These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Information Center » EVE Information Portal » New dev blog: Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing

Topic is locked indefinitely.

First pagePrevious page3334353637Next pageLast page

New dev blog: Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing First post First post
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

Hex'Caliber

The Scope

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 0

#681 - 2011-11-02 11:11:11 UTC

Moonaura wrote:

Thanks for looking at this balancing CCP Tallest.

TL;DR Rokh and Eagle don't do enough DPS with Blasters

This change isn't about a couple of marginal caldari boats, it's about fixing an entire race so they have a part to play.

Not one Gallente combat boat stands out in its group as being better than other races in its class. Currently, in every respect Gallente are also ran's, with ships from other races better able to fulfil X role. Hell even the rokh is a far better rail boat than anything Gallente currently have, and its our primary weapons platform.

Smoking Blunts

ZC Omega

Likes received: 729

#682 - 2011-11-02 11:21:03 UTC

so i have a toon with 15mil sp's only in hybrids. i was looking forward to them getting attention. but these changes do not go far enough and certainly do not fix them
dps of blasters is still low and dosnt make up for the time taken to get into range.
range is still bad.

make them good at 1 thing pls. not **** at 2 things.

so either push there damage up to make up for the getting into range problem
or give them more range.
also please look at null and void, faction ammo shouldnt be the only option that makes sence, there should be a reason to use t2 ammo above faction

fake edit. fix the ******* forums also, what a pile of **** these are

OMG when can i get a pic here

Merende Macaco

Tranquility Tavern

Pandemic Horde

Likes received: 25

#683 - 2011-11-02 11:47:47 UTC | Edited by: Merende Macaco

Dog ate my reply so trying again (fix yer forums dammit).

As a Gallente who flies almost exclusively Minmatar these days i agree with the proposed changes.

I am a proponent of the shotgun blasters role -
Keep range very short (better optimal, less falloff)
Tracking improvements work
Higher damage at close range with a sig radius penalty to avoid being OP against tackle

Blasters should be a pvp thing - mission runners can fit the new improved rails and deploy drones.

Possible gallente ship fixes aside from speed to address the range issue:
Increased web or scram range
Shorter minimum warp range (but have it increase cap use dramatically)

Sizeof Void

Ninja Suicide Squadron

Likes received: 642

#684 - 2011-11-02 11:56:16 UTC

Hex'Caliber wrote:

Drone boats? The Domi is one of the oldest ships in the game, and still one of the most flexible and difficult-to-anticipate ships in PVP. Even after the speed nerf, the Ishtar is still among the best HACs. And, the Ishkur is one of the best solo PVP boats in the frigate-sized class. I'm pretty certain that many people consider the Vexor and Myrmidon to be very effective in PVP, within their class of ships.

Taranis is also considered, by many, to be the best solo PVP interceptor, even with the currently-gimped blasters.

Dunmur

Tempered Logic

Likes received: 27

#685 - 2011-11-02 11:59:41 UTC

Sizeof Void wrote:

Tiger's Spirit wrote:

But dont forget the most important things. If CCP dont fix blasters just using this weak fix, they wont change them again for other 3 years long. We waiting so much time for fix, and we need a real solution for blaster fix or we would be waiting for another 3 years.
Keep them under pressure. Give to CCP good and useable ideas or they wont fix fine the hybrid guns with this halfway measures.

This is an unsubstantiated statement. Have you been told by CCP that no further adjustments will be made to hybrids for another 3 years?

No, I didn't think so.

Please get your head out of the past and stop judging CCP on what they did or did not do before.

CCP has demonstrated its renewed commitment to to FiS and esp. to addressing long outstanding issues, while downsizing efforts/resources for WiS. This is not just idle rumor or speculation - the publicly released Winter Expansion plans, followup devblogs, and company restructuring completely support this change in CCP's attitude/direction.

Back on topic, we don't need yet another one-time fix, such as the mothership->supercarrier "fix". We need an ongoing cycle of tweaks to stats, in-game evaluation and feedback - in order to achieve an actual balance of various complex game elements and mechanics.

I don't agree

They need to prove they have changed over time, otherwise it is fair judge based on past actions. Doing a 180 on WIS to FIS is NOT proof that they will be doing more frequent balance changes. These changes are so useless they might as well not be there for all the good they will do. We have waited 3 years for balance and THIS is all we get, 20 percent tracking for blasters and 10 percent dps for rails is akin to throwing a piece of bread to a starving man he may shut up for the moment but he will still be hungery after hes done.

If you want a ongoing cycle how bout thus they should do a one time fix now and tone it down little by little if its op. I say thats a hell of alot better than being useless for the next 2-3 years (5-6 years total) while they oh so very slowly buff hybrids

Sizeof Void

Ninja Suicide Squadron

Likes received: 642

#686 - 2011-11-02 12:23:37 UTC

Dunmur wrote:

They need to prove they have changed over time, otherwise it is fair judge based on past actions. Doing a 180 on WIS to FIS is NOT proof that they will be doing more frequent balance changes.

This sort of thinking is so lol. The single biggest complaint by players was WIS vs FIS. No one really expected CCP to actually capitulate on this issue, even during the meltdown weekend this summer. But, they did - and now you say that it isn't good enough. lol.

To use your analogy, this is like giving a steak to a starving man, then having him demand steak sauce.

Dunmur wrote:

If you want a ongoing cycle how bout thus they should do a one time fix now and tone it down little by little if its op.

You must mean like the mothership buff, right? I seem to recall that this issue was the second biggest complaint by players.

Dunmur wrote:

I say thats a hell of alot better than being useless for the next 2-3 years (5-6 years total) while they oh so very slowly buff hybrids

Tell you what, you pull up a copy of CCP's 2-3 year plan for rebalancing hybrids, and then we can talk. If CCP says that they do not plan to take another look at hybrids for at least another year, then, your argument has merit.

Tiger's Spirit

Templars of the Shadows

Likes received: 141

#687 - 2011-11-02 13:02:07 UTC | Edited by: Tiger's Spirit

Dunmur wrote:

Sizeof Void wrote:

Tiger's Spirit wrote:

Just dont feed Sizeof Void troll with his CCP roadmap or plan idea.
We know CCP promised so many things, as walking in station in 2009 year, or new gui in 2010 or other things what is did not come true yet, but passed 3 or 4 years and still happened nothing. So plan-roadmap is nothing.

Anything else. I agree with your answer. We wrote many ideas for hybrid fixes to CCP and to the CSM forum section. Just check Assembly Hall: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1203311
But nothing happened at least 3 years long. Now when finaly CCP trying to fix the hybrid guns , we got a far from a fine solution changes. We know that they want to forget drones, becaused they dont like them and drones create lag in the game, but gallente advantages was the plus drone damage and huge damage from guns from short distances. (so, CCP dont wanna give drone buffs anymore when fix gallente ships, just check supcap drone nerfs or moros changes)
Gallente ships lost after speed/web/agility nerf their advantages, need solution to a good balance for them. Year to year guns got + damages from implants, from rigs, but drones got just nerfbat. (no damage implants, no damage rigs just for sentries,hammerhead tracking nerf,bandwith nerf,drone number nerf,myrmi,eos,moros drone nerfs)
It's time to compensate the gallente drone nerfs with fine hybrid boost if they dont want to buff drones and want to forget them.

When CCP make this fix, we dont want to wait after patch more three years again, when blaster wont working fine. SoonTM wont change their fixes again when their ideas will implement to the game. They will just change then only when those changes too overpowered and need nerf as Supercarriers which is ruined all 0.0 fights. They needed more than 1 year for just a supcap balance, which made crap their main 0.0battle zones. So many times we waited years, when they created an unbalanced module or ships. We dont want this anymore.

I think, that's better when they create an overpowered hybrid platform and balancing them after 8 months later, than we waiting three years again when they creating a bad or weak changes for hybrid guns now.

Tanya Powers

Doomheim

Likes received: 2,092

#688 - 2011-11-02 13:29:23 UTC

Tiger's Spirit wrote:

Dunmur wrote:

Sizeof Void wrote:

Tiger's Spirit wrote:

Moonaura

The Dead Rabbit Society

Likes received: 591

#689 - 2011-11-02 13:48:17 UTC | Edited by: Moonaura

Hex'Caliber wrote:

Moonaura wrote:

Thanks for looking at this balancing CCP Tallest.

TL;DR Rokh and Eagle don't do enough DPS with Blasters

I whole heartily agree it is not about two boats, but overall about bringing Hybrids in line with other weapon types - the changes look solid in that respect. But it is also about balance in EvE overall and my feeling, and the feeling of many others, is even when that is all said and done, both the Rokh and Eagle will still be unused and unloved, even with the Hybrid balances.

Here is the Rokh description:

Quote:

Having long suffered the lack of an adequate hybrid platform, the Caldari State's capsule pilots found themselves rejoicing as the Rokh's design specs were released. A fleet vessel if ever there was one, this far-reaching and durable beast is expected to see a great deal of service on battlefields near and far.
Special Ability: 10% large hybrid optimal range per level and 5% shield resistance per level

When was the last time the Rokh was considered a fleet vessel? And when did any Caldari pilots rejoice over the Rokh? And it certainly hasn't see a great deal of service on any battlefields near... only occasionally far ;-)

Essentially, The Rokh and the Eagle are one trick ponies, which undermines the whole point of being able to swap fits for different fleet types, and that feels a shame given it's potential tank when setup for close range.

While it is a great snipe boat, granted, in shield gangs, it is now Minmitar shield battleships or bust, given their potential alpha and fitting flexibility, why would a decent FC want Rokh's in his fleet setup? And given that fleets are sniping at the maximum range of Minmitar ships (about a third less than the Rokh's range potential) it's lack of DPS even makes it a poor option for snipe fleets.

As it stands and will continue to be without specific ship blaster DPS bonuses, both the Rokh and Eagle can only really be considered useful for extreme long range and will not see real use outside of snipe fleets. My suggestion is that they get a bonus to Blaster DPS, not Rails, to give them that fitting flexibility, and while they should never be as good at DPS as a Megathron or Minmitar battleships, they should at least be a bit closer, while still comparably weaker due to the range bonus they receive.

And while I agree that Gallente aren't setup for Rail guns particularly well, they also have a unique advantage in very high DPS, excellent tracking bonuses, unique race drone bonuses, faster speed, and larger buffer tank potential, which is why you still see so many Megathrons in use, even with the current state of Hybrids. I get what you are saying about Megathron's not being ideal for Rail sniping, but they are at least pretty close to Minmitar artillery in terms of DPS and range.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine." - CCP t0rfifrans

Ponder Yonder

Strategic Exploration and Development Corp

Silent Company

Likes received: 85

#690 - 2011-11-02 14:01:49 UTC | Edited by: Ponder Yonder

The buffs are good, but the main remaining issue with blasterboats is the fact that they cannot get into range to apply the superiour damage.

My solution: Gallente blasterboats get a racial bonus of 10% per level to the overheating bonus of MWD and AB.

Thus, a max skilled pilot will get a 75% speed boost from overheating a MWD or AB, rather than the normal 50%. This gives the ship the chance to get into range, but not much more.

Affected ships are dedicated blasterboats only:
Incursus
Enyo
Catalyst
Thorax
Deimos
Brutix
Megathron

This is a good solution, because:
1. It only applies to blaster boats
2. It fixes a specific problem, without breaking racial roles, i.e. Minmater will still be faster in a straight line over time.
3. It provides a bonus, speed, for the risk of burning the mod.
4. It rewards skilled players
5. It makes blasterboats very dangerous but requires trained and skilled pilots.

Creat Posudol

German Oldies

Likes received: 68

#691 - 2011-11-02 14:22:30 UTC

Sizeof Void wrote:

Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.

The real problem with Gallente ships has been the combined high PG reqs of both hybrid guns and armor plates, which made balancing gank vs tank difficult. In addition, after the previous across-the-board speed rebalancing, Gallente ships were running a bit too slow, due to the speed/agility penalty from armor plates and armor rigs.

The proposed reduction in PG reqs for hybrid guns means that many of the Gallente blaster ships will be able to fit a full rack of higher grade guns, while maintaining the same amount of tank - ie. instead of electron blasters, you can now fit ion blasters. This is equivalent to giving a massive damage buff to both blasters and railguns. For example, upgrading from T2 medium electron blasters to T2 medium ion blasters, is a 60% boost in damage. Railguns get an additional 10% damage buff, on top of the ability fo upgrade to higher grade guns - from the old T2 350mm rails to the new T2 425mm rails, we're talking about a 50% boost in damage. So, what are you complaining about?

However, the PG reduction is even better than a simple damage buff. Why? Because you can also opt to keep the same gank, and use the extra PG to upgrade your tank instead.

For example, the PG req for an 400mm plate is 30, whereas the PG req for an 800mm plate is 200. In many cases, due to the high PG of the hybrid guns, Gallente ships have been a bit short on PG for the 800mm plate and thus forced to use the 400mm plate. Now, with the lower PG of the guns, you will be able to upgrade many ships to the 800mm plate, which has 100% more armor HP than the 400mm plate. So, armor tanking gets a bit of love out of this hybrid rebalance, too.

But, we don't stop here. Currently, if you want a beefer armor tank, you might opt to use two (2) 400mm plates, or one (1) 800mm plate + RC/PDS module or ACR rig (to boost the PG). The reduction of the gun PG reqs means that you will be able to fit the single 800mm plate, without a PG upgrade, to get the identical tank. This effectively frees up either a low slot or a rig slot - which can be used for an additional damage mod/rig, a tanking mod/rig, or even a speed mod/rig. Yeah, baby!

Next, the buff to Gallente ship max velocity/agility helps to take the edge off of the armor plate penalty. For example, the Incursus (new speed 344 m/s) is now only a hair slower than the Rifter (353 m/s), and likely more agile. With faster tracking blasters, the upgraded Incursus just might be the new FOTM for solo PvP frigs... hmm.

And, finally, the substantial reduction in cap use of the hybrid guns reduces the need for cap rechargers, cap boosters, nosferatus, and CCC rigs. Again, we''re talking about freeing up mod/rig slots which can be used to improve gank, tank, or speed.

I've had this reply open for 2 days but only now have the time to reply to it. I just want to avoid anyone blindly buying these statements (even though it was back on page 15)...

First of all, Neutrons may be harder to fit at the moment, but they aren't unused (far from it actually). So anything you suggest about getting a damage advantage from the PG (or even CPU) requirement reduction only applies to fits that don't already use them. Those may be able to fit a bit more tank though, which blaster boats obviously need very much to survive long enough to even start causing any damage in the first place.

For top-grade rails the fitting requirements are (were?) much more of an issue in my opinion, but those do NOT provide a significant damage advantage over their smaller versions. Their distinguishing attribute is range! Higher grade rails have significantly higher optimals, but the damage barely increases. This is especially true if you include the reload time, since the internal ammo storage halves for every step up in size/grade. This leaves (T2) small and medium rails with about 1 dps advantage (around 3-5%) for each bigger size on a hybrid bonused platform, and about 2 dps for larges (about 5%). Even with the 10% damage increase this is really FAR away from the 50% increase you suggested. More like 15% at best...

Which brings me to my next point: the reduced fitting requirements will not allow you to go up a grade for your guns. It puts the new requirements close to the midpoint between the current requirements. Let's look at T2 425s and large T2 neutrons requirements after the change in relation to the current requirements of 425s and 350s, neutrons and ions respectively.
Currently:

425s: 2625

350s: 1969

L-T2 Neutrons: 2363

L-T2 Ions: 1838

New values according to the blog: 425s @ 2310; T2 Neutron @ 2079
This puts the new 425s PG requirement on the 52% spot between current 425s and 250, neutrons land on 46% between current neutrons and ion. Similar results for the next step down, calculate it yourself :P
So any fit that doesn't use the highest grade guns already can now do so only by reducing the tank (if it had that much free PG it was a really REALLY bad fit).

All the statements about how the fitting changes can be used to improve the tank are of course valid, even though I haven't checked any numbers myself...

19
OOooole Likes received: 19	#692 - 2011-11-02 14:48:06 UTC 1 aahaha I understand ccp now this is just scared helloween joke real balance coming in 2015 bye bye maybe i com back whe we boost black ops Account Expires 18 January 2012 - 1:38 pm (in 4 days)

Vrykolakasis

Sparrowhawks Corp

Likes received: 107

#693 - 2011-11-02 15:04:14 UTC

Looking at a lot of the responses since I last checked in, I'm still not sure I agree that these changes are insufficient. I think it would be interesting for blasters to gain even more dps at extremely close range, but I'm not positive that it's necessary. We have to remember that this buff isn't about making hybrids AWESOMEtm, but about making them approximately as useful (different roles, etc assumed) as the other weapon types.

I still do agree, however, that the Rokh and Hyperion, especially the Rokh, should become useful ships. The other r3 battleships are really great, and they're made by the duct tape kings and a bunch of bible thumpers. You'd think the State and the Federation could do better, if not at least equally as good.

thoth rothschild

Aliastra

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 78

#694 - 2011-11-02 15:08:42 UTC | Edited by: thoth rothschild

After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be

=> minmatar with hybrids and gallente with projectiles.
(Giving Aretha the rifle and Bolt the shotgun)

The minmatar playstile (Shield&Speed) would perfectly fit with blasters. hit hard and run ... While gallente (Armor Tank) likes the range control which projectiles do provide. Easy fix.

Whoever had the idea to give armor tanks short range weapons should receive a falcepalm.
To be fair, in the beginning Ships like the Thorax had a function like the modern cynaball but that is long long in the past....


OOooole Likes received: 19	#695 - 2011-11-02 15:17:28 UTC thoth rothschild wrote: After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be . ccp must start using memory augementation - improved cybernetic subprocessor - improved social adaptation chip - improved bye bye maybe i com back whe we boost black ops Account Expires 18 January 2012 - 1:38 pm (in 4 days)

Vincent Gaines

Deep Core Mining Inc.

Caldari State

Likes received: 595

#696 - 2011-11-02 15:49:25 UTC | Edited by: Vincent Gaines

thoth rothschild wrote:

After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be

=> minmatar with hybrids and gallente with projectiles.

The minmatar playstile (Shield&Speed) would perfetly fit with blasters. fast in hit hard and hide again. While gallente (Armor Tank) definitly likes the control of aerea from projectiles. Easy fix.

Whoever had the idea giving short range weapons to armor tanks should be hung, drawned and quartered.
To be fair, in the beginning Ships like the Thorax had a function like the cynaball nowadays but that is long long in the past....

Really, that's so off the wall outlandish it actually makes sense. Shame it's one of those things that should have been done from inception and would be hard to change so much lore and content.

I present your post with a like, sir.

Not a diplo.

The above post was edited for spelling.

Grady Eltoren

Hogyoku

Likes received: 85

#697 - 2011-11-02 15:53:45 UTC

Jane Idoka wrote:

Celebris Nexterra wrote:

Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.

You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!

And you tell me this is fair?

+1 for giving Aretha Franklin a shotgun... Cool

Quoted because it is one of the funniest things I have read in days. Epic win :)

Dravidshky

Falling Outside The Normal Moral Constraints

Likes received: 6

#698 - 2011-11-02 15:58:21 UTC

Max Von Sydow wrote:

Reilly Duvolle wrote:

Now, a speedboost certainly is a good start, but you cant make Gallente ships faster than minmatar without breaking the lore.

Then let them make new lore, cant they say that some gallente engineer have designed a new superior propulsion system for gallente ships that make them faster but less agile than minmatar ships?

Exactly my opinion.

Kumq uat

Aliastra

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 176

#699 - 2011-11-02 16:16:59 UTC

Tracking and fitting were issues but so is damage. Currently blasters have barely any DPS edge over AC without the range, versatility, capless firing, ammo size, customizable damage, escapability, etc that AC's and Minmatar have.

As a blaster pilot you plow into the center of the battle and commit yourself 100% and subject yourself to all the scrams, drones, neuts, webs, etc. The blasters have pitiful range. They barely out damage AC's even in the optimal of that range and because of the range they need to be in they require tons more tracking. Add to the fact that blasters in their hay day were also combined with things like a Thorax launching 7 heavy drones. Then CCP buffed HP on all ship hulls. Then came rigs which buffed EHP even more. Then the other weapon systems got boosted. Blasters no longer were TOTALHELLDEATH if you came in range of them.

The changes are a first step but they are hardly enough. There needs to be not a range bonus or speed but a massive DPS and tracking boost to make them acceptable for the risk of flying straight into a fleet and committing 100% to the battle with no hope of escape. That is the Gallente way and IT WILL BE GLORIOUS!

Creat Posudol

German Oldies

Likes received: 68

#700 - 2011-11-02 16:26:47 UTC | Edited by: Creat Posudol

I'm still reading the thread, and am currently back on page 25, but I'd rather post now than wait till I've read it all and nobody cares anymore.

Many propose or support giving Gallente blaster boats a web bonus (I suppose implemented as a role bonus). I'm against this, as it would be sort of special treatment to compensate for earlier changes (web nerf) instead of adapting the ships/guns to the way things are now. It might be hard to explain to newer players (who haven't been around for the web nerf) why only Gallente boats get a role bonus and nobody else. Also don't forget that the web nerf came together with the "scram turn off mwd"-change. This would mean nobody who came close to any such ship would have a chance in hell to get away. Close range should be their domain, but there still needs to be a counter (like using speed mods to be able to escape). Currently anyone basically can escape without needing to have such a counter, which also isn't a solution of course. But otherwise webs and afterburners pretty much balance each other out (1 web negates 1 ab), they wouldn't then.
Also keep in mind that the web bonus only helps if they can get into web range in the first place.

As I've already hinted in an earlier post there is another way to approach this while keeping the racial features and distinctions. That would be to make Gallente noticeably faster than even Minmatar, but reduce (nerf) agility also significantly. This would mean they are faster in a straight line but much slower once they start orbiting (or turning in general). Minmatar are still the agile and nimble flyers, can orbit Gallente but have a much harder time keeping out of blaster range (or getting away). It's still possible but requires pilot skill and maneuvers, not just pressing "orbit" and not just flying away in a straight line (Gallente will just catch up).
This could be balanced so that current ships still orbit and approx. the same speed they do now (with no speed/agility mods) at or near the optimal range of their blasters. This is to ensure smaller ships become neither cannon fodder nor unhittable for bigger ships. Obviously this would

A reversal in railgun damage progression has also been proposed. Make the closer ranged variants capable of higher DPS than the long ranged ones. This is in fact a great idea and would give the smaller rails an additional advantage other than just a bit of tracking.

A lot of the discussion is focused on PVP, but please don't completely forget PVE in the process. Yea the racial differences are more apparent during PVP, but that doesn't mean all is well in the PVE world. The proposed changes do pretty much nothing to address the insufficiencies there. There has already been a great post about the usability (or lack there of) for Gallente ships in incursions here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=286154#post286154
Let me paraphrase: Proteus is the only T3 that is basically useless in incursions and wormholes. Medium Pulses and ACs can hit Sanshas in Vanguards, medium Blasters can't really. Not even close. Not even with Null. Even battleships (or marauders) have trouble compared to pulses and ACs and effectively need to use Null. I don't even know how to fix this without breaking the Gallente fighting style, which sadly isn't an option for these encounters. The only thing I can think of is to reduce the orbiting distance of the sanshas/sleepers. Maybe give a significant boost to Null? As has been pointed out many times it provides far smaller bonuses (in %) than the equivalent laser/projectile ammo, leading to an even smaller increase (since the range is much shorter to begin with).

First pagePrevious page3334353637Next pageLast page