EVE Search - Sticky:[Scylla] Medium Railguns

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Scylla] Medium Railguns

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 4917	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:00:16 - [1] - Quote As announced last night on the o7 show, we have a list of high-impact balance changes planned for Scylla. One of those changes is a reduction in rate of fire for all medium railguns by 7.5% for all types. Back in 2013 we did a balance pass on all medium long range turrets, which in general had a very positive effect on the balance of usage. While we are happy with the results, we do see the improvement to rails may have gone a bit too far and the result is a strong pressure to field rail platforms: Moas, Tengus, Vultures, Proteii, Eagle, etc. There are of course many contributing factors to the popularity of those ships, but railguns are simply the simplest angle of attack for us when it comes to having a small impact on all of them at once. You can find a more detailed description of the situation in this dev blog (coming out later today). Looking forward to your feedback. @ccp_rise

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 758	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:02:53 - [2] - Quote ed: First :D That's pretty heavy for a first pass, but needed.
Cassius Invictus Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers 127	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:03:25 - [3] - Quote I hope you did your math on this. It seems to be a step in right direction.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15247	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:04:15 - [4] - Quote At first look I am not too concerned. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Swanky nutjob The Scope Gallente Federation 15	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:09:33 - [5] - Quote Did you factor in rails are one of the few systems which can hit out to ranges that Ishtars orbit at?
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15247	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:10:45 - [6] - Quote Swanky nutjob wrote: Did you factor in rails are one of the few systems which can hit out to ranges that Ishtars orbit at? rate of fire wont change that. Ishtars are also getting nerfed too. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 998	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:15:30 - [7] - Quote seems good. 250mms in particular were beyond ridiculous and this should tone them down a bit maybe look at making javelin useful while you're looking at railguns though, that ammo is really bad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Anthar Thebess 891	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:20:42 - [8] - Quote I think rails where not the issue - they are ok now. Again combining rail guns with the overpowered hulls (eg Tengu) was the only issue. For example. Harpy gangs are very specific, and are easy to counter. They die in masses. I think no change to rail guns are necessary - and nerfing them will put again some cruisers out of the fields. Simple additional nerf to Caldari offensive system can solve the Rail Tengu issue once and for all , while not affecting other ships that are now viable. So NO to rail nerf. Yes to adjusting Tengu Offensive system. We could also consider changing a bit Eagle for lower optimal , bigger fallof. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Aiyshimin Fistful of Finns Triumvirate. 404	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:23:06 - [9] - Quote This seems like a sensible tweak.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15249	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:26:33 - [10] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: I think rails where not the issue - they are ok now. Again combining rail guns with the overpowered hulls (eg Tengu) was the only issue. For example. Harpy gangs are very specific, and are easy to counter. They die in masses. I think no change to rail guns are necessary - and nerfing them will put again some cruisers out of the fields. Simple additional nerf to Caldari offensive system can solve the Rail Tengu issue once and for all , while not affecting other ships that are now viable. So NO to rail nerf. Yes to adjusting Tengu Offensive system. We could also consider changing a bit Eagle for lower optimal , bigger fallof. Harpy fleet dont use med rails Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship

Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 998	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:28:40 - [11] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: I think rails where not the issue - they are ok now. Again combining rail guns with the overpowered hulls (eg Tengu) was the only issue. For example. Harpy gangs are very specific, and are easy to counter. They die in masses. I think no change to rail guns are necessary - and nerfing them will put again some cruisers out of the fields. Simple additional nerf to Caldari offensive system can solve the Rail Tengu issue once and for all , while not affecting other ships that are now viable. So NO to rail nerf. Yes to adjusting Tengu Offensive system. We could also consider changing a bit Eagle for lower optimal , bigger fallof. all the ships that use 250mms are pretty strong, so i'm fairly sure you're wrong and targeting the med railguns is a good idea harpys wont be affected https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 758	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:30:00 - [12] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: I think rails where not the issue - they are ok now. Again combining rail guns with the overpowered hulls (eg Tengu) was the only issue. For example. Harpy gangs are very specific, and are easy to counter. They die in masses. I think no change to rail guns are necessary - and nerfing them will put again some cruisers out of the fields. Simple additional nerf to Caldari offensive system can solve the Rail Tengu issue once and for all , while not affecting other ships that are now viable. So NO to rail nerf. Yes to adjusting Tengu Offensive system. We could also consider changing a bit Eagle for lower optimal , bigger fallof. Rails were so stupid they were better DPS on hulls not even bonused for them. Railgun stabber had no business out DPSing a projectile stabber, for example. Eagles are about as common in Eve as they are in the wild. Endangered species.
Phoenix Jones Isogen 5 1101	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:38:13 - [13] - Quote Need to run numbers, but this is a bigger hit to dps than people think. Your not going to get too many complaints on this though. Yaay!!!!
Alvatore DiMarco Capricious Endeavours Ltd 3529	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:50:50 - [14] - Quote Maybe this will slow or cease the posting of "make artillery have better RoF with less alpha to compete with rails" threads.
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 116	Posted - 2015.02.27 11:58:11 - [15] - Quote Eagle: 5250mm Railgun T2 - Fed Navy Antimatter Charges 4 Mag Stabs T2 511 DPS - 40.5k+15km range Eagle: 5Heavy Neutron Blaster T2 - Fed Navy Antimatter Charges 4 Mag Stabs T2 557 DPS - 5.08k+6.25k range There really shouldn't be 45 DPS difference between long range guns and close range guns, especially not considering there's also 45km falloff difference as well. +1km = -1 DPS just seems wrong The Rate of Fire nerf should do good to separate them a bit. Not too heavy, likely not too light
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 869	Posted - 2015.02.27 12:02:48 - [16] - Quote Was that really all the way back in 2013?? Wow... I feel old. I thought medium railguns were in a pretty good place as is. Can you explain or give numbers to support this nerf? Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1006	Posted - 2015.02.27 12:06:12 - [17] - Quote will it ever be possible to armour tank and fit long range guns? also will my ferox ever stop having effectively 1 less slot than other BCs?
Swanky nutjob The Scope Gallente Federation 16	Posted - 2015.02.27 12:24:40 - [18] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Swanky nutjob wrote: Did you factor in rails are one of the few systems which can hit out to ranges that Ishtars orbit at? rate of fire wont change that. Ishtars are also getting nerfed too. I mean't in respect to the overall use of Rails as a platform vs other weapon types.
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2736	Posted - 2015.02.27 12:31:11 - [19] - Quote So back in Odyssey medium railguns got, +15% damage, +15% ROF, and -15% tracking. This leaves us with effectively +15% damage +7.5% ROF and -15% tracking. Seems fair enough, 250mm rails were competing with heavy neutron blasters for damage output.
Basil Pupkin Why So Platypus 122	Posted - 2015.02.27 12:55:30 - [20] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: So back in Odyssey medium railguns got, +15% damage, +15% ROF, and -15% tracking. This leaves us with effectively +15% damage +7.5% ROF and -15% tracking. Seems fair enough, 250mm rails were competing with heavy neutron blasters for damage output. Just to correct your math, adding 15% ROF and removing 7.5% ROF from that doesn't give +7.5% ROF, it gives +6.375% ROF from original in the result. A crap ton equals 1000 crap loads in metric, and roughly 91 shit loads 12 bull shits and 1 puppy's unforeseen disaster in imperial.

Anthar Thebess 895	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:19:36 - [21] - Quote I know that harpies are not using med rails. This is just example how you can see if the some combination is not broken. Harpy fleet have range , dps ...but they are dying. Sometimes whole fleets are gone in the matter of minutes. THIS IS EVE. You shoot something to do 'BOOM' , just to minutes later meet the same fate. Like you see i also pointed that eagles need some work. As for rail gun stabber - interesting. Still, remember - hybrids : - do only kin/Thermal damage - use power to shoot If you see hybrid fleet , you can tank it easily. You can try neut some enemy ships to totally negate their damage. In case of projectiles - you can easily choose damage type, guns don't use energy, and those guns have high amount of alpha. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Gustav Mannfred Summer of Mumuit 105	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:26:36 - [22] - Quote This could be the end for all the suicide gank moas and vexors in Uedama and Niarja. Welcome back good old arty tornados :) However, I think a range nerf could be more useful than a damage nerf. Vultures still do a good amount of damage over 100km+ i'm REALY miss the old stuff.-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1626	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:35:13 - [23] - Quote This nerf is too high! The tengu is the only rail ship that has seen widespread use recently, and it was nowhere near the ishtar, nor was it getting out of hand. A nerf was needed, but not that much. And the other ships defnitely didn't need to see so much damage reduction. Meanwhile, the Ishtar which has triple the use AND selectable tracking AND selectable damage AND higher alpha only losses 17% of its DPS. Why do you hate Caldari so much? Have you seen the anemic DPS of tengus? They are used mainly because they are resilient, not because they are overpowered. In addition to that, railgun ships don't have drones. AT ALL. Apart from the moa which is a fake rail ship since it doesn't have any range bonuses. Therefore the DPS is even thinner. What I'd do would be to increase cap consumption of medium rails, increase their tracking and reduce their optimal by the same amount. Therefore resulting in less DPS if you want to keep range equivalent, and same DPS at point blank, point blank DPS being less than overpowered with rails given the ratio tracking vs dps. What do you think? Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 1002	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:52:20 - [24] - Quote you guys saying the dps is fine as is, just go check the difference between blasters and railguns using antimatter and see for yourself: the dps very similar now fair enough the railguns have worse tracking, but at the extreme ranges they apply damage the tracking is more than enough to hit even most frigates i think a dps hit is exactly what medium rails needed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5883	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:56:16 - [25] - Quote Seems entirely fair to me. Med rails are too close to blasters in DPS right now tbh. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
Wrik Hoover Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:57:08 - [26] - Quote ok
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 959	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:59:08 - [27] - Quote Wrik Hoover wrote: ok Same
Jezza McWaffle No Vacancies 178	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:07:56 - [28] - Quote Seems sensible, they were ridiculous when compared to the other medium long range weaponry, though maybe a little smidge of extra tracking to compensate, only like 3-4%? C6 Wormhole blog http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
Grookshank Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 45	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:13:30 - [29] - Quote I am utterly biased, not even trying to hide that, but are there actually numbers on ships like Moas and Eagles being overused by anyone but us? Is the number of ships we kill and lose maybe influencing your impression of them being overused? We emptied Amarr of medium Railguns when we deceided for them, so I am not pulling that out of thin air. Note: I am not talking about T3s, but while you want to nerf the Railgu and the Rail-Proteus, you hit the Caldari T1 and T2 cruisers pretty hard (and Gallente cruisers are anything but overusing med rails). Please consider that in weighting your impression of overused.
Tethys Luxor Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 6	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:25:29 - [30] - Quote Ok Brave, let's train 8.1% more pilots into Eagles to nullify the nerf.

MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2057	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:28:16 - [31] - Quote On thr plus side im now cap stable There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Ines Tegator Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc. 566	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:40:26 - [32] - Quote At present. medium rails (a long range gun) do no more dps then pulse lasers (a short range gun). I call this justified. Overhaul Dscan! Make your own rules - Noobs to Null / Casual Vets Corp
Soldarius Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent 1140	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:58:33 - [33] - Quote Discomanco wrote: Eagle: 5250mm Railgun T2 - Fed Navy Antimatter Charges 4 Mag Stabs T2 511 DPS - 40.5k+15km range Eagle: 5Heavy Neutron Blaster T2 - Fed Navy Antimatter Charges 4 Mag Stabs T2 557 DPS - 5.08k+6.25k range There really shouldn't be 45 DPS difference between long range guns and close range guns, especially not considering there's also 45km falloff difference as well. +1km = -1 DPS just seems wrong The Rate of Fire nerf should do good to separate them a bit. Not too heavy, likely not too light Agreed. This change is also a stealth buff to rail ships in the form in decreased capacitor usage. As for BNI's usage of Moas and Eagles, its only common sense. The ship progression is Moa >> Eagle >> Tengu. While you don't have to train for an Eagle to get into a Tengu, the Eagle is simply the cheaper but less capable version. So any alliance without the finances to regularly replace more expensive ships will choose something more within their means. I've advocated Eagles/Tengus since HACs and Med Rails were rebalanced, and couldn't be happier that BNI chose them for a fleet doctrine. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Marciniusz Solo Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic 0	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:01:58 - [34] - Quote Wouldn't a reduction in RoF make railguns shoot faster and therefore put out more dps? That looks like a buff to me, not a nerf...
Tethys Luxor Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 6	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:08:18 - [35] - Quote There's no capacitor buff, but it's a funny joke. You can already manage your guns to get the same cap use as after this nerf. After looking at your comparisons with beams and blaster, railgun damage seems really a bit high. At the same time Moas and Eagles are not OP. One conclusion would be that blasters and beams don't do enough damage, but it seems quite wrong. On a different note, this may allow artillery to make a come back. Railguns get range, Arties goes for alpha. After the change, what is the dps comparison between arties and railguns ?
Tethys Luxor Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 6	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:09:59 - [36] - Quote Marciniusz Solo wrote: Wouldn't a reduction in RoF make railguns shoot faster and therefore put out more dps? That looks like a buff to me, not a nerf... reduction in rate of fire means less shots per seconds.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1433	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:13:41 - [37] - Quote I am a long-time railgun enthusiast (since well before the changes in 2013), and I support this change. The combination of good DPS and excellent projection available to medium rails was a bit much. Plus...less cap usage. \o/ My Many Misadventures Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I seek to create content, not become content.
Dersen Lowery Drinking in Station 1465	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:14:03 - [38] - Quote Entirely fair. After the buff, I remember mocking up a 250mm Brutix and thinking, why would I ever fit blasters? Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables. I voted in CSM X!
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2804	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:36:00 - [39] - Quote Capqu wrote: seems good. 250mms in particular were beyond ridiculous and this should tone them down a bit maybe look at making javelin useful while you're looking at railguns though, that ammo is really bad But I don't see anybody complaining about the dual 150mm rails being over powered. Is there a way CCP could be a bit more refined with the rail nerf and look at which combination of ships and rails are putting out the most damage? JUSTK is recruiting.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2804	Posted - 2015.02.27 15:42:34 - [40] - Quote Grookshank wrote: We emptied Amarr of medium Railguns when we deceided for them, so I am not pulling that out of thin air. Good point. We emptied Jita and Dodixie of 150mm railguns during the Huola fight last summer. They went on no ships except the Sniper Corm. That said, we see Sniper Eagles quite a bit from Snigg out where we live. And we see Rail Proteus from the local pirates. JUSTK is recruiting.

Soldarius Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent 1144	Posted - 2015.02.27 16:28:33 - [41] - Quote Forgot to say something. Medium rails were one of the few systems that only needed a bit of a tweak; and that is exactly what they got. Looks good. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Ben Ishikela 17	Posted - 2015.02.27 16:48:47 - [42] - Quote noooooooooooo.... but i like railguns so much. magneticaly accelerated charges of anitmatter rock. but i would be ok with lowest damage but highest versatility and highest application of all ranged weapons. I hope this still applies. why not buff everything that is underused by 1% rate of fire or another unique attribute over several iterations/patches until it is used again? BigData will help :) No more nerfing of percieved Overpowered Content! It makes a game boring after too many iterations. Instead add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to fight the current Meta.
Nivin Sajjad Resurrection Ventures Un.Bound 2	Posted - 2015.02.27 17:08:17 - [43] - Quote CCP wrote: Shout-out here to CSM member mynnna for a great internal discussion on this topic. He raised the point that if you look at these weapon systems on their own, rather than comparing the ships using them, they look very balanced. It would follow then that the problem is more about Tengu, Eagle and Vulture than about rails. So far so good. CCP wrote: However, we can never look at weapon systems or ships without taking the other into consideration.The relationship between cap use of energy weapons and ships with cap use bonuses for energy weapons is another good example where trying to look at one without the other causes problems. We are therefore happy to consider balancing via the weapons or the ships depending on which fits the situation best. In this case, we are happy to use rails as the avenue because it is much simpler for us to design and you to adjust to. I'm going to take that "however" to mean "mynnna is correct in this instance, however...", in which case the followup reasoning actually contradicts CCP's own proposed actions. This is what the devblog line of reasoning looks like to me: Certain medium rail using ships are unbalanced. This unbalance is caused by a combination of weapon stats and ship bonuses, and any balance proposal should consider both. We are therefore happy to muck around with the performance of every single medium rail using ship in the game, regardless of how their particular bonuses interact with the weapon system. This is because a de facto change to every single medium rail using ship in the game is easier to adjust to, compared to a change to only 3 troublesome ship types. Hopefully you can see how this makes no sense.
Masao Kurata Z List 189	Posted - 2015.02.27 17:10:18 - [44] - Quote Gustav Mannfred wrote: This could be the end for all the suicide gank moas and vexors in Uedama and Niarja. It definitely isn't. A 7% reduction in dps still leaves these as the most effective suicide gank fits in their class, they just will be a bit less effective for low SP pilots.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2029	Posted - 2015.02.27 17:20:07 - [45] - Quote Tengus: killer of HM and now Rails. Who will be the next victim? ECM?
James Zimmer Furtherance. 14	Posted - 2015.02.27 17:57:21 - [46] - Quote I have mixed opinions about this. I agree that rails were a bit too strong, but a flat reduction in ROF may be a crude way to deal with the problem. The real issue is that rails have really good DPS that projects extremely well over great distances. While on paper, their tracking is the worst, in practice they track much better than arty, which has to shoot at closer ranges. Maybe anti-matter charges should have the same damage output, but a shorter base range, and then tweak all of the rail ammo range bonuses so that long range ammo still has a range bonus over arty and beams, albeit with much reduced DPS. If you did this, railguns would actually suffer from the tracking nerf when they try to go for super-high DPS, so using anti-matter would be risky, while still allowing them a range/kiting advantage over arty and beams. Alternatively, you could just nerf tracking even more. Another thing that could be done to nerf rails would be to take a close look at Spike ammo. When you stack an 80% bonus to range on top of the longest range turret based weapon, on a ship bonused to range, the range overmatch gets a little ridiculous. I agree that Caldari rail boats should have good projection, but they shouldn't have a 100km advantage over their peers.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1099	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:01:56 - [47] - Quote i imagine railguns as being high dps but low alpha, i would rather see a 10% damage nerf than 7.5% RoF Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone/fighter assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Murkar Omaristos The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance 90	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:09:25 - [48] - Quote Why does this need to apply to all railgun boats b/c Tengus are overpowered? Does the Deimos really need this kind of nerf? This also takes away a good chunk of the buff that the arazu/lachesis recently got..... Although I'm pretty happy with the Ishtar changes, but this recent attitude of "Nerf all the things! Swing the nerf bat hard in every direction!" is maybe a bit overkill.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 483	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:13:47 - [49] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: I think rails where not the issue - they are ok now. Again combining rail guns with the overpowered hulls (eg Tengu) was the only issue. For example. Harpy gangs are very specific, and are easy to counter. They die in masses. I think no change to rail guns are necessary - and nerfing them will put again some cruisers out of the fields. Simple additional nerf to Caldari offensive system can solve the Rail Tengu issue once and for all , while not affecting other ships that are now viable. So NO to rail nerf. Yes to adjusting Tengu Offensive system. We could also consider changing a bit Eagle for lower optimal , bigger fallof. I personally would like to see the double ranged bonuses on ishukone ships and the tengu sub get changed for optimal and tracking speed. It would go a long way towards improving their combat flexibility in skirmishes outside of large fleet gangs.
Sven Viko VIkolander Friends and Feminists 326	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:40:05 - [50] - Quote The problem with this change is that it will essentially kill numerous medium rail platforms that are not widely used, but still have certain roles while solo/smallgang/fleet (such as: rail thorax, rail deimos, rail vigilant rail exeq navy issue, and even the rail moa and rail eagles which are just barely viable and even then because BNI fleets are generally SP limited, so cannot use tengus etc.). Yet the change is probably not good enough to kill the rail tengu fleet meta as people will still just bring more, or only undock if they have 7%+ more people post-nerf. So basically what this change will accomplish is: it will virtually kill about a dozen medium rail platforms, while only moderately reducing the effectiveness of the rail tengu (a reduction that can be fixed by bringing more people in the fleet).

Cae Lara Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:41:34 - [51] - Quote I like it. Hitting the rate of fire still lets people critical mass their way to victory from the same range with the same numbers. They'll just be a bit less effective when all is said and done. We'll see how it plays out, but I think this was a really good way to go about the nerf.
Tyanir Ellecon Arbitrary Spaceship Destruction -affliction- 10	Posted - 2015.02.27 19:32:07 - [52] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Moas, Tengus, Vultures, Proteii, Eagle, etc.. Mostly that just says to me that its not so much the rails that are the problem as the insane optimal range bonuses on the caldari hybrid line and the proteus having a range bonus also along with a massive tank. I just fear that such a large change to the weapons rather than the boats will make railguns unviable on ships such as the thorax/deimos. In short I feel that, while the nerf is probably needed, its a bit harsh on other Hybrid platforms not listed where they are not so clearly overused/powerful and that a less severe nerf to the turrets combined with the alteration to optimal range bonuses would help bring them into line without rendering them useless on non-optimal bonused Hybrid hulls.
Anthar Thebess 918	Posted - 2015.02.27 21:13:04 - [53] - Quote Why rails are so popular , and show up high on graphs? Tengu fleets? Brave ridding hybrids as main weapon system for very long time? Most of the CFC using rails because of popular harpy fleet. Some ships simply don't deserve nerf they will get because of this. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Atomeon The Scope Gallente Federation 13	Posted - 2015.02.27 21:43:07 - [54] - Quote Seems everyone agreed that Tengu is the problem not the rails. I m against this nerf.
Anthar Thebess 919	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:35:45 - [55] - Quote Well i think that hybrids are very popular because from logistic and skill point perspective unified doctrine is easier to maintain. CFC is using hybrids in baltec fleets since you needed T2 med gun before T2 large hybrids. Many people have those skills so it is popular. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Murkar Omaristos The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance 92	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:37:23 - [56] - Quote Atomeon wrote: Seems everyone agreed that Tengu is the problem not the rails. I m against this nerf. Very much indeed, CCP Plz. R.I.P. Deimos.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 778	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:40:54 - [57] - Quote They're popular because they do shitloads of DPS at long ranges. N-Exe will do 545 with CNAM for gods sakes.
Vic Jefferson The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple 176	Posted - 2015.02.27 22:47:50 - [58] - Quote Murkar Omaristos wrote: Atomeon wrote: Seems everyone agreed that Tengu is the problem not the rails. I m against this nerf. Very much indeed, CCP Plz. R.I.P. Deimos. A good bit of this is wrapped up in kiting vs brawling. Rail Thorax, rail Deimos, rail Proteus, and rail Brutix are all just better off than their blaster cousins because of the speed and projection of common ships out there these days. Part of why rails are used so often, even outside of big doctrines, is largely because brawling is in such a bad place. Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 17	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:18:32 - [59] - Quote -1, just hurts some ships that didn't need the bat. Everything I train for just gets nerfed, that's 5 in a row. Damn sucks to be caldari.
Anthar Thebess 919	Posted - 2015.02.27 23:50:36 - [60] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: -1, just hurts some ships that didn't need the bat. Everything I train for just gets nerfed, that's 5 in a row. Damn sucks to be caldari. Train all guns / missiles / combat ships to T2 , and your problem will be solved. Only T2 hvy drones left for me. Nerfing rails will be bad for whole line of ships that don't need this , as they already not used. I always loved Ferox hull, but never had real reason to fly one. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.

Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 491	Posted - 2015.02.28 03:25:49 - [61] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Forgot to say something. Medium rails were one of the few systems that only needed a bit of a tweak; and that is exactly what they got. Looks good. Oh good now they can fix the heavy missile weapon system by giving it some more application. Explosion velocity please. Least offensive balance change you can do. As for medium rails themselves I haven't use them since I ran L3's in a ferox. Years ago. Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
Lug Muad'Dib Wise Humans Sword 37	Posted - 2015.02.28 09:45:57 - [62] - Quote Dual 150 are so OP.. Isn't only some 250mm plateform that are problematic ? CCP Rise wrote: There are of course many contributing factors to the popularity of those ships, but railguns are simply the simplest angle of attack for us when it comes to having a small impact on all of them at once. does it mean i'm lazy so i take the easy way ?!? D-Scan immunity is dumb.
Aiyshimin Fistful of Finns Triumvirate. 417	Posted - 2015.02.28 10:14:35 - [63] - Quote Sven Viko VIkolander wrote: The problem with this change is that it will essentially kill numerous medium rail platforms that are not widely used, but still have certain roles while solo/smallgang/fleet (such as: rail thorax, rail deimos, rail vigilant rail exeq navy issue, and even the rail moa and rail eagles which are just barely viable and even then because BNI fleets are generally SP limited, so cannot use tengus etc.). Yet the change is probably not good enough to kill the rail tengu fleet meta as people will still just bring more, or only undock if they have 7%+ more people post-nerf. So basically what this change will accomplish is: it will virtually kill about a dozen medium rail platforms, while only moderately reducing the effectiveness of the rail tengu (a reduction that can be fixed by bringing more people in the fleet). I love my rail ENI to bits, but I'm also willing to admit that with the current rail dps there is very little reason to fit blasters on anything anymore. All Proteuses on TQ have been 250mm fit since the buff, and so are Vigilant, two of the most iconic blaster platforms have become rail platforms. I also enjoy rails on Phobos and Lach, but the dps really just is a bit too much. I hope this 7.5% isn't too much, and they still remain viable options. However, it is also true that Tengu being stupidly OP as a hull has already resulted in the nerf of two weapon systems. Perhaps it is time to take a deeper look at Tengu itself instead of skirting around the problem. The tanking buff certainly does not solve the issue, it should be nerfed instead.
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 117	Posted - 2015.02.28 10:16:26 - [64] - Quote Lug Muad'Dib wrote: Dual 150 are so OP.. Isn't only some 250mm plateform that are problematic ? CCP Rise wrote: There are of course many contributing factors to the popularity of those ships, but railguns are simply the simplest angle of attack for us when it comes to having a small impact on all of them at once. does it mean i'm lazy so i take the easy way ?!? Not even sure it's only some platforms. I tried with Heavy Neutron vs 250mm Rail on a Vaga, and they are dangerously close in DPS. Vaga; 5 Heavy Neutron T2, Fed Navy Antimatter 4 Magstabs T2 446 DPS, 2.25+6.25 Vaga; 5 250mm Railgun T2, Fed Navy Antimatter 4 Magstabs T2 409 DPS, 18+15 37 DPS vs 24.5km still seems off (considering it's an unbonused hull)
Jacob Holland Weyland-Vulcan Industries 378	Posted - 2015.02.28 10:46:28 - [65] - Quote All types is perhaps a little heavy - Do Dual 150s really need a nerf?
Idame Isqua Vipres' Templis CALSF 0	Posted - 2015.02.28 10:51:45 - [66] - Quote Nivin Sajjad wrote: CCP wrote: Shout-out here to CSM member mynnna for a great internal discussion on this topic. He raised the point that if you look at these weapon systems on their own, rather than comparing the ships using them, they look very balanced. It would follow then that the problem is more about Tengu, Eagle and Vulture than about rails. So far so good. CCP wrote: However, we can never look at weapon systems or ships without taking the other into consideration.The relationship between cap use of energy weapons and ships with cap use bonuses for energy weapons is another good example where trying to look at one without the other causes problems. We are therefore happy to consider balancing via the weapons or the ships depending on which fits the situation best. In this case, we are happy to use rails as the avenue because it is much simpler for us to design and you to adjust to. I'm going to take that "however" to mean "mynnna is correct in this instance, however...", in which case the followup reasoning actually contradicts CCP's own proposed actions. This is what the devblog line of reasoning looks like to me: Certain medium rail using ships are unbalanced. This unbalance is caused by a combination of weapon stats and ship bonuses, and any balance proposal should consider both. We are therefore happy to muck around with the performance of every single medium rail using ship in the game, regardless of how their particular bonuses interact with the weapon system. This is because a de facto change to every single medium rail using ship in the game is easier to adjust to, compared to a change to only 3 troublesome ship types. Hopefully you can see how this makes no sense. Quote2: "Not even sure it's only some platforms. I tried with Heavy Neutron vs 250mm Rail on a Vaga, and they are dangerously close in DPS. Vaga; 5 Heavy Neutron T2, Fed Navy Antimatter 4 Magstabs T2 446 DPS, 2.25+6.25 Vaga; 5 250mm Railgun T2, Fed Navy Antimatter 4 Magstabs T2 409 DPS, 18+15" If CCP understands the game as little as you do god help us! CCPlease
Smurfette Zoohl Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.02.28 11:23:45 - [67] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Soldarius wrote: Forgot to say something. Medium rails were one of the few systems that only needed a bit of a tweak; and that is exactly what they got. Looks good. Oh good now they can fix the heavy missile weapon system by giving it some more application. Explosion velocity please. Least offensive balance change you can do. As for medium rails themselves I haven't use them since I ran L3's in a ferox. Years ago. Yea missiles could use a bit of loving
Arinola Pendoler The Imperterrits 0	Posted - 2015.02.28 11:38:45 - [68] - Quote Preciselly 250 medium railguns is what I use to PVE and get some ISK... I finished to get the skill a couple of weeks ago... Bad luck... Im nerfed :( -+Maybe there is a solution for PVP that doesnt affect my PVE ship? Just asking, I know its complicated stuff...
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1441	Posted - 2015.02.28 13:36:34 - [69] - Quote Arinola Pendoler wrote: Preciselly 250 medium railguns is what I use to PVE and get some ISK... I finished to get the skill a couple of weeks ago... Bad luck... Im nerfed :( -+Maybe there is a solution for PVP that doesnt affect my PVE ship? Just asking, I know its complicated stuff... Every ship is a PvP ship. My Many Misadventures Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook. I seek to create content, not become content.
Arinola Pendoler The Imperterrits 0	Posted - 2015.02.28 15:05:33 - [70] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: Arinola Pendoler wrote: Preciselly 250 medium railguns is what I use to PVE and get some ISK... I finished to get the skill a couple of weeks ago... Bad luck... Im nerfed :( -+Maybe there is a solution for PVP that doesnt affect my PVE ship? Just asking, I know its complicated stuff... Every ship is a PvP ship. Touch+¬.... But still, for those that use medium railguns for pve and are going to be nerfed like me, maybe a compensation for PVE could be an increase of the ammo capacity to reduce the time reloading the guns... Its just an idea from a noob like me, who reached medium railguns V recently ;)

Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2739	Posted - 2015.02.28 17:10:38 - [71] - Quote Confirming even post nerf these are going to be better than the old railguns. And there were a lot of us who used them for pve before there initial buff.
Ines Tegator Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc. 569	Posted - 2015.02.28 19:25:46 - [72] - Quote [Gnosis, Railguns 250] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M [Empty High slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] Medium Railguns, Tech 1 Short Range Ammo, 3 DPS mods, All 5 Skills 419 DPS [Gnosis, Lasers] Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M [Empty High slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] Medium Pulse Lasers, Tech 1 Short Range Ammo, 3 DPS mods, All 5 Skills 373 DPS Would anyone else like to argue that the problem is with a few specific ships? Long range guns are putting out more RAW dps then short range guns. Something is obviously wrong. Nerf is justified. All hail the nerf. Overhaul Dscan! Make your own rules - Noobs to Null / Casual Vets Corp
O2 jayjay Tit-EE Sprinkles Stratagem. 19	Posted - 2015.02.28 23:17:10 - [73] - Quote I think the 7.5% should apply to cal ships only and the Proteus s getting Nerf. Don't need to mess with the gallente ships or you will break rails for them again. Also people dont understand that 250 track like crap. DPS doesnt matter when you cant apply them. Blaster have decent tracking but are made for brawling.
Alexis Nightwish 101	Posted - 2015.02.28 23:49:16 - [74] - Quote Ines Tegator wrote: [Gnosis, Railguns 250] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M [Empty High slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] Medium Railguns, Tech 1 Short Range Ammo, 3 DPS mods, All 5 Skills 419 DPS [Gnosis, Lasers] Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M [Empty High slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] Medium Pulse Lasers, Tech 1 Short Range Ammo, 3 DPS mods, All 5 Skills 373 DPS Would anyone else like to argue that the problem is with a few specific ships? Long range guns are putting out more RAW dps then short range guns. Something is obviously wrong. Nerf is justified. All hail the nerf. Ines Tegator, that's not the full story. [Gnosis, Dual 150mm Rail] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] Dual 150mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M Dual 150mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M [empty high slot] 368 DPS [Gnosis, Dual 200mm Rail] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M [empty high slot] 388 DPS [Gnosis, Quad Light Beam] Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] Quad Light Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Quad Light Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Quad Light Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Quad Light Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Quad Light Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M [empty high slot] 389 DPS [Gnosis, Focused Medium Beam] Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty low slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] [empty med slot] Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M [empty high slot] 340 DPS SUMMARY: 419 DPS: 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 373 DPS: Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M 388 DPS: 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 340 DPS: Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M 368 DPS: Dual 150mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 389 DPS: Quad Light Beam Laser II, Multifrequency M CCP, please don't apply this nerf to the Dual 150s. They aren't broken in the way 200s and 250s are. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 17	Posted - 2015.02.28 23:53:40 - [75] - Quote Ines Tegator wrote: [Gnosis, Railguns 250] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M [Empty High slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] Medium Railguns, Tech 1 Short Range Ammo, 3 DPS mods, All 5 Skills 419 DPS [Gnosis, Lasers] Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Low slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] [Empty Med slot] Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M Heavy Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency M [Empty High slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] [Empty Rig slot] Medium Pulse Lasers, Tech 1 Short Range Ammo, 3 DPS mods, All 5 Skills 373 DPS Would anyone else like to argue that the problem is with a few specific ships? Long range guns are putting out more RAW dps then short range guns. Something is obviously wrong. Nerf is justified. All hail the nerf. Apples to apples please: [Gnosis,Gnosis] 5x Heavy Beam Laser II (Multifrequency M) 3x Heat Sink II All skills to 5, 408dps. tracking: 0.037125 (vs 0.025625 for rails)
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 787	Posted - 2015.03.01 00:09:38 - [76] - Quote Rails still do more damage at longer ranges though. (15+10 vs 18+15) Lasers also use more than triple the cap per shot. (16gj vs 5.25gj). Rof not significantly out at lasers doing 4.32 vs rails @3.9 (no dps mods here) There may be an element of rounding here, it's from a phone fitting tool.
Loken Grimsward Easy Co. Fatal Ascension 3	Posted - 2015.03.01 09:12:53 - [77] - Quote I dont see a good reason to nerf railguns. If your intention is to change the meta so pilots are not exclusively flying Ishtars with sentries and Tengu with rail guns wouldn't it be better to just nerf the hulls? Nerfing the weapon systems also nerfs every other ship that can use that weapon system. Doesn't sound like it will balance anthing at all to be honest.
Arinola Pendoler The Imperterrits 0	Posted - 2015.03.01 09:28:38 - [78] - Quote Loken Grimsward wrote: I dont see a good reason to nerf railguns. If your intention is to change the meta so pilots are not exclusively flying Ishtars with sentries and Tengu with rail guns wouldn't it be better to just nerf the hulls? Nerfing the weapon systems also nerfs every other ship that can use that weapon system. Doesn't sound like it will balance anthing at all to be honest. Im agree, I use Railguns in a diferent way and Im going to be heavily punished for this nerf. If advised i would not train Medium railguns.
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1225	Posted - 2015.03.01 09:50:03 - [79] - Quote "nerf all med rails" makes no sense apart from "uuuuhm, we can't be bothered to figure it out". 250mm being too good is obvious, 200mm is already borderline and nerfing dual 150 is just moronic. I'm old Gregor.
Valkin Mordirc 666	Posted - 2015.03.01 13:23:12 - [80] - Quote Reading through the comments and see what others have posted. 250mm need the nerf, not ALL Medium ral guns. CPP You cray cray if you think this is a decent idea. Not to attack you or anything but this seems like a lazy rushed fix to the game which hurts more than then it fixes. Yes 250mm need to be fixed. But not a Nerf to all medium rails. `#DeleteTheWeak`

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 791	Posted - 2015.03.01 13:58:25 - [81] - Quote 200s are stupid too, stop deluding yourselves.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 584	Posted - 2015.03.01 21:15:31 - [82] - Quote Ha! Nerf the Ferox! The Ferox was way too (un-)strongh for a long time now, time to nerf that ship.. signature
DrysonBennington Aliastra Gallente Federation 215	Posted - 2015.03.01 21:20:19 - [83] - Quote So I guess us Gallente are going to have to start throwing Squid's (Caldari) and Amie's (Amarr) at the enemy now. I don't have a problem with that.
Kiryen O'Bannon Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans 214	Posted - 2015.03.02 01:40:17 - [84] - Quote I think it would be more appropriate to wait and see what effects the Tengu changes have and then decide to what degree rails need changes.
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 500	Posted - 2015.03.02 03:30:35 - [85] - Quote From what I can see here, people not being super huttburt over this change implies that nerfing the ishtar was not going to mean that railgus became the next meta. Perhaps I am wrong but the overwhelming amount of stupid overflowing from the skynet change implicates that this particular change here with railguns as being of much smaller impact to the populace. Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
Victini 0	Posted - 2015.03.02 07:24:24 - [86] - Quote 7.5% is too strong hit... 5% is more suitable
Chi'Nane T'Kal Interminatus Aeterna Anima 306	Posted - 2015.03.02 10:20:34 - [87] - Quote I have to agree on two points raised: - the nerf seems a bit excessive, with the more frequent update scheme smaller steps would make more sense. - your most compelling argument is the proliferation of railguns in doctrines. There are two main factors contributing to that, hull power and weapon system power. You're adressing both parameters at the same time, which is scientifically unsound. It would make more sense to follow up on the defensive subsystem change with a period of observation and then follow up with a railgun change - if it is still necessary. Again the more frequent update scheme would easily allow such a strategy.
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 656	Posted - 2015.03.02 11:04:59 - [88] - Quote Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote: I have to agree on two points raised: - the nerf seems a bit excessive, with the more frequent update scheme smaller steps would make more sense. - your most compelling argument is the proliferation of railguns in doctrines. There are two main factors contributing to that, hull power and weapon system power. You're adressing both parameters at the same time, which is scientifically unsound. It would make more sense to follow up on the defensive subsystem change with a period of observation and then follow up with a railgun change - if it is still necessary. Again the more frequent update scheme would easily allow such a strategy. This would be my suggestion as rail guns were just a meh gun type for most of my Eve time, now they are usable, however this post makes total sense because so much of Eve is adjusted because of large fleet meta's and that gets wearing, when most of the issue centres around buffers and RR, but if you do nerf medium rail guns 7.5% ROF is a bit much, 5% sounds better. Ella's Snack bar
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2743	Posted - 2015.03.02 12:10:10 - [89] - Quote Before damage mods a thorax with 5 250mm railguns, navy antimatter, and level 5 skills will deal 300 DPS currently. After this nerf it will do about 277 DPS, it is not that big of a nerd and comically enough still has almost as much DPS as 425mm railguns.
Sinigr Shadowsong Monkey Attack Squad Goonswarm Federation 134	Posted - 2015.03.02 14:13:02 - [90] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: As announced last night on the o7 show, we have a list of high-impact balance changes planned for Scylla. One of those changes is a reduction in rate of fire for all medium railguns by 7.5% for all types. Did you mean increase in rate of fire? Because lower RoF value goes more DPS you apply. "Attack speed" goes the other way, but there is no such term in EVE.

Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 18	Posted - 2015.03.02 14:43:50 - [91] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Before damage mods a thorax with 5 250mm railguns, navy antimatter, and level 5 skills will deal 300 DPS currently. After this nerf it will do about 277 DPS, it is not that big of a nerd and comically enough still has almost as much DPS as 425mm railguns. large rails have underwhelming dps.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 150	Posted - 2015.03.02 22:07:32 - [92] - Quote This is also a nerf to Galente Cruisers, will the hybrid bonused ships get a compensation? Also I agree, 150 dual rails are not too strong to deserve a nerf. CCP, you go the lazy way. I'm my own NPC alt.
Zekora Rally Negative Density 10	Posted - 2015.03.03 10:21:20 - [93] - Quote Rail proteus is far worse than a rail tengu. You ain't seen nothing.
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1613	Posted - 2015.03.03 18:54:59 - [94] - Quote Sinigr Shadowsong wrote: CCP Rise wrote: As announced last night on the o7 show, we have a list of high-impact balance changes planned for Scylla. One of those changes is a reduction in rate of fire for all medium railguns by 7.5% for all types. Did you mean increase in rate of fire? Because lower RoF value goes more DPS you apply. "Attack speed" goes the other way, but there is no such term in EVE. Rate of fire is the amount of shots you take in a certain amount of time. The fact that EVE display it the other way around (how much time per shots) does not change the actual meaning of the words. Weapon rate of fire for example are ususally rated in shots/minutes. Lowering the rate of fires gives less shots per minutes.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 586	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:07:20 - [95] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: Before damage mods a thorax with 5 250mm railguns, navy antimatter, and level 5 skills will deal 300 DPS currently. After this nerf it will do about 277 DPS, it is not that big of a nerd and comically enough still has almost as much DPS as 425mm railguns. large rails have underwhelming dps. At least I'm no longer the only one, who thinks this. signature
Odethia Rondass 1	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:16:01 - [96] - Quote Though Railguns are obviously extremely good on some ships, I don't think the Eagle need a nerf. It's definitely not overpowered even with it's broken guns.
Spugg Galdon Aliastra Gallente Federation 622	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:41:43 - [97] - Quote how is this 7.5% reduction in RoF (or increase in duration) calculated? The math I'm doing is coming out at a rough 8-9% reduction in dps
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 270	Posted - 2015.03.04 14:29:07 - [98] - Quote And after a full 5 pages and at least 5 days since the OP commented, NO COMMENTS FROM CSM 9 One of those changes is a reduction in rate of fire for all medium railguns by 7.5% for all types, I trust you did the math CCP, but keep an eye on it if it needed only to be 5% after the Tech 3 cruiser nerf The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg GÇÖChilde Roland to the Dark Tower came.GÇÖ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY3oMRLfArU
Davir Sometaww Snuff Box Snuffed Out 36	Posted - 2015.03.05 02:13:58 - [99] - Quote While we are at it; Can we actually make heavy missiles NOT suck anymore?
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 125	Posted - 2015.03.05 03:55:10 - [100] - Quote Umm... let's calm it down a bit shall we? How about we start with a -5% reduction in ROF and see where things end up?

Vincintius Agrippa The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology 77	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:35:07 - [101] - Quote Did I miss something? Last time I checked rails had **** tracking and mediocre damage. I've never seen rails on anything other than tracking bonused hulls like the thorax. Occasionally a moa fleet, but rarely. `Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!`
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 816	Posted - 2015.03.05 09:49:15 - [102] - Quote Vincintius Agrippa wrote: Did I miss something? Last time I checked rails had **** tracking and mediocre damage. I've never seen rails on anything other than tracking bonused hulls like the thorax. Occasionally a moa fleet, but rarely. Was that in 2008?
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1998	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:39:48 - [103] - Quote Vincintius Agrippa wrote: Did I miss something? Last time I checked rails had **** tracking and mediocre damage. I've never seen rails on anything other than tracking bonused hulls like the thorax. Occasionally a moa fleet, but rarely. They have WAAAAY more trackign than arties. A bit less than beams. They have WAY MORE damage then both of them. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1998	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:41:09 - [104] - Quote Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote: I have to agree on two points raised: - the nerf seems a bit excessive, with the more frequent update scheme smaller steps would make more sense. - your most compelling argument is the proliferation of railguns in doctrines. There are two main factors contributing to that, hull power and weapon system power. You're adressing both parameters at the same time, which is scientifically unsound. It would make more sense to follow up on the defensive subsystem change with a period of observation and then follow up with a railgun change - if it is still necessary. Again the more frequent update scheme would easily allow such a strategy. The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 18	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:51:43 - [105] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote: I have to agree on two points raised: - the nerf seems a bit excessive, with the more frequent update scheme smaller steps would make more sense. - your most compelling argument is the proliferation of railguns in doctrines. There are two main factors contributing to that, hull power and weapon system power. You're adressing both parameters at the same time, which is scientifically unsound. It would make more sense to follow up on the defensive subsystem change with a period of observation and then follow up with a railgun change - if it is still necessary. Again the more frequent update scheme would easily allow such a strategy. The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. But same Stabber with Beams does about the same damage. Slightly less range, but slightly better tracking.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1998	Posted - 2015.03.05 15:04:09 - [106] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote: I have to agree on two points raised: - the nerf seems a bit excessive, with the more frequent update scheme smaller steps would make more sense. - your most compelling argument is the proliferation of railguns in doctrines. There are two main factors contributing to that, hull power and weapon system power. You're adressing both parameters at the same time, which is scientifically unsound. It would make more sense to follow up on the defensive subsystem change with a period of observation and then follow up with a railgun change - if it is still necessary. Again the more frequent update scheme would easily allow such a strategy. The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. But same Stabber with Beams does about the same damage. Slightly less range, but slightly better tracking. With WAY higher fittings are more cap usage. At the end rails do not have any serious disadvantage "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Erihn Sabrovich Bionesis Technologies 0	Posted - 2015.03.06 19:10:47 - [107] - Quote 1) If the goal is to nerf a particular ship/gun combination, I think that it'd be better to nerf the ship than the gun. It'd avoid to touch the balance for all other ships. 2) as pointed before, the possible overpower of the railgun does not apply on the same way to all Medium rails... a similar nerf on all med-rails seem a little odd. 3) What about the other parameters ? PG, CPU, Cap ? Comparing Rails to Arty don't take in account the difference in Cap usage. Cap is the ability to sustain AB, MWD, Reps, Shields, ... and, for rails and laser, the ability to fire. Tracking difference must also be taken in account... Aswell the delay between firing and hitting. 4) Maybe the problem is in having Caldari using railguns (instead of missiles), ... Using a kind of weapon not related to the ship should have some penality... 5) Rails are the only weapon that can't switch damage type... You only have thermal/kinetics... what magnitude can you give to that drawback ? You can't compare raw damages of lasers or arty which can switch damage type to raw damages of Rails. 6) CCP is targetting mostly a few number of ships... and nerf both the ships and one kind of weapon... I think that a more sensible behaviour is to do only one change at the time. This would allow to get a better view at the effects of the changes.
Nalha Saldana Shattered Void Test Alliance Please Ignore 882	Posted - 2015.03.06 20:28:26 - [108] - Quote These changes might be good to fix the extreme use of this weapon system but the problem isnt the weapon system! The ships that are popular for these are the Moa, Eagle and mostly the Tengu. What is the actual problem then? A typical fleet Moa fit has 58k (!) EHP, thats more than a Maller with 1600mm plate and nothing but tank in the low slots. The Eagle has 114K EHP, thats more than many battleship fits! Combined with a small sig radius these just dont die. And the Tengu? Yea i think you can guess... Please don't nerf the Gallente rail ships! They are underpowered enough as is.
Xequecal GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 270	Posted - 2015.03.07 10:24:08 - [109] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: With WAY higher fittings are more cap usage. At the end rails do not have any serious disadvantage The disadvantage of rails is that they do kin/therm damage, which is a massive disadvantage. This nerf is completely stupid. Medium rails are only really used on ships with double range bonuses in order to outrange sentry drones. If you're planning to engage at under 130k, you should be in Ishtars as they completely dominate all other ships inside that range. All this nerf does is make the only real Ishtar counter have to blob even harder to break through reps. You're already shooting right into the T2 resists and doing next to no damage, now it's even worse.
Nina Lowel Ministry of War Amarr Empire 9	Posted - 2015.03.08 05:40:10 - [110] - Quote It's not rails that need a nerf, it's blasters need a buff, and it's only 3 ships that are too good with rails...hence no other doctrines that fit rails. I mean, I wish CCP would actually use their brains. If you want to know what's OP, look at the most heavily used doctrines in null, I can tell you it's not rail demios or proteus, it's freaking tengu! I've given up on CCP's ability to recognize problem areas and how to fix them.

Arinola Pendoler The Imperterrits 0	Posted - 2015.03.08 09:32:58 - [111] - Quote It's pretty frustrating for a new player (late 2014) to be afected by a nerf, on a -+10? years old game... I just finished "railgun spec" weeks ago; at this moment its my only seriuos lvl 5 skill for PVE. Instead to focus the solution in a weapon, I think, in my opinion, that they should focus in the ships that are overpowered and are mentioned in the article. Ships that I dont use... I use 250 medium for PVE to get some little ISK. Railguns use thermal and kinetic always, thats big a disavantage, between little others. Just an opinion of a frustrated new player ;)
Ben Ishikela 21	Posted - 2015.03.08 16:47:12 - [112] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: (...)strong pressure to field rail platforms: Moas, Tengus, Vultures, Proteii, Eagle, etc. (...) but railguns are simply the simplest angle of attack for us 1st simple =/= best. Status: .Rails are a good average. they have no big issue with falloff, tracking, damagetypeselection. that makes them versatile and good to begin with for new players. Compared to other turrets. .they are heavily used in fleetdoctrines and solo/small gang not so much, right? .many new players have indeed trained Rails. Goal: .lets keep their strength = simplicity .make them a good base for lower skillpoints and skills. .make other turrets a specialty by them dealing more damage in comparison for skilled pilots. .create incentive for Starters to move on to other specialized WeaponPlatforms, once they have enough practise. Change: .make it faster to train for rails .let them scale with skillpoints and pilotskill slower than other turrets. ..less damage bonus per skill level compared to other weapons ..tengu/vult/eagle gets less bonus to damage/etc per skill level, but higher base ..better tracking and even lesser falloff to punch it more into its new role ..?increase damage per skill on others? ..crazy: make every T3 able to use Rails effective. .advertise them as good starter Issues: atm i cant think of any. help me! No more nerfing of percieved Overpowered Content! It makes a game boring after too many iterations. Instead add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to fight the current Meta.
Suitonia Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep 465	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:29:05 - [113] - Quote afkalt wrote: Vincintius Agrippa wrote: Did I miss something? Last time I checked rails had **** tracking and mediocre damage. I've never seen rails on anything other than tracking bonused hulls like the thorax. Occasionally a moa fleet, but rarely. Was that in 2008? Blammo Contributer to Eve is Easy: https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
Ben Ishikela 24	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:53:42 - [114] - Quote If you reduce the damage output of dual150 too, could there be a way to decrease their signature to get them up to speed? I remember being a noob and putting dual150 on my thorax to hit frigates better, but then realising they have more sig then single 150 small guns. Or please rename them, because its one step less too learn and is no meaningful choice. Hint: there is also the rapid light missile launcher that is a good medium weapon against frigs. give us a proper turret that can do this! Add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to fight the current Meta!
Rek Seven The Scope Gallente Federation 1968	Posted - 2015.03.18 10:47:35 - [115] - Quote So basically, if they ship doesn't have a bonus to the weapon, don't use it... That will do wonders for fitting options. +1
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2024	Posted - 2015.03.18 14:30:01 - [116] - Quote Erihn Sabrovich wrote: 5) Rails are the only weapon that can't switch damage type... You only have thermal/kinetics... what magnitude can you give to that drawback ? You can't compare raw damages of lasers or arty which can switch damage type to raw damages of Rails. WHAT? ever heard of Pulses, Beams and blasters? "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2024	Posted - 2015.03.18 14:32:59 - [117] - Quote Ben Ishikela wrote: CCP Rise wrote: (...)strong pressure to field rail platforms: Moas, Tengus, Vultures, Proteii, Eagle, etc. (...) but railguns are simply the simplest angle of attack for us 1st simple =/= best. Status: .Rails are a good average. they have no big issue with falloff, tracking, damagetypeselection. that makes them versatile and good to begin with for new players. Compared to other turrets. .they are heavily used in fleetdoctrines and solo/small gang not so much, right? .many new players have indeed trained Rails. Goal: .lets keep their strength = simplicity .make them a good base for lower skillpoints and skills. .make other turrets a specialty by them dealing more damage in comparison for skilled pilots. .create incentive for Starters to move on to other specialized WeaponPlatforms, once they have enough practise. Change: .make it faster to train for rails .let them scale with skillpoints and pilotskill slower than other turrets. ..less damage bonus per skill level compared to other weapons ..tengu/vult/eagle gets less bonus to damage/etc per skill level, but higher base ..better tracking and even lesser falloff to punch it more into its new role ..?increase damage per skill on others? ..crazy: make every T3 able to use Rails effective. .advertise them as good starter Issues: atm i cant think of any. help me! RAIls are overpowerred not the hulls If you deconsider all ship bonuses rails are already more powerful than other weapon systems. They do way more damage with way better tracking and WAY lower fittings than arties. Do a close to same damage damage with a bit less tracking.. with MASSIVELY easier fittings than beams. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Arsine Mayhem Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 385	Posted - 2015.03.19 17:16:04 - [118] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. Are there still minmatar ships in this game? And for the rails vs artys, this is only for medium.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2025	Posted - 2015.03.20 14:21:47 - [119] - Quote Arsine Mayhem wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. Are there still minmatar ships in this game? And for the rails vs artys, this is only for medium. Yes, only mediums have a HUGE unbalance. The large ones have a smaller unbalance, still present, but bearable because alpha is way more important on the large gun scale. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Tyranis Marcus Bloody Heathens 1412	Posted - 2015.03.21 01:39:04 - [120] - Quote It's not going to nerf ships that don't need a nerfing is it? I'm talking about medium railgun platforms that aren't currently too strong? If there are any? Do not run. We are your friends.

Aeryn Maricadie Periphery Bound 13	Posted - 2015.03.23 02:41:56 - [121] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Swanky nutjob wrote: Did you factor in rails are one of the few systems which can hit out to ranges that Ishtars orbit at? rate of fire wont change that. Ishtars are also getting nerfed too. But since Ishtars are just getting a damage nerf too that won't really change the dynamic. It will still be Ishtars and Tengus pounding away at each other. The lower dps might allow other doctrines more viability, but I think someone just needs to come up with a Rooks&Kings style counter. Something wacky and ingenious like the pipebomb fleet.
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 81	Posted - 2015.03.26 15:00:54 - [122] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Arsine Mayhem wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. Are there still minmatar ships in this game? And for the rails vs artys, this is only for medium. Yes, only mediums have a HUGE unbalance. The large ones have a smaller unbalance, still present, but bearable because alpha is way more important on the large gun scale. 2 dps more, And Alpha is important on pretty much all tiers. An artillery stabber have more than 2 times as much alpha as an stabber with rails. It's an additional reason why high sec griefer corps/alliances use loki.. (the fast locking is 1 thing, but the alpha is an additional reason.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2028	Posted - 2015.03.27 09:43:20 - [123] - Quote kraken11 jensen wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: Arsine Mayhem wrote: Kagura Nikon wrote: The problem are NOT the hull. If you put medium rails on a STABBER, it still does more damage than an ARTI STABBER. Are there still minmatar ships in this game? And for the rails vs artys, this is only for medium. Yes, only mediums have a HUGE unbalance. The large ones have a smaller unbalance, still present, but bearable because alpha is way more important on the large gun scale. 2 dps more, And Alpha is important on pretty much all tiers. An artillery stabber have more than 2 times as much alpha as an stabber with rails. It's an additional reason why high sec griefer corps/alliances use loki.. (the fast locking is 1 thing, but the alpha is an additional reason. Wayt o go on irrelevant things. Yes of course arti will have more alpha than rails. But is is nto strange that rails have more dps on a stabber.. a ship that has PROJECTILE BONUSES????? Why not make AC do more damage on a mega then neutrons then? Alpha is NOT equally important on all scales. It is far more important on the battleship scale because you can reliably get to the point where you can destroy any subacpital in game and battleships do not move while doing that. Smaller weapons do not scale so fast on their alpha and they tend to need to move otherwise even non arti guns will start blapping them . When you are moving.. arties become bad very fast. There is a reason why there are no MEDIUM arties doctrines, but there are large arties ones. Because alpha is only serioyusly relevant on the large ships. The smaller you go, the more DPS and range becomes the only important factors. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
WhyYouHeffToBeMad IsOnlyGame 7281	Posted - 2015.03.29 11:20:44 - [124] - Quote when will autocannons get more falloff? Everything's a game if you make it one - Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.