These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Crias Taylor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2011-10-31 15:22:09 UTC
JC Anderson wrote:
.....Taranis.

I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot more of them.


Afraid not. While this is a nice start  it doesn't address a few bug issues. 

1. I can still be kitted with a scram and/or web. 
2. Hybrids suck power. 
3. MWD suck power
4. Speed probably isn't enough when you consider armor tanks make you slow. 
5. Hybrid ammo is big still. 
VaL Iscariot
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#82 - 2011-10-31 15:22:22 UTC
So my overwhelmingly powerful Megathron will now be even more powerful? Thanks, CCP!

Also:

I flew Gallente before the buff.

Does that make me a Hybrid Hipster?
CCP Tallest
C C P
C C P Alliance
#83 - 2011-10-31 15:22:57 UTC
Jackie Fisher wrote:
No cap usage reduction?


Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now.

Reduced Capacitor usage:
* All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use

[b]★ EVE Game Designer ★ ♥ Team Super Friends ♥[/b]
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#84 - 2011-10-31 15:22:58 UTC
Can someone clarify something for me, is the CPU reduction suppose to be a percentage, as well as teh speed mod a percentage as well?

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Largo Coronet
Perkone
Caldari State
#85 - 2011-10-31 15:23:23 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Railguns now do more damage, and much more damage at longer ranges. True to the RP nature of what most of us consider railguns to be like, ultra high muzzle velocity means, damage attenuates much less at long to ultra long range.

This picture should help explain the changes: http://www.theskyunion.com/railguns.jpg

Could you please put some numbers on the graphs for clarity? kthx

This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.

Someday, this signature may save my life.
gfldex
#86 - 2011-10-31 15:23:43 UTC
Medium and small blasters became a complete gamble when webbers where nerfed and scrams got boosted. That change was ment to be a boost to AF. That never played out. You acknowledge that there is a problem with webbers in conjunction with blasters but fail to understand the underlying issue. The combined effect of having a rather useless webber and at the same time getting your MWD shut off was the killer. A brutix can lose 75% of it's damage because a rifter is switching it's MWD off.

For Dreads adding the mass boost to siege modules made blasters a complete nono. If you get bumped at jump in you can't drop in siege for minutes. You might even have to relocate via warp out and back in to get into any reasonable range. If there are hostiles around that is simply not an option.

Fiddling around with fitting requirements or tracking wont change anything. The big gamble that are medium and small blasters is still there and I wont take it. Your unwillingness to take a change to the game back that didn't play out as expected is not going to make anything better.

Before we got T2 ships the low kin/therm resi on pretty much any PvP fit ship made up for the lower damage mod on rails. Increasing the base damage wont change that. Any T2 ship got either increased kin or therm resi. With combat prolongment and the RR boost volley damage got even more important in PvP then it used to be. A 10% dps increase wont change that.

I can't see how the proposed changes will improve anything in PvP.

If you really want to change something you need to let rails play in their own league. I would propose to turn rails upside down. Let the shortest rails do the most damage and then give those short rails a hefty damage boost. If you keep trying to have a difference between rails and beams/arties without making them different you will just keep shifting inferiority around.

In my eyes the root of all evil started at the very beginning of EVE when 4 races got introduced that where ment to fill the same role without being redundant. Nobody would argue about the inferiority of Apocs compared to Hulks because those different factions ships are meant to fulfill a different role. If you don't give up on the concept of having the same role for different ships or weapon systems you will just keep shifting FotMs around.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#87 - 2011-10-31 15:24:49 UTC
Fix active tanking to include a bonus to incomming rr... Cuss right now 5% to resists is op in comparisson...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Perdition64
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2011-10-31 15:25:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Perdition64
Blasters definitely need a damage increase on reflection. Now, this might look very high on paper, but perhaps a 20% increase to damage in addition to these changes. This way, whilst their damage dealt in close proximity is very high, they still have similar TTK’s as their peers, due to the fact that they have more travelling than any other ships to get into their optimal range – i.e they accrue more damage in the process.
If I take 2 well established ships, the hurricane and a Brutix: (fittings ripped mercilessly from Battleclinic, because I LOST MY EFT BACKUPS >.>)


[Hurricane, Comparison]
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Damage Control II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Invulnerability Field II
Warp Disruptor II
Large Shield Extender II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive

425mm AutoCannon II
425mm AutoCannon II
425mm AutoCannon II
425mm AutoCannon II
425mm AutoCannon II
425mm AutoCannon II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II

Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I


Warrior IIx5

VS

[Brutix, Brutix : Neutron Shield gank ]
Reactor Control Unit II
Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II

Warp Scrambler II
Invulnerability Field II
Large Shield Extender II
10MN MicroWarpdrive I

Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M

Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I


Hammerhead II x5

We can see that DPS is not too far apart, (768 dps vs 592 dps), yet the speed of a hurricane is 1434 m/s vs the Brutix's 1112 m/s (before the change). Tank is only different by 4k EHP.

10 m/s is not going to effect this hugely. The tanking abilities are relatively close, as are the dps abilities, considering the hurricane can kite outside the Brutix's maximum 9km effective range, as it is the faster ship. Now, if the Brutix was given greater damage, (20% increase), we see its DPS rise to 921 dps. There is a larger difference, but now, that is accounted for by the hurricanes ability to kite the target, as well as the fact that Brutix will recieve more damage attempting to get into that range. What it does mean, however, is that when it is in range, it will hurt and hurt hard, evening out this fight somewhat.

Again, maybe 20% is too far, maybe 10% would suffice. All I know is that blasters and rails both need a bit more damage, to really make their roles attractive alternatives. It seems this buff does not go far enough. To paraphrase others here, why would you fly blasters over AC's as it stands? This buff, compared to the projectile buff is impotent.
Crias Taylor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2011-10-31 15:25:15 UTC
VaL Iscariot wrote:
So my overwhelmingly powerful Megathron will now be even more powerful? Thanks, CCP!

Also:

I flew Gallente before the buff.

Does that make me a Hybrid Hipster?


It means you sat on gates and station undocks.
xo3e
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#90 - 2011-10-31 15:25:31 UTC
Quote:
Does that mean that you forgot to mention the capacitor usage changes or that the cap changes will not be implemented?


HURRDURR HYBRYD WEPONS ARE FINE
YOU GOT YOUR TRACKING NOW MOVE ALONG

Signature removed. Navigator
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#91 - 2011-10-31 15:26:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Hungry Eyes
Tallest, listen brother....

some change is better than no change, i'll give you that. you seem to have a good understanding of what's wrong (you mentioned projectiles, and the possibility of the actual ships needing boosts).

but these changes dont even scratch the surface, not even close. you have to look at it this way:

- why should i use a blaster boat over an AC or pulse boat?
- if the role is not changing, then make these guns as desirable as lasers and projectiles
- blaster platforms need to be the fastest in the game or have some sort of resistance to scrambling, or more resists to damage, or a really long web, or something, hands down. you cant leave these ships status quo (10m/s boost is nothing, 30m/s boost would be something)
- if youre not touching the ships much, then increase blaster range and falloff significantly. i hate to say it, but make them like AC's.

i cant stress this enough, please consider an AC nerf as a viable solution to this mess. then simply balance rails and blasters to pulses at medium range


TLDR: projectiles are simply overpowered, consider nerfing them. blasters need to be as appealing as AC's and pulses in some way. if youre not changing the role of these weapons, blaster boats need some serious buffing; they should be the fastest OR the most resilient in the game.

thanks for listening, this is a great start. im sure some other players will give you a much better breakdown of what i mentioned above because the community is pretty much in agreement.
Walextheone
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2011-10-31 15:28:19 UTC
Good start but compared to projectiles hybrids still still need cap, can not swtich damage output type and have less range.

SO a 5-10% damage increase should really be given to become somewhat be in line with them.
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
#93 - 2011-10-31 15:29:07 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:
Jackie Fisher wrote:
No cap usage reduction?


Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now.

Reduced Capacitor usage:
* All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use


Now, on to that issue of rails having way too much wasted range.
Wacktopia
Fleet-Up.com
Keep It Simple Software Group
#94 - 2011-10-31 15:29:09 UTC
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
Schmell wrote:
And S, M and L railguns still dont have place in current meta game (beam dont have it either funnily enough). All Hail (and quake) MINMATAR


I can't help but echo this sentiment. Rails still have no way to leverage that "average damage," at the rediculously long range they've got (that's before you recall that caldari ships also have an optimal bonus). Furthermore I see no mention of cap usage, tracking, or reload time: all of which plague the rail pilot in practice and make the platform a comparatively sub-par choice.

I want to believe that 10% damage and a little more leeway on grid/cpu will make headway for rails, but I have serious doubts.

Wacktopia wrote:
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Stan Kirby wrote:
Minmatar or projectile boost:
- +100% artillery burst damage
- overpowered cynobal, machariel, dramiel
- huge falloff bonus from TE and TC.

...
Gallente/hybrid boost:
- blasters tracking speed +20% .... LOL Lol
- railguns +10% damage ... megaLOL Lol

CCP fail... again.

It does have that feeling doesn't it?



No... it has the feeling of CCP trying to balance something without creating FOTM lol-damage-mobiles.

Lets just see how these changes actually affect the game. If they're not enough they have already said they will go back and look at armor tanking ships combined with hybrids in future.


It should be obvious to anyone with a shred of experience using railguns on non-frigate hulls that these changes are not going to do much of anything. I think we all know what happens if these ineffectual changes go live and are promised to be reviewed "in the future." I'd much rather see rails go fotm for a while than continue to see them all-but-ignored for another half decade.


I agree this patch is more blaster-focused than rails.

I'm wondering if we're going to see an on-grid warp nerf to 200-250km?

Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together -  Fleet-Up.com
David Xavier
The Capsuleers of Unconscious Thought
#95 - 2011-10-31 15:29:51 UTC  |  Edited by: David Xavier
Fix the forums so posts don't get eaten by it. Really annoying!

The lowering of fitting requirements is welcome!

About rails, if they are intended to be "The Average" long range weapons system between artillery and beam lasers, then please tune tracking accordingly as well. Currently targets easily get under the guns due to lack of alpha and the lack of tracking.

For example the Tech 2 350mm railgun should have more like 0.01328 instead of 0.01167 rad/sec tracking , without skills and modules.

I don't suffer from insanity.. I enjoy it !
stoicfaux
#96 - 2011-10-31 15:30:38 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
Roosterton wrote:
"Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty"

TwistedTwistedTwisted

Sorry, RF Fusion...


Agreed. Definitely reduced demand for RF Fusion.

edit: Plus a 11.6% damage boost for Ye Olde Angel hunting Vargur... Nice.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Dalton Vanadis
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#97 - 2011-10-31 15:31:23 UTC
Nice guys. I might have to give hybrids another go at this point. I await your further iteration on the matter though; as many have pointed out here and it seemed with your dev blog, there is a lot of examination and study to be done on how well this buffs up hybrids and their uses in actual gameplay.
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad
Against ALL Authorities
#98 - 2011-10-31 15:31:44 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Much as I love these new changes (I have 2 Gallante toons) CCP need to do something about their insider trading. I love the fact that somehow from a new Dev blog today all the ammo types that have just had boosts anounced were bought up off the market 7 days ago. Players that are involved in the balancing/development ideas should not be able to make huge sums of isk out of inside trading.


Test server base dump was laid out a week ago.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#99 - 2011-10-31 15:31:45 UTC
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
CCP Tallest wrote:
Jackie Fisher wrote:
No cap usage reduction?


Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now.

Reduced Capacitor usage:
* All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use


Now, on to that issue of rails having way too much wasted range.



Yeah like remove the optimal range bonus and replace with a rate of fire bonus

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
xo3e
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#100 - 2011-10-31 15:33:17 UTC
Quote:
blaster platforms need to be the fastest in the game or have some sort of resistance to scrambling, or more resists to damage, or a really long web, or something, hands down. you cant leave these ships status quo (10m/s boost is nothing, 30m/s boost would be something)



blasters platforms are fine. here we have few carebears on vindicators in the corner of the map. you cant say now, that blaster boats is unusable at all HA-HA.

srsly ccp what is wrong with you guise? do you even play your own game?

Signature removed. Navigator