These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rebecha Pucontis
Doomheim
#981 - 2013-04-24 23:20:35 UTC
Chessur wrote:
CCP Thanks to the new EFT- i have done some number crunching for you and present to you some interesting results.

Ships shown are level 5 skilled. No drugs, no heat, no implants. 2 gyros and 2 TE's are used with barrage. The dps shown is damage applied at 28K (Or around kiting ranges) The use of the word kiting in my semantics is this:

Kiting is flying well out of web / scram range. Kiting is a range greater than 24K.

hurricane
Old TE: 226 DPS
New TE: 178 DPS

Cynabal
Old TE: 264 DPS
New TE: 236 DPS

Vagabond:
Old TE: 242 DPS
New TE: 211 DPS

'New' Stabber
Old TE: 157 DPS
New TE: 137 DPS

'New' Hurricane Fleet issue
Old TE: 233 DPS
New TE: 185 DPS

As a joke: RLM Caracal 2 BCS, lv 5 skills no heat, Fury lights

DPS: 236 (Yes a t1 cruiser on par with a cynbal, and beating out every other minmitar ships at kiting range.) CCP Was this your intention?

Why are you doing this to projectile guns CCP? AAs the power creep with EHP increases in ships- using an auto cannon based weapon system to kite is becoming pointless. We are looking at abysmal dps. The lack of projection is what was already hurting minmitar ships, this will compound it more.

The stabber has always been useless. And with the TE nerf will continue to be. The new hurricane and hurricane fleet issue struggle with projection currently, and this nerf puts them in the grave.

When we look at the 'quintessential' kiting ship the vaga- again the damage is beyond anemic. The cynabal has passable damage, but its still nothing great. 236 DPS takes some time to chew through the EHP monsters that one can create with T1 cruisers.

Those ships are also going to be taking a huge drop in projected damage. Why? With the DPS you are giving the class now, they simply will not stand a chance. Please explain yourself CCP? Minmitar ships have been hurting since the days of the nano drake. Why the projection reduction? You realize that with this change, RLM missiles, and t2 pulse lasers (of any size) are going to rule?



That is a pretty steep damage drop off there. Looks like autocannons are going to need some buffing.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#982 - 2013-04-24 23:24:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonas Sukarala
Quote:
That is a pretty steep damage drop off there. Looks like autocannons are going to need some buffing.



in exchange for cap use perhaps would be acceptable.

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Rebecha Pucontis
Doomheim
#983 - 2013-04-24 23:32:39 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
Quote:
That is a pretty steep damage drop off there. Looks like autocannons are going to need some buffing.



in exchange for cap use perhaps would be acceptable.


What!! No that is blasphemy.
Anabella Rella
Gradient
Electus Matari
#984 - 2013-04-25 01:20:54 UTC
That guy has made multiple posts arguing for projectiles to use cap. He's one of the people who buys into the crap argument about Minmatar ships being overpowered due to lack of cap use. It's not true now as Minmatar ships have been given more mass, less speed, had fitting options removed. Also, it's a dumb idea on the face of it and from a lore/flavor/real world physics perspective it makes absolutely no sense; projectile weapons use a chemical reaction to fire. How the hell does cap use enter into a chemical reaction of gunpowder/oxidizer?

Minmatar ships have been nerfed enough already and these TE changes will continue that trend. I'm glad that I'm training Amarr now so that I'll be able to fly any race ship and be effectively "nerf-proof" in the near future.

When the world is running down, you make the best of what's still around.
Rebecha Pucontis
Doomheim
#985 - 2013-04-25 01:55:38 UTC
Anabella Rella wrote:
That guy has made multiple posts arguing for projectiles to use cap. He's one of the people who buys into the crap argument about Minmatar ships being overpowered due to lack of cap use. It's not true now as Minmatar ships have been given more mass, less speed, had fitting options removed. Also, it's a dumb idea on the face of it and from a lore/flavor/real world physics perspective it makes absolutely no sense; projectile weapons use a chemical reaction to fire. How the hell does cap use enter into a chemical reaction of gunpowder/oxidizer?


Yeah, certified crazy indeed. You should see what he was proposing to do to the Tornado in the Minmatar balance thread.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#986 - 2013-04-25 02:35:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Chessur
Minmitar are not OP. I just don't understand it. Sure dual neut auto cane was ok as a bralwer (sometimes) but then the nano drake came. Since that point, hurricanes (and all other minmitar ships) are suffering massively from projection issues. Minny BC's don't have amazing tanks, and compared to blasters don't have the damage for up close brawling. The minni cruisers are even worse. Stabber does no damage no matter how you fit it, and it can't kite- because it does less damage than an LML condor. The bellicose is passable.... but again this is a missile ship.

So you have the vagabond, and cynabal. The cynabal is expensive, and the vaga (as shown in my other tables) gets out damaged by a light missile caracal.

So CCP, why do you hate minmitar and kiting in general?

Are you happy with all minmitar ships that are not missile based, being forced to brawl?
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#987 - 2013-04-25 06:58:20 UTC
At above.

I kite with 440 dps Ruptures that have more EHP than most Omens. Its really easy to kite with autocanns provided brain cells when fitting are used.

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#988 - 2013-04-25 14:12:07 UTC
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
At above.

I kite with 440 dps Ruptures that have more EHP than most Omens. Its really easy to kite with autocanns provided brain cells when fitting are used.


Im sorry 440 DPS ruptures? Doesn't exist.

Rupture, lv 5 skills, 2 gyro, 2 TE, barrage. No heat, no implants, no drugs damage projection listed at ranges:

Rupture damage (old te's)

20K: 217 DPS
24K: 188 DPS
28K: 155 DPS

Rupture damage (new TE's)

20K: 196 DPS
24K: 155 DPS
28K: 116 DPS

So where is this 440 dps? I don't see it. Its really impossible to kite with ruptures in the first place. you should use some brain cells and look at the ship bonus. I Don't see any projection bonus do you? Also A shield rupture fully shield fit, with DCU is only pushing out about 27K ehp. Way less than an armor tanked omen.

Use some brain cells before posting next time.
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
#989 - 2013-04-25 17:39:34 UTC
So awhile back I asked the devs how they intend for turret-using T1 "attack" frigates to kite in light of the TE nerf. At the time I suggested CCP buff the "long range" small turrets such as beams and artillery, specifically in the area of tracking. In order to see how viable such an approach would be, I began experimenting with an artillery Slasher, and this is what I've found:

Even with the tracking bonus and Depleted Uranium ammo (which gives even more tracking), you simply move too fast and out-track your guns when fighting other frigates at longpoint range. When fighting a Rifter I found I had to manually reduce my speed down to roughly 1.5 km/s, which you can obtain by using an AB rather than MWD. This makes you perilously easy to get slingshotted, however, so I also found myself using an overheated web and keeping a close eye on the target's distance. Not only that, but with Domination Depleted Uranium ammo loaded the ship simply doesn't do a lot of DPS. While I did end up killing the Rifter, this was probably only because it was piloted by a relatively new pilot and had meta mods fit.

So I recorded my artillery's tracking speed and went to work with a beam-kite Executioner, and looking at the numbers it would suffer the exact same problem. The conclusion? Long-range small turrets have too poor of tracking to keep up with the recently buffed T1 "attack" frigates' speed. And this is why we see more Condors engaging in high-speed kite fits and no other "attack" frigates doing the same.

CCP, aren't you concerned with how very easy it is to kite in a Condor but not in a Slasher, Executioner, or Atron? Why can only one race's T1 "attack" frigates engage in longpoint kiting with such ease?

I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.

Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#990 - 2013-04-25 18:10:49 UTC
Streya Jormagdnir wrote:
So awhile back I asked the devs how they intend for turret-using T1 "attack" frigates to kite in light of the TE nerf. At the time I suggested CCP buff the "long range" small turrets such as beams and artillery, specifically in the area of tracking. In order to see how viable such an approach would be, I began experimenting with an artillery Slasher, and this is what I've found:

Even with the tracking bonus and Depleted Uranium ammo (which gives even more tracking), you simply move too fast and out-track your guns when fighting other frigates at longpoint range. When fighting a Rifter I found I had to manually reduce my speed down to roughly 1.5 km/s, which you can obtain by using an AB rather than MWD. This makes you perilously easy to get slingshotted, however, so I also found myself using an overheated web and keeping a close eye on the target's distance. Not only that, but with Domination Depleted Uranium ammo loaded the ship simply doesn't do a lot of DPS. While I did end up killing the Rifter, this was probably only because it was piloted by a relatively new pilot and had meta mods fit.

So I recorded my artillery's tracking speed and went to work with a beam-kite Executioner, and looking at the numbers it would suffer the exact same problem. The conclusion? Long-range small turrets have too poor of tracking to keep up with the recently buffed T1 "attack" frigates' speed. And this is why we see more Condors engaging in high-speed kite fits and no other "attack" frigates doing the same.

CCP, aren't you concerned with how very easy it is to kite in a Condor but not in a Slasher, Executioner, or Atron? Why can only one race's T1 "attack" frigates engage in longpoint kiting with such ease?


The problem with turrets in general- is this:

Long range turrets are simply not viable for small gang / solo pvp. The tracking and fitting is just so bad that your weapon system becomes unplayable. That is where short range turrets come in. They have the tracking to still be effective- and with old TE's could still be some what usable when applying damage.

Personally I think that CCP needs to introduce three turrets for each race. A 'short range' a 'medium range' and 'long range'

Currently the medium range turrets are simply bastardized versions of the short range. So much of a ships fitting room is poured into making a short range turret that is effective at a medium range. CCP should take a step back from extremes ie. blaster / rail and auto / arty and create some type of middile ground. This would help small gang and solo players, as well as possibly making more ships viable / playable will different fitting styles.
Gargantoi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#991 - 2013-04-26 01:14:03 UTC
Serenety Steel wrote:
If it aint broke, DON'T fix it!


Way to nerf some more stuff, well done ccp..




agreed with this ...vagabond + cynabal will be ****** to begin with barelly have 450 dps now the range will go down say goodbye autocannons also a lot of sniping ships like naga / maesltrom / rokh will suffer from this ..u want to make fleet fights from 150km to 90 km ? srsly leave the TE how they are frozzie srsly u are usless somethimes insteed of nerfing things all the time by "Balancing them" i guess when u added scripts was also a boost when u killed arazu , in 2008 an arazu would **** u up with dampners ..now all arazu pilots use shield buff + warp dis / warp scram and thats that no dampners gg scripts ..then on to sensor boosters insteed of fitting 1 sbo on your sniping bs now u got to go with 2 or 3 cuz u need scripts waste more med slots ...since i started playing this game in 2007 i swear to god u guys killed it badlly ..u **** things up then introduce new things then when that is also to ****** up u sudenly do a "balance" to undo the ******* u just did unfortunatlly u end up by making it even worse by your mentality everybody should fly officer fitted ships because the remote variants are to close to those stats ..u dont take into consideration that someone has to use an alt for that someone pays an account to actually remote sensor boost someone wastes time and money to do that ..but is easy to have the nerf hammer and press it and again ..all the feedback u get is from people who didnt get out of empire or they rat 24/7 and there best pvp is when they take on a lvl 4 mission
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#992 - 2013-04-26 14:12:17 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
  • TEs and TCs give double bonuses to Falloff compared to Optimal, but rigs and implants give the same bonuses. Why not change those?
    • This is something we do have on our radar, although I can't say for sure exactly when we'll be adjusting it. When we do I can't guarentee that it will be doubling the bonus, we may decide on a different multipler and unify the effects at that level.

    Personally I'm not sure this is the right way to go - as I said earlier in the thread I don't know why the optimal bonuses are being taken below their pre-boost levels in order to compensate for issues which seem to be entirely related to short ranged weapons and falloff.

    And what is the point of modifying the TEs so heavily if a modification to rigs, which provides a greater weight to falloff, then returns things to the way they are anyway?
    Gargantoi
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #993 - 2013-04-26 15:11:42 UTC
    Jacob Holland wrote:
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
  • TEs and TCs give double bonuses to Falloff compared to Optimal, but rigs and implants give the same bonuses. Why not change those?
    • This is something we do have on our radar, although I can't say for sure exactly when we'll be adjusting it. When we do I can't guarentee that it will be doubling the bonus, we may decide on a different multipler and unify the effects at that level.

    Personally I'm not sure this is the right way to go - as I said earlier in the thread I don't know why the optimal bonuses are being taken below their pre-boost levels in order to compensate for issues which seem to be entirely related to short ranged weapons and falloff.

    And what is the point of modifying the TEs so heavily if a modification to rigs, which provides a greater weight to falloff, then returns things to the way they are anyway?



    why change something if it doesent need to be change so far everything works based on tracking enhanters + rigs for faloff / optimal foozie u should come up with something constructive ..we already got problems with minmatar bs's ...tempest has 500 dps as a cruiser now u wanna kill the whole race with the tracking enhanters think ccp should move u to a diferent section u not constructive and good at "balancing" for u a balance is a nerf is like me going to wow and trying to "balance" **** there i got no clue about how it works or how it is applyed ..u should see how crap minmatar will be after this ....and how it will affect all ships also
    Streya Jormagdnir
    Alexylva Paradox
    #994 - 2013-04-26 15:52:52 UTC
    Chessur wrote:

    The problem with turrets in general- is this:

    Long range turrets are simply not viable for small gang / solo pvp. The tracking and fitting is just so bad that your weapon system becomes unplayable. That is where short range turrets come in. They have the tracking to still be effective- and with old TE's could still be some what usable when applying damage.

    Personally I think that CCP needs to introduce three turrets for each race. A 'short range' a 'medium range' and 'long range'

    Currently the medium range turrets are simply bastardized versions of the short range. So much of a ships fitting room is poured into making a short range turret that is effective at a medium range. CCP should take a step back from extremes ie. blaster / rail and auto / arty and create some type of middile ground. This would help small gang and solo players, as well as possibly making more ships viable / playable will different fitting styles.


    See, I have no problem using up most of my fitting to slap on "medium" range turrets, since I fly faster kite ships which tend not to have tank anyway. The problem I'm seeing with this nerf is that now we'll be forced to either snipe outside of point range OR brawl, at least if you fly solo.

    Solo is already hard enough, which is why so many solo PvPers tend towards kiting so they can always disengage when the blob starts coming. With this TE nerf things will be a bit more difficult; I won't say "solo/smallgang PvP will die" because missiles are completely and entirely unaffected by this nerf as well as TDs, but why should solo/smallgang PvPers be forced to use only missiles to be effective?

    If I had to suggest anything, yes CCP go ahead and nerf TEs, but allow them to be scripted like TCs to retain some performance. And for the love of all that is pixelated please look over the imbalance in performance between turrets and missiles. While it is true that missiles are not often found in huge fleets because they take time to reach a target, they are amazing in smaller fleets or for solo since one need not worry about their tracking or range being TD'd.

    I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.

    Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever
    Alexander Nebula
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #995 - 2013-04-26 21:37:19 UTC
    I feel sorry for the people that have years vested in this gameSad I just started, thank God! From the mass of opinions stated, I agree it is dumbing down the game. As a NOOB Min I started out with the Hurricane nerfs and now this. I huddle in terror to think what is next. I do think there is a disconnect with the programmers and the actual consumer. I was looking forward to just defending wormholes with 210ish days training. I thank CCP for letting me know ahead of time of these changes so I can un-sub and look at this game a few years in the future when all the nerfs are done and things have settled down. It's extremely hard to train for anything with stuff changing for the worse. So, with much ado, I will regrettably return to my free to play games in which I expect such such things, not pay for bad newsit seems every month. This isn't a rage quit, since I haven't did much other than train and buy plex from CCP. They seem not to want my business, oh well. I don't feel the need to renew my sub either Cool With pay games there needs to be an economic statement of our disapproval. Thanks to all the pilots that gave me advice, No hard feelings, just time to move on before I train for 6 months only to be disappointed.
    Gargantoi
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #996 - 2013-04-30 20:10:23 UTC
    Alexander Nebula wrote:
    I feel sorry for the people that have years vested in this gameSad I just started, thank God! From the mass of opinions stated, I agree it is dumbing down the game. As a NOOB Min I started out with the Hurricane nerfs and now this. I huddle in terror to think what is next. I do think there is a disconnect with the programmers and the actual consumer. I was looking forward to just defending wormholes with 210ish days training. I thank CCP for letting me know ahead of time of these changes so I can un-sub and look at this game a few years in the future when all the nerfs are done and things have settled down. It's extremely hard to train for anything with stuff changing for the worse. So, with much ado, I will regrettably return to my free to play games in which I expect such such things, not pay for bad newsit seems every month. This isn't a rage quit, since I haven't did much other than train and buy plex from CCP. They seem not to want my business, oh well. I don't feel the need to renew my sub either Cool With pay games there needs to be an economic statement of our disapproval. Thanks to all the pilots that gave me advice, No hard feelings, just time to move on before I train for 6 months only to be disappointed.




    Tell me about it bro ******* we pay subscription and they **** us up ..again i say this tracking enhanter nerf is stupid as **** insteed of nerfing actually do yourself a favor and start boosting the faction tracking enhanters to give optimal + faloff bonus rather then just +1 more to tracking and a price tag of 150 m for that 1% u nerf it and kill minmatar as a race ...is simple as **** even a 5 year old can understand ...minmatar turret ships except sleipnir / maelstrom cant tank ...since they cant tank they use speed as advantage ..since thats the point of minmatar ..speed ...now ..speed is good but to hit your target even on a vaga u need at least 1 tracking enhanter ...vaga / cynabal already have crap dps applyed @ 20 km with curent tracking enhangers ...by nerfing them u will reduce them to have like what ..200 dps ? even a daredevil deals more dmg not to mention ..u cant engage arazu + proteus ...u get scrambled u go bye bye ..u cant engage a bs ..heavy neut on you = bye bye u cant even engage frigates anymore cuz the faloff would be so fail u cant kite it down before it enters its optimal scram range so fozzie again i tell u leave the tracking enhanters as they are ..they worked since day 1 they were in the game ..i understand u guys wanna make the game a blob fest ..but people dont like that they dont wanna fly blob vs blob some people like to solo and since u killed that 5 years ago with the nano age ...basicly the only reason why solo "works" is cuz of range + speed ..killing range ..speed will be usless since warp scram disables mwd...at 1 point in the future u guys will wake up and see that the only people who actually play r isk farmers / macro miners and new players who like shinny effects but the old brigade will just move on 2003-2007 chars wasted cuz u guys do stupid nerfs that u think "r good"
    Perihelion Olenard
    #997 - 2013-04-30 20:24:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
    Holy crap, Gargantoi. Your wall of text is a massive eyesore. People will read what you have to say if you put forth the effort to make that readable.
    Gargantoi
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #998 - 2013-05-01 18:11:51 UTC
    Perihelion Olenard wrote:
    Holy crap, Gargantoi. Your wall of text is a massive eyesore. People will read what you have to say if you put forth the effort to make that readable.



    Do Not Nerf Tracking Enhanters !
    Chessur
    Full Broadside
    Deepwater Hooligans
    #999 - 2013-05-01 20:55:57 UTC
    Streya Jormagdnir wrote:
    Chessur wrote:

    The problem with turrets in general- is this:

    Long range turrets are simply not viable for small gang / solo pvp. The tracking and fitting is just so bad that your weapon system becomes unplayable. That is where short range turrets come in. They have the tracking to still be effective- and with old TE's could still be some what usable when applying damage.

    Personally I think that CCP needs to introduce three turrets for each race. A 'short range' a 'medium range' and 'long range'

    Currently the medium range turrets are simply bastardized versions of the short range. So much of a ships fitting room is poured into making a short range turret that is effective at a medium range. CCP should take a step back from extremes ie. blaster / rail and auto / arty and create some type of middile ground. This would help small gang and solo players, as well as possibly making more ships viable / playable will different fitting styles.


    See, I have no problem using up most of my fitting to slap on "medium" range turrets, since I fly faster kite ships which tend not to have tank anyway. The problem I'm seeing with this nerf is that now we'll be forced to either snipe outside of point range OR brawl, at least if you fly solo.

    Solo is already hard enough, which is why so many solo PvPers tend towards kiting so they can always disengage when the blob starts coming. With this TE nerf things will be a bit more difficult; I won't say "solo/smallgang PvP will die" because missiles are completely and entirely unaffected by this nerf as well as TDs, but why should solo/smallgang PvPers be forced to use only missiles to be effective?

    If I had to suggest anything, yes CCP go ahead and nerf TEs, but allow them to be scripted like TCs to retain some performance. And for the love of all that is pixelated please look over the imbalance in performance between turrets and missiles. While it is true that missiles are not often found in huge fleets because they take time to reach a target, they are amazing in smaller fleets or for solo since one need not worry about their tracking or range being TD'd.


    I fly a ton of small gang / solo as well. Kiting is really the only way to play if you have any hope of surviving the blob. We all know eve is PvPPPPPPPP. I don't have a problem flying lightly tanked kiting setups, but I do have a problem when the lightly tanked setups- even with tons of mods to help with damage and projection... Still cannot project or apply damage in any meaningful way. I agree with your post 100% RLM missiles are the wave of the future for solo / small gang. ECM and recons are just so punishing to the small gang / solo having a weapon system that can disregards ECM, TD's, and damps is nice. THe only turrets worth while for solo / small gang is large autos, blasters, pulse, or medium pulse. That is likerally it. There is no weapon system + hull combination that makes any other medium gun superior to pulse, and medium blasters have no range.

    The reason when I feel so strongly about the proposed TE nerf- is the fact that you are now flying under an unbonused TD. Damage is becoming anemic, and a single unbonused TD used against the new TE"s are going to shut you down so completely- things are just going to get stupid. As you stated- either fit useless long range weapon systesm (rail, arty, beam) and fail to track anything- or brawl. And we all know what happens when you brawl, you get blobbed, ECM'd and dead in 10 seconds.

    CCP please do not nerf TE's as a round about way of fixing mini ships. They are already bad- because autos already struggle to project any type of damage in the first place.
    Shade Alidiana
    PROSPERO Corporation
    #1000 - 2013-05-02 01:28:17 UTC
    Although I like TE + TC combination, this change looks more or less reasonable. Low slot modules should be worse than mid slot ones, yes... But as an arty hurricane pilot, I'd still like to have full lock optimal with tremors (call me mad at this, I'm trying to keep at optimal to apply my damage).
    Someone mentioned projectiles' huge alpha? Well, this is +- compensated with generally low tracking IMO. Still too many misses and weak hits...
    And if we speak about ammo and picking damage, I'd love something for primarily kinetic (not titanium). Forced to use mostly plasma rounds...