These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Make Faction Weapons Useful
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
voetius
Grundrisse
#21 - 2013-06-13 11:18:16 UTC

I agree with the idea of making them more useful but my approach would be different.

Rather than making them more powerful, make them cheaper.

While there are some faction mods that are always in demand, like Fed Navy Webs and CN Ballistic Controls most of the guns and launchers are rarely seen on the market because the tag / insignia cost sets a floor on the price you can sell them at and compared to T2 guns or some rare instances of COSMOS they are too expensive for what you get.

I would suggest either increasing (doubling or tripling) the drop rate of insignias in anti-faction missions and either removing the NPC buy orders (which sets a price floor) or dropping the floor down, or a combination of these.

At first sight I can see mission runners complaining that doubling the drop rate halves the value ... but then if you sell more you get the isk back that way.

If the insignias required for some faction gun were halved or more that would encourage people to start selling them on the market at e.g. half the current price but a similar isk / lp price conversion. This in turn would exert upwards pressure on insignias so the net effect could be cheaper faction guns / launchers and some modules without destroying the total value of insignia drops over time, even increasing their value.

End result:

Mission runners are no worse off if they want to sell the tags on the market
Mission runners are better off if they want to convert LP to faction guns / launchers etc
It's not inflationary
Creates a market for faction guns etc that doesn't currently exist so potential buyers are better off
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#22 - 2013-06-13 11:34:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:

If price determined cost-effectiveness than a lot of officer gear should be multiple times more effective than what they currently are. They're at that price because clearly enough people are willing to buy them at that price.


Wrong. Cost and effectiveness do not scale proportionately in EvE. They scale exponentially. People pay through the nose to gain very small advantages. This is as intended.
You're pretty bad at understanding sarcasm because you just repeated my point lol.

Spugg Galdon wrote:
Faction weapons are expensive because of LP to ISK exchange rate. People will not trade for less than the current LP rate. People won't pay for faction weapons when T2 is very accessable and for a tiny fraction of the price. (faction drones are in a similar state.
LP:ISK ratio set the limits to what people will pay on the market before they decide it's so expensive they'll just grind the LP themselves. What is on the market currently is the price that enough people will buy it at for sellers to sell it at. This is just common sense.

Spugg Galdon wrote:
Like I said above. Make the weapon specialisation skill effect all the weapons and not just T2. Then it will buff faction gear fairly well.
If you're making the skill apply to all weapons, you're not just buffing faction but all weapons. The net result is really just a T2 nerf. This isn't needed.
Meditril
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#23 - 2013-06-13 12:54:47 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
Meditril wrote:
No.

In my opinion faction weapons need to be changed as following:

a) give them a 30% bonus to optimal range / fall off range / missile flight time.
b) reduce their costs in LP store so that taking everything into account they cost no more than 3 times of the same T2 weapon.

Thats's all.
This gives them a role, haveing a bit less DPS than T2 weapons, but having better range than T2 weapons with T1 ammo.


I like this idea although the cost would need to be dropped as well. They're just too expensive for that role, currently.


You should not forget that you can build them with a BPC without any T2-Components. So in far-off low-sec or end-of-the-universe 0.0 this is a real pro, since they are much easier to produce.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2013-06-13 13:06:12 UTC
Faction weapons are functionally fine they just need there cost reduced to about 3~4 times of what T2 is

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#25 - 2013-06-13 14:18:30 UTC
correct me if i am wrong, but t2 weapons give a 2% bonus per level to damage or ROF.

t1 do not get this bonus. i made this argument a couple months ago on the forums.

officer weapons should be able to use t2. they should not gain the 2% bonus for that ammo, but "should" be able to use it.

i do not think faction should. but, having faction have better range would be a good thing. faction isnt really useful and officer is just blingy.

ive had the brokara mega pulse on a nightmare and a paladin once. they did massive damage, but couldnt use the t2 ammo.

to me, if i am spending 650M for a pair of lasers, it better use all ammo. if these weapons are going to be modified and put on officer ships, they better use the best ammo available.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#26 - 2013-06-13 15:34:02 UTC
Faction ships using same faction mods should get a "synergistic bonus"! Including faction weapons firing faction ammo!

Anyways... continue on.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2013-06-13 15:46:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Vassal Zeren
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Then how do you respond to the noobs argument? Theoretically every new char should be able to use the CNB, but they don't. Price clearly has something to do with it.
Lol what do noobs have to do with balancing? The power of ships aren't balanced on their accessibility to newbie players.


Vassal Zeren wrote:
By the way I just checked my eft. I don't know anything about pve nightmares but as for the tengu you only get 14 extra dps from a set of faction launchers (using an rr tengu max skills and cn scourge missiles) 300 million for 14 dps is not realistic which is why I don't think these missile launchers see much use.
If price determined cost-effectiveness than a lot of officer gear should be multiple times more effective than what they currently are. They're at that price because clearly enough people are willing to buy them at that price.

Vassal Zeren wrote:
One of the main challenges of EVE is cost effectiveness. Right now i don't think faction launchers and other weapons have a role, partially due to high cost and partially due to their being worse than T2.
If your answer to the challenge of cost-effectiveness is faction mods you're doing something wrong.


Ok, I think you are not understanding my points so I will rephrase them because you have a cool bio.

1) The newbie point is obviously not to say that we should make everything accessible to newbies. Just the opposite. I was pointing out (and I still am) that the idea that cost does not balance things is wrong, because in the case of a newbie the only thing thats stopping him from fitting a faction module is cost. Do see my point? He can use the module so skillpoints do not factor into the balancing in this case, merely cost. Therefore cost plays a factor in balancing, thats all I'm saying.

2) This should be obvious but I guess it isn't. BY ITS VERY NATURE price determines cost effectiveness. That is what cost effectiveness IS. How expensive is something vs how useful it is. This is perfectly related to my point which is that there is not a significant benefit (and indeed in many cases there is an uncompensated drawback) for using faction weaponry. Perhaps you thought when I said cost effectiveness I meant cheap. That would be incorrect. I am talking about the principle of cost vs use. This principle is proven when you see tons of tengus with CNB. There is a use for the CNB to compensate for the cost. There is not for faction launchers, in general.

3) As stated Previously, faction mods ARE cost effective. They are not cheap. But there is about a 100 dps increase from them at least for Tengu's which means less time doing sites more safety and more profit. Cost effectiveness can be summarized like this: Does it make sense to buy this item at this price? Can my money be better spent elsewhere? In the case of the CNB's the answer is NO! CNB's are the best mod for you money if you want to add faction gear to you ship. The answer to CNHML is YES! your money can be spent better in a million other areas! CN HML and other faction weapons are overpriced and inferior to T2 in the vast majority of situations.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Zaknussem
Everybody Loves Donuts
#28 - 2013-06-13 16:01:53 UTC
Allowing Faction weapons to use T2 ammo? No. Just no. It's been explained pretty well why that is not a good idea.

Allowing Faction weapons to gain from the weapon Specialization skills? Maybe. At least it makes more sense than the T2 ammo suggestion.

Allowing Officer weapons to use T2 ammo? Possibly. I'd be more interested to see a bigger variety of Officer or Deadspace weapons, personally.

Making Faction weapons cheaper? That's due to the market, YOU go tell the market how to behave.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2013-06-13 16:08:45 UTC
Zaknussem wrote:
Making Faction weapons cheaper? That's due to the market, YOU go tell the market how to behave.


You don't understand, yet you are sarcastic. Know more before being a smart alec. The prices of all faction things are directly a result of the amount of LP and tags need to be exchanged for them. Lower that amount and you guarantee a lower price. Your other declarations go out the window if you don't even understand that, which is funny considering other people have already posted how this work in the comments.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#30 - 2013-06-13 16:20:04 UTC
Faction guns are fine the way they are at being basically on par with T2 guns, but restricted to T1 ammo. Officer guns should be able to use T2 ammo however. The way I see it, faction guns are modified versions of T1 guns while officer guns are modified versions of T2 guns.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#31 - 2013-06-13 22:18:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Zaknussem wrote:
Making Faction weapons cheaper? That's due to the market, YOU go tell the market how to behave.


You don't understand, yet you are sarcastic. Know more before being a smart alec. The prices of all faction things are directly a result of the amount of LP and tags need to be exchanged for them. Lower that amount and you guarantee a lower price. Your other declarations go out the window if you don't even understand that, which is funny considering other people have already posted how this work in the comments.



Yes and no. Even if LP prices dropped via a tag reevaluation (which I would support, the stores are using criteria that are way outdated) the market now has an established price. In an inflated economy. Price change with tag adjustment won't fix human greed. For players like me this would work. I can spam me some LP's and I can hit the stores for personal use (tags currently make this not possible even for me). Your noob won't be running level 4's like a 3 year player like me with time tested mission power grinding ships/fits and tactics however.

Sadly this is how markets work. Example, I run a 2 X Gist B SSB tengu I go back to alot. Same setup and mods I have for years. For you or a noob to buy this setup today (just SSB) is like 120mil per shield booster in todays market last I hit up jita. I got my boosters years ago at the low low price of 20 mil a pop. I used to run these in pvp on AF's in fact, at 20 mil why the hell not if you are making good isk 0.0 ratting. Market said oh, people like gist now, lets drain them wallets.



rest of this stuff....faction guns get their bene's. It may not be what you like, but they are there. Another example: I have a love/hate with rokh and I try to do fun things with it in pve time to time when I am on the love side. t2 425 II rails even with my max fitting skills gives me PG issues out the ass with certain off the wall builds I have in eft.

If I replace those t2's with CN's....I have lots og PG to play with. The pg this gets me would not have me missing t2 ammo (I don't use it in pve anyway,) and I would not miss the large spec 4 bonus as these builds give me other more desirable effects. I just don't want to roll around in a gank bait rokh with 700-800 mil in guns alone lol.

And I am a cheap mission runner. So I settled for plan B...a MJD T2 425 II rokh sniping with uranium /plutonium. Sure the tracking sucks. But atter a hop cruisers fly straight into you to instapop at 90 km's.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2013-06-14 01:25:18 UTC
Thanks for the well thought out response. I was just pointing out that the market isn't completely random and that it can be influenced by the rarity or abundance of things. For example a dramatic increase in those small dead space SB's would certainly lower their price. So this thing that people seem to be saying about the market being fickle and cost has nothing to do with balancing is untrue. I don't deny that a player run economy has trends like a real one, I'm saying that unlike a real one, CCP can rebalance the abundancy of things easily if it so desires. That said the problem of inflation seems to be greater than just the problem of faction weapons. The truth is the EVE economy is unstable because it is inflating quite rapidly. Just think of the price of a PLEX in 10 years! So I hope CCP is on the ball with this stuff.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#33 - 2013-06-14 01:50:11 UTC
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Ok, I think you are not understanding my points so I will rephrase them because you have a cool bio.

1) The newbie point is obviously not to say that we should make everything accessible to newbies. Just the opposite. I was pointing out (and I still am) that the idea that cost does not balance things is wrong, because in the case of a newbie the only thing thats stopping him from fitting a faction module is cost. Do see my point? He can use the module so skillpoints do not factor into the balancing in this case, merely cost. Therefore cost plays a factor in balancing, thats all I'm saying.

2) This should be obvious but I guess it isn't. BY ITS VERY NATURE price determines cost effectiveness. That is what cost effectiveness IS. How expensive is something vs how useful it is. This is perfectly related to my point which is that there is not a significant benefit (and indeed in many cases there is an uncompensated drawback) for using faction weaponry. Perhaps you thought when I said cost effectiveness I meant cheap. That would be incorrect. I am talking about the principle of cost vs use. This principle is proven when you see tons of tengus with CNB. There is a use for the CNB to compensate for the cost. There is not for faction launchers, in general.

3) As stated Previously, faction mods ARE cost effective. They are not cheap. But there is about a 100 dps increase from them at least for Tengu's which means less time doing sites more safety and more profit. Cost effectiveness can be summarized like this: Does it make sense to buy this item at this price? Can my money be better spent elsewhere? In the case of the CNB's the answer is NO! CNB's are the best mod for you money if you want to add faction gear to you ship. The answer to CNHML is YES! your money can be spent better in a million other areas! CN HML and other faction weapons are overpriced and inferior to T2 in the vast majority of situations.
No I understand, I'm jsut not sure you do.

Faction mods in general aren't cost effective, therefore talking about cost-effectiveness in terms of faction mods is rather moot. There are very limited circumstances where they are (points and webs for example are arguably worth it when used in combination with links). Some people get faction mods because they're easier to fit. Navy Launchers for example are easier to fit. The rest I'd wager simply do so because they're spacerich and can afford to so... why not?

In terms of your tengu example. How many Navy BCUs do you need to get that extra 100DPS? 3? 4? You could buy a brand new fully t2 (aside from rigs) tengu with that money. In otherwords you can dual box your alt with the 2nd tengu and literally get double your dps. That's cost-effective. Faction mods not so much.

What you're really saying is faction guns/launchers are even more ridulously cost-inefficient than other faction mods. In which case you're right. But then its a tricky thing to balance in comparison to its relative low importance. In either case, letting t1 use specialisation skills or t2 ammo is something I strongly disagree with since I don't think T2s, given their requirements need a nerf, which is the real effect of your proposition. I perhaps agree to lowering their LP store requirements to assemble, but that's about it.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-06-14 14:58:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Vassal Zeren
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Vassal Zeren wrote:
Ok, I think you are not understanding my points so I will rephrase them because you have a cool bio.

1) The newbie point is obviously not to say that we should make everything accessible to newbies. Just the opposite. I was pointing out (and I still am) that the idea that cost does not balance things is wrong, because in the case of a newbie the only thing thats stopping him from fitting a faction module is cost. Do see my point? He can use the module so skillpoints do not factor into the balancing in this case, merely cost. Therefore cost plays a factor in balancing, thats all I'm saying.

2) This should be obvious but I guess it isn't. BY ITS VERY NATURE price determines cost effectiveness. That is what cost effectiveness IS. How expensive is something vs how useful it is. This is perfectly related to my point which is that there is not a significant benefit (and indeed in many cases there is an uncompensated drawback) for using faction weaponry. Perhaps you thought when I said cost effectiveness I meant cheap. That would be incorrect. I am talking about the principle of cost vs use. This principle is proven when you see tons of tengus with CNB. There is a use for the CNB to compensate for the cost. There is not for faction launchers, in general.

3) As stated Previously, faction mods ARE cost effective. They are not cheap. But there is about a 100 dps increase from them at least for Tengu's which means less time doing sites more safety and more profit. Cost effectiveness can be summarized like this: Does it make sense to buy this item at this price? Can my money be better spent elsewhere? In the case of the CNB's the answer is NO! CNB's are the best mod for you money if you want to add faction gear to you ship. The answer to CNHML is YES! your money can be spent better in a million other areas! CN HML and other faction weapons are overpriced and inferior to T2 in the vast majority of situations.
No I understand, I'm jsut not sure you do.

Faction mods in general aren't cost effective, therefore talking about cost-effectiveness in terms of faction mods is rather moot. There are very limited circumstances where they are (points and webs for example are arguably worth it when used in combination with links). Some people get faction mods because they're easier to fit. Navy Launchers for example are easier to fit. The rest I'd wager simply do so because they're spacerich and can afford to so... why not?

In terms of your tengu example. How many Navy BCUs do you need to get that extra 100DPS? 3? 4? You could buy a brand new fully t2 (aside from rigs) tengu with that money. In otherwords you can dual box your alt with the 2nd tengu and literally get double your dps. That's cost-effective. Faction mods not so much.

What you're really saying is faction guns/launchers are even more ridiculously cost-inefficient than other faction mods. In which case you're right. But then its a tricky thing to balance in comparison to its relative low importance. In either case, letting t1 use specialisation skills or t2 ammo is something I strongly disagree with since I don't think T2s, given their requirements need a nerf, which is the real effect of your proposition. I perhaps agree to lowering their LP store requirements to assemble, but that's about it.


I disagree about the cost effectiveness of faction BCUs. Since my experience is mainly in wormholes I'll give an example from a C3 wh. You can farm a C3 site in 1 faction BCU tengu in about 15 minutes. It takes about 25 minutes in a T2 fit Tengu. Now you get about 50 million on average for 1 c3 site. So in an hour with the faction Tengu you have received 200 million vs in an hour with the non faction Tengu you have a little over 50 million. Yes the initial investment is considerate but it is still worth it-- which is why people buy CN BCU's. They don't buy the launchers.

As for dual boxing, that is not a valid comparison because you conveniently left out the added cost of paying for 2 plexes instead of 1 or an extra 15 dollars per month. I don't think when arguing over game balance it is apt to compare something that would require paying for an extra account. CCP definitely doesn't balance things based on whether or not people will dual box.

Also 3 CN BCU cost 300 million. A tengu is 570 with rigs. There is another point I'd like to make: necessity. In some cases the extra DPS that CN BCU bring is necessary for the operation such as farming C5 sites with as few RR tengus as possible (if you don't have many guys) the extra dps will keep you alive by killing the sleeps faster than they can neut you. You can't say that about the missile launchers. So the ballistics have a role to play and the faction missile launcher role, while it may exist is pretty narrow.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2013-06-14 15:16:08 UTC
Faction guns are the only faction item class where T2 completely outclasses faction.

Most egregious are the blasters, where meta 3 and 4 have more optimal.

There is no reason they can't require T2 skills to load T2 ammo, just the same as they require skills to load defenders or FOF missiles in launchers.

Caldari/DG launchers are the exception

Faction weapons need a boost.
Either to base stats (moar optimal+falloff+damage), or through applying T2 attributes to them (load T2 ammo if skills allow, let T2 skills benefit faction weapons).

I'll keep making these suggestions until CCP gets around to module rebalance (a long time given the ship rebalance that still has a lot of work left)
PavlikX
Scan Stakan
HOLD MY PROBS
#36 - 2013-06-15 15:00:12 UTC  |  Edited by: PavlikX
System T1 (meta0)--->Meta1-4--->Meta8--->T2 (meta5)--->Meta11... is obviously broken
It should be 0--->1-4--->5--->8--->11
How? Posible solutions:
1. Allow T2 ammo to be used
2. Allow specialisations to give their bonuses to the 8 and 11, but without that specialisation skills in prequirements
3. Boost basic specs (each faction can boost it's own spec greatly, meantime officers boosts few specs)
4. Decrease fitting and cap demands

Personnaly I like those combinations
Navy weapons p.2 and p.4 with slight p.3
Pirate weapons p.2 and p.3 with slight p.4
Officer weapons p.1, 2, 3 and slight p.4 or 1,2,4 and 3.

Another option is to bring new skills, available in LP shops of factions and exploration, increasing stats of faction ammo and weapons. For example skill Amarr Navy large pulse specialisation works only with Amarr navy large pulses, but gives no T2 ammo usage. This option can replace p.2 according to the faction weapons
Naomi Anthar
#37 - 2013-06-15 15:57:51 UTC
It's pathethic that for some (insert word describing some clueless idiot) really do think that faction guns shouldn't be better than t2.

Why?

Because it's against entire fitting theory created by devs. Look at almost every single module except weapons and you will see that faction stuff is BETTER. It is intended to be VASTLY BETTER. Because it's harder to acquire , more expensive and often produced (via lore) by SUPERIOR to tech 2 technology. The only people who are against faction guns/launchers/drones (yes they suck aswell compared to cost) are manufacturers who do T2 stuff. They fear that suddenly people would mount faction guns (tho they wouldnt ... its expensive after all) , and people from FW would earn thier money (buying faction guns from store).

Truth is that if someone THINKS it's easy to get for example faction gun - i can give someone entire day for farming and lets see how many guns he can dish out from rats. Very often it will be 0 guns.

Damn meta 8 and more is supposed to outclass meta 5 by all means. If you are against it, then i vote for t0 and t1 stuff to be better than meta 5 (aka tech II). Beacause WHY NOT. Then i will drink your tears.
Aston Martin DB5
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#38 - 2013-06-15 17:39:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Aston Martin DB5
Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.

If you disagree then remove skill training in the game.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-06-15 17:42:05 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
Personally, I think that faction weapons should be buffed to make them competitive with Tech II but rather than allow the use of tech II ammo they should have a bonus to using the same faction's faction ammo in order to give them a little bit more dps than tech II guns and tech II ammo.



In a players driven game content and economy you want NPC stuff to be superior?

No, this would be bad. Why spend hundreds or thousands of hours training tons of skills to build/invent Modules requiring far more training than NPC ones just to build lower value items?

It's a player driven economy and content, officer and A-B-X type modules are already far powerful than they should be.
Now if the idea behind it is to make it so a each item used on whatever ship from the very same faction brings a small bonus on top so that if you want a space pinata with awesome bonus, why not, worth the gank at least.

Every change to NPC stuff or players stuff must keep this "lei motiv": players create the content and the items, NPC stuff should be a simple bling to cater to poor mindless red cross shooting people that will never do anything else whatever the game is than farm, farm farm farm farm and still farm NPC crap.

Notice I'm not saying it needs to be nerf, except industry/market/high sec POS slots, but NPC items are already far too good as they are:

want a 109km point on your Lachesis arazu? -RF or True sancha for 99km

Want webs at sniper ranges? true sancha or Fed Navy

Ammo/Probes/Cap booster charges

Navy Drones

Probe launchers/Cap injectors/neutralizers

Shields extenders and hardeners/passive resists

Armor plates and hardeners/platings

MWD's and Afterburners

Pirate ships worth a billion not even requiring the amount of minerals of an old Tier 3 BS but the same of a Tier 1 BS for far better performances in all aspects.

And the list goes on and on about modules frequently used in PVP that are already far too good compared with player build items. PVE is not and should never be a reference for balance, PVP does since it's what this game is about.

Faction guns are fantastic already, they don't need more buffs in any aspect.




removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Naomi Anthar
#40 - 2013-06-15 17:43:47 UTC
Aston Martin DB5 wrote:
Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.

If you disagree then remove skill training in the game.


No pay to win ? Then i say T2 is too expensive too ! I want to roam around in meta 0 stuff pwning and it must be as strong as officers stuff !! No pay to win !!! meta 0 invu must give 50% resists as Estamel !!! NO PAY TO WIN !!

Dude please biomass for your own good...