These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1221 - 2011-11-28 22:09:06 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Tub Chil wrote:
Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.

so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff?


Because Talest is either predudice and mostly uses Winmitar characters, or due to his holiday before the patch change freeze he missed the boat.
Corruption or incompitence, take your pick.

It is more likely that for now they just patched a hole and decided they will properly fix it later, because release date is son and a proper fix requires real game-changing stuff. So for now we just have better hybrids.
Jaigar
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1222 - 2011-11-28 22:23:48 UTC
I think the changes are a good start, but we need to see how they will affect tranquilly before anymore changes are added. The effect of running new T2 skrimish links to boost their speed along side the blaster tracking and damage and cap buffs may produce some interesting results.

So much is changing in this patch, so small steps at this point is for the better.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1223 - 2011-11-28 22:24:16 UTC
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:
Naomi Knight wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Ganthrithor wrote:
Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part.


Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed.

so change them

Exactly, designing spaceships is not rocket-science.



Well played sir. I see what you did there.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB

Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1224 - 2011-11-28 22:43:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Charles Edisson
Jaigar wrote:
I think the changes are a good start, but we need to see how they will affect tranquilly before anymore changes are added. The effect of running new T2 skrimish links to boost their speed along side the blaster tracking and damage and cap buffs may produce some interesting results.

So much is changing in this patch, so small steps at this point is for the better.


I almost think they need to go along the lines of increasing the optimal of AC and reducing their falloff to maintain effective max range, reducing their tracking so they dont hit as well at very short range. This might give Blasters a niche in being able to get under the other races guns. Currently AC have about the same tracking as hybrids after the hybrid buff. Buffing a weapon system to only have parity in an area that is supposed to excell in is not exactly doing it properly.

It would be nice to see all four races used to a roughly even ratio but alas we still wont, Mini and Amarr will still be the races of 0.0. Hybrids and Missiles just have too small a use.

Here's hopping they will fix it in 2014 when Hybrids get looked at again.
Jaigar
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1225 - 2011-11-28 23:16:00 UTC
Charles Edisson wrote:
Jaigar wrote:
I think the changes are a good start, but we need to see how they will affect tranquilly before anymore changes are added. The effect of running new T2 skrimish links to boost their speed along side the blaster tracking and damage and cap buffs may produce some interesting results.

So much is changing in this patch, so small steps at this point is for the better.


I almost think they need to go along the lines of increasing the optimal of AC and reducing their falloff to maintain effective max range, reducing their tracking so they dont hit as well at very short range. This might give Blasters a niche in being able to get under the other races guns. Currently AC have about the same tracking as hybrids after the hybrid buff. Buffing a weapon system to only have parity in an area that is supposed to excell in is not exactly doing it properly.

It would be nice to see all four races used to a roughly even ratio but alas we still wont, Mini and Amarr will still be the races of 0.0. Hybrids and Missiles just have too small a use.

Here's hopping they will fix it in 2014 when Hybrids get looked at again.


What are you smoking? Neutron Blaster II= .051 tracking, 800mm= .043
Archare
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1226 - 2011-11-29 17:35:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Archare
Quote:
* Hail (all sizes): Reduced falloff penalty from 50% to 25%

So... patch is live and Hail has no falloff penalty....What?
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1227 - 2011-11-29 19:03:56 UTC
Archare wrote:
Quote:
* Hail (all sizes): Reduced falloff penalty from 50% to 25%

So... patch is live and Hail has no falloff penalty....What?


LOL!

How can you not laugh!?

So, for whatever reason, if I get tired of using RF fusion, I can use Hail!?

Seriously, how did this happen? YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BUFF HYBRIDS AND YOU BUFFED PROJECTILES!

It's a damned circus, I tell you. Ugh
thoth rothschild
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1228 - 2011-11-29 20:05:57 UTC  |  Edited by: thoth rothschild
all bow to the minmatar lords.
what's thy bidding ....


So aretha is still using a shotgun but u. bolt switched rifle with a tankkiller mashine gun :p
Archare
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1229 - 2011-11-29 22:57:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Archare
Gonna repost 2 fits to show how great the hail buff is!

[Thorax, Crucifer]

Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M

Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Stasis Webifier II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive

1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Reactor Control Unit II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II

Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

Hammerhead II x5

298/343 OH dps with Fed Navy AM
237/273 OH with Null
add another 158 dps from hammerhead II's or 80 dps from warrior II's

If you swap an EANM for a Magstab you get
366/422 dps with AM with 31k EHP

And if you wanna be like a true precursor to the Diemost go dual magstabs for
438/504 dps with AM with 25k EHP
1212/1715 m/s
37k EHP


Versus


[Thorax, AutoCrux]

220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M

Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Stasis Webifier II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive

1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Reactor Control Unit II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II

Medium Projectile Collision Accelerator I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I


Hammerhead II x5

218/251 dps with the new buffed hail ammo. Roughly 75 less dps than my earlier fit

Oh did I mention that optimal + falloff is double that of the other fit?
220mm Hail 1.35km optimal + 11km falloff = 12.35 km
Ions w/ CN AM 1.88km optimal + 5km falloff = 6.88 km

Suffers in tracking
Hail .106 vs Ion .165

but it's capless!

why do I use hybrids again?
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1230 - 2011-11-29 23:43:48 UTC
thoth rothschild wrote:
all bow to the minmatar lords.
what's thy bidding ....


So aretha is still using a shotgun but u. bolt switched rifle with a tankkiller mashine gun :p


Don't foget that the shotgun is complicated to use and needs a lot of Arethas brain capacity (CPU), it is heavy to equip (Power grid) and hard to use (cap usage) while Bolt has an easy to use lightweight tank killing riffle :)

I still prefer AC over Blasters on an Ishtar, more range, less CPU, less PG and CAP free while I can also choose damage type easily. ACs just support drones for PVE better than Blasters and you can use a better fit becouse more PG and CPU left for other modules.
tEcHnOkRaT
WipeOut Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1231 - 2011-11-30 04:09:23 UTC
how about adding a big boost to gallente hull resistance as they have to fight at close range
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
#1232 - 2011-11-30 13:10:39 UTC
Jaigar wrote:
I think railguns could be made more unique by decreasing the damage penalty for long range ammos.

Interesting, but you can't do that without buffing blasters the same way. Is that a desirable goal? Maybe, maybe not- not wanting to debate that.

I have just had a thought about how you could make it work for one and not the other, though. Big smile

Give hybrids seperate damage modifiers for kinetic and thermal damage, then give close range ammo high % thermal and long range high % kinetic. Example (n.b. I just pulled these numbers out of my ass, they're not going to be balanced Blink):

Blasters: 1.5x thermal, 0.5x kinetic
Rails: 0.5x thermal, 1.5x kinetic

(This is before the gun's normal damage mod is applied. Or after. Whatever. Multiplication is commutative.)

Divide the ammos into 4 range bands, with a high therm/high kin variant in each:

-30% optimal

Antimatter L: 32t + 16k (48); 56 w/Blasters, 40 w/Rails
Lead L: 24t + 24k (48); 48 w/Blasters, 48 w/Rails

+0% optimal

Plutonium L: 25 2/3t + 16 1/3k (42); 46 2/3 w/Blasters, 37 1/3 w/Rails
Iridium L: 18 2/3t + 23 1/3k (42); 39 2/3 w/Blasters, 44 1/3 w/Rails

+30% optimal

Uranium L: 20t + 16k (36); 38 w/Blasters, 34 w/Rails
Tungsten L: 14t + 22k (36); 32 w/Blasters, 40 w/Rails

+60% optimal

Thorium L: 15t + 15k (30); 30 w/Blasters, 30 w/Rails
Iron L: 10t + 20k (30); 25 w/Blasters, 35 w/Rails

Advantages:

• More gradual damage falloff with longer range ammo for rails, as discussed above
• Stresses the racial damage types (Gallente/Blasters/Thermal; Caldari/Rails/Kinetic)
• Hell, it even works fluff-wise; rails shoot the ammo as shells and blasters as fireballs

Disadvantages:

• More or less precludes any of the more interesting ammo-adjustment solutions
• There's probably a great gaping hole somewhere I'm not seeing.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#1233 - 2011-11-30 13:35:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
CCP Tallest wrote:

* Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking.


I hope you won't just buff active tanking to the level which will dumb down small-scale PvP ever further, but rather address passive tank and current EHP stupidity instead, will you?

Passive tank needs more penalties and/or less EHP values.

You'll surely need to revise your Dominion changes to arties as well. I do hope this side-task won't prevent you from reaching your goal Cool

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1234 - 2011-11-30 13:50:29 UTC
Indeed multiple things will have to be looked into, however a straight buff to active repairing is exactly what is needed. Active repairing doesn't only stink because buffer tanks are better, but also because ships today are generating far more dps than they did a few years ago.

People currently using faction active shield tanks with a full set of hi-grade crystals are having fun in pvp, so perhaps we shuold make crystals do something else and give everybody the feeling of of working active tanks by simply making active reps generate x % more hitpoints pr cycle.

Shield and armor in general are very well balanced with armor having higher resist, using less cap pr hitpoint with shield boosters being nice burst tanks, invuls able to be overheated and EATING cap...
Also armor has 1600mm plates which are giving more protection than the biggest shield extender. At the same time passive shield recharge was nerfed a lot in the past.

If anything I would look into fitting and drawbacks of buffer tanks/active tanks, but a straight buff is indeed a very valid buff.

Pinky
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#1235 - 2011-11-30 14:20:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
Increasing repair rates is exactly what they should avoid at all costs.

Since 2006 there's already way too much tank around and this got even worse after introduction of rigs. Generic damage output increased by about 15% (faction ammo) while tank has received massive boosts - several straight HP boosts in 2006 (x2...x3, depending on ship class) plus introduction of current rigs, which promote tank over anything else.

Shooting at stuff and seeing it repping back or slowly losing few pixels of lifebar is not only dull and stupid, but also promotes blobs since it's virtually impossible to kill anything before reinforcements arrive or the situation changes in some other way.

As I said above, address EHP instead.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1236 - 2011-11-30 15:31:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
Active reps doesn't promote blobs - having 100x more people online at the same time than 5 years ago promotes blobs...

But yes rigs has side effects in a negative direction. Also EHP is strong, however CCP wanted to prolong the fights and I agree this buff is in fact working as intended. We just need active tanks to be in line. Active tanks have many reasonable flaws (easier alphaed, weak against neuts, limited space for cap boosters etc). nerfing hitpoints will be counterproductive to the CCP stated inventions where boosting active tanks will promote a viable alternative. Ofcourse I'm not ruling out several tweaks on buffer but with the amount of dps coming from a single BC these days there is nothing wrong with buffing active tanks to match.

The people using active shield tanks in lowsec with implants have great fun and if they seem overpowered it might be because they are often using faction battleships with faction equipment supported with fleet boosters and often logistics/falcons as backup.

Why not make sure everybody can have this fun without needing to pay billions for faction items and implants only to barely making it worth it?

Giving every active tank a boost in hitpoints generated while changing crystal implants to something else will give EVERYBODY an equal oportunity to have a viable active tank without riscing their implants has multiple benefits : 1,5b isk spent on implants will no longer give people the same advantage as now, people might use active tanks out of empire/lowsec without fearing loss of implants to bubbles and people will no longer be forced into faction equipment just to be competible with T2 buffer tanks.

Yes EVERYTHING and especially rigs will need a look into, however I completely disagree with not touching active reps as I believe the hitpoint buff did exactly what it was designed for - CCP just failed to locate all consequences and will need to adress them now (rigs being too strong, buffertank too easy to fit for their HP compared to active tanks and as I mentioned the need for active reps to be repairing more)

Pinky
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#1237 - 2011-11-30 15:40:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
Pinky Denmark wrote:

Giving every active tank a boost in hitpoints generated while changing crystal implants to something else will give EVERYBODY an equal oportunity to have a viable active tank without riscing their implants has multiple benefits : 1,5b isk spent on implants will no longer give people the same advantage as now, people might use active tanks out of empire/lowsec without fearing loss of implants to bubbles and people will no longer be forced into faction equipment just to be competible with T2 buffer tanks.

That's slaves which need to be turned into armour-rep bonus implants. Don't fix something which isn't broken. Crystals don't affect capital mods and thus are fine.

What you propose is just silly. Why exactly EVE should drop its fundamental rule risk vs. reward and promote those unwilling to risk their implants? Carebears are already very safe while flying within their endless blobs with gazillion logistic ships on stand-by. There's no need in dragging everyone down to that level.

Enough of this communism. People are NOT equal just like human races are NOT equal etc. And there's no need in this artificial equalizing you propose.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1238 - 2011-11-30 18:35:16 UTC
I hope to god CCP is listening, and players for that matter. One will have irrefutable evidence and the other will be able to make a quick buck playing the market.

Hail is going to skyrocket in value. You took away the one thing that makes it less favorable than RF fusion. Now Hail provides the already-insane effective range projectiles are capable of via lack of falloff penalty, and it will hit harder than RF fusion.

There is only one thing to note here. All you did was extend the effective range. Three months from now, you'll be wondering why no one is using hybrids, despite your laughable "buffs" to them. Hail will be selling like hot cakes regardless of its grossly inflated price. Why? Because range is the key here. Range is what you didn't give hybrids, and it's what you gave to Hail. Don't claim you don't know how to balance hybrids months from now. I just told you how.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1239 - 2011-11-30 18:38:17 UTC
risc vs reward is a nice legacy, however so is the concept of diminishing returns and currently crystal sets will give the rich people a huge advantage. Also because it is a valuable asset plugged into your clone most people given this option will only use them in parts of Eve where they have a little risc of losing them...

Making slaves work as crystals will solve very few issues compared to fixing it the other way around. Maybe crystals shouldn't be changed to work like slaves, but for sure slaves should never be changed to work like crystals.

Pinky
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
Siberian Squads
#1240 - 2011-11-30 20:01:39 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Pinky Denmark wrote:
risc vs reward is a nice legacy, however so is the concept of diminishing returns and currently crystal sets will give the rich people a huge advantage. Also because it is a valuable asset plugged into your clone most people given this option will only use them in parts of Eve where they have a little risc of losing them...

Making slaves work as crystals will solve very few issues compared to fixing it the other way around. Maybe crystals shouldn't be changed to work like slaves, but for sure slaves should never be changed to work like crystals.

Pinky

There's already a concept of diminishing returns in place there since LG Crystals cost a fraction of HG ones and provide half the bonus.

It's a total heresy to believe Slaves boosting EHP by nearly 50% are OK while Crystals which provide 52% increase for repairing rate are OP.

By your logic we should get rid of ALL pirate sets altogether along with the removal of faction ships. Only these measures can make everyone equal.

Edit: Off topic part removed, CCP Phantom

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.