MrB
inSpirAcy Caldari The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:55:00 - [6] I haven't even bothered training this past level 2 because it's such a weak skill, and I use blasters regularly. Give it 10% and I might finish it to L4.
Voltron Caldari Black Lance Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.10 20:59:00 - [7] /me holds nyxus closely Volt
Leshrac Shepherd Amarr Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.10 21:01:00 - [8] Fine, but only if the ammo capacity of projectile guns is increased accordingly.
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.10 21:04:00 - [9] Originally by: Leshrac Shepherd Fine, but only if the ammo capacity of projectile guns is increased accordingly. It doesn't need increasing by the same relative amount. But it needs boosting, too, if combat is prolonged (and that goes for Caldari missile ships, too). It does not need boosting quite as much if combat is not prolonged. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Benglada Central Defiance	Posted - 2006.08.10 21:07:00 - [10] Originally by: Leshrac Shepherd Fine, but only if the ammo capacity of projectile guns is increased accordingly. what the hell does that have to do with anything? --------------------------- Originally by: Wrangler Unfrtinately you dnot get to vote..
Namelesz Tachyon Combined Technologies Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.10 21:08:00 - [11] /signed excellent idea, i support it 100% "notify: Only ships can be assembled, this is a Elite Frigate." Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content - Cortes
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.10 21:10:00 - [12] Originally by: Benglada Originally by: Leshrac Shepherd Fine, but only if the ammo capacity of projectile guns is increased accordingly. what the hell does that have to do with anything? Longer combat = reloads more common = reduced dps Thats not really a porjectile issue, though, effects hybrids and missles just as well.
Audri Fisher Caldari The Keep THE R0CK	Posted - 2006.08.10 22:28:00 - [13] would help out caldari gunboats out a lot to
Dethis Caldari Eve University The Big Blue	Posted - 2006.08.11 00:15:00 - [14] I fully support this idea because im a hybrid ***** -------- Kill em all and let god sort em out
Durethia RillaCorp	Posted - 2006.08.11 01:30:00 - [15] /signed I've been a blaster dude since day wun. A prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline... --Nicolo Machiavelli (1505 AD)
Idara Caldari Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.11 01:45:00 - [16] Already got L5, so yeah, plz give me 50% less cap when firing!
Taria Tring	Posted - 2006.08.11 01:54:00 - [17] As long as projectiles get increased DPS and ammo capacity, sure.
Valea Silpha Cereal Killerz Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:00:00 - [18] Lasers should use a butt load of cap. Its the downside to using cap as their ammo. Blasters should also use as much cap as they do on the grounds of them doing so much damage. Also, for the purposes of role play, energy weapons and hybrid weapons get almost all of their kick from the energy applied to them, and as such decreasing it would be a lil out of character. <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head
Dred 'Morte Minmatar Sammael's Legion	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:05:00 - [19] As someone who loves lasers, I was forced to train all this stuff to become effective with my Apocalypse: Amarr Battleship V Energy Management V Energy Systems Operations V Controlled Bursts V (among other things) Those skills are so important. They effectively change a cap eating monster that is an amarr battleship with lasers to a ship that doesn't need to worry about cap. I don't know how Gallente function though. I can only guess that without ship cap bonus, they most likely run out of cap while using cruiser-bs guns relatively quickly. This is a gallente problem, not amarr. I have no simpathy with gallenteans. They are turning themselves from the suckiest race in pvp to one of the best in the course of this game's history. While us Amarrians seem to be loosing fame. Signature made by Mr Floppykickners
Hydrian Alante The Loot Company	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:14:00 - [20] Great idea! /signed This would also help the Abbadon. I think this Bonus is needed in all ways.
Corellia Orsam Dragonstar	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:50:00 - [21] simple fix, just add a skill called something like 'advanced controlled bursts' and make it do a further 5% less cap used firing turrets per trained point, give it a bigger training multiplyer than the current controlled bursts skill, make it rank 3, 4 or 5. If CCP think its too good make 2.5% per trained point or whatever. Or how about a low or mid slot module that reduces weapon cap usage? like the opposite of a shield boost amp.
xphreakx Caldari Colony.	Posted - 2006.08.11 02:56:00 - [22] Edited by: xphreakx on 11/08/2006 02:56:06 /signed on OP Originally by: Corellia Orsam simple fix, just add a skill called something like 'advanced controlled bursts' and make it do a further 5% less cap used firing turrets per trained point, give it a bigger training multiplyer than the current controlled bursts skill, make it rank 3, 4 or 5. If CCP think its too good make 2.5% per trained point or whatever. Or how about a low or mid slot module that reduces weapon cap usage? like the opposite of a shield boost amp. No eve doesn't need more skills ----------- -phreak Freespace2 Source Code Project
Gierling Gallente Celestial Fleet Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.11 03:17:00 - [23] Controlled bursts would be best retooled as a 5% increase in weapon ROF (as in a penalty) AND A 5% Straight Damage increase (TO nullify the penalty). That way not only does it drastically decrease cap use, it also gives Minmater and Caldari a reason to try it. Plus it kinda works from the "Your controlling your fire so your not shooting as often and not wasting energy but when you do fire you make it count."
Stamm Amarr GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.11 03:37:00 - [24] Edited by: Stamm on 11/08/2006 03:38:13 Stamm says : Nyxus you're never off these forums these days. Get mining instead! Also, I do think this would be a good idea. Especially with Minmatar getting the boost that their weapons don't use cap. Even now it's possible to run out of cap pretty easily in a fight, and unless you want Caldari and Minmatar to have the advantage that they don't fit cap mods, and Amarr and Gallente do... then controlled bursts has to do something more effective than what it does now.
eLLioTT wave Art of War	Posted - 2006.08.11 03:42:00 - [25] /signed 10% please (while you're at it please reduce all lasers cap need by 25% :) and.. DEVS PLEASE COMMENT HERE
Lienzo Minmatar	Posted - 2006.08.11 04:07:00 - [26] I'm tempted to agree with you, but I can't say I've looked at metrics on the issue so if I did, I would have the following caveat: On the grounds that skill training is an inane time sink, keep the skill as is and lower the base if needed. Seven Deadly Sins
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest	Posted - 2006.08.11 04:08:00 - [27] 7.5% per level... no more than that tho. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.08.11 04:59:00 - [28] Originally by: eLLioTT wave /signed 10% please (while you're at it please reduce all lasers cap need by 25% :) and.. DEVS PLEASE COMMENT HERE no In rust we trust!!!
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.11 06:53:00 - [29] I love this idea. Sure, it will help my Armageddon out, but the ship that REALLY needs it is the Rokh. EIGHT 425 IIs with a SHIELD TANK? No way the cap is going to handle that. --------------------- Originally by: Herko Kerghans Nik = win. Period. Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.11 08:39:00 - [30] Originally by: Gierling Controlled bursts would be best retooled as a 5% increase in weapon ROF (as in a penalty) AND A 5% Straight Damage increase (TO nullify the penalty). That way not only does it drastically decrease cap use, it also gives Minmater and Caldari a reason to try it. Plus it kinda works from the "Your controlling your fire so your not shooting as often and not wasting energy but when you do fire you make it count." At level 5 this would decrease capacitor use by 20% instead of 25% - the wrong direction. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death

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.