These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#621 - 2011-11-01 21:25:01 UTC
Tanya Powers wrote:
wtf .....ganked FTL again....fracking forum !!

Yeah, it happens. The message editor times out.

Try this:

Type in your post. When you are done, hit Ctrl-A to select all your text, then hit Ctrl-C to copy it to the clipboard. Next, press the PREVIEW button, and all of your changes may be gone. If not, press POST and be happy. If your changes are indeed gone, don't despair yet. If you were editing a new post and the message window is empty, click in the message window and then hit Ctrl-V to paste your new text from the clipboard. If you were editing a quoted post and the message window is not empty, click in the message window, then press Ctrl-A to select everything again, and then Ctrl-V to overwrite with your new text from the clipboard. Press PREVIEW again and confirm that everything was copied correctly. Finally, press POST.

If you get tossed to the GANKED page, after pressing PREVIEW or POST, just click the link to return back and continue with the above steps to recover and post your message.
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
#622 - 2011-11-01 21:28:35 UTC
Tanya Powers wrote:
Quote:
And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship.


It's the point for every single race. You add nothing relevant to the discussion stating this.

I have no desire to go around and around with you on these forums. Most of my points were stated about 10 pages back, and I think I said what I wanted to. I will respond to this though.

Artillery - Republic Fleet ammo is used almost exclusively except in Tremor ranges. Tier4 weapon systems maintain effectiveness until you get to 70km+ engagement ranges on Battlecruisers and even further on Battleships for standard fitting configurations.
Autocannon - I've always used Republic Fleet in T2 weapons, not sure if T2 was better previously?
Beam - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Aurora
Pulse - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Scorch
Standard/Heavy/Cruise Missiles - Caldari Navy
Torpedo's - Javalin/Rage

In all but Torpedo's, the T1 faction ammunition IS the way to go for PvP in most situations with the current implementations and balance of power between weapon systems. Some of the changes in this dev blog may change that. When you add a weapon system that pushes high DPS and crowds out the engagement windows of other systems, you quickly invalidate both ammunition types and effectively ship setups/tactics.

Were you to make blasters operate in the 15km+ range (25km with Null? 35km with Null and Tracking Enhancers?) there would be little to no engagement window for Pulses even with Scorch (hard to maintain range for any amount of time), and the switching of range advantages that is an Amarr capability right now would be relatively void as their DPS would be outperformed by blasters for just about every other engagement range. Again, Autocannons are designed to operate in Falloff and are a different beast altogether, held up most notably by their damage types even if their DPS curves fall off reasonably well.

If you make Gallente ships super speedy and have ultra-high DPS, you end up with gank mobiles, and make lots of Minmatar pilots cry.
If you make Gallente ships have mid-range engagement protential and ultra-high DPS, you replace Amarr in this category, leaving them without a purpose.
Blasters should have their niche. Without it, its just putting all the weapons systems back into the balance blender and ending up with something that comes out broken in the end.
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
#623 - 2011-11-01 21:34:22 UTC
CCP you should rename this post to:

"Minmatar FTW."

With the buff you've given the Tech II ammo, projectile weapons become even more overpowered. Why fly much else? Obviously you couldn't get away with a post called that so you nested the really big change with some minor improvements to hybrids to keep the masses focused on the shiny object. Classic bait and switch.

I find it interesting that after the many responses and lots of ideas that this thread has produced no real input from any of the CSM's. This hybrid change must not be important to them? I noticed they were very vocal in CAP ship re-balancing. Why is this?

EVEN more absent is any response from CCP. I've noticed that the Faction Warfare thread has numerous responses back from CCP and has helped guide the dialogue in a productive and exciting way. With some input from CCP this could do the same. If CCP came back and said, hey no way we can make Gallente faster or whatever, then people can stop talking about that and focus on other ideas. The impression I get is that this hybrid/Gallente issue is just too big, too hard and will only be marginal. As it stands right now, with the boost to the ammo, its Minmatar all the way.


And the Talos will be as fail as the Diemost btw.
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#624 - 2011-11-01 21:35:45 UTC
Digital Gaidin wrote:
Tanya Powers wrote:
Quote:
And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship.


It's the point for every single race. You add nothing relevant to the discussion stating this.

I have no desire to go around and around with you on these forums. Most of my points were stated about 10 pages back, and I think I said what I wanted to. I will respond to this though.

Artillery - Republic Fleet ammo is used almost exclusively except in Tremor ranges. Tier4 weapon systems maintain effectiveness until you get to 70km+ engagement ranges on Battlecruisers and even further on Battleships for standard fitting configurations.
Autocannon - I've always used Republic Fleet in T2 weapons, not sure if T2 was better previously?
Beam - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Aurora
Pulse - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Scorch
Standard/Heavy/Cruise Missiles - Caldari Navy
Torpedo's - Javalin/Rage

In all but Torpedo's, the T1 faction ammunition IS the way to go for PvP in most situations with the current implementations and balance of power between weapon systems. Some of the changes in this dev blog may change that. When you add a weapon system that pushes high DPS and crowds out the engagement windows of other systems, you quickly invalidate both ammunition types and effectively ship setups/tactics.

Were you to make blasters operate in the 15km+ range (25km with Null? 35km with Null and Tracking Enhancers?) there would be little to no engagement window for Pulses even with Scorch (hard to maintain range for any amount of time), and the switching of range advantages that is an Amarr capability right now would be relatively void as their DPS would be outperformed by blasters for just about every other engagement range. Again, Autocannons are designed to operate in Falloff and are a different beast altogether, held up most notably by their damage types even if their DPS curves fall off reasonably well.

If you make Gallente ships super speedy and have ultra-high DPS, you end up with gank mobiles, and make lots of Minmatar pilots cry.
If you make Gallente ships have mid-range engagement protential and ultra-high DPS, you replace Amarr in this category, leaving them without a purpose.
Blasters should have their niche. Without it, its just putting all the weapons systems back into the balance blender and ending up with something that comes out broken in the end.



But that's exactly where we are now.

Autocanons and pulse took the blasters place, have better engagement distance thx to so many buffs like tracking falloff or amo like scorch.

So, what must be donne, buff blasters or nerf projectiles and lasers to bring them at their place?
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#625 - 2011-11-01 21:36:34 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
All these one-line posters going 'Woo!! Thanks CCP! This is awesome!' are going to feel pretty let down when they realise these tweaks basically change nothing.

CCP, this is really disappointing. When the Chaos stats were leaked, you told us that they were WIP and may change. Now, it turns out that they were exactly what you were going to implement (apart from correcting your agility nerf to a buff).

Blaster boats will still be outclassed by every other short-range weapon system. They will still be kited by every other type of ship, with their superior versatility of range. If, by some miracle, a blaster platform gets its target into optimal range, its damage output will still not be enough to make up for all the damage being applied by the opponent while it was getting into range.

Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.

If you're determined that blasters should remain a very short range weapon, then they really have to do a truckload of damage at that range to make up for all the time getting into range, taking damage while doing none. In other words, blasters should do something like twice the damage of ACs if they get in range. Letting a blaster platform get into optimal range before it's at least half-dead already, should mean almost certain death.

If you don't want to give blasters that kind of insane damage, then you have to give them better range. They shouldn't be iwin buttons at longer ranges, but they desperately need more versatility. No other weapon system has such a small envelope in which to operate, and such a steep decline in effectiveness outside of that sweet spot. So fix it with a rebalancing of ammo types to give blasters viable options at ranges beyond Null.

As for rails, you've designed a weapon system that only gains superiority in ranges where the new scanning mechanics make fighting completely impossible. Just give them another 10% damage boost on top of the one you've given them already, and they might become useful.

It would be nice if CCP posted at all in this thread to reassure all those concerned about this supposed 'rebalancing' that the feedback is actually being taken on board, and being acted on.


This guy nailed it.
haldon taradi
hauler killers
#626 - 2011-11-01 21:37:29 UTC
Forgive me, I haven't read the entire thread, but a good portion of it. I'm sure this has been mentioned but just want to put it out there again.

Seems to me, the problem with gallente is they don't have the 'legs' to get to targets (especially minnies) out of range of their blasters. We don't want to give them the ability to go kite, that's minmatar. If we change blasters into projectiles that use cap (more falloff), nothing is achieved except having two races that are the same. So, what we need is something like this:

ship bonus: +10% bonus to overheated speed for afterburners and microwarpdrives per skill level.

Don't worry about the exact percentage, that's something that needs to be tuned. Effectively, what you do is give gallente a sort of overdrive so they can burn into range. However, they can't sustain this speed so they either need to grab their target or they're dead in the water. It makes being a minmatar pilot less automatic as well. Do you fit full shield extenders and hope to outrun? Or do you use webs to keep the blasters out of their true optimal? Do you stay at long range and your target warps out, or at warp disrupt range but risk getting run down? Did his MWD really just burn out, or does he have some charges left and is playing dead? These sort of questions would add some more interesting scenarios to solo pvp. In small group pvp, makes for interesting target calling on the side of the opfor.

Of course, the bonus would have to be tuned, as I said above, so that you have a good chance of catching someone trying to warp disrupt you, but not so good that you can run down really long range guys or kiters at medium range.

Blasters could probably also use a SMALL dps bonus, on the order of 10%.

What rails need is more of an open question. These changes are a really good start, but as someone said, there really is no 'long range' pvp, what with probers. Maybe change 'warp to' range to be 250km?
Bhaal Chinnian
#627 - 2011-11-01 21:41:15 UTC
Lekgoa wrote:
Enyo with neutrons + NULL: 212 gun dps @ 4.2+3.9
Wolf with 200's + HAIL: 286 gun dps @ 0.8+9


I fully support blaster DPS facemelting buff, straightline speed buff, and Web buff for Gallente hulls. The Gallente ships are so limited atm. NO range buff needed as blasters == spaceshotguns.

'A Good Plan executed today is better than a perfect plan executed next week'-- George Patton
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
#628 - 2011-11-01 22:00:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Digital Gaidin
Tanya Powers wrote:
So, what must be donne, buff blasters or nerf projectiles and lasers to bring them at their place?


Berendas wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.



This guy nailed it.

I think I answered your question Tanya with the second quote... which is essentially the exact thing I was trying to propose!

And if you do the extended range, you either increase it's optimal and stomp all over Pulses (where one will remain the best), or increase its falloff and stomp all over projectiles (except Projectiles will still be able to switch damage types!). Insane DPS at point blank is the way to make it a truly unique weapon system and give someone a reason to specifically use it. If going this route, remember they need to have some pretty amazing tracking else some odd behavior will be witnessed (e.g. getting bumped and DPS going to zero).
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#629 - 2011-11-01 22:28:17 UTC
I don't care if i can't shoot further than 15km to full dmg with my blasters, I want to blow up their teeth if they let me get in to that range and I want "working" tools to achieve this.

Witch means not missing or half hitting shots, not having total crap tracking at 1km or total crap dps at 15km and have enough tank to support the dps i'll be taking while I try hardly to get in range.

Not asking the moon, not asking to shoot 100% dmg at 25km, there are already laser and projectiles for that (oups my cynabal shoots shortest range atomic ammo at 33, Hail to hail now over this super buff)

The only thing that will ever make me use more often blaster ships is to have tools to catch my preys and melt them seriously, if they're dumb too late, if they're smart they deserve my wreck, not the pain has it is right now where there's almost nothing you can do to catch whatever with a smart fit, all you can do is watch yourself miserably die.

Or be surrounded by big numbers of minmatar friends to help pin down stuff just for you, because they love blasters so much, what would they do without them...
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#630 - 2011-11-01 22:28:22 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.


I'm not a fan of giving blasters significantly more range, as it just homogenises the weapon systems. That just leaves us with giving blasters the massive damage advantage close up, as a balance to the massive damage advantage that Pulse and ACs have at medium ranges. There are two ways of doing this - a) much more DPS for blasters, or b) much less DPS for ACs and Pulse at blaster range.

Option A sounds easier, but, frankly, the damage boost that would be needed to make blasters worth using, given the very short range and necessity and difficulty of going into web range and bearing in mind that Pulse and ACs would still be able to apply very good DPS at blasters' optimal, would be about 30-50%. That's game-breaking, it's just stupid.

So, IMO, the only way to make blasters worth using is to greatly reduce the applied DPS of Pulse and ACs at blaster-range. This could be achieved by a large cut to the tracking of Pulse and reverting all of the completely unnecessary projectile boosts.
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#631 - 2011-11-01 22:36:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Sebastian N Cain
In the thread "are hybrids inherently broken and impossible to fix?" I wrote this:
Quote:
That it might be not possible to fix hybrids is an idea i had some time ago as well. Most of the proposed changes would turn hybrids either into lasers, but ones that need ammo and has kinetic damage instead of em, or it would turn them into projectiles, but ones that need cap and have fixed damage types. Thats completely pointless.

Also the "don´t change hybrids, change the ships" approach. Yeah, just make them able to close in fast, where they still can´t hit cr4p without the agility to lessen the tracking problems. Oh, agility too? Great, but if you want to turn the Gallente into Minmatar that badly, why not simply giving them the projectile weapons? Also blasters aren´t the only hybrids. And, well, is it just me or is it really a bad idea to close in as fast as possible with rails? If you just want to change the ships you´re better finding some buff that makes both blasters and rails useful. Good luck with that.Roll

Also there is no area left that isn´t already covered by either lasers or projectiles. One has good alpha, the other good dps; one good optimal, the other good falloff; one uses cap, the other uses ammo; one has instant reload, the other variable damage types; what should a third turret weapon specialize in without either becoming a copy of an existing weapon, become underpowered (for example using both ammo and cap, have both reload time and fixed damage types...) or overpowered (by giving all the advantages and none of the flaws).

Thats the problem with a weapon system that incorporates every existing flaw possible while rejecting every possible advantage. You simply have nothing to work with when it comes to balancing.

If you want to keep hybrids, you practically have to rework all turret weapon systems completely if you want to end up with something where all of them are balanced.

My solution was simpler: give caldari lasers and gallente projectiles (or gallente lasers and caldari projectiles), adjust the ships stats for the use of those weapon systems and get rid of hybrids. Problem solved.Twisted


The proposed changes are proving me right. As it is, hybrids are really impossible to fix.

I got lost in thought... it was unfamiliar territory.
OOooole
#632 - 2011-11-01 22:43:49 UTC  |  Edited by: OOooole
special function on guns
minmatar --without cap--
amar --insta reaload--
caldari-- without cap--

galente have what ?

lol thx Hamox Big smile

bye bye maybe i com back whe we boost black ops Account Expires 18 January 2012 - 1:38 pm (in 4 days)
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#633 - 2011-11-01 22:46:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Hamox
OOooole wrote:
special function on guns
minmatar --without cap--
amar --insta reaload--

galente have what ?


They look nice when they shoot :)

Edit: Don't forgett Caldari Missles also without cap...
draconothese
Independant Celestial Enterprises
#634 - 2011-11-01 22:52:57 UTC  |  Edited by: draconothese
as it is now i fly a proteus with tech 2 neutron blasters fitted with antimatter i can only hit at 5km away and thats with all 4 in gun skills by the time i can get in range im smoking and on fire.

let alone after i can get in range if they get moving just enough i cant hit for nothing

so from what i have been expereincing a damage buff anlong with a big tracking increase would even out blasters a lot.

armor tanks are also part of the issue and some of that comes from the problem of blasters as well from the fact we cant finish off anyone.

after we finaly get in range we have taken to much damage and cant dish enough out to make up for the loss in our tank

now the other thing is getting into range i thought the 90% increase in webs was vary interesting as it is now must ships fit webs so would be a interesting idea to have gallente ships have a web bonus along with all there others


sorry for my bad grammer i have issues with english XD
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#635 - 2011-11-01 23:02:09 UTC
draconothese wrote:
as it is now i fly a proteus with tech 2 neutron blasters fitted with antimatter i can only hit at 5km away and thats with all 4 in gun skills by the time i can get in range im smoking and on fire.

let alone after i can get in range if they get moving just enough i cant hit for nothing

so from what i have been expereincing a damage buff anlong with a big tracking increase would even out blasters a lot.

armor tanks are also part of the issue and some of that comes from the problem of blasters as well from the fact we cant finish off anyone.

after we finaly get in range we have taken to much damage and cant dish enough out to make up for the loss in our tank


sorry for my bad grammer i have issues with english XD


Haha you should compare the Proteus with a Tengu on level 4 or 5 missions, you will start to cry :)
The Tengu hits everything up to 90 km and you can easily fit 3 balistic controls on it to improve the damage.
I have just done such a test, I fly Proteus and Tengu, and the Tengu needed 1/3 of the time that I needed to finish a mission with a Proteus. Even if you improve the damage on PVE by 500% the Tengu will be faster becouse you loose so much time to fly to your target, especially if you are in dead space and you can not use MWD.
The whole idea about hybrids is just unplayable on PVE, you have the choise between no range or no tracking ;)

But lets get back to topic, it is all about pvp balancing, right?
Alski
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#636 - 2011-11-01 23:03:44 UTC
The proposed changes are nothing to get excited about tbh, and even *IF* Gallente ships were going to get looked at one by one to bring them back into favour vs. other races, the entire weapon system itself adds nothing at all that another race can't do better.

ie:
Amarr. Able to change weapon range instantly, damage type more useful than kinetic+thermal. excellent optimal range of pulse.
Minmatar. Ability to change damage type, exceptional range from AC's, exceptional alpha from Artys, capless guns
Caldari. damage type, capless missile platforms, great ECM boats, railboats are as fail as gallente though.
Gallente. ... drones?

Try this, I got bored and knocked it up in 10 minutes off the top of my head, i had a vague stab at ballanceing it but i really don't care, mostly posting it for the luls.... Lol

...and to make the point that Gallente weapons need a unique role.


Blasters = Multirole Weapons System.

Neutron Blasters
Same as TQ +65% Damage multiplyer, -30% ROF reduction, +30% activation cap useage, point blank alpha king, 35% more damage tha TQ, horrendious unsustainable cap usage.

Ion Blasters
Same as TQ +300% Optimal, -25% falloff, +50% Damage multiplier, -30% ROF, +25% activation cap useage. alpha roughy equvilent to neutrons but less dps. Autocannon challanger with less DPS, but with max damage ammo your still hitting for nothing beyond 15km

Electron Blasters
Same as TQ +20% Tracking, +30% optimal, +15% ROF, +400% ammo capacity, same optimal as TQ ions but less falloff, actully has a role now.

Damage ammo:

Antimatter.
Optimal -50%, combined damage: 48 (as TQ)

Plutonium.
Optimal -50%, combined damage: 40, cap usege -20% (the sensible Neutron blaster ship pilot's choice of ammo, makes above OP neuts not much better than TQ)

Urinium.
Optimal -50%, combined damage 100, cap useage +270%, ROF -50% (max alpha strike ammo, distroys your cap in just a few vollys)

Compromise ammo:

Thorium.
Optimal 0% (as TQ), combined damage: 36 (TQ is 33) -50% cap useage (as TQ)

Lead.
Optimal -15%, combined damage: 40. cap useage same as antimatter. -15% tracking speed

Range Ammo

Iridium.
Optimal +30% (TQ is 20%), combined damage 32 (TQ is 28) -24% cap (as TQ)

Tungsten.
Optimal +30% (TQ is 40%), combined damage 56 (TQ is 24) cap useage same as antimatter, -50% ROF.

Iron.
Same as TQ, because :lol.iron:

Reload Times

Small Hybrids Reload time = 2 seconds
Medium Hybrids Reload time = 4 seconds
Large Hybrids Reload time = 6 seconds


(may not be actually serious Blink )
Nyla Skin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#637 - 2011-11-01 23:06:11 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:


I'm not a fan of giving blasters significantly more range, as it just homogenises the weapon systems.


The other option would be what I have proposed couple times elsewhere, make gallente ships more agile, give them acceleration buff, less mass, something.

In after the lock :P   - CCP Falcon www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#638 - 2011-11-01 23:21:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
OOooole wrote:
special function on guns
minmatar --without cap--
amar --insta reaload--
caldari-- without cap--

galente have what ?

lol thx Hamox Big smile

What? You're putting zero cap usage and instant reload in the same paragraph, thus implying these 2 things are of close usefullness? You've got to be kidding. Instant ammo switch (in case of lasers, which can't select damage types) is like 0.05 of what 0 cap usage gives. And I'm not even sure this is not an overestimation.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#639 - 2011-11-01 23:24:01 UTC
Tanya Powers wrote:

I really hope someday you try to fly minmatar ships of all kinds to figure out by yourself how screwed blaster and rail ships are stuck in a very small niche, so tiny it doesn't ever happen in other places than dreams or in forum posts.

Boo, hoo. I guess you found me out. My tears are flowing.

Anyhoo.... back on topic....

Yeah, blaster and rail ships are in a niche. Autocannon ships are the FOTM. No argurment from me.

Is it absolutely impossible to win with a Gallente blaster boat or rail ship, in any PvP or PvE situation, irregardless of the circumstances? I don't think so, and I tried to explain wny, but If your answer is always "absolutely, effing yes", then the fix is simple - remove blasters and rails from the game, as well as the offending Gallente ships. Ok, done. Next problem.

If you are now saying, "Now wait a minute,dammit, that's not what I said - I just want to buff blasters and rail guns so they do more damage, with faster tracking and more range, and with T2 ammo which is as good as T2 projectiles in all aspects, and I want to make the Gallente ships fast enough to always catch the Minmatar ships in a straight run", then what you really want are autocannons, artillery, lasers, and Minmatar ships - and we've already got them in the game. So, let's just fly Minmatar and Amarr ships - and not fly Gallente ships (except maybe the drone boats). Ok, done. Next problem.

If you are now yelling, "You arsewipe, what we're saying is that we don't want blasters to be like ACs, we want them to be facemelting awesomeness at short ranges with enough speed on the blaster boats so they can actually get close enough to use it", well, then, what you want just so happens to be what CCP apparently wants. Run the new numbers, fit some new loadouts. You'll find that the proposed balance changes do buff blaster damage (by fitting better guns), and do buff Gallente ship velocity to within 5-10m/s of the Minmatar ships (although the Thorax is still a bit short), and do buff agility and blaster tracking, so those silly blaster ships can orbit close at speed and still hit something.

If you are now screaming, "Oh, yeah, right... but, you arrogant plick (Mel Gibson chinese accent here), it is not enough! CCP needs to do even more! Your dreamy EFT fits only work in forums and your own fairytale mind. Real PvP doesn't work that way. You've obviously never flown these ships or used these weapons before, so you don't know what you are talking about."

Well, guess what? Neither have you. With the new stats in place, these are effectively new guns and new ships. The old loadouts, the old strategies and the old experiences are simply obsolete. You get to start over again and see what actually happens when you put these guns and ships in game.

And, if you claim that you already know exactly how these new stats will affect the actual gameplay, in terms of who will come out on top of every PvP encounter - one on one, small gang, medium and large fleets - then, you are either a genius or just a plain ol' hypocrite - living in your own dreams and own forum posts.

Now, I'm not personally claiming to be a genius or a trying to be a hypocrite, so I'm simply advocating folks to take a look at the numbers, use EFT, theorize how certain changes to the ship fitting will affect overall performance, discuss the possibilities with others, and get ready to play around with the actual new guns & ships when they go live... before screaming (yet again) that CCP isn't doing enough.

Too much to ask? Maybe so. I'm so sad.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#640 - 2011-11-01 23:27:56 UTC
Nyla Skin wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:


I'm not a fan of giving blasters significantly more range, as it just homogenises the weapon systems.


The other option would be what I have proposed couple times elsewhere, make gallente ships more agile, give them acceleration buff, less mass, something.


None of these changes would address the fact that ACs would still do similar applied DPS at blaster optimal, while having the advantages of no cap use, much greater falloff and being mounted on faster hulls, giving them the ability to apply DPS without having to expose themselves to the dangers of web range.

I think the only way to make the mobility solution work is to make blasterboats faster than AC-boats. Now, people quite rightly object to that because Minmatar are supposed to be the fastest. That leaves a workaround of switching blaster and AC falloff. People will object to that, too.

Bleh. I can't see any of these changes happening, because they involve nerfs, and CCP is terrified of alienating the playerbase and unleashing threadnoughts. We'll just get some half-arsed "fix" similar to the stuff in the blevdog that completely fails to give blasterboats a reason to exist.