EVE Search - How about a 3rd T2 ammo type for everyone?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

How about a 3rd T2 ammo type for everyone?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.17 07:07:00 - [1] Edited by: Goumindong on 17/11/2007 07:06:40 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Amarr would get an overpowered crystal Minmatar would get an ammo they already have Gallente would get a useless ammo Caldari already have all damages :-p Short answer: No, its a bad idea.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.17 08:01:00 - [2] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer fixed. Uhm why would it be overpowering to give amarr 1 T2 medium range and damage crystal that is a complement to the missing damage type? Why wouldnt minmatar use a kin/therm medium ranged fairly high damage ammo? Why would EM/EXP damage be useless? Did you even bother running the numbers before you said this. run them
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.17 12:53:00 - [3] Originally by: Juha85 Yes, the 750 dps (or was it 650) that my corpmate does in his gank harbinger is really a myth. It's still a myth even when he solo's drakes, megathrons and abaddons in it.. or pretty much anything he catches. Yes. The laser damage is really poor. Yup, that is a myth. You can do 672 max in a Harb for a solo build, but its not as good as the lower DPS fittings.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.17 21:16:00 - [4] Originally by: Max Hardcase IIRC wasnt it mentioned by some dev that they're looking @ a reload all with ammo X button ? Yes, and even without it Amarr would change too fast to make damage type variation of the sort propsed even remotely balanced.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.18 08:43:00 - [5] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Max Hardcase IIRC wasnt it mentioned by some dev that they're looking @ a reload all with ammo X button ? Yes, and even without it Amarr would change too fast to make damage type variation of the sort propsed even remotely balanced. Oh noes, lasers would actually be the best weaponry. A weapon that takes most grid, cap and sucks up one big ship bonus. Oh noes now it would actually be WORTH the downsides. It wouldnt be balanced, it doesnt matter how hard it is to fit, it doesnt matter how much cap it uses, it doesnt matter how many ship bonuses it uses, if the end result is "it wouldnt be balanced" then you stop and figure out something else.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.18 16:35:00 - [6] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer But minmatar would get a mid range T2 ammo with good damage that does therm/kin damage. Who wouldnt want that? What race doesnt want a mid range T2 ammo, something inbetween the two other T2 ammo types? A race that already has a med range ammo with good damage that does therm/kin? Republic Fleet Phased Plasma, for all your "shooting at shields" needs. Base 2.3 kin, and 9.2 thermal base[x2 for med, x4 for large] Not to mention the whole supplimentary dps issue with them having more instances of extra usable missile slots than the rest of everyone else.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.18 22:55:00 - [7] Please dont go suggesting ideas if you havent any clue whether or not it would unbalance the game.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.18 23:47:00 - [8] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Goumindong Please dont go suggesting ideas if you havent any clue whether or not it would unbalance the game. How about tweaking the idea instead of just crapping all over it? fetching some cookies to feed everyone with Why tweak it? Its terrible. It goes against the fundamental design decisions of the game, it builds on things that are already largly imbalanced.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.18 23:49:00 - [9] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Almost no drawbacks? How about: -High grid costs -Most ships cant viably fit an mwd -Many ships cap out by the high laser cap usage -All ships lose a bonus and even with the cap reduction bonus they suck large cap -Ships that have 1 too few mids. Retri with 1mid, Geddon 3mids, Sader 2mids etc -you can only do EM/therm dmg wich is high armor resisted -Youre mostly one of the slowest ships around These are not downsides but what? No amarr does need a beefy crystal to compensate for all these drawbacks. These are problems with the ships largly and not the weapons. Breaking the weapons does not fix the problems of the ships, but makes the ships without those problems broken.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 00:49:00 - [10] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer What also goes against fundamental design decisions are the suckage of lasers compared to other weapon systems. Lasers are supposed to be good, thats why amarr were so good back in the days but they overnerfed everything and broke the whole race. Why wouldnt lasers be good? We are paying alot for it penalty wise dont we? Lasers on balanced ships can be good. Lasers are not supposed to be better than any other weapon system. They are supposed to be balanced.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 10:26:00 - [11] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer They are supposed to be balanced? No you gotta look at the whole package. The ship + the weapon. Explain to me how amarr turret ships are compensated for missing 1 mid. Remove 1 low (or rather 1 useless utility high) and place it in the mid instead on pretty much all ships (except some obvious ones that have enough mids) and the ship becomes alot better. No it doesnt really lose much tank or gank by losing 1 low for a mid. This IS a drawback and frankly we are not compensated for it. Yes, they are supposed to be balanced. Amarr turret ships are compensated for missing 1 med by gaining one low slot. This allows them to fit more damage mods while retaining a similar amount of tank. Or allows them to fit more tank while fitting a similar amount of damage mods. The ships that have issues have issues seperately from their slot layout. A good example would be the Prophecy. Its problem is that it doesnt have 7 guns and a damage bonus to be comparable to a brutix. Not that it has 3 meds and 6 lows. In fact a 7 gun, damage bonused prophecy would be very good compared to a brutix, a harbinger with more hit points that looked better. If the Maller had 2 meds, 5 guns, a damage bonus, and 50 cubes of drones it would also be good[well, if it could fit the guns]. And that doesnt mean that there arent other problems, but for the most part these would not be solved by giving lasers ex/kin damage. All that would serve to do is unbalance the ships that dont have problems.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 14:17:00 - [12] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer ... The Abaddon isnt inherently overpowered. Its pretty well balanced actually. And so is the Armageddon[if not unfortounatly obsoleted by the Abaddon]. But the smaller ships that have issues cannot be fixed by "fixing" lasers, they are all wildly divergent in quality and based off of old game mechanics that no longer exist. The Prophecy cannot be made balanced by the same figures that would make a Maller balanced. And the Maller cant be balanced in the short and long ranges at the same time. Extra damage types fixes nothing and breaks everything.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 15:52:00 - [13] Edited by: Goumindong on 19/11/2007 15:53:51 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Ok so how do you explain the abaddon then? It doesnt have the laser cap bonus but its still a good ship. How is this laser cap bonus on our ships not a fake if abaddon works without it? Do you even remember why amarr were getting this bonus in the first place instead of damage bonuses? I never said it wasnt a bad bonus, i said it doesnt justify breaking lasers or changing basic design decisions. ED: How is the Armageddon good if it has the fake bonus and works with it?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 19:05:00 - [14] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Im about to give up resoning with these people. The point is very valid. Compare the up and down sides of each weapon and its quite obvious lasers need to perform better. They arent saying the ships dont need to perform better, they are saying that it shouldnt be in this manner.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 19:14:00 - [15] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer And do you know why they rather have any other change to boost us instead of the damage type alternative? Because balance is most important.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 20:50:00 - [16] Originally by: shinsushi How about we talk about effective weapons and the RAW dmg/effective dmg and comparitive fittings and cap usage at those levels? Just to start it off. Maelstrom = 10.666 effective weapons. Tempest = 12 effective weapons Tempest = 10.6666 effective weapons Abaddon = 10 effective weapons Apoc = 8 effective weapons Armageddon = 9.333 effective weapons Those are just the BSes, lets not even get into the cruisers/frigates. Anyway, there is no really good reason why amarr can't have a moderately damaging Explosive crystal... none. Effective weapons do not tell the entire story. As well, i have littered this thread and others with excellent reasons why Amarr cant have a moderatly damaging explosive crystal.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.19 23:04:00 - [17] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg How about ammo that does random effects, like capacitor recharge or speed nerfing. Already had that. Got changed.

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.