| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Murukan
Minmatar
The Priory
   |
Posted - 2006.09.15 20:08:00 -
[1]
Well most people know that atm hail ammo is a little borked. I'm not saying it should have no penalties (that would be ******* sweet tbh) but having a huge speed nerf on a speed relient race kind makes it useless.
Right now hail only really works if you
A) are in a blob so the target won't have time to capitalize on you moving 30m/s
B) are in a 1600 plate munnin killing non blaster ships
If you look at void ammo, it does have penalties, however it is still quite useable for blaster ships.
Maybe since AC's typically have higher tracking, increase the optimal nerf to 60% like void, and have a tracking penalty too. Then maybe you can add something along the lines of a sig radius penalty also do the say "increased gun recoil making the need to push your shields farther from the ship" or some tosh reason like that.
This will be nice counters to AC's tracking, and on the other hand a counter to Minmatar's typical lower sig radius.
But at the same time it will make hail useable in more situations than the very very select few that exist atm.
In rust we trust!!! |
Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 20:14:00 -
[2]
-50% Falloff?
-
Three years old |
Murukan
Minmatar
The Priory
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 20:17:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Ithildin
-50% Falloff?
That could work too. It would be a pretty harsh penalty on hail, but at the same time vagas using hail too much would be nasty so that would limit that situation. Would give tempests a decent boost too as barrage on the bship lvl isn't that great as it puts you fighting way outside disruption range or lagging way behind the enemy in damage.
In rust we trust!!! |
Tasty Burger
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 20:25:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Murukan
Originally by: Ithildin
-50% Falloff?
That could work too. It would be a pretty harsh penalty on hail, but at the same time vagas using hail too much would be nasty so that would limit that situation. Would give tempests a decent boost too as barrage on the bship lvl isn't that great as it puts you fighting way outside disruption range or lagging way behind the enemy in damage.
Tempests need a boost at close range, they simply cannot compete with blasterthrons at the moment. Not with railathrons and artillery either, for that matter... but thats a separate topic.
|
Reatu Krentor
Minmatar
Void Spiders
Fate Weavers
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 20:26:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ithildin
-50% Falloff?
I think -50% would be too much of a reduction, but a falloff penalty would be the right direction to go imo.
-30% falloff would be acceptable imo. It would be the same as the additional penalty void receives on optimal: -50% -30% = -65%.
Also have been thinking about the cap recharge penalty for hail, it's not a bad as the velocity penalty but considering it is an effect that is allways active whenever you have hail loaded I'd rather see it changed(same with most of these silly ammo constant effects that stack per gun, it breaks destroyers and battlecruisers).
Perhaps an increase in ammo size for hail would be an alternative...
If people disagree about how the penalties have been decided, tough. I think it was decided like this by the devs and untill a dev debunks it, I won't change my mind.
... oh well Rabble rabble ra...(meh) |
Enmel
Minmatar
Setenta Corp
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 20:41:00 -
[6]
To be honest, I've not found the speed reduction to be much of an issue with hail, BUT I've only used it on an AC ruppy which only has 4 turrets and a higher base speed. Used on a tempest say, it would be crippling I imagine.
|
Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 21:00:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Reatu Krentor
Originally by: Ithildin
-50% Falloff?
I think -50% would be too much of a reduction, but a falloff penalty would be the right direction to go imo.
-30% falloff would be acceptable imo. It would be the same as the additional penalty void receives on optimal: -50% -30% = -65%.
It is't a question of what's acceptable. The high-damage ammo is something you use when you have a clear advantage or if you are attacking a capital ship.
As for the 30% falloff penalty being the same as for a Megathron (seriously, stop comparing and trying to be equal to other ships), it's just not true. The Megathron recieves 65% penalty to about 42% of it's range, thus a range penalty of -27% of total. A Tempest would actually recieve a tiny bit (we're talking about -35% total with the 30% falloff penalty) more penalty on range, however one should remember that the energy use penalty on Void is crippling.
I feel a 50% falloff penalty (in addition to 50% optimal penalty) is a fair one since no other penalties would be aplied and you'd do an extra 37% damage (compared to EMP).
It should be noted that an 800mm AC on a Tempest with the -50% falloff Hail would be dealing a lot more damage than a Megathron with Ion IIs and AM. The range would be rather similar (slight advantage Megathron, same falloff a little longer optimal), but cap usage and CPU usage would be clearly in favour of Tempest. Powergrid near similar, slight advantage Mega.
All in all, a 50% falloff might be too little a penalty.
Bah, just put T2 ammo on ice until something intelligent can be done about them.
-
Three years old |
xlop
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 21:09:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Ithildin
It is't a question of what's acceptable. The high-damage ammo is something you use when you have a clear advantage or if you are attacking a capital ship.
As for the 30% falloff penalty being the same as for a Megathron (seriously, stop comparing and trying to be equal to other ships), it's just not true. The Megathron recieves 65% penalty to about 42% of it's range, thus a range penalty of -27% of total. A Tempest would actually recieve a tiny bit (we're talking about -35% total with the 30% falloff penalty) more penalty on range, however one should remember that the energy use penalty on Void is crippling.
I feel a 50% falloff penalty (in addition to 50% optimal penalty) is a fair one since no other penalties would be aplied and you'd do an extra 37% damage (compared to EMP).
It should be noted that an 800mm AC on a Tempest with the -50% falloff Hail would be dealing a lot more damage than a Megathron with Ion IIs and AM. The range would be rather similar (slight advantage Megathron, same falloff a little longer optimal), but cap usage and CPU usage would be clearly in favour of Tempest. Powergrid near similar, slight advantage Mega.
All in all, a 50% falloff might be too little a penalty.
Bah, just put T2 ammo on ice until something intelligent can be done about them.
this is not about megathron vs tempest, but i can say megathron ftw in 95% of situations. [and i fly both with t2]
on the cruiser/BC/CS/Hac level AC Ships > blaster ships imo, but atm im forced to use blaster ships because i cant use hail!! the fact that blaster ships can use void means blaster ships ftw at all levels!
|
Murukan
Minmatar
The Priory
|
Posted - 2006.09.15 21:15:00 -
[9]
Xlop if you want to be extremely narrow minded then by all means go ahead. However just because barrage gives an advantage over void ammo (try not being such a tit and loading null) has nothing to do with hail being borked. And really no **** a someone shooting you from 10km over your blasters optimal is better. That's not the arguement. I would love to see what would happen to a vagabond who loads up hail (in it's current for) and then has a diemos jump come saunter up next to him.
In rust we trust!!! |
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 13:15:00 -
[10]
I think for an easy, simple fix to hail, removing the speed penalty and adding a 50% falloff penalty seems fine to me. Ithildin's obviously looked at the numbers though, so maybe a little more penalty would be needed? Just increase the falloff penalty farther.
There's a whole host of other options, too; reduce tracking a little more. Reduce damage a little (iirc, Hail does more damage than, for example, Void, so reducing it some wouldnt make it pointless).
Originally by: Ithildin
Bah, just put T2 ammo on ice until something intelligent can be done about them.
I agree.....they're just not balanced enough, and need looking at again as a whole, and with a little more thought this time.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 14:12:00 -
[11]
Remove speed penalty, add 30-35% falloff penalty. Fixed.
--[23] Member--
Originally by: DB Preacher
The only time BoB's backs are to the wall is when Backdoor Bandit is in local.
|
Kai Lae
Gallente
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 16:10:00 -
[12]
A penalty that makes sense! Imagine that :)
/approved
Raptor and Ares Fix |
Murukan
Minmatar
The Priory
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 18:38:00 -
[13]
Fix our hail!
In rust we trust!!! |
inSpirAcy
The Solopwnmobiles
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 18:41:00 -
[14]
Hail looks like the best thing ever next to Quake. 
Seriously, someone went to town while making up the penalties for that stuff.
|
Tasty Burger
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 18:47:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
I think for an easy, simple fix to hail, removing the speed penalty and adding a 50% falloff penalty seems fine to me. Ithildin's obviously looked at the numbers though, so maybe a little more penalty would be needed? Just increase the falloff penalty farther.
There's a whole host of other options, too; reduce tracking a little more. Reduce damage a little (iirc, Hail does more damage than, for example, Void, so reducing it some wouldnt make it pointless).
Originally by: Ithildin
Bah, just put T2 ammo on ice until something intelligent can be done about them.
I agree.....they're just not balanced enough, and need looking at again as a whole, and with a little more thought this time.
Hail does same damage as void and conflagration. It shouldn't get penalized for that, EMP is only weaker because it does 3 damage types (which I disagree with anyway).
I think a 30% falloff penalty would be fine. That way void and hail would have the same range/tracking penalties, and hail would **** up anything that needs to be sustainable while void would outright hog the tanking cap. Though tbh, I definitely notice the cap penalty on hail more than I notice it with void. I can still run everything fine on most ships with void, while hail makes even a couple jammers or warp disruptors or whatnot devour your cap.
All I know for sure is that the velocity penalty needs to go.
|
Testicular Testes
|
Posted - 2006.09.16 19:20:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Tasty Burger
Hail does same damage as void and conflagration. It shouldn't get penalized for that, EMP is only weaker because it does 3 damage types (which I disagree with anyway).
EMP does an extra point due to 3 damage types. I don't quite understand how this myth of doing one less keeps living - both other types of AC ammo do 10/20/40 base, and ACs would be quite ridiculous at 12/24/48 base and with an easy to use 60 damage ammo.
T1 AC ammo has range issues (Nulls range proxynerfs it hard and T1 AC falloffs are about 25% below being genuinely useful, even after Trajectory Anaylsis), but the damage output is fine for their role. There's no reason for us to get an oversized boost (36%) instead of the regular overpoweredness (25%).
Of course, there's no reason for anyone to get the 25% in the first place, but that's another topic.
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 09:32:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 17/09/2006 09:32:54
Comparing gallente and minmatar tech 2 turret ammo:
Null M gets +25% optimal range and +25% falloff. 22 total damage.
Barrage M gets +50% falloff. 22 damage.
I think those too are pretty balanced, since minnie ships often fight in falloff range and a optimal range bonus doesnt do much for autocannons. Blasters do more damage than autocannons not because of the ammo, but because of the higher dps of the guns.
Void M gets -65% optimal range, -50% tracking and also require 25% more cap. 30 damage.
Hail M gets -50% optimal range, -50% tracking, -14% velocity and -7% cap recharge rate. 30 damage.
The velocity & cap recharge rate for Hail is calculated per fitted gun. Im not sure on the math, but if I go 399 in my ship with 5 guns, the speed drops to 187 with Hail. I tried running some maths, but failed to provide a formula that works... someone else will have to do that for me. :)
The speed penalty is abit over the top really. Compared to barrage, you already lose 50% falloff range which forces you to get close to whatever you face. With its current penalties, you are also forced to stay at that range, because you give up the option to dictate range when you switch to Hail. Also the cap recharge penalty hurts the tanking, and tanking is required if you are going up close like a sitting duck.
It has its uses, but if you want to make the ammo more widely used, I think it would be better to switch the speed penalty to a falloff penalty. You still wont see minmatar pilots orbiting the target at 5k range, because Hail would keep its tracking penalties.
It would be overpowered if you could just use the speed advantage and still keep out of web range, while shooting Hail at the target. Thats why the Hail speed penalty would get a falloff penalty instead. Make it a requirement to be within web range to hit something.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Odin Quak'or
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 10:05:00 -
[18]
fit 2 domi nanos... a domi mwd.. and a snake set with teh 8% bonus... and even with 5 guns with hail you go over 3500m/s
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.17 10:38:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Odin Quak'or
fit 2 domi nanos... a domi mwd.. and a snake set with teh 8% bonus... and even with 5 guns with hail you go over 3500m/s
Thanks, Helpy McConstructive!
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
Murukan
Minmatar
The Priory
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 04:08:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Odin Quak'or
fit 2 domi nanos... a domi mwd.. and a snake set with teh 8% bonus... and even with 5 guns with hail you go over 3500m/s
just because a faction kit vagabond with pirate implants can do good speed with hail in doesn't mean that the ammo is not borked.
In rust we trust!!! |
Ephemeron
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 04:37:00 -
[21]
Hail penalty on speed AND cap recharge seems excessive when compared to Void ammo
I'd say, either lessen the penalty of Hail or add a speed penalty to Void
|
Foulis
Minmatar
Chosen Path
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 04:55:00 -
[22]
I really aggree, why do we get the shaft with t2 ammo?
----
Cake > Pie - Imaran
Cathath > Imaran - Cathath
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Boobies
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 05:58:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 18/09/2006 06:04:59
Originally by: Foulis
I really aggree, why do we get the shaft with t2 ammo?
Its not THAT bad... its just that its only useful on the heavy tanker ships we have. Sleipnir with autocannons and Hail would be pretty devestating for example.
The suggestions here is just to make it a better option for fast ships like the stabber, but it would require them to get within web range to use it.. otherwise it would be pretty overpowered, specially considering the effect of Hail on armor. :)
It still has its uses though, but mostly on ships that already are pretty slow.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
jernej
Destructive Influence
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 12:01:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Ithildin
It should be noted that an 800mm AC on a Tempest with the -50% falloff Hail would be dealing a lot more damage than a Megathron with Ion IIs and AM. The range would be rather similar (slight advantage Megathron, same falloff a little longer optimal), but cap usage and CPU usage would be clearly in favour of Tempest. Powergrid near similar, slight advantage Mega.
All in all, a 50% falloff might be too little a penalty.
Bah, just put T2 ammo on ice until something intelligent can be done about them.
Dude, Dual 650mm are the equivalent of Ions and why are you comparing Hail damage and AM damage ???
|
Murukan
Minmatar
The Priory
|
Posted - 2006.09.18 15:53:00 -
[25]
Bump for the hail fix please.
And in response to the guy above me yah hail should be compared to void not AM and 800's to nuetrons (which they pale in comparison)
In rust we trust!!! |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |