Test Server Feedback

Apologies.... overlooked that. Maybe a slight boost to railgun tracking would help.

base concept should be this :
1. Ship with short range weapons have to catch long range one - so it has to be the fastest.
2. After getting in its range, its dps have to be that much higher, that it compensates for the time spent (and dmg received) while getting in that range.

This is base, other things like tracking ( well that is allready in point 2) pg, cpu etc, are secondary issues.

The sooner this people and mainly devs aknowledge, the better.

I disagree... Minmatar are the Mobility race. Hi agility and versatility.

Not speed. Having the highest speed too is a problem and overpowers Minmatar

That is what you think/would like. Fact is, Minmatar is the fast race. Their ships have the highest base speed, better agility modifiers and lower masses. Which is what I was saying. CCP designed the races like this and it's unlikely they will, now in 2011, change the setup substantially.

higher durability and/or higher dps is matter of course (to compensate for getting dmg while not in range to fire). Positioning - why would i choose a ship that needs some extra possitioning to have even a slightest chance of winning if i have another that is just better in allmost every situation (and in those specific ones it still might be better). Only thing i think is ok is the speed burst - form of rush abilities of melees in other games, but that is again far greater issue than simply changing some stats of hybrids ( where i think is this balancing going )

Well, even in the open space of EVE there are many situations where you have choke points or forced positioning. Gate camping, pos bashing, undocking, PI shuttling, whatever. In these situations a more durable ship, with high dps at close range may win over a faster, lower dps counterpart that is forced to bash through the danger zone.

Not saying that "gate camping" is a great design for any ship, but it's a possibility. As it is, blasters can't really fulfill that role either. (Well, neither railguns can, even though sniping itself is mostly a positioning war)

Edit for ideas: remember, in suggesting we may think outside the box as well... If nothing gets implemented we may still give CCP something to think about... For example a bonus to short range warps... This way a coordinated attack of short range ships could catch an unprepared, but faster, ship. This is NOT a great idea, we have problems with on-grid probing already, but it's still something different and unique other than "MOAR SPEED PLZKTHXBAI"

Fast RoF railguns is a nono, navy ammo already costs enough.
If you want to do that, make normal/navy ammo cheaper/take less space

Worryingly, there is no mention in Ytterbium's post of the insignificant damage difference between blasters and their counterparts, and no insights into the problems of railguns.

on the bright side, they seem aware that the problem runs much deeper. this is a good sign.

and more importantly, theyre understanding that the tornado is OP.

This post got me thinking about how to use ship stats for mass, inertia and speed to help Gallente ships stay mobile, even when weighed down with plates.

Bear in mind that mass doesn't affect speed unless an AB or MWD is active.

The obvious way to compensate for plates is to lower the mass of Gallente ship hulls. But this is actually counter-productive, as the addition of plates will actually be a greater percentage increase in mass, and will hurt speed and agility while the AB or MWD is on more than it would with a high base ship mass. By the same token, the difference in AB/MWD speed between an armour buffer and shields will be even greater.

So what I'd suggest (slightly counter-intuitively), is to actually increase the mass of Gallente ships, but also give them a boost to base speed and agility to compensate. This would mean that putting plates on a Gallente hull would make less of a difference to its AB/MWD speed, because the difference in mass caused by the addition of the plate and the activation of the prop mod is smaller compared to the total mass of the ship. Armour rigs would still hurt your speed, but plates would have less of a negative effect than they do currently.

With these changes, Gallente ships would have much higher base speeds, but it wouldn't translate into as much as a gain when using AB/MWD. This also means better mobility when scrammed at present. Currently, even if a Gallente blaster boat manages to get into scram range of its target (as it must), getting scrammed itself often means the target slips away due to their higher base speeds. If Gallente had the fastest base speeds instead (maintaining the Minmatar's superior mobility with AB/MWD), then they'll have a far easier time staying on top of their target in scram range.

Gallente would have the speed advantage inside scram range (assuming single-prop MWDs), but Minmatar would still be the fastest ships with MWDs active.

This is very much just a priori theorising. Someone who is better with formulae than I am ought to do the maths on it, and there are probably unintended consequences that I haven't thought of. However, tweaking manoeuvrability through the use of speed, agility and mass (instead of just speed and agility) could mix things up in some very interesting (and hopefully positive) ways.