These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1021 - 2013-05-12 16:36:27 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Will there be module rebalancing part two?


Well we've already announced the large energy turrets and cruise missile changes. But we're working on part four (and probably five) now.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Alexander the Great
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1022 - 2013-05-12 16:43:39 UTC
You still didn't answer if you're going to look at Tracking Link as part of this change. Bonuses from remote assistance module should be better than from Tracking Computer.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1023 - 2013-05-12 16:47:07 UTC
Alexander the Great wrote:
You still didn't answer if you're going to look at Tracking Link as part of this change. Bonuses from remote assistance module should be better than from Tracking Computer.


Not as a part of this change, although I definitely won't rule out future changes.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1024 - 2013-05-12 17:09:01 UTC
torp changes/explosion radius changes plox

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1025 - 2013-05-12 18:49:21 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
torp changes/explosion radius changes plox


ammo volume and cpu usage plox
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1026 - 2013-05-13 06:22:05 UTC
Has CCP ever addressed why TEs should give double the bonus to falloff that they do to optimal?

To me it seems just like more love for Minmatar, and I thought they didn't want them to be "Winmatar" anymore (while also not being a pathetic Minmatard loser race)
Rholak Khardula
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1027 - 2013-05-13 09:00:49 UTC
The real problem isn't TE's are OP, the real problem is Projectiles uses a different set of math than other turrets.

I have tested this with friends in game, they can hit for perfect damage at max falloff, they can track faster than the game says they should. So much so that when you fly something else, like Amarr, you count falloff as part of your range only to find you do almost no damage past Optimal. While with autocannons falloff is counted just like optimal.

When 425's can track a scepter orbiting you at .78 Transversal, but your guns say they can only track at .15 something is not adding up..

I am almost a pure Minmatar Pilot, I love Autocannons, but even I say they don't follow the same rules as other turrets. Before you hurt EVERYONE, by nerfing a module (which Blasters use the Op/Fall range bonus more than Autos) How about going back and looking at the code that controls projectiles, and see what's broke in it.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#1028 - 2013-05-13 09:35:13 UTC
Rholak Khardula wrote:
The real problem isn't TE's are OP, the real problem is Projectiles uses a different set of math than other turrets.

I have tested this with friends in game, they can hit for perfect damage at max falloff, they can track faster than the game says they should. So much so that when you fly something else, like Amarr, you count falloff as part of your range only to find you do almost no damage past Optimal. While with autocannons falloff is counted just like optimal.

When 425's can track a scepter orbiting you at .78 Transversal, but your guns say they can only track at .15 something is not adding up..

I am almost a pure Minmatar Pilot, I love Autocannons, but even I say they don't follow the same rules as other turrets. Before you hurt EVERYONE, by nerfing a module (which Blasters use the Op/Fall range bonus more than Autos) How about going back and looking at the code that controls projectiles, and see what's broke in it.


This is not how tracking (or the damage equation) works.





Fozzie, what about looking at TDs, since a nerf to turret tracking is an effective buff to the effectiveness of already this already too-effective module?
Fonac
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1029 - 2013-05-13 19:19:55 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Will there be module rebalancing part two?


Well we've already announced the large energy turrets and cruise missile changes. But we're working on part four (and probably five) now.



Hey Fozzie, do you guys have any future plans for torpedo's ?

I just noticed, that fitting a widow with torp's and cruise missiles, there's only a 100 dps difference between the two weapon systems, if you use faction torps(because of damage application + range) and furies on cruise missilies.

Seeing that the damage application on torpedo's is really poor compared to the turret systems, and the fact that their base range is 25.6 km, it could really use some love, along the lines of cruise missilies.

So, any plans? :)
Rholak Khardula
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1030 - 2013-05-13 20:44:37 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Rholak Khardula wrote:
The real problem isn't TE's are OP, the real problem is Projectiles uses a different set of math than other turrets.

I have tested this with friends in game, they can hit for perfect damage at max falloff, they can track faster than the game says they should. So much so that when you fly something else, like Amarr, you count falloff as part of your range only to find you do almost no damage past Optimal. While with autocannons falloff is counted just like optimal.

When 425's can track a scepter orbiting you at .78 Transversal, but your guns say they can only track at .15 something is not adding up..

I am almost a pure Minmatar Pilot, I love Autocannons, but even I say they don't follow the same rules as other turrets. Before you hurt EVERYONE, by nerfing a module (which Blasters use the Op/Fall range bonus more than Autos) How about going back and looking at the code that controls projectiles, and see what's broke in it.


This is not how tracking (or the damage equation) works.





Fozzie, what about looking at TDs, since a nerf to turret tracking is an effective buff to the effectiveness of already this already too-effective module?


ChanceToHit = 0.5 ^ ((((Transversal speed/(Range to target * Turret Tracking))*(Turret Signature Resolution / Target Signature Radius))^2) + ((max(0, Range To Target - Turret Optimal Range))/Turret Falloff)^2)

AvgDPS = Base Damage * [ ( ChanceToHit^2 + ChanceToHit + 0.0499 ) / 2 ] Simplified form for average DPS for chance to hit at or BELOW 1%: AvgDPS = Base Damage * 3 * ChanceToHit

Actually that is exactly how the math works, and you should end up with a curve such as

http://wiki.eveonline.com/wikiEN/images/a/a4/Falloff.png

But what I'm saying and what I have seen and so has others that fly Minmatar, is that the curve for projectiles is much flatter than any other turret in the game.
Major Thrasher
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1031 - 2013-05-14 00:51:35 UTC
minmatar nerfed into the ground is would seem.

only ships i fly are kite fit, TE being a key part of any build.

i fail to see why they need a nerf if anything buff the TC's, and leave te as they are.

guess ccp likes brawling, there goes my whole flying style since if i wish to stay out of web ranges, i'l left with zero dps.

already very low compared to a kiting rail fit.

i deal with frigs mainly, can't rly comment on anything bigger, but its completely screwed every AC kite fit.

.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1032 - 2013-05-14 13:42:19 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:
Has CCP ever addressed why TEs should give double the bonus to falloff that they do to optimal?

To me it seems just like more love for Minmatar, and I thought they didn't want them to be "Winmatar" anymore (while also not being a pathetic Minmatard loser race)



YEs we did calculated that way back then we proposed and ccp listened to add falloff bonuses. FAlloff is effectively and mathematically shown as worth HALF of what range is wroth.


When you increase your optimal by 10 km you increase your FULL dps 10 km more. WHen you increase falloff by 10 km you increase HALF dps 10 km.


Just beleive in the peopel that did the math (I was one back then) Falloff bonuses must be larger than optimal bonuses or they become much weaker than optimal ones.


Remember that just before that change LASERS were considered overpowered and peopel were asking for lasers NERFS. One of the reason was that nothing received so much love from range modules as Pulse lasers did.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1033 - 2013-05-14 13:44:39 UTC
Rholak Khardula wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
Rholak Khardula wrote:
The real problem isn't TE's are OP, the real problem is Projectiles uses a different set of math than other turrets.

I have tested this with friends in game, they can hit for perfect damage at max falloff, they can track faster than the game says they should. So much so that when you fly something else, like Amarr, you count falloff as part of your range only to find you do almost no damage past Optimal. While with autocannons falloff is counted just like optimal.

When 425's can track a scepter orbiting you at .78 Transversal, but your guns say they can only track at .15 something is not adding up..

I am almost a pure Minmatar Pilot, I love Autocannons, but even I say they don't follow the same rules as other turrets. Before you hurt EVERYONE, by nerfing a module (which Blasters use the Op/Fall range bonus more than Autos) How about going back and looking at the code that controls projectiles, and see what's broke in it.


This is not how tracking (or the damage equation) works.





Fozzie, what about looking at TDs, since a nerf to turret tracking is an effective buff to the effectiveness of already this already too-effective module?


ChanceToHit = 0.5 ^ ((((Transversal speed/(Range to target * Turret Tracking))*(Turret Signature Resolution / Target Signature Radius))^2) + ((max(0, Range To Target - Turret Optimal Range))/Turret Falloff)^2)

AvgDPS = Base Damage * [ ( ChanceToHit^2 + ChanceToHit + 0.0499 ) / 2 ] Simplified form for average DPS for chance to hit at or BELOW 1%: AvgDPS = Base Damage * 3 * ChanceToHit

Actually that is exactly how the math works, and you should end up with a curve such as

http://wiki.eveonline.com/wikiEN/images/a/a4/Falloff.png

But what I'm saying and what I have seen and so has others that fly Minmatar, is that the curve for projectiles is much flatter than any other turret in the game.



On the price that the CUrve starts much earlier than other wepon systems, as Pulses for example. Its a tradeoff and peopel really forgot very fast how pwoerful the RANGE of pulses can be. They have less extreme range but they have a MUCH broader range where they deal full damage.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
DarkLander
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1034 - 2013-05-14 17:06:26 UTC
I think Tracking Enhancer nerf is not good idea. dislike. Maybe carebears want nerf minmatar pvp ships? Roll
Beth Askold
Pigeon Patrol
#1035 - 2013-05-17 15:57:08 UTC
ccp fail yet again to notice that the faction TE's have basically the same stats as the T2... with this nerf surely you should make faction te's viable by leaving them in their current state.

Im happy to pvp with faction tracking enhancers and more than happy to loot them if that would be the case :)

i would rather spend the 70m+ isk and buy faction then leave all my minnie ships to rust in stations.
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#1036 - 2013-05-19 00:24:49 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
This is the post I've been waiting for.
Grow a pair and get close you sissies P

Cynabal nerf? check.
No more people trying to kite in Thorax hulls? check.
Significantly less reliable Tier3 BCs? Check.
Significant scan res nerf for RSBs? Check.

This is a good development.


They're also nerfing ReSebos.

So no more stupid ******* insta-locking infini-range Cynacamps.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Mirel Dystoph
Perkone
Caldari State
#1037 - 2013-05-19 00:29:43 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
This is the post I've been waiting for.
Grow a pair and get close you sissies P

Cynabal nerf? check.
No more people trying to kite in Thorax hulls? check.
Significantly less reliable Tier3 BCs? Check.
Significant scan res nerf for RSBs? Check.

This is a good development.


They're also nerfing ReSebos.

So no more stupid ******* insta-locking infini-range Cynacamps.

You don't need RSebos for instalocking cynacamps.

"Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise." 
Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#1038 - 2013-05-19 01:41:08 UTC
Mirel Dystoph wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
This is the post I've been waiting for.
Grow a pair and get close you sissies P

Cynabal nerf? check.
No more people trying to kite in Thorax hulls? check.
Significantly less reliable Tier3 BCs? Check.
Significant scan res nerf for RSBs? Check.

This is a good development.


They're also nerfing ReSebos.

So no more stupid ******* insta-locking infini-range Cynacamps.

You don't need RSebos for instalocking cynacamps.


I never said you did DDEURUEDUERUEDUEUDEUR.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1039 - 2013-05-19 07:19:33 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

On the price that the CUrve starts much earlier than other wepon systems, as Pulses for example. Its a tradeoff and peopel really forgot very fast how pwoerful the RANGE of pulses can be. They have less extreme range but they have a MUCH broader range where they deal full damage.

Aye. Pulse lasers, even without Scorch, have a huge engagement envelope where they deliver full or almost full DPS because of their high optimal range and excellent tracking.
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation
#1040 - 2013-05-19 18:28:47 UTC
DarkLander wrote:
I think Tracking Enhancer nerf is not good idea. dislike. Maybe carebears want nerf minmatar pvp ships? Roll

Maybe carebears rely on TEs as well?