These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Re-balancing ships for intended roles.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Teras Lakkos
SuperMassive Torque
#1 - 2011-11-05 17:58:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Teras Lakkos
There are topics all over the forum saying buff this nerf that. I do think some changes are in in order but people are going about it the wrong way.

Intended roles:

Gallente: active armor with close range, highest dps blasters or long range ok dps rails.

Caldari: shields with missles or longest range weakest dps rails

Amarr: passive armor with good range and dps lasers at a cost (cap, tracking)

minmatar: weak armor/sheilds, skirmish fighter (speed, falloff etc) or alpha king.

Still with me? So where are the problems? Minmatar overlaps gallente in close range brawls where the advantages of projectiles outweighs a little dps adantage for blasters. And rail damage is a joke (being fixed hopefully) plus long range sniping sucks with warp ins. Other factions are fine.

The fixes:
http://imgur.com/D7em5
minmatar/projectiles are kiting platforms, point blank should be gallente territory so a small dps decrease at point blank range is in order. I mean, what else is projectiles bad at? damage unbonused ships get projectiles for a reason.

rail dmg: ccp is working on it.

sniping: perhaps a hic like ship that blocks probe scan ins in a bubble area for ships.

addendum: hybrids dont have much going for them in terms of advantages, perhaps a small 15% speed debuff effect to ships hit with a hybrid. As I think buffing blaster range is a bad idea.
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#2 - 2011-11-05 17:59:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tanya Powers
Hey OP: There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode


Lol

EDIT: Op sry you're missing the first stuff wich is the most important stuff. You can't give someone's different rifles type and then to someone you obviously don't want it to do **** gi him a water pistol and expect him to perform has snipers or rifles can.

If you want to fix races abilities then you can't give to 3 of them the range and dmg application/selection and the 4th nothing of those, speed is another factor, it doesn't hit that much amarr or caldari because they can apply dmg from 0 to far distances without big and important tactical changes.

The 4th has any of those, how do you expect it to perform in any other field than blast mackinaws or hulks and get killed by concord? -great role indeed.
mingetek
Brainless in Space
#3 - 2011-11-06 19:54:26 UTC
Teras Lakkos wrote:


Amarr: passive armor with good range and dps lasers at a cost (cap, tracking)



passive armour ??? and a tracking penality for lasers???
as if cap use aint enough?

btw you cant do passive armour. its more liek buffer tank. in which case how would you work that?
..
Majuan Shuo
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#4 - 2011-11-07 02:01:01 UTC
passive armor = buffer tank

passive = not doing anything, intert

it was called passive armor a long, long, long time ago.

now its usually just called a buffer tank but its the same idea

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." - Abrazzar
Cpt Fina
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2011-11-07 05:29:40 UTC
OP is hitting the head on the nail here. Noone but a very few want every weapon and race to be able to perform in every situation – most of us realizes what a boring and homogenous game that would lead to. Instead CCP needs to outline the core fundamental characteristics of the respective race and from that extrapolate the logic behind the balance-changes.

The OP presents some characteristics that traditionally have been tied with the respective races, if we want those exact characterristics to prevail or if we want to define new roles could be up for debate. What shouldn't be up for the debate is that some races are supposed to suck balls at some things. Blasterfitted hulls should not set their foot anywhere near a fleet engagement. This is something that has been accepted in the community traditionally but seems to have gone lost on more and more people at present.

People should stop being so afraid of the fact that some ships and races are supposed to be bad in certain situations.
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
#6 - 2011-11-07 06:18:39 UTC
Majuan Shuo wrote:
passive armor = buffer tank

passive = not doing anything, intert

it was called passive armor a long, long, long time ago.

now its usually just called a buffer tank but its the same idea


In shield tank terminology, there's a clear and obvious difference between a passive shield tank ad a buffer shield tank. Please note this fact.