These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Will turrets ever see the same love that (rapid fire) missiles got?

Author
Nina Lowel
Echelon Research
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2015-02-24 07:32:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Nina Lowel
Something like small/medium "gun clusters"?

BS sized turrets that spot the damage of say, 3x small guns (cause it would look like there is a "cluster" of small guns on the large turret hardpoint) with the tracking of a small gun? Maybe mediums (if there were mediums) would be 2x medium gun "clusters" per large hardpoint?

Of course the numbers would need to be balanced out but why not the same love launchers got?
Discomanco
We pooped on your lawn
#2 - 2015-02-24 08:00:07 UTC
I guess they could make turrets like Dual 150mm Railguns or Quad Light Beam Lasers and Dual 180 Autocannons work like Rapid modules, however I do see balance issues in it, and I'm not sure if I support it due to how much the modules would change
Amarisen Gream
The.Kin.of.Jupiter
#3 - 2015-02-24 09:50:32 UTC
I talked about this like a year ago.
Th duals and quads would be nice if the used smaller ammo and such.
Like rapid lights and heavys

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs

Ix Method
Doomheim
#4 - 2015-02-24 10:10:44 UTC
Amarisen Gream wrote:
I talked about this like a year ago.
Th duals and quads would be nice if the used smaller ammo and such.
Like rapid lights and heavys

+1 to this. Electrons, etc. are kinda underwhelming, you'd think there'd be a comfortable midpoint for tracking/range between Ions/the lower tier where they wouldn't be oppressive.

Travelling at the speed of love.

stubbsie Panala
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2015-02-24 10:29:24 UTC
would be interesting but you run into problem when you look at how to balance them, you could balance them with long reload times like RLM/RHM but when you look at energy turrets that have no reload time at all, Do you impose a reload time for energy turrets or just make them require a LOAD of cap? Using a lot of cap doesn't really limit them either as someone could fit to have more cap and therefore more shots.

but yeah interesting idea so +1
Discomanco
We pooped on your lawn
#6 - 2015-02-24 11:28:41 UTC
stubbsie Panala wrote:
would be interesting but you run into problem when you look at how to balance them, you could balance them with long reload times like RLM/RHM but when you look at energy turrets that have no reload time at all, Do you impose a reload time for energy turrets or just make them require a LOAD of cap? Using a lot of cap doesn't really limit them either as someone could fit to have more cap and therefore more shots.

but yeah interesting idea so +1

I guess they could put in a "de-heat" kinda thing (not like Overheating) to give the lasers the reload time.
The longer it shoots, the more heated it becomes and after x cycles it needs to de-heat for 35 seconds.
Of course the amount of cycles should be on par with other Rapid modules of the same size
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#7 - 2015-02-24 11:31:51 UTC
Personally I like this. Mostly because of MORE DAKKA, but this could open interesting possibilities. Recently I posted about a new T2 battleship type, one focused on fleet protection. Imagine a battleship (not neccesarily these ones) that fits rapid fire turrets, sacrificing firepower against other large ships but being more efficient at blowing up smaller targets, like an AA vessel.

Maybe, rather than being front-loaded DPS with long reloads as rapid missiles are, these rapid turrets could be just like several smaller turrets put together, with slightly increased range, and have the same ammo/cap consumption several of the original small turrets would have. For example, 4 rapid turrets with 2 small railguns on each would consume as much ammo and cap as 8 small railguns.

+1
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#8 - 2015-02-24 12:37:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
might just be easier to give electrons, and other under utilised lower grade turrets, faster tracking.

It effectively does the same thing but without complexity. Electrons are like small neutrons turrets with longer range, higher fitting costs and their medium ammo is economically little different to several small rounds.

its not like launchers where the missile itself dictates damage, application and range and is critical for concept to work. Instead with turrets everything can be tweaked on the gun and there is no necessity to use small ammo.

Similar discussion

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Katabrok First
Apukaray Security
#9 - 2015-02-24 14:01:09 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
might just be easier to give electrons, and other under utilised lower grade turrets, faster tracking.

It effectively does the same thing but without complexity. Electrons are like small neutrons turrets with longer range, higher fitting costs and their medium ammo is economically little different to several small rounds.

its not like launchers where the missile itself dictates damage, application and range and is critical for concept to work. Instead with turrets everything can be tweaked on the gun and there is no necessity to use small ammo.

Similar discussion

I'd have to disagree a little with you there. You are forgetting signature resolution, which impacts directly your tracking. If you up tracking enough to overcome the smaller size of ships a class below your actual class, you make its tracking too strong against its own class and above.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#10 - 2015-02-24 14:09:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
nah this is something that should stay with missiles because of how damage application works as well as its one of the only roles that missiles fill better than other weapon types



at the same time this could never be done for lasers do to how they don't need to reload


NOT ALL WEAPON SYSTEMS NEED TO BE THE SAME
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2015-02-24 14:15:53 UTC
BS sized weapons can already one-shot frigs and obliterate cruisers in some circumstances. Medium-sized weapons are well known to pop small targets.
Missiles lacked this opportunity so "Rapid" systems were introduced. While more variety is good, downsized turrets will actually hurt complexity as it will make turrets and missiles to similar.
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#12 - 2015-02-24 16:30:54 UTC
it would help if the small turrents in their worked properly, the dual sets and quad lasers get no bonuses for what they are considered

ie a quadlaser that's considered a medium weapons receives no medium bonuses last I heard

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith

Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#13 - 2015-02-24 17:02:08 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
nah this is something that should stay with missiles because of how damage application works as well as its one of the only roles that missiles fill better than other weapon types



at the same time this could never be done for lasers do to how they don't need to reload


NOT ALL WEAPON SYSTEMS NEED TO BE THE SAME
I agree not all weapon systems need to be the same, but I don't think these rapid turrets would violate that rule, if they are made differently.

My concept of them is the following. Instead of being able to deal high DPS in a short time before having a long reload while being able to apply this damage effectively to smaller ships (as rapid missiles work), I envision this turrets working not much differently from their smaller counterparts, while taking advantage of being fitted onto a much larger ship:

- Each one is composed of several instances of the smaller weapon they're based on (for example, quadruple 125mm AC). Damage output should be comparable to that number of smaller weapons (quadruple 125mm AC would be similar, maybe slightly less, than 4x 125mm AC). Same tracking. Range should also be comparable, so that a large ship with this kind of weapon wouldn't have a range advantage over a small ship with the same kind of weapon (as happens with rapid missiles).

- As such, when fired, they consume as much ammo and cap as that number of smaller weapons (same example, 4 times the ammo of a single 125mm AC, or 4 times the cap of a similar laser, and so on). Magazine size and reload times are the same as the original small weapon, since they're simply several of them stacked together.

- They would have CPU and PW comparable to weapons the size of the ship they're made for, as rapid missile launchers do: for example, the quadruple 125mm AC would have similar fitting requeriments to those of the 220mm AC, if it is a medium-sized weapon, or those of the 425mm AC, if it is a large weapon.

This way, the purpose of these turrets would not be to deal front-loaded DPS (as rapid missiles can do), but to allow a large ship to dedicate itself to shoot down smaller ships that come into range, converting it into a "fleet protection" role, while sacrificing its capabilities against other large ships, but keeping its usual tank and speed.

This could help battleships to be more desired into fleets: if you are willing to sacrifice firepower on your battleship, you could help the fleet defend itself against frigates, by essentially becoming an AA platform with battleship-sized tank (and speed). For me, this opens a lot of interesting possibilities, rather than simply making missiles and turrets too similar.


[sorry OP for somehow taking over your topic]

Lugh Crow-Slave
#14 - 2015-02-24 17:49:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
then just have it fit small weapons

Or do you want frig level tracking with cruiser tank and dps with no real penalty?


and rapid missiles do have the same range as their counterparts so they do not have more range than smaller ships using the same weapon
thatonepersone
Black Jack 0-1
#15 - 2015-02-24 17:54:05 UTC
Komodo Askold wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
nah this is something that should stay with missiles because of how damage application works as well as its one of the only roles that missiles fill better than other weapon types



at the same time this could never be done for lasers do to how they don't need to reload


NOT ALL WEAPON SYSTEMS NEED TO BE THE SAME
I agree not all weapon systems need to be the same, but I don't think these rapid turrets would violate that rule, if they are made differently.

My concept of them is the following. Instead of being able to deal high DPS in a short time before having a long reload while being able to apply this damage effectively to smaller ships (as rapid missiles work), I envision this turrets working not much differently from their smaller counterparts, while taking advantage of being fitted onto a much larger ship:

- Each one is composed of several instances of the smaller weapon they're based on (for example, quadruple 125mm AC). Damage output should be comparable to that number of smaller weapons (quadruple 125mm AC would be similar, maybe slightly less, than 4x 125mm AC). Same tracking. Range should also be comparable, so that a large ship with this kind of weapon wouldn't have a range advantage over a small ship with the same kind of weapon (as happens with rapid missiles).

- As such, when fired, they consume as much ammo and cap as that number of smaller weapons (same example, 4 times the ammo of a single 125mm AC, or 4 times the cap of a similar laser, and so on). Magazine size and reload times are the same as the original small weapon, since they're simply several of them stacked together.

- They would have CPU and PW comparable to weapons the size of the ship they're made for, as rapid missile launchers do: for example, the quadruple 125mm AC would have similar fitting requeriments to those of the 220mm AC, if it is a medium-sized weapon, or those of the 425mm AC, if it is a large weapon.

This way, the purpose of these turrets would not be to deal front-loaded DPS (as rapid missiles can do), but to allow a large ship to dedicate itself to shoot down smaller ships that come into range, converting it into a "fleet protection" role, while sacrificing its capabilities against other large ships, but keeping its usual tank and speed.

This could help battleships to be more desired into fleets: if you are willing to sacrifice firepower on your battleship, you could help the fleet defend itself against frigates, by essentially becoming an AA platform with battleship-sized tank (and speed). For me, this opens a lot of interesting possibilities, rather than simply making missiles and turrets too similar.


[sorry OP for somehow taking over your topic]



They would have to be only dual smalls other wise it would be op. Dual meds before ship bonus's would give ~1400 dps. Quad smalls would give about 2k dps before ship bonus's.
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#16 - 2015-02-24 18:37:39 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
then just have it fit small weapons

Or do you want frig level tracking with cruiser tank and dps with no real penalty?


and rapid missiles do have the same range as their counterparts so they do not have more range than smaller ships using the same weapon

thatonepersone wrote:
They would have to be only dual smalls other wise it would be op. Dual meds before ship bonus's would give ~1400 dps. Quad smalls would give about 2k dps before ship bonus's.

You both have a point. It is reasonable they would need to have the same damage their original weapon have, in order not to be OP. In that case, you would have frigate/destroyer DPS, range and tracking on a cruiser/battleship tank. In that case, the penalty would be to have such low DPS and range against other large ships; even a blaster battleship could almost outrange that in many cases.

Now the thing is, how could we make these rapid turrets not to be made obsolete by just fitting small weapons? Apart from having turret cruisers/battlecruisers/battleships being bonused for these too. Maybe having a higher rate of fire, as rapid missiles do?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#17 - 2015-02-24 19:15:29 UTC
if the problem is already fixed by just fitting smaller weapons then there is no need to add anything else.....
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#18 - 2015-02-24 19:19:26 UTC
similar to the other thread talking about using the lesser used weapons too provide a anti small/medium ship weapon.

balance points
- maybe make the largest bs weapons hard too fit even for battleships too encourage use of the smaller power versions
- maybe make the largest (neutrons etc) harder on cap and smaller clips.

converting lower weapons like electrons etc into cluster weapons
- reduce the sig res too something like 250 ( smaller would be too good) and better tracking
- visible on hull as 3 smaller than bs weapons
- increase visible size of bs guns on hulls
- dps would be lower than the largest(best) versions (neutrons, etc.)
- much higher RoF than neutrons etc.

pros
- better against smaller ships than current bs weapons, mainly against bc's (they need their sig reduced mind) and cruisers.
- higher RoF in general
- higher tracking
- easier on cap/fittings

cons
- less dps
- less alpha

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#19 - 2015-02-24 19:30:18 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
if the problem is already fixed by just fitting smaller weapons then there is no need to add anything else.....

The problem isn't, because of ship bonuses. (Which apparently are wonky for guns already on the smallest size turrets.).
Cruisers all get bonuses to RLML and BS to RHML now. (A couple of exceptions still I 'think' which make no sense even then). Only BC don't get the bonuses.

This could quite easily be done to all guns.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-02-24 19:50:11 UTC
Rapid small guns may have some issues, such as offering something of a tackler immunity.

Rapid medium guns would be a good idea. We may see a comeback of battleship gangs, to the detriment of Ishtar/tengu blobs. It can help shift the balance of Eve player mentality towards committing to a fight, instead of the current risk aversion meta where everyone flies slippery tengu/ishtar fleets that pull out at the earliest possibility of losses, simply because they can.

This will save a lot of wasted time and frustration on both sides of the 2 tengu/ishtar fleets attempting to shoot each other. Watch this on a covops on grid is like watching 2 retards trying to hit each other with sticks - excruciating.
123Next page