These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#421 - 2011-11-10 00:31:07 UTC
Bubanni wrote:
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Bubanni wrote:

And that is ofc true,also why I suggested CCP makes gallente have better agility compared to minimatar, while minimatar still maintains higher speed (that doesn't break the design does it?)



minmatar ships having higher speed and still keeping their excellent agility, even if gall had higher agility, means that they will still kite effortlessly

I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need



The suggesting for higher better agility is for those siturations where you can get a quick tackle on the guy before he gets to kiting distance, or if your starting off just a little outside that range, the be able to accelerate towards him, faster than he accelerates away, just for a few sec... that is the main idea...



I understand your concept however the main flaw is that you are completely reliant on always landing right on top of your target. Jumping through a gate you're probably gonna be about 20km away and will never get in range no matter how agile you are. This will be the situation almost everytime. Which is the same situation we have right now.

Remember that agility allows you to turn faster and tighter so if a blaster boat was faster but had lower agility the slower but more agile Minnie ship will be faster in the turns which is really important when kiting. Pilot skill becomes the key factor
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#422 - 2011-11-10 02:36:32 UTC
I really feel like the changes being proposed for hybrids are a move in the right direction. I always found Gallente and Caldari boats just shy of impossible to fit. Now instead of a fitting mod you can put something else to make your ship faster, hit farther, hit farther, or just plain take more hits. Cool

Most of the changes are tweaks. Some are significant. 20% better tracking here. 10% better damage there. Less cap useage. 5 second reload times. Some are much more..... subtle. 5% extra blaster damage, 10 or 5 more velocity. 5% better agility.

I really think ammo changes would be the way to go now. Short-medium-long - same as Minmatar. Give the long some actual reach. A vagabond used to have falloff of 23 km before the projectile buff with it's 220mm and Barrage. That got buffed to 25km. You throw on one TE and it becomes 32km. Two and you're up to 41km. The vagabond's range was almost doubled by the projectile buff. Everything should be relative. If a blaster cruiser could get to half the vagabond's range before - it's only fair that it should get to half it's range now. Either that or bring the vagbond's range back in line.
Imrik86
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#423 - 2011-11-10 05:55:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Imrik86
CCP Tallest, please take notes and see if what I'm going to say makes any sense. I've been cooking this idea after reading the feedback on the thread.

Let's start from the issues:
- Blasters don't work basically because Gallente ships can't get in range
- Rails fail because you have a fixed warp range of 100km so shooting past that means nothing

It's hard to proposed changes to the guns alone since the reason why they don't get used are on the actual game mechanics, thus I propose other possible changes:

For fixing blasters:

1. Buff the MWD bonuses on Gallente blaster boats, but penalyze on cap usage.

Say, give 15% more speed, but 30% increased cap usage. That would make Gallente ships superior at quickly closing in, while forcing it to be used just for a burst, not for perma-running. So they can still be kitted, just not forever, and are forced to find a balance between speed and cap left for shooting. That added with the improvements in damage output and tracking would make it the de facto close range platform, without taking the ability to dictate range out of the other races.

2. Bring sensor dampeners back

As I see it, sensor damps. are the racial EWAR module for Gallente. When a blaster boat can't burst towards its enemy, it should be able to sensor damp to avoid being kitted from too far, forcing the enemy to get closer to get a lock, thus allowing it to MWD towards the enemy again.

For fixing rails:

1. Make rail boats deal the same damage, but track better and shoot for longer

Rails are underutilized because the current warp mechanics make shooting above 100km completely useless, while the damage output inside this range is less than impressive. Giving rails more sheer damage would make it compete with the other gun systems, so it's not a solution. I suggest instead to give it significantly better tracking (more than the 5% proposed). That will force the enemy of a railboat to find the sweet spot between being too close and too far. A enemy too close should risk being outtracked and/or ECM jammed, while a enemy too far (but still under 100km) risks being outside of optimal. What this means is that railboats strategy should not be to outdamage in sheer numbers, but to have a chance to outlast the fight by doing less damage, but steadly, while the enemy is fighting to get a lock (ECM) or taking critical hits more than dishing out (tracking).

2. Un-nerf EWAR a little bit

Since there will be more EWAR drones, its possible this is already underway. Regardless, Caldari got nerfed pretty bad in the EWAR department and this made the rails strategy not be viable anymore. Just like the sensor dampener for Gallente, ECM jammers are the modules that allow Caldari to outlast the fight by having a chance to disrupt locks and, in the long run, deal more damage than is taken. Only 2 non-niche ships get bonuses for ECM (Blackbird and Scorpion), and thats wrong. Ships like the Rokh, that are 100% rail platforms, are the ones that should get bonuses for ECM since it's instrumental to make rail tactics work. The Rokh for instance should get a ECM bonus (like ECM burst range/cycle, or a combination of ECM strenght bonus and range penalty) to force enemies away from point-blank, instead of a hybrid turret optimal, which is useless given its optimal can easily cover most of the useful range (100km).

Overall, I think it's less a matter of "fixing" hybrids, and more about going back to EVE roots and figuring out what Gallente and Caldari platforms are supposed to do well.

I would enjoy if someone from CCP can comment on those ideas, I've put a lot of effort on coming up with this rationale.
Mack Rin
Doomheim
#424 - 2011-11-10 06:13:29 UTC
Rather than shoehorn two incompatible elements, it's be easier to swap auto cannon and blaster stats. Minmatar being the fastest should be using the closest range weapon as it is best able to dictate range. Gallente should be a low-med range race.

This would also solve some of the caldari suckiness as it too could have a reasonable mid range weapon system that is compatible with its ship design while having more range less damage than gallente.

I suggest also to modify the new blaster stats to have a more hybrid weapon optimal to fall off ratio, and to make it a high alpha (but same dps) weapon as another mentioned before to differentiate from amarr.

Seriously all this ship stat changing and extra damage is never going to produce optimal results while Minmatar are philosophically optimized for close range.
Captain Alcatraz
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#425 - 2011-11-10 08:23:53 UTC
Mack Rin wrote:
Rather than shoehorn two incompatible elements, it's be easier to swap auto cannon and blaster stats. Minmatar being the fastest should be using the closest range weapon as it is best able to dictate range. Gallente should be a low-med range race.

This would also solve some of the caldari suckiness as it too could have a reasonable mid range weapon system that is compatible with its ship design while having more range less damage than gallente.

I suggest also to modify the new blaster stats to have a more hybrid weapon optimal to fall off ratio, and to make it a high alpha (but same dps) weapon as another mentioned before to differentiate from amarr.

Seriously all this ship stat changing and extra damage is never going to produce optimal results while Minmatar are philosophically optimized for close range.


Minmatar do kiting, hit and run is their philosophy since 2003. Some people need to keep their opinions to themselves.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#426 - 2011-11-10 08:49:11 UTC
Imrik86 wrote:

1. Make rail boats deal the same damage, but track better and shoot for longer

Rails are underutilized because the current warp mechanics make shooting above 100km completely useless, while the damage output inside this range is less than impressive. Giving rails more sheer damage would make it compete with the other gun systems, so it's not a solution. I suggest instead to give it significantly better tracking (more than the 5% proposed). That will force the enemy of a railboat to find the sweet spot between being too close and too far. A enemy too close should risk being outtracked and/or ECM jammed, while a enemy too far (but still under 100km) risks being outside of optimal. What this means is that railboats strategy should not be to outdamage in sheer numbers, but to have a chance to outlast the fight by doing less damage, but steadly, while the enemy is fighting to get a lock (ECM) or taking critical hits more than dishing out (tracking).

2. Un-nerf EWAR a little bit


Well written post, and for that you get a cookie.

But all Caldari Hybrids boats need to sort them out is the same or better tank than Amarr, and gaining a mid slot for the loss of a low wouldn't hurt either, so they can do less damage but live longer. They don't need e-war to fix them, and giving so many ships ECM bonuses negates the point of the specialist ships being brought to a fight at all. ECM is already pretty good, remember the ECM fit Zealots?

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Sigras
Conglomo
#427 - 2011-11-10 09:23:44 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Bubanni wrote:
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Bubanni wrote:

And that is ofc true,also why I suggested CCP makes gallente have better agility compared to minimatar, while minimatar still maintains higher speed (that doesn't break the design does it?)


I maintain speed is a key attribute blaster boats need



The suggesting for higher better agility is for those siturations where you can get a quick tackle on the guy before he gets to kiting distance, or if your starting off just a little outside that range, the be able to accelerate towards him, faster than he accelerates away, just for a few sec... that is the main idea...



I understand your concept however the main flaw is that you are completely reliant on always landing right on top of your target. Jumping through a gate you're probably gonna be about 20km away and will never get in range no matter how agile you are. This will be the situation almost every time. Which is the same situation we have right now.

Remember that agility allows you to turn faster and tighter so if a blaster boat was faster but had lower agility the slower but more agile Minnie ship will be faster in the turns which is really important when kiting. Pilot skill becomes the key factor


I love this idea . . . kiting should not be as easy as "keep at range" or "align to" . . . the fastest ships should always be the shortest ranged. I do however like the idea of making them very unagile, so that the longer ranged ship can still kite, it would just take piloting skill to know when to change direction and turn to make those slower turning gallente ships follow.

I think this could be achieved by changing the armor rig penalty to agility, giving all gallente ships a base agility nerf and a large speed bonus.
B'atou
RATS Corp
#428 - 2011-11-10 09:24:49 UTC
Nemesor wrote:
My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.

From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.

Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.

If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses.
Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.

REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)



That's a concept I really like! We should get the ability to try this in Sisi!

Every winner needs a looser, only idiots need a leader!
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#429 - 2011-11-10 09:30:30 UTC
B'atou wrote:
Nemesor wrote:
My out of the box idea of the day. Keep an open mind.

From day one there is one attribute that all Gallente ships have that is superior to all other races. This was obviously a racial trait of some sort whose purpose has been lost in the sands of time.

Gallente ships have more structure points than any other race. A lot more in most cases. The Amarr generally have second most, followed by the Matari then the Caldari. The only exception to my knowledge is the Tech 3 ships where the Amarr suddenly have more structure. This is obviously the design team forgetting about the old racial trait of Gallente.

If there were a few more low slot modules released... like an Advanced damage control II. Say this increased the hull resists by 25 percent and gave a hull HP Boost of 50 percent... increasing the efficiency of reinforced bulkheads (WOW WHO EVER USES THAT MODULE!) even increasing the efficiency of bulkhead and remote bulkhead reppers (Yes they exist in the game, I swear). Switch the active armor bonus's on existing gallente ships over to Structure resist bonuses. Switch MWD bonuses to structure amount bonuses.
Now you have a Gallente ship that is beefy, is unaffected by heavy armor plates, and able to fit a nice passive tank with a couple of decent modules. Can other races fit these things? Sure why not. They can't fit them as well as Gallente can. They won't have ships with bonuses to fitting them and they won't have as much structure points.

REAL MEN HULL TANK. (only it wouldn't be a joke this time.)



That's a concept I really like! We should get the ability to try this in Sisi!


It's a stupid idea. If you've decided that Gallente boats need to be faster with more EHP, then just give the hulls more speed and more EHP. Don't overcomplicate things by creating a silly gimmick that makes their ships incompatible with current logistics.
Mack Rin
Doomheim
#430 - 2011-11-10 09:34:37 UTC
Captain Alcatraz wrote:


Minmatar do kiting, hit and run is their philosophy since 2003. Some people need to keep their opinions to themselves.


Part of the point of the thread is to reassess whether the philosophy is compatible with a workable mechanic. Given that much has changed since 2003, this is not unreasonable.

I didn't even suggest Minmatar no longer have this role, so your emotional outburst was not necessary.
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#431 - 2011-11-10 09:46:12 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
random negative input.


It was just a silly notion. It makes you think about problems in a different way. I only see you spitting on others ideas
and not contributing anything of value except stating the obvious. Trust me. Most rational people agree with you.
The easiest solution is speeding up Gallente and buffing damage. Tallest just seems unwilling to **** off the Matari
masses... understandable... but it does nothing to advance true game balance.

A truly stupid idea is not thinking of every solution to a problem. The funny part of your post
was pointing out that Gallente Logistics would be different than current logistic sets. I do not see it
as a bad thing. Personally, I think Logi is a bit overpowered in the meta. Why else would CCP keep
teams from fielding more than 1 logi ship during the tournaments? It is overpowered and makes combat
rather drawn out and boring.


Sigras
Conglomo
#432 - 2011-11-10 10:10:36 UTC
to the poster above me: CCP kept teams from fielding more than one logi in the tournament because it made for boring matches. They wanted the matches to be a spectator sport, and thus began nerfing the things that made the match more drawn out . . .

Now, on to the topic at hand.

I think the real fix for the blaster problem is the ammo. Blasters have nothing that makes them really stand out. Minmatar switch ammo to switch damage types and gain some more tracking; Amarr switch ammo to trade damage for range, and the gallente do that too but the amarr just does it way better.

I think if you made the gallente ammo unique in some way, it would really help set the gallente apart and perhaps provide a niche that only they fill.

What if, instead of trading range for damage, the same way the amarr do, they traded range for capacitor use? or tracking? IE, a megathron could still do antimatter damage at Iron range, but it would just take a massive (read worse than unbonused lasers) cap penalty. This would keep blasters the kings of short range damage while adding some utility and usefulness to the other types of ammo because, lets be honest, does anyone use anything other than antimatter?

Having the weapon that is supposed to do the most damage at close range take a damage penalty for additional range seems kinda silly unless it gets a LOT of extra range . . .
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#433 - 2011-11-10 10:17:14 UTC
Nemesor wrote:
It is overpowered and makes combat
rather drawn out and boring.


To the poster above me. Read posts.
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#434 - 2011-11-10 10:52:32 UTC
Tallest,

At this point it is clear everyone with any sense knows what the problem is. A race with long and mid range DPS has the title of "The Speed Race". Over the years, CCP has morphed and twisted the roles of the races through various changes and because Gallente were so well balanced for so long (they were in 2005-2006) they were neglected and past Devs passed the buck to you
to sort it all out when it reached critical mass. I sympathize. However...

Gallente need speed to close range and a bit extra DPS over what has been granted to overcome the approach. You know it. The Matari players know it (and deny it with no substantial evidence to prove otherwise) and the Gallente players know it (and provide example after example to back their claims). There is no getting around this by adding more agility or range to the weapons. ACs already have godly falloff and keeping their speed will always allow them to kite with impunity. Give the Matari the Agility buffs. Give the Gallente the speed buffs. Others say... "Railguns will become the new kiting AC." Even looking at railguns now, have you seen the tracking on SISI? Have you seen the Alpha? There is no danger of it threatening AC or Arty and its role of range dominance.

DO the right thing Tallest. Give Gallente a speed buff, remove the speed penalty for armor rigs and grant the Matari an Agility buff. It is the simplest and most sensible solution to the issues facing Gallente as a race.
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#435 - 2011-11-10 11:15:09 UTC
No to overpowered special prop modules.

Yes to Rig changes

Yes to Hybrid ammo rebalance, the longer range ammo’s should be useful, I have seen it a number of times so CCP must have seen it, a proposal to change the tracking and kin therm ratio’s to create ammo that slightly support rails and blasters better individually but can still be used in either if you choose.

Yes to larger drone bays, E-war drone rebalance and T2 E-war drones, a stasis web drone that reduces the targets speed by 25% could give us the temporary boost we need to get close and yet can still be countered by the enemy.

Does the reload timer change go far enough?

If it was zero would that be better?

Then you would have two weapon systems that have instant reloads and cap use and two weapon systems that have 10 second reloads and no cap use.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#436 - 2011-11-10 11:27:17 UTC
Absolutely no reason to swap AC/Blaster stats... With all the tweaks going on, a revamp of Hybrid ammunition and a fall-off nerf to tracking enhancers everything should be fine and ready to balance the ships that are also a major contributor to this problem.
Keen Fallsword
Skyway Patrol
#437 - 2011-11-10 12:16:48 UTC
Dear CCP Tallest

Changes that are on SiSi are not enough. I don't know if you ever try to fly gallente ships ? If yes you must saw that you are unable to Mess with target even in Scrambler range and this situation is the biggest issue in entire game. Imagine gallentian ships fight during any racial WAR they are unable to win anything. (Its from RPG Game :) ). Who cares ...

anyway..

I was chatting with many players almost everybody can agree with stats switch between blasters and AC. Even as Gal and Matar pilot I can agree that AC is overpowered. For now matter is most sophisticated race in entire game !! No cap for shoot, fast and agile ships (What is impossible in real word coz you cant be fast and agile in the same time...) ETC.. anyway. How they was able to get there ? Its stupid. With this patch you want to make Matar even better ! Javelin and Hail changes ...

Also many players see that Matar is DEV favorite coz many of you guys play this race. Tell us that is not true and your private favorites have nothing to this coz you want to make good product. ? If so gallente pilots are your clients and what I saw that they really loves their's race ..

The problem is that we (older players I am 2005 ) dont want to fly Matar only (How long more Vaga gangs ? ... ). There is so many ships that we want to play and we cant coz they are insta death... Its not only Gallente problem but also Caldari.. In fleets we can see almost only Arazu, Lachesis and taranis - thats all for now ...

Please make a revision of your ideas. Recent tweaks are not even half way..

Regards
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#438 - 2011-11-10 12:28:44 UTC
Nemesor wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
random negative input.


It was just a silly notion. It makes you think about problems in a different way. I only see you spitting on others ideas
and not contributing anything of value except stating the obvious. Trust me. Most rational people agree with you.
The easiest solution is speeding up Gallente and buffing damage. Tallest just seems unwilling to **** off the Matari
masses... understandable... but it does nothing to advance true game balance.

A truly stupid idea is not thinking of every solution to a problem. The funny part of your post
was pointing out that Gallente Logistics would be different than current logistic sets. I do not see it
as a bad thing. Personally, I think Logi is a bit overpowered in the meta. Why else would CCP keep
teams from fielding more than 1 logi ship during the tournaments? It is overpowered and makes combat
rather drawn out and boring.




Are you nuts? Logistics ships are one of the few things that make EvE so wonderful and tactical and make fights last longer than two minutes. I guess being in Rote Capelle, and living next door to Rooks and Kings you have come to hate them lol.

Moving on...

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#439 - 2011-11-10 12:48:02 UTC
Keen Fallsword wrote:
I was chatting with many players almost everybody can agree with stats switch between blasters and AC. Even as Gal and Matar pilot I can agree that AC is overpowered.



I don't.

blaster ships need to be more mobile. damage projection on blasters needs to be done by the ships themselves. if the ships need to be more mobile than matari ships, then so be it.

as for the AC problem, only nerf I would allow would be the falloff bonus on ships that use it, which are, in fact, the really troublesome ones (vagabond, cynabal, machariel). IF said nerf happened on the time when the TE boosts happened, at the very least the forum rage wouldn't have been as high as it is now.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Imrik86
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#440 - 2011-11-10 13:21:22 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
Imrik86 wrote:

1. Make rail boats deal the same damage, but track better and shoot for longer

Rails are underutilized because the current warp mechanics make shooting above 100km completely useless, while the damage output inside this range is less than impressive. Giving rails more sheer damage would make it compete with the other gun systems, so it's not a solution. I suggest instead to give it significantly better tracking (more than the 5% proposed). That will force the enemy of a railboat to find the sweet spot between being too close and too far. A enemy too close should risk being outtracked and/or ECM jammed, while a enemy too far (but still under 100km) risks being outside of optimal. What this means is that railboats strategy should not be to outdamage in sheer numbers, but to have a chance to outlast the fight by doing less damage, but steadly, while the enemy is fighting to get a lock (ECM) or taking critical hits more than dishing out (tracking).

2. Un-nerf EWAR a little bit


Well written post, and for that you get a cookie.

But all Caldari Hybrids boats need to sort them out is the same or better tank than Amarr, and gaining a mid slot for the loss of a low wouldn't hurt either, so they can do less damage but live longer. They don't need e-war to fix them, and giving so many ships ECM bonuses negates the point of the specialist ships being brought to a fight at all. ECM is already pretty good, remember the ECM fit Zealots?


Yes, but I believe that all Caldari dedicated rail platforms (think the Rokh) should get some sort of short-range ECM bonus, to negate point-blank from the enemy, thus making rails a viable tactic. The Rokh already has enough shields and mid slots to fit a good tank. It simply dies in a fight because anyone can close in and out damage it, and you can't maneuver that if you can't disrupt locks.

Bringing a specialized ECM ship in the fleet is okay, but for those rail ships ECM is central to make it work, in the same way that you are basically obligated to fit a webber on a AC boat. Sensor dampeners should work the same for Gallente, since it denies long-range from the enemies and force them into point-blank.

The status quo today is kinda link everybody fits a speed mod, web and scram. Racial EWAR like ECM and sensor damps. got nerfed so much that they are now limited only to niche-ships, when it shouldn't be like that. It should be integral part of Gallente and Caldari strategy, since they are the cherry that completes the hybrid cake.