EVE Information Portal

here is a boost for gallente make it so remote sensor damps also reduce the ships sensor strength so its easier to lock them down with multi specs... (would also make sence why gal have information warfare links)

this would make ships like the lechasis/arazu used more then just a long point or scram...

All of the time? Then, everyone would be flying Gallente ships next year.

The whole point of "balancing" is to avoid creating a sure win for one particular weapon, ship, or strategy.

In general:
Minmatar ships are faster - kiting is a valid strategy, and AC stats support this strategy.
Gallente ships are DPS beasts - warping to 0 is valid strategy, and blaster stats support this strategy.

If the Minmatar ship can kite the Gallente, then the Minmatar ship should have the advantage. If the Gallente ship drops right on the Minmatar ship, then the Gallente ship should have the advantage. But, in either case, it should never be a sure win.

But, more seriously, CCP Tallest -

What about a buff to the graphics and sound effects for blasters and railguns?

Even with those changes i still think the hybrids deserve another boost.

You can either boost falloff a little bit, or give them quicker reload. The Amarr get to reload fast, I think hybrid guns should reload quicker to, due to their poor range you're constantly adjusting. Unlike projectile ammo, you barely get to 50% of web range with antimatter on medium hybrid blasters, the only type of ammo requiring several ammo type under 10km...

And that's why blasters just don't work.

you want feedback? ok here's feedback:


proposed blaster fixes on the devblog are half-assed. I can comprehend the armour tanking balancing a bit, but blasters are supposed to be something akin to shooting nukes at someone's face at point blank ranges. this does not happen today because their damage is marginally better than "the next best thing(TM)", and even at some cases it is actually surpassed (a gank torp raven, theoredically, outdamages a gank neutron megathron btw). Also said marginally better damage is only better in perfect conditions.

my proposal is to boost (M and L) blasters dps on the 50% range. tracking change is actually not bad and I don't mind the fittings change. For sake of balancing I don't even mind cutting down the blasters' optimal and falloff further so that they do no more than paint scratching beyond the 10-15km range or thereabouts.

In the blasters' case, the damage projection mechanism should be solely the ships themselves, and not the guns, so the speed and agility boosts aren't actually bad, altho I would boost them a bit more.

in sum, I don't mind blasters getting even shorter ranges if A) they get the means to get there and B) get overwhelming damage to compensate said ranges.


And , in my opinion, proposed changes are only half way there tbh.

It is obvious that these changes are not sufficient in any way. Blasters need more damage if you are going to keep their range as short as it is, which I think should happen. They really should be the short range artillery as many others have indicated, inflicting massive alpha and high sustained DPS but with a low rate of fire. As it stands, Autocannons do almost the same amount of damage, and when you consider the range at which they project that damage and ESPECIALLY that they can switch to any damage type the slight damage advantage blasters have is completely overshadowed.

I think another possible fix would be to divide blaster damage 3 ways so that it inflicts roughly 33% each of EM, Thermal, and Kinetic; which would make scientific sense as they are plasma weapons and plasma certainly has a lot of EM energy; if you did this blasters would still be viable with the same damage they have now since people couldn't just stack more kin/therm resist on top of already decent kin/therm resists (especially for Tech 2 ships).

No matter how you look at it, blasters need either more damage, or the damage they have needs to be more effective in some way; and just improving the tracking is not going to cut it. For the Record I can fly all races near perfectly and pretty much only participate in PvP when I play, and have been using mostly minmatar for a long long time now. I was excited that blasters might be better soon, but this is not going to make me use them again when I can still choose any damage type I need and do that damage at kite range in the fastest ships in the game. There is just still no reason to choose blasters.

Again, to recap, at least two of these three changes are needed.

1. Give blasters alpha comparable to artillery.

2. Give blasters more DPS.

3. Give blasters EM damage in addition to Kinetic and Thermal while keeping their current DPS. (this is still inferior to projectiles because 67% of your damage will not be against their weakest resist, unlike projectiles where almost 100% of their damage is the perfect type to destroy their target).

So basically, you want Gallente to be to be useful only in small fleet vs 1 ship gank situations? Because you need to have 1500 dps in one ship for that to work right... all other situations you will be kited and killed @15km becuase you are slower and cant get into web range without help from another ship. In fleet situations your are useless. If this happens Gallente will only be useful in 5% of combat situations. I'm sorry not acceptable.


I would like to see ammo lose its dps for range stats and instead some sort of cap for range stat and reduce ammo load times from 10 seconds to 5 or instant. Then on top of that something like this would be more useful:

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431186&page=1#1

My assembly hall post before the old forum got shut down had about 70% thumbs up.

The idea is to make blasters shotgun damage. Meaning the closer you are, the more raw dps they do. This would mean medium do 20-30% more damage when within 50% of optimal. The same dps when outside of optimal.

And then , instead of falloff decreasing the chance to hit, it would only reduce the damage blasters deal. Because shotgun blasters as we all know move in a cone. So the closer you are the more hits you take, the farther away you are the less hits you take. However the cool part of this plan is optimal range is based on the size of the target. If your trying to shoot a target with larger sig radius than your guns, than their effective optimal range is greater. Since the cone of damage gets larger as it travels, damage is directly linked to how far away the target is, and how big it is.



Think the way they balance shotguns for any fps title.



If your in a frigate trying to hit a battleship, then hell why not, you now have 12-15km range on your small blasters. Which allows you to tackle and still put on some dps.

the problem with that is that falloff is in the chance to hit formula... but that is only half of the applied damage formula...

pretty much chance to hit = 0-1 and it goes against x which is a random generated number between 0-1.... if x is greater then chance to hit you miss...

i dunno sounds like you want directional smart bombs... it could be cool... but remember shotguns have more then one ammo type... you have slugs too..

so how about making some of the ammo types directional smart bombs that have a 30 degree arc and the others are traditional ammo types...?