These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Overheating tackle: A disparity in base values, bonuses and combat effectiveness.

Author
Noisrevbus
#101 - 2013-01-11 16:12:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
Paikis wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
This argument was worthless when it was applied to Titans and it's worthless here. Neither cost nor training time are of any great significance in balancing. Liang is absolutely right, gang links are massively overpowered, whether on grid or off. The worst offenders are probably the sig radius and tackle range links, but even the ewar strength Info link is hugely overpowered.

And yes, I have a maxed link character too... Big smile


Ever seen a Guardian in a C6 Wolf-Rayet wormhole with links?

Base signature: 70m
c6 Wolf-Rayet effect: 35m
Loki links w/ mindlink: 22.7m
Just Loki links: 45.4m
For comparrison, a Merlin has a base of 39m and a fit SR of 51.8 (1x MSE II 3x CDFE I)

But that's just a cruiser, how about a Battleship? What about a Navy Apocalypse? With the Loki links, you're looking at 259m, down from a base of 400m

I have a fully maxed out boosting alt. I have literally got everything in the leadership tree to V, except Fleet Command which is IV. I can also fly all the command ships and all the T3s except the Gallente ones. I have a LOOOONG time invested in these linking skills. They are ridiculously over the top and need nerfed.


Are you trying to argue the point that sig-tanking (thanks to Links) would be malbalanced in the face of accuracy?

... or are you arguing that changing links would require us to rebalance every other factor of their impact?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#102 - 2013-01-11 18:16:17 UTC
No, he was arguing that they're ridiculously overpowered and need a nerf... at least, that's what the last sentence says.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#103 - 2013-01-11 19:26:28 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
No, he was arguing that they're ridiculously overpowered and need a nerf... at least, that's what the last sentence says.

-Liang


The secondary point being that some of the link bonuses are fundamental to let ships work at all. Meaning some thinks need to be moved closer to linked effectiveness while not-linked and the links themselfs, globally need to be 'nerfed'

Over-all we're saying that combat stats wont increase, by any means, to above what they are today with links. But the base numbers will move closer to links on some modules and downright simply nerf other linked modules, without touching the modules base effectiveness.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#104 - 2013-01-11 19:47:19 UTC
Aye. I can completely agree. :)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#105 - 2013-01-11 20:05:52 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Aye. I can completely agree. :)

-Liang


:shockedface:
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#106 - 2013-01-12 03:02:08 UTC
Maeltstome wrote:
Over-all we're saying that combat stats wont increase, by any means, to above what they are today with links. But the base numbers will move closer to links on some modules and downright simply nerf other linked modules, without touching the modules base effectiveness.


Print it. Make it happen.
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#107 - 2013-01-13 14:29:55 UTC
Paikis wrote:
Maeltstome wrote:
Over-all we're saying that combat stats wont increase, by any means, to above what they are today with links. But the base numbers will move closer to links on some modules and downright simply nerf other linked modules, without touching the modules base effectiveness.


Print it. Make it happen.


Isn't that why we're discussing this in the forums?
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#108 - 2013-01-13 14:47:57 UTC
So you still think that being able to tackle a slower, close range ship from outside it's effective range while still doing damage with close range weapons and maintain this state permanently due to speed difference is the ideal balance?

We had this situation, and it was fixed. This was exactly the reason why Null was buffed.

.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#109 - 2013-01-13 15:31:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Maeltstome
Roime wrote:
So you still think that being able to tackle a slower, close range ship from outside it's effective range while still doing damage with close range weapons and maintain this state permanently due to speed difference is the ideal balance?

We had this situation, and it was fixed. This was exactly the reason why Null was buffed.



... Another blaster boat hero. Please go work out how having more turret slots, higher turret damage and more drones gives you an advantage over kiting ships. Then come back and argue why you need range too.
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#110 - 2013-01-13 15:47:26 UTC
If you are significantly slower and less agile, can't apply any dps beyond scram range after your drones are shot, all those turrets mean nothing. This was the situation, a plated blaster boat simply couldn't do anything when being kited. Mechanics-based 100% win, or imbalance.

Cue to Retribution- blaster ship can try to fight back using long range ammo and manual piloting. eve though it can't point the kiter. Kiter can still win on virtue of piloting skill, and disengage at will. Player skill vs player skill, or balance.

Do you now understand your motivation better?

.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#111 - 2013-01-13 15:56:58 UTC
Roime wrote:
If you are significantly slower and less agile, can't apply any dps beyond scram range after your drones are shot, all those turrets mean nothing. This was the situation, a plated blaster boat simply couldn't do anything when being kited. Mechanics-based 100% win, or imbalance.

Cue to Retribution- blaster ship can try to fight back using long range ammo and manual piloting. eve though it can't point the kiter. Kiter can still win on virtue of piloting skill, and disengage at will. Player skill vs player skill, or balance.

Do you now understand your motivation better?


No because you're talking out your ass. A blaster boat with null and 2x TE's (which isn't asking much, it's not unpopular) can out-dps a kiting ship with a range bonus up to 22k~. That's without drones. Addin 5 med's which is common on most cruiser+ blaster ships and the DPS becomes a joke.

Being plated means nothing since you can sit stationary and deal more DPS than the kiting ship and will have more EHP. Now look at micro-jump drives. They have been an unmitigated success for battleships - imagine when these modules are added to smaller ships. Soon you wont even need an MWD. As long as you have the ability to hit to 13km (that's overheated interceptor bonused scram range) you will be able to apply DPS to everything that can scram you (Except Gallente recons). This means that people need to be inside your DPS range or you can activate the MJD and leave combat.

And im sorry but putting a plate on your ship and right-clicking your guns group and 'load null' is not player skill. Please don't pretend for a second that plated brawlers are hard to fly. 1 mistake in a kiting ship and you are dead. Brawlers make lots of mistakes and are fine, but 1 good move and they win a fight. I fly gallente and minmatar so im not being biased - i KNOW how these ships. I fly them. Where-as your killboard paints a 100% gallente picture, so don't 'Nerf rock, paper is fine. Scissors' until you go and actually f*cking fly some ships we're talking about.
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#112 - 2013-01-13 16:10:58 UTC
I proved your first argument false pages ago, go look up the fits. You're twisting stats to support your argument.

But if you think you can win a fight by sitting still and shooting Null, there's really no need to discuss things further.

True, I fly only Gallente and always will, but your killboard is 100% kiting ships. Mine is both brawlers and kiters, or ships that can do both. I know exactly how retardedly easy kiting is in a fight where you have more range and speed than your opponent, and on top of that you can leave any time you like.

It only becomes interesting if the slower ship has a chance, which is the current status quo.




.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#113 - 2013-01-13 16:21:09 UTC
Roime wrote:
I proved your first argument false pages ago, go look up the fits. You're twisting stats to support your argument.

But if you think you can win a fight by sitting still and shooting Null, there's really no need to discuss things further.

True, I fly only Gallente and always will, but your killboard is 100% kiting ships. Mine is both brawlers and kiters, or ships that can do both. I know exactly how retardedly easy kiting is in a fight where you have more range and speed than your opponent, and on top of that you can leave any time you like.

It only becomes interesting if the slower ship has a chance, which is the current status quo.







Wow...

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Maeltstome#losses

Most flown ship: Drake.

Please, tell me how i only fly kiting ships.
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#114 - 2013-01-13 16:26:56 UTC
Please tell us how your Drake piloting confirms your experience on flying plated blaster boats.

.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#115 - 2013-01-13 16:51:54 UTC
Roime wrote:
Please tell us how your Drake piloting confirms your experience on flying plated blaster boats.



http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16666262
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16800993
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16788415
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16778895
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16770084
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16716172
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16671219
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16619251
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=16670764

You're right, i never fly plated ships or blaster boats. Not like thats only page 1 of my most recent losses...

Oh and BTW - regarding the whole 'plated blasterboat' thing. I'll do a comparison on the last killmail i posted.

Quote:
Brutix: 60k EHP, 440 Gun DPS (9k Op+Fall), 890 M/s


Now, here's another fit.

Quote:
Brutix: 55k EHP, 520 Gun DPS (22k Op+Fall) 1150 M/s -and all with a 2% PG implant


I can tell you right now which one i would rather fly. The first one is a 1600mm trimark build. The second is an LSE+Invuln+3xExtender build.

So i'm sorry that plating your ships and fitting no sort of long range tackle, projection or speed isn't working out for you. But this game isn't about the vacuum you live in, it's about the game as a whole.
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#116 - 2013-01-13 17:58:45 UTC
Those losses include exactly two of ships that we are talking about, and the second one you lost to kiting tier 3s.

Quote:
I can tell you right now which one i would rather fly. The first one is a 1600mm trimark build. The second is an LSE+Invuln+3xExtender build.

So i'm sorry that plating your ships and fitting no sort of long range tackle, projection or speed isn't working out for you. But this game isn't about the vacuum you live in, it's about the game as a whole.


wut, I've just been saying that now it's not a 100% suicide to fly brawlers, like it used to be.

So now you are saying that brawling doesn't work, but you still want long point range to be longer? In the earlier post you wrote that

Quote:
Being plated means nothing since you can sit stationary and deal more DPS than the kiting ship and will have more EHP.


So, which way is it?

And to prevent this thread from derailing into kb scrutiny and minuscule details and personal stuff, I repeat my argument:

With current tackle & weapon ranges, kiter vs brawler combat is balanced, the outcome depends on the individual skills of the pilots. If long point range was extended, brawlers would once again be defenceless.

I'm all in for variety in the battlefield. Variety is only possible if different styles are all viable.

.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#117 - 2013-01-13 18:13:43 UTC
Roime wrote:
Those losses include exactly two of ships that we are talking about, and the second one you lost to kiting tier 3s.

Quote:
I can tell you right now which one i would rather fly. The first one is a 1600mm trimark build. The second is an LSE+Invuln+3xExtender build.

So i'm sorry that plating your ships and fitting no sort of long range tackle, projection or speed isn't working out for you. But this game isn't about the vacuum you live in, it's about the game as a whole.


wut, I've just been saying that now it's not a 100% suicide to fly brawlers, like it used to be.

So now you are saying that brawling doesn't work, but you still want long point range to be longer? In the earlier post you wrote that

Quote:
Being plated means nothing since you can sit stationary and deal more DPS than the kiting ship and will have more EHP.


So, which way is it?

And to prevent this thread from derailing into kb scrutiny and minuscule details and personal stuff, I repeat my argument:

With current tackle & weapon ranges, kiter vs brawler combat is balanced, the outcome depends on the individual skills of the pilots. If long point range was extended, brawlers would once again be defenceless.

I'm all in for variety in the battlefield. Variety is only possible if different styles are all viable.


Fine, then i'll repeat: You have a miniscule ammount of experience compared to most people taking part in this thread. Your grandiose claims are not abcked up due to the broken logic you employ and the lack of common sense applied when reading other peoples statements.

You skim peoples posts and already have your reply in your head before even finishing them. Really think - THINK - about what people are writing and maybe you'll have an epiphany.
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#118 - 2013-01-13 18:25:19 UTC
Maeltstome wrote:

Fine, then i'll repeat: You have a miniscule ammount of experience compared to most people taking part in this thread. Your grandiose claims are not abcked up due to the broken logic you employ and the lack of common sense applied when reading other peoples statements.

You skim peoples posts and already have your reply in your head before even finishing them. Really think - THINK - about what people are writing and maybe you'll have an epiphany.


I have no idea where you base your claims on my lack experience, neither you point out any flaws in my logic or lack of common sense, and you completely failed to counter my argument.

I read all your posts and they are confused (claiming contradicting things), filled with extremely heavy bias (kiting is leet and brawlers are stupid), manipulating stats to your advantage (the fits you posted) and now finally, ad hominems.

And I'm just saying that extending long point range would result in imbalance, if you are willing to explain why you think this would not happen, I'm all ears. If you want to instead have a pissing contest about posting logic and reading comprehension, find another forum, or someone who is on your rather unimpressive level.





.

Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#119 - 2013-01-13 19:14:01 UTC
Roime wrote:
Maeltstome wrote:

Fine, then i'll repeat: You have a miniscule ammount of experience compared to most people taking part in this thread. Your grandiose claims are not abcked up due to the broken logic you employ and the lack of common sense applied when reading other peoples statements.

You skim peoples posts and already have your reply in your head before even finishing them. Really think - THINK - about what people are writing and maybe you'll have an epiphany.


I have no idea where you base your claims on my lack experience, neither you point out any flaws in my logic or lack of common sense, and you completely failed to counter my argument.

I read all your posts and they are confused (claiming contradicting things), filled with extremely heavy bias (kiting is leet and brawlers are stupid), manipulating stats to your advantage (the fits you posted) and now finally, ad hominems.

And I'm just saying that extending long point range would result in imbalance, if you are willing to explain why you think this would not happen, I'm all ears. If you want to instead have a pissing contest about posting logic and reading comprehension, find another forum, or someone who is on your rather unimpressive level.


My posts are confusing you because you don't understand the game properly.

A brawler is not necessarily a ship that has stacked plates and trimarks on it. It's a ship that likes to be close to apply a large amount of damage. Generally blaster ships are the quintessential example of this style of play.

Against other ships the same size/class as it, brawlers will win when in close quarters generally. They are designed to have superior damage to ships who use range to mitigate damage. They also generally have better fitting or other bonuses that allow them to field a larger tank or stick on 'more guns' to aids this damage.

The point you do not seem to be grasping is that being a 'Brawler' does not mean being as slow, oversize-plated, trimarked hunk of metal. In most cases brawlers will fit shield tanks or ASB's and reach similar levels of EHP as they would when fitting a buffer tank on armor. This result is a lot more low slots being free for more damage mods and, most importantly, tracking enhancers. If you are fielding old fashioned plated blaster ships and flying around solo then i can only wonder why, since it offers no benefit outside of having slaves and/or being in a fleet with logistics. More tackle slots is another possible advantage, but tracking computers also offer an alternative for more range that use mid slots.

None of what i have said is imbalanced. People choosing to inflate their sig radius rather than loose speed has it's advantages and disadvantages. Also people being able to increase their projection isn't a big deal either - thats a choice they make.

Now no matter what these ships wont be able to match a ship with a range bonus in terms of projecion. On paper, their opti+falloff will come well short of the opti+falloff of a 'kiting' ship with a range bonus (vaga/stabber, Deimos etc.). This against is balanced against these ships have less bonused hard-points and normally a smaller drone bay. They deal less total damage, but at longer ranges the 'real' damage they deal means they start to be the better candidate in that fight.

The issue comes in when you work out exactly *at what range does* does a kiting ship start to deal more REAL dps than a brawling ship. This is the linked to 'At what range is combat limited to?' - referring to that maximum range of tackling a target.

The ability to run away is fine (that's why i fly these ships, im choosing to get out rather than kill people, less kills but less losses). By the same token, other targets will also escape me due to stargates/stations. I have no hard tackle, nor can i afford to get in range to use it if i did. This advantage works both ways until you are fighting, literally, in a vacuum - with no interactable objects on grid.

Now if the range at which i start to deal more real DPS is 50% of my maximum point range, then that means i have a zone i can operate in where i have an advantage over a more heavily armed, short range ship. However this isnt the case. The range where i start to deal more real DPS is at 90%+ of my maximum point range. This means i am existing in a 2km pocket, which is impossible to maintain and honestly may aswell not even exist in real fights due to eve updating every second (so regardless of how quickly i react, eve makes me wait a second until i carries out my commands due to the 'tick rate' of the server). All this only takes into account gun DPS. With gallente they have drones to supplement damage at longer ranges which throws this, versus minmatar, into a massively steep 1-sided result. Against Amarr they operate in optimal, meaning they have a very big real DPS advantage until they start to do no damage at all. The range where this happens at is even further out and beyond point range. The difference is that lasers base damage is lower than that of a blaster, and as such are rewarded with more range.

All of this is trying to say: There is no advantage to being a kiter in a fighting situation. You are arguing that brawlers should have the advantage up close and at range, simply because at range your target can run away if they are faster than you. That is a weak argument, since YOU survived the fight too - the difference is that the instant you have every fighting advantage in a battle that the kiter can never win unless you make so many mistakes that anything could have killed you.

I'll try and some this up with the bullet point advantages of kiting versus brawlign ships

Brawl:
-DPS
-Tank/EHP
-Fitting
-Drones

Kite:
-Range
-Speed

Now bow of them deal the same damage within point range, so 'range' is not actually an advantage. Which changes the list to:

Kite:
-Speed
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2013-01-13 22:21:35 UTC
This is one of those polarised arguments where the arguments end up going round in circles.

My feeling is that base T2 point range is fine. Frig combat feels well balanced around short point range and a lot of rebalancing mainly in regards to Hybrids in particular the Null change make Hybrids more viable throughout the 24km range. A tackle ship as outline by the OP's example being able to hold point long enough for support while still risking being driven off/destroyed sounds balanced.

That said ship speeds and EHP in the Rebalanced classes are up and this affects fight duration/ how long point can be held for.

I feel Tech one point range could be increased by 2km at least, this closes the gap too T2 especially when overheated.

The comments about needing to maintain Disrupter overheat longer than scram are valid and I would also support reducing the heat damage. This should enable overheating for longer while still not allowing long range disruption Indefinitely.

It is possible that the overheat range modifier could be changed to 25%, again this increases point range for a limited period of time out to 30km for T2.

I think these are relatively practical changes without large scale changes in ships and mods.

T1 range with 22km base and 25% overheat = 27.5km

T2 range with 25% overheat = 30km