EVE Search - Make mix missile/turrets setups viable

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Make mix missile/turrets setups viable

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Paul Griffin State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:52:39 - [1] - Quote Currently, on almost all ships, it is not viable to mix different types of turrets and/or missiles because ships have bonuses to certain one type only and coupled with the fact that weapon upgrades also target only one type of turret/missile, it makes mixing them kind of gimped. This limits both the enjoyment and the tactical setups of ships in the game. To remedy this, two things needs to be done: Add ship bonuses to more than one type of weapon type. Introduce modules which has bonuses to more than one weapon type Obviously it needs to be balanced but imo that would make ship setups much more interesting and space combat would reflect sci-fi combat which you see in many popular franchises such as Star Trek.
Alvatore DiMarco Capricious Endeavours Ltd 3450	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:56:23 - [2] - Quote Perhaps you should try flying Minmatar instead - specifically, Republic Fleet ships.
Ralph King-Griffin Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 8814	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:57:24 - [3] - Quote yeah we have these already "I'm also quite confident that you are laughing and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers." =]I[=
Paul Griffin State War Academy Caldari State 1	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:00:00 - [4] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Perhaps you should try flying Minmatar instead - specifically, Republic Fleet ships. Well I did say Quote: on almost all ships, it is not viable to mix And that still does not do anything about having modules with mix bonuses. Sure you could fit one of each but that would require atleast 2 slots. And you would be limited to a couple of Minmatar ships. I think it should be viable for most ships to mix weapons. Makes it more interesting and versatile.
Alvatore DiMarco Capricious Endeavours Ltd 3452	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:02:10 - [5] - Quote Split weapons are a horrible nightmare. That's why they were removed from Minmatar ships and the Fleet versions given the upgraded version of it that they have today.
Paul Griffin State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:32:47 - [6] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Split weapons are a horrible nightmare. That's why they were removed from Minmatar ships and the Fleet versions given the upgraded version of it that they have today. Yeah, hence why I think they need to work on it because it is not viable with the current setup.
Stephen Rogers Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:49:31 - [7] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Split weapons are a horrible nightmare. That's why they were removed from Minmatar ships and the Fleet versions given the upgraded version of it that they have today. Why are they a nightmare? I've used both but am not familiar with why a hybrid system isn't a good idea.
Sinigr Shadowsong Monkey Attack Squad Goonswarm Federation 130	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:14:33 - [8] - Quote Split weapon system is an interesting concept, only it's implementation was lackluster. Certainly there are ways to make it better even without creating new modules. For example: === Numbers are placeholders === Role bonus: * 50% increased effectiveness of Ballistic Control Systems and Gyrostabilizers * Double stacking penalties for Ballistic Control Systems and Gyrostabilizers By tweaking these numbers we can get fun and balanced platforms with split weapon systems.
SOL Ranger SOL. 193	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:31:28 - [9] - Quote Stephen Rogers wrote: Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Split weapons are a horrible nightmare. That's why they were removed from Minmatar ships and the Fleet versions given the upgraded version of it that they have today. Why are they a nightmare? I've used both but am not familiar with why a hybrid system isn't a good idea. Generally it's because of the way modules enhance weapon properties, when using two weapon systems you will also need two types of enhancers. Especially problematic in the case of guns and missiles combined you will get many issues with sub par performance because you now need the double amount of damage enhancers/projection mods/rigs to keep both weapon systems properly functional costing overall effectiveness. Also there is the factor of different weapon characteristics when using them, usually it is much more effective to just have one kind of weapon system and pilot your ship accordingly to apply the damage, when you have two different weapon systems you must(optimally) allow both to do damage somehow to stay highly effective and that can prove literally impossible in many cases as your weapons will be completely different in their properties. In most cases you will only have effective use for one weapon system at a time and that is quite far from optimal making the other half of your weapon systems utterly wasted, of course having access to two different weapon systems creates an advantage that you can nearly always do at least something, but also you're doing it at half effect or some such; Rarely is that beneficial in actuality in EVE, especially when you do have an option to always be optimal with a single weapon system the flexibility is simply too costly in every way. An advantageous secondary weapon system even when it is unbonused is the drone, because they provide a solution to a multitude of problems, whereas alternative secondary weapons such as missiles/guns rarely do anything significant and you're almost always better off just fitting something else in those slots, like neuts or almost anything really. There are rare situations where you can have somewhat of a use for a secondary unbonused weapon single or pair of guns or launchers, to enhance damage output, to use defender missiles(very poor), pick off frigates with guns or possibly a fleet doctrine with a few extra launghers, but that is rare and the same sort of niche use I mentioned before. Generally, it isn't very beneficial to use multiple weapon systems, generic unbonused drones being excluded somewhat from that, also because they come really without a fitting cost for the pilot. The Vargur requires launcher hardpoints, following tempest tradition.
Antillie Sa'Kan KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 905	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:32:28 - [10] - Quote Stephen Rogers wrote: Why are they a nightmare? I've used both but am not familiar with why a hybrid system isn't a good idea. Can you just trust me when I say that split weapon systems are terrible? Having more than one weapon be viable on a ship is fine. See the current Republic Fleet line. But true split weapons ala the old Typhoon or the Loki's Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration subsystem are just flat out terrible.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Snuffed Out 7296	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:38:34 - [11] - Quote Even if it split-weapon were viable for all ships... mono-weapon setups would still be preferred due to their ease of use and consistency in dealing damage. Plus there are other problems to consider. - A damage mod that gives bonuses to multiple weapon systems will quickly become the preferred mod in all situations (especially for 0.0 groups that do their own industry). The only way to mitigate this is by making it more expensive and lowering the bonuses this multi-weapon mod gives... but this has its own set of issues because if 2 of such a mod provide the same bonuses as 1 of each "specialized" mod... it will not be preferred. example: Multi-spectral ECM is not preferred in almost all cases because the racial specific jammers have a higher signal strength. - ships have roles and weapon specialties for a reason... to force greater tactical options. I know this seems counter-intuitive... but the idea of allowing all ships to use all weapons with equal proficiency actually does the opposite of "make things more varied." What players do instead is use the weapon system that is most optimal for their preferred tactic... rather than use more varied tactics to work with their preferred (or only) weapon system. This same principle can be applied to ships as well. - most ships have some sort of "split weapon system." Some examples: ----- with the exception of the Vexor Navy, Worm, and Gila... most drone-boats are "split systems" that rely equally on drones and an on-board weapon system. ----- most ships cruiser-sized and larger rely on drones as supplemental damage and point-defense. - consider that there are people that UTTERLY HATE split weapon systems on principle (either for lore, cost, or OCD reasons). Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. "How did you veterans start?"
Lugh Crow-Slave 693	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:46:28 - [12] - Quote ShahFluffers wrote: example: Multi-spectral ECM is not preferred in almost all cases because the racial specific jammers have a higher signal strength. any situation that you do not know the enemy fleet set up but you are only setting out to engage small to mid sized gangs you use multi any time you are going out to engage larger sized gangs or know the enemy set up do you use racial and even in a lot of these set ups you will use a mulit or two Fuel block colors
To mare Advanced Technology 391	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:48:07 - [13] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Perhaps you should try flying Minmatar instead - specifically, Republic Fleet ships. still if you fly RF ships you usually pick one weapon and focus on that one, while the other highs are usually best used with neutralizers.
To mare Advanced Technology 391	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:50:30 - [14] - Quote one way to make split weapons ships viable would be to group both weapon bonuses int a single one, so you dont waste 2 bonuses to do the job of a single one (if this is done the 7.5% bonuses should be reduced to 5%, and this would probably make some people unhappy), so we can have another useful bonus, doesn`t matter how you do it but right now split weapons ships pretty much always waste a bonus. another problem of split weapon ships is damage mods since you need more to achieve the same result of a single weapon bonused ship (could have been fixed with double damage mods) . honestly there were many ways back then to fix split weapon ships and make them viable but CCP decided it wasn`t worth their time so they went the lazy way pretty much removing split weapon system all together, and giving to the few that remain the means to be effective even discarding 1 weapon system all together and focus on the othe one.
Kabark Caldari Provisions Caldari State 4	Posted - 2015.02.09 22:25:23 - [15] - Quote Torps on a macheriel. :D trolling for days.
Phaade Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 311	Posted - 2015.02.10 00:05:15 - [16] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Split weapons are a horrible nightmare. That's why they were removed from Minmatar ships and the Fleet versions given the upgraded version of it that they have today. They were a nightmare because CCP didn't add bonuses to both weapon systems, or did and considered it two rather than one. I think it is a good idea and should have been done long long ago, but didn't because reasons.
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 142	Posted - 2015.02.10 02:24:39 - [17] - Quote Just a wild thought here. How about using drones, they are the most flexible weapons system in the game, at least they are for now.= -1 to your idea because of the possibility of some seriously OP setups.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1907	Posted - 2015.02.10 02:52:27 - [18] - Quote Try a Gnosis, and see how it works.
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 95	Posted - 2015.02.10 03:22:15 - [19] - Quote Well there is quite a few of ships with multiple weapon bonuses, mainly the Gallente drone boats and the Guristas lines. And of course our own old friend, Gnosis. Tristan, Algos and Vexor (Hybrid + Drones) Worm, Gila and Rattlesnake (Missiles + Drones) Gnosis (Bonus all the turrets!) I know it's not exactly what you're asking for, but just pointing out that ships with bonus to more than 1 weapon system (yes, drones is a weapons system) does exist. As for being turret based only, have you ever tried fitting Dragoon, Arbitrator or Armageddon? Despite Dragoon and Arbitrator having hardpoint layout for a 50/50 (Turret/Launcher) with no weapon bonus, the effect would be the same (If Geddon were to follow the pattern, it would have a 3/3 layout or 4/4 with 8 highs, which would be horrible). You would simple pick either and use the rest of the highs for utility.
Nebaile Sharisa Annoying Flies At A Barbecue 3	Posted - 2015.02.10 03:40:02 - [20] - Quote I've been known to slap a launcher on if i dont have the fitting for something better. Worse comes to worse might help pop a drone. But overall i wouldn't want split weapons.
Paul Griffin State War Academy Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.02.13 10:14:03 - [21] - Quote Nebaile Sharisa wrote: I've been known to slap a launcher on if i dont have the fitting for something better. Worse comes to worse might help pop a drone. But overall i wouldn't want split weapons. Yes, because it is not viable. My proposal is to make it viable by introducing more mixed weapon bonuses on ships and mix weapon bonus modules. I think for this to work really well they need to make it so that some turrets are best for shields, such as lasers, and some best for armor but bad for shields, thus giving you more incentive to mix it up. But that would mean you would have to overhaul all the ammos and damage types and CCP will never do that at this point.
Paul Griffin State War Academy Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.02.13 10:17:59 - [22] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Try a Gnosis, and see how it works. Haven't tried flying a Gnosis but on paper it looks really nice. Still, it would suffer from weapon bonus modules affecting only one type. Still I will for sure try it out and see how it works out.
Lugh Crow-Slave 728	Posted - 2015.02.13 10:21:27 - [23] - Quote Paul Griffin wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Try a Gnosis, and see how it works. Still, it would suffer from weapon bonus modules affecting only one type. Could this IDK... be a draw back for the extra versatility? This is not a bad thing on multi weapon system ships sure you get less bonus per one damage mod but you get extra bonus if you fit more than that since they don't suffer stacking penalties. Less potential tank for more potential DPS the main problem with mixed weapons is not damage bonuses but for the most part you can never do full dps since your optimal and tracking are different (missiles work around this) Fuel block colors
Paul Griffin State War Academy Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.02.13 10:45:24 - [24] - Quote Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: Paul Griffin wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Try a Gnosis, and see how it works. Still, it would suffer from weapon bonus modules affecting only one type. Could this IDK... be a draw back for the extra versatility? This is not a bad thing on multi weapon system ships sure you get less bonus per one damage mod but you get extra bonus if you fit more than that since they don't suffer stacking penalties. Less potential tank for more potential DPS the main problem with mixed weapons is not damage bonuses but for the most part you can never do full dps since your optimal and tracking are different (missiles work around this) So are you saying that mixed missile and turret is viable? Because I almost never see that and I think the reason is that the versatility you mention is not enough to make up for the lower total DPS (what is even the versatility, dmg types?). Imo a mixed weapon setup should give you a higher overall DPS but due to how damage resists work in this game, where both shield and armor can be fitted to get high resists against all damage types, there really isn't any incentives to have a ship setup with different damage types. And no incentive to use both armor and shield tank. To change that it would require an overhaul of the whole system which CCP wont do so I guess this game is simply made for only one damage type and one tank type. Pity as it would open up a lot of interesting fits if it was. For example, let's say that shields always have 0% EM dmg resists, which cannot be enhanced, and same with armor and explosive dmg. That would make it viable to have a weapon setup which does mix EM and Explosive, and no single weapon type which can do both of these damage types and thus give incentives for building both an armor and shield tank. I dunno, I just feel that Eve combat has become a bit stale. Always shield tank OR armor tank and always one type of weapon and all of the same type. CCP should make changes to mix this up a bit. The suggestion above with damage resists and multiple weapon bonuses on almost all ships and modules, both tank and weapon, which gives bonuses to both would go a far way of doing that. But then again Eve is too old of a game and probably the player base too accustomed to how it is so that would be extremely unlikely to happen. Pity.
Soldarius Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent 1092	Posted - 2015.02.13 15:09:16 - [25] - Quote Trust us. It doesn't work. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 564	Posted - 2015.02.13 22:11:13 - [26] - Quote Paul Griffin wrote: ... I dunno, I just feel that Eve combat has become a bit stale. Always shield tank OR armor tank and always one type of weapon and all of the same type. CCP should make changes to mix this up a bit. That is just what you think. There is no rule in EVE that prevents you from doing something out of the ordinary. See the lazoer-Myrmidon can be surprising or a blaster Omen. Prior to 'Trinity' I used to fly heavy missile Feroxes and man, I do miss them . Why should CCP make changes because you cannot make something new on your own? signature
Dangeresque Too Pistols for Pandas 100	Posted - 2015.02.22 15:10:16 - [27] - Quote The base issue lies with when they tiericided all the ships. At that point they felt that giving the ship a full rack of guns with appropriate bonuses was not good enough. Or in many cases they actually removed and lowered the number of bonused turrets on a ship, without increasing that bonus. So to make up for the inevitable drop in DPS across so many hulls most of the time they would provide a 1, maybe 2, unbonused launcher slots. Just so they could save face and say that they didn't reduce the DPS on the changed ships, when they actually did. (Maybe CCP could run the numbers on the percentage of ships they did this to that are actually attempting to use those single one-off unbonused hardpoints) I know for nearly all the ships that I had that lost primary turrets and therefore effective DPS, I just fit a random utility high as it is more useful than trying to remember that I can use the stray missile launcher but only once the target gets within a certain range. Its like fitting an artillery ship, and then putting a single autocannon on. Most ships in this situation have a drone bay as well. So in the situation where you would maybe have a occasional need to dispatch of random drones or small frigs, you have drones for that, not a random unbonused launcher slot. Granted, the launchers do have the defender missile, but since its not exactly useful its not really worth putting on a turret boat with a single non-bonused launcher slot. However, on the flip side, all those missile boats that inherited a non-bonused turret to make up for a drop in DPS, what exactly are they expecting you to do with that? Put an arty on a cruise boat? Fit a blaster on a torp ship? So if maintaining the same DPS was such a concern, why not tweak the bonuses to do the same thing? I would love to see the utilization numbers of people using the non-bonused hardpoints after the tiericide as compared to the number of people using the full rack of bonused hardpoints before. This would tell us if it was a good change or a bad one.
Lienzo Amanuensis 26	Posted - 2015.02.22 22:40:11 - [28] - Quote The split weapon setups that are most viable are those which have no hardpoint bonuses at all. These include the dragoon, arbitrator, blackbird, celestis, prophecy and the armageddon. These are all swiss-army knife ships and are hard to shut down with any one type of ewar.

Pages: 1 :: [one 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.