Ships & Modules

I don't mean to stir the hornet's nest, but seriously, is this a joke?

Blasters get a tracking buff, but a web is pretty much necessary to make them effective in the first place, thus the tracking bonus is moot. The range stats on blasters remain untouched, so CCP completely ignores THE LARGEST CONTRIBUTING FACTOR which makes blasters ineffective: range. Speed and agility bonuses to blaster ships is a step in the right direction, but from what I can tell, Minmatar ships will still be able to outrun them, and considering autocannons still provide more than triple the effective range of blasters (as does Scorch, but I'll get to that), I don't see how anything really changes. In addition, changes to ship stats does nothing in terms of getting the most out of tracking enhancers and tracking computers. At present, hybrids get the least out of these fittings because THE BASE STATS OF HYBRIDS IS FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN!

Railguns get their damage increased from "crap" to "slightly above crap," which I guess is a good thing, but the problems by railguns wasn't only damage. First and foremost, railguns do not bring anything unique to the table. Artillery dons the alpha crown and lasers don the ammo-free, instant-reload crown. Railguns have nothing like this. In addition, railguns [and blasters for that matter] receive a fairly even split in their optimal and falloff stats, whereas projectiles are primarily falloff and lasers are primarily optimal. This may not seem like a big deal at a glance, but what this means to a seasoned pilot is a hybrid user must boost TWO stats to match the effective range of projectile counterparts (who only need falloff) and laser counterparts (who only need optimal). This is illustrated best when looking at T2 ammo for short-range turrets. Null does not hold a candle to the effective ranges of Barrage and Scorch, and it is primarly because the bonuses applied don't have to be split between optimal and falloff. Splitting the bonuses from other range-increasing fitting mods and having to chase down twice as many rigs and implants to match effective range simply MAGNIFIES the problem.

Ultimately, with the proposed changes, hybrids still hold the most negatives in terms of fundamentals:

-requires cap: let's face it, a cap-usage reduction is really just sugar-coating on a rotten egg. Cap use is cap use.
-requires ammo/reload
-fixed damage type

Honestly, I really do appreciate the effort, but I find myself wondering if devs/testers who implemented these changes actually PLAY Eve. My money would be on "not really."

I'm not seeing any significant change to the Deimos, aside from the slight increases in speed and agility, but this is the same as all of the other hybrid turret ships. I DO see a "Deimos Old," so there's some implication that it's being changed, but as to those details, I have no idea. Do you have a link with more info?

Also, I hope you're not suggesting speed and agility increases to the Deimos makes it a powerhouse. Even with the fitting requirements lessened for blasters, I'd still take a Vagabond/Zealot/Muninn/Sacrilege/Ishtar over it. Blaster range is the Deimos shortcoming, as is the case presently with any other hybrid ship. Still, I'll admit my partaking in supposition here; I'd like to see proposed changes to the Deimos if you have them.

Thanks BTW

It's a step in the right direction, but I still think that rails and blasters need some extra mojo, some reason to actively choose them instead of just saying, "Ah @#$% it, I trained hybrid skills and don't wanna cross-train right now so let's go with it."

It's time to get creative. Maybe weapon systems should have certain effects that go beyond damage, although NOT random-chance effects. Something like rails doing 0.1% of their damage directly to the hull of subcaps. Blasters increase the cycle time of their targets' weapon systems by 5% to counter the damage the blaster boat took while getting in range. Sure, they're ridiculous ideas; I know that. But my point is that CCP should make us want to use rails and blasters in certain setups, instead of just making them slightly less crappy and less vomit-inducing than they are now.

Oh joy, the Naga gets only range and precision bonuses in a shipclass that is made for full out gank and papertank.
But hey, there is a choice between failing with hybrids or failing with torps.

Edit: missed the part about 8 launchers. So the torp variant may be not hat bad at all.

Not convinced on the blaster changes - #1 : Since when has fitting been the primary issue?.

As far as #2 goes, the 20% tracking buff, to put it into context you have to recall the 400% change that occured with QR in 2008 and the way the tracking formula works up close. Once you do that, you see it really doesn't change much at all...

*sad face*

It'd be pretty hilarious if the speed and agility increases on hybrid ships outweighed the increase to blaster tracking, making blasters even worse than they are now. And this is NOT some far-fetched theory once MWDs are in play....

Interesting proposals. Better still, the commentary here.

Too soon to dust off all those Tristans I've amassed, but Destroyers V looks like a worthy goal.

Tiny correction....

One shortrange ammo was changed, hail.

It was the longrange gun ammo that was changed, except for that.

IE. Conflag/scorch/null/void/barrage unchanged, though I am sure they are working hard to buff barrage as we speak.

Have you ever flown ANYTHING that uses hybrids? My guess is no.

Looking forward to the hybrid changes in there, should open up some interesting new PvE and PvP fits for Gallente.

Happy they went with a damage increase and the fitting reduction on Rails instead of tracking increase

Also all the Gallente getting a speed and Agil boost, very tasty.

Though I suspect this is all very subject to change.