These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
M1AU
Zappenduster Inc.
#501 - 2011-11-10 22:01:44 UTC
Kvaser Rand wrote:
A question:

The changes that was announced on the devblog: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012 Are they still in effect, meaning, will they still be implemented alongside the changes that CCP Tallest mentions in teh first page of this thread?

Or, are the changes mentioned in the devblog scrapped?


As I read correctly, the changes mentioned in the first post of this thread alongside the changes mentioned in the devblog are still going up-to-date.
Nothing is set in stone of course.
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#502 - 2011-11-10 22:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
I just had a crazy idea:

Unify blasters and hybrid turrets!

Consider this carefully. Unify the turrets. Create separate ammunition for hybrid turrets. Blaster ammunition, which is close range, and rail ammunition which is long range. Blaster ammo gives the turret a huge penalty to fall-off and optimal range, but increases tracking speed and has a high ammunition damage base. Rail ammunition provides a massive bonus to optimal range and fall-off but gives a major penalty to tracking speed and has lower damage numbers. When the ammunition type, (Meaning blaster and rail ammunition), changes the turret visibly changes shape as well, (To demonstrate the change in ability.)

The five second change to loading hybrid ammunition assists this idea. This way a Rokh battleship, (For example), can snipe at long range because if they warp to you at zero you change your ammunition to blaster ammunition and use that on them.

This solves all the issues. You can use your medium damage-per-second low tracking rail-gun ammo as you approach them. When you are in range you switch to blaster ammunition in your turrets and use that on them. If you want to do this you should carry twice the amount of ammo in your cargo hold so this presents a penalty as well.

What do you think about this presentation?
Monger Man
D.S.A.
#503 - 2011-11-10 22:06:51 UTC
Shadow Lord77 wrote:
I just had a crazy idea:

Unify blasters and hybrid turrets!

Consider this carefully. Unify the turrets. Create separate ammunition for hybrid turrets. Blaster ammunition, which is close range, and rail ammunition which is long range. Blaster ammo gives the turret a huge penalty to fall-off and optimal range, but increases tracking speed and has a high ammunition damage base. Rail ammunition provides a massive bonus to optimal range and fall-off but gives a major penalty to tracking speed and has lower damage numbers. When the ammunition type, (Meaning blaster and rail ammunition), changes the turret visibly changes shape as well, (To demonstrate the change in ability.)

The five second change to loading hybrid ammunition assists this idea. This way a Rokh battleship, (For example), can snipe at long range because if they warp to you at zero you change your ammunition to blaster ammunition and use that on them.

This solves all the issues. You can use your medium damage-per-second low tracking rail-gun ammo as you approach them. When you are in range you switch to blaster ammunition in your turrets and use that on them. If you want to do this you should carry twice the amount of ammo in your cargo hold so this presents a penalty as well.

What do you think about this presentation?


A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.

First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game.
So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.

You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.

The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime.
But its an interesting idea still.
Lekgoa
Free State Project
#504 - 2011-11-10 22:09:47 UTC
Elrianmk2 wrote:
Lekgoa, i understand your concerns about the limited amount of ewar fitting, as my post suggested, this was about another approach to looking at the problem, An additional midslot on blaster-boats and the damp bonus would help dictate range.

My main point of my post though was that no matter what we do, for PvE, you know the making money part to do PVPing? Hybrids are firggen useless.


Bonused damps might work on blaster boats with an extra mid, but I still think that solution is too complicated. Some nice, simple buffs to T2 ammo and Gallente mobility (speed, agility, mwd bonuses, overload bonuses, take your pick) would go a long way towards making blaster boats viable.

As for PvE...dominix. I don't care if it looks like a potato. It kicks ass. And it has a chubby little man drawn on the bottom.
Moana Pozzi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#505 - 2011-11-10 22:28:55 UTC
I like the idea of some kind MWD bonus but only on the first cycle... something like:

activate MWD... for first cycle your linear speed is increased by 100%... after the first cycle the MWD works normally.

The idea like said in many previous posts, is to "jump" on the victim, scram, web it and show the power of the blasters....

i also agree that blasters needs more than only a 5% dps buff. i dunno exactly how much more, but more...

blasters at short range must be scary... but real scary... 5% is not so scary...

all imho.

Thanks in advance to everybody for reading my post.
Sigras
Conglomo
#506 - 2011-11-10 22:43:01 UTC
Lekgoa wrote:
Elrianmk2 wrote:
Lekgoa, i understand your concerns about the limited amount of ewar fitting, as my post suggested, this was about another approach to looking at the problem, An additional midslot on blaster-boats and the damp bonus would help dictate range.

My main point of my post though was that no matter what we do, for PvE, you know the making money part to do PVPing? Hybrids are firggen useless.


Bonused damps might work on blaster boats with an extra mid, but I still think that solution is too complicated. Some nice, simple buffs to T2 ammo and Gallente mobility (speed, agility, mwd bonuses, overload bonuses, take your pick) would go a long way towards making blaster boats viable.

As for PvE...dominix. I don't care if it looks like a potato. It kicks ass. And it has a chubby little man drawn on the bottom.

well the problem is that even 3 damps cant dampen someone enough to make them come in web range.
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#507 - 2011-11-10 22:54:40 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Nemesor wrote:
I still think you just want to have the comfort of controlling range and whether you want to fight or not. It's understandable though. It is quite an advantage to have.


FYI, the vast majority of my SP is dedicated to Gallente ships and hybrids. I only ever fly any other race through gritted teeth. I have a vested interest in Gallente and hyrids being buffed, but I want there to be balance more than I want to fly a new FOTM.


Then take it from a pilot who is maxed skill in all four races in every ship BS and below. I fly predominantly AC and Arty ships. The Loki, Vaga and hurricane are the ones I use most. Matari need to be the most agile not the fastest. I only started as a Gallente pilot.
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#508 - 2011-11-10 23:06:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Monger Man wrote:

A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.

First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game.
So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.

You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.

The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime.
But its an interesting idea still.

Laser weapons systems have an advantage as they have excellent EMP and thermal damage-per-second. Scorch gives them excellent damage-per-second at range. They have superior ammo logistics.

Projectile weapon platforms require no capacitor amount to cycle. They have an advantage in close-range combat and good long-range artillery damage numbers.

What advantage do hybrid weapons have?
Jazz Styles
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#509 - 2011-11-10 23:08:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jazz Styles
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102

Some other things:
- The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres.

A few things about ammo:
- Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters.
- Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo.
- Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20.


Listen to this guy, he knows what he's talking about. Make it happen!
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#510 - 2011-11-10 23:18:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Monger Man wrote:

A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.

First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game.
So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.

You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.

The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime.
But its an interesting idea still.

Laser weapons have an advantage as they have excellent electromagnetic properties and thermal damage and consume virtually no ammo, (Depending on the crystal used). Scorch allows for fair damage at range. Projectile weapons take no capacitor; Minny ships can close in easily to use auto-cannons. Artillery cannons are better than rail-guns in fleet combat. Therefore hybrid weapons need a tangible advantage in order for them to be used over others. In complying with CCP's original fleet-doctrine the ability to use moderately powerful ammunition at long range and very powerful short-ranged ammunition in very-close-combat without changing turrets provides an advantage over laser and projectile weapons while not being overly superior to them; and this gives them their own niche.
Monger Man
D.S.A.
#511 - 2011-11-10 23:31:52 UTC
Shadow Lord77 wrote:
Monger Man wrote:

A few things, I've actually thought of this and posted it in a different thread.

First it makes hybrids hands down the most flexible weapon in the game.
So you would have to go back to 10 sec (or longer) reloads.

You would probably want to revert the cap changes. Heck probably all the changes.

The problem is you would have "the" answer for any situation anytime.
But its an interesting idea still.

Laser weapons have an advantage as they have excellent EMP and thermal damage values and consume no ammo. Scorch allows for fair damage at range. Projectile weapon require no capacitor and they are numerically superior at close range and long-range alpha sniping. What advantage do hybrid weapons have over these?


I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.

But that aside.

Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range
by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.

Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.

But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be
able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.
Insane Randomness
Stellar Pilgrimage
#512 - 2011-11-10 23:32:06 UTC
Jazz Styles wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102

Some other things:
- The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres.

A few things about ammo:
- Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters.
- Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo.
- Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20.


Listen to this guy, he knows what he's talking about. Make it happen!


What they said. Make it so. Maybe the Rohk will be usefull then. Reduction too cap needs was in the right direction. So was most of the changes, but they all just need to be MOAR. MOAR of it all.
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#513 - 2011-11-10 23:36:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Monger Man wrote:

I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.

But that aside.

Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range
by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.

Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.

But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be
able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.


I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to?

Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite blaster systems either by being quick or stasis-webbing their ship. The ships by design which use blasters are slow. This idea is simply another niche and solution to the issues with hybrid turrets and an interesting one at that.
Monger Man
D.S.A.
#514 - 2011-11-10 23:59:08 UTC
Shadow Lord77 wrote:
Monger Man wrote:

I think that might be the first time I've heard EMP damage being an advantage.

But that aside.

Hybrids don't have those advantages. But if you make them able to hit any range
by switching ammo from the same turret. You give them a possible OP advantage.

Now I did say possible. And I never said it was a bad idea, I've had the same one myself.

But you have to consider the havoc that could cause. And it would be very powerful to be
able to switch to ammo that gives you a 100km range in one fight then 10km range in another.


I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to?

Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite you. Armor-tanked Gallente and slow-by-design Caldari ships use blasters and blasters have terrible range. Having switchable ammunition causing your turret to function as a rail-gun and blaster solves that problem for hybrid weapons.


Sorry having issues editing my last post for some reason.

I do like the idea very much, but only two outcomes can be really expected from such a massive change.

1. Every body ends up flying hybrid boats. They do everything as well as any other ship, using only one gun.

Or

2. They still suck, because even though they can hit any range there no good at it.


How can you balance them so you don't have 1 or 2?
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#515 - 2011-11-11 00:34:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Monger Man wrote:
Shadow Lord77 wrote:


I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to?

Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite blaster systems either by being quick or stasis-webbing their ship. The ships by design which use blasters are slow. This idea is simply another niche and solution to the issues with hybrid turrets and an interesting one at that.


Sorry having issues editing my last post for some reason.

I do like the idea very much, but only two outcomes can be really expected from such a massive change.

1. Every body ends up flying hybrid boats. They do everything as well as any other ship, using only one gun.

Or

2. They still suck, because even though they can hit any range there no good at it.


How can you balance them so you don't have 1 or 2?


Simple: Decrease the range on blaster weapons even more than they are. Make it so the enemy needs to be at 7-14 kilometers to be able to be hit by the optimal+falloff of all large blasters. (As of now the optimal+falloff of the large blaster cannon that can shoot the farthest is 17.2km; 7.2 being the optimal). The staff at crowd control productions want rail guns to do moderate damage at long-distances.

Right now you are able to scan down the enemy shooting you at 150km and warp directly on top him. If you do so in these circumstances you may be hit with blasters if they are using a hybrid system with blaster ammunition. If they warp within 10km or so you can close in and hit them with blasters. It'll be in their best interest to engage you at range when they have an advantage by using artillery or beam lasers, or near 24km if they are using a large pulse laser auto-cannon system. If they drop on top of you you can engage them on your own terms. It creates a niche. You're not superior at long range, (38-70km), you're superior at an extremely long range, (70-150km), and you're superior at a very close range if you can get to it. Not everyone wants to play by those rules. The issue is solved.

What about gate camping and other close-range combat? Hybrid weapons with blaster ammo would be good at those ranges, but so are other other weapons like torpedoes, short-range lasers, and auto-cannons. It's nothing big. Hybrids would be balanced finally. Hybrids use capacitor and ammunition and to fit one requires attention to that. Neutralize the capacitor of a close-range blaster ship and he simply cannot fire.
Monger Man
D.S.A.
#516 - 2011-11-11 01:12:21 UTC
Shadow Lord77 wrote:
Monger Man wrote:
Shadow Lord77 wrote:


I submitted that post before I had finished. Can you re-read my original post and edit if you need to?

Hybrid weapons have massive draw backs. Capacitor use for a moderately damaging weapon which is easily approached and overthrown for lack of tracking is one. But the idea is not dissimilar to having heavy missiles in the idea that you can be able to send a lot of damage efficiently a long way and still be able to attack an enemy close up with the same system. Remember other ships can kite blaster systems either by being quick or stasis-webbing their ship. The ships by design which use blasters are slow. This idea is simply another niche and solution to the issues with hybrid turrets and an interesting one at that.


Sorry having issues editing my last post for some reason.

I do like the idea very much, but only two outcomes can be really expected from such a massive change.

1. Every body ends up flying hybrid boats. They do everything as well as any other ship, using only one gun.

Or

2. They still suck, because even though they can hit any range there no good at it.


How can you balance them so you don't have 1 or 2?


Simple: Decrease the range on blaster weapons even more than they are. Make it so the enemy needs to be at 7-14 kilometers to be able to be hit by the optimal+falloff of all large blasters. (As of now the optimal+falloff of the large blaster cannon that can shoot the farthest is 17.2km; 7.2 being the optimal). The staff at crowd control productions want rail guns to do moderate damage at long-distances.

Right now you are able to scan down the enemy shooting you at 150km and warp directly on top him. If you do so in these circumstances you may be hit with blasters if they are using a hybrid system with blaster ammunition. If they warp within 10km or so you can close in and hit them with blasters. It'll be in their best interest to engage you at range when they have an advantage by using artillery or beam lasers, or near 24km if they are using a large pulse laser auto-cannon system. If they drop on top of you you can engage them on your own terms. It creates a niche. You're not superior at long range, (38-70km), you're superior at an extremely long range, (70-150km), and you're superior at a very close range if you can get to it. Not everyone wants to play by those rules. The issue is solved.

What about gate camping and other close-range combat? Hybrid weapons with blaster ammo would be good at those ranges, but so are other other weapons like torpedoes, short-range lasers, and auto-cannons. It's nothing big. Hybrids would be balanced finally. Hybrids use capacitor and ammunition and to fit one requires attention to that. Neutralize the capacitor of a close-range blaster ship and he simply cannot fire.


Well you have certainly solved problem number 1.

But as far as I can tell, you put us squarely in problem number 2.
Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#517 - 2011-11-11 01:15:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Morgan North
I'm always confused about why the Railguns don't have the highest alpha damage, while having lowest DPs. Thinkabout it...

A railgun works by expending electrical energy (cap) to boost a charge to incredible speeds.

It would make sense the weapon had to cool down for a bit due to friction (if at all present) / electrical circuit cooldown, making it a supposedly great alpha weapon but with little DPS.

Somethign that would...

I don't know, make Sniper-duty (for a ship) sensical and logical.

Instead we have artilery doing the highest alpha when this should be the highest DPS weapon, given that its just a big bullet inside a barrel, with no cap drainage, that supposedly is reloaded very quickly.
Zircon Dasher
#518 - 2011-11-11 01:40:00 UTC
Morgan North wrote:
artilery

Quote:
that supposedly is reloaded very quickly.


Dont use arty much do you.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#519 - 2011-11-11 02:20:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Morgan North wrote:
I'm always confused about why the Railguns don't have the highest alpha damage, while having lowest DPs. Thinkabout it...

A railgun works by expending electrical energy (cap) to boost a charge to incredible speeds.

It would make sense the weapon had to cool down for a bit due to friction (if at all present) / electrical circuit cooldown, making it a supposedly great alpha weapon but with little DPS.

Somethign that would...

I don't know, make Sniper-duty (for a ship) sensical and logical.

Instead we have artilery doing the highest alpha when this should be the highest DPS weapon, given that its just a big bullet inside a barrel, with no cap drainage, that supposedly is reloaded very quickly.


It's a game.

Monger Man wrote:
Well you have certainly solved problem number 1.

But as far as I can tell, you put us squarely in problem number 2.


I didn't put us squarely in problem number two. Crowd control productions did. They designed rail guns to use capacitor, take ammunition, fire long distances, but have bad tracking and relatively poor damage. The issue as I hear it, is that fleets can warp on top of you, and this makes the range bonus negligible. While nano-fits traveling +2000m/s were viable once long ago they aren't any longer. You can't kite. You're a sitting duck. They can warp on top of you. Simply put hybrids aren't good at range and when the enemy warp right near you it's often the case that you can't track them and when you do, the ship performs poorly in terms of damage per second.

If there was blaster ammunition, which made a hybrid turret behave like a blaster cannon at blaster ranges, and rail gun ammunition, which made the same behave like a rail gun at rail gun ranges, eliminating the difference between the two and making the difference solely in terms of ammo you wouldn't have to be worried about engaging at long distance with hybrid weapons because if they close in on you, you can close in on them and use blaster charges. The other weapons already have a bonus, (No cap, no ammo.), Hybrid weapons need one. I think this is it.
Miriiah
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#520 - 2011-11-11 03:00:30 UTC
Insane Randomness wrote:
Jazz Styles wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
I posted my thoughts in response to the hybrid rebalance in a different thread, so please refer to that: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=290102#post290102

Some other things:
- The damage difference between the 2nd and 3rd tier railguns is too small. Give the 150, 250 and 425mm rails a bit more damage, to make them a worthy step up from the 120, 200 and 350mm calibres.

A few things about ammo:
- Null ammo needs +50% for both optimal and falloff. Barrage gives a 50% falloff bonus, and Scorch gives 50% extra to range. Blasters depend on both range and falloff, so Null ought to give a 50% bonus for both, to help truly address the range issues of blasters.
- Significantly increase base damage for Antimatter, Void and Javelin. This would make blasters truly melt face at close range. Railguns would be more viable for mid-range engagements, where their counterparts are actually pulse lasers and autocannons with long-range ammo.
- Simplify the ammo types. There's too much granularity of range at present. Instead, make hybrid ammo more like projectile ammo, so different ammo types have different balances of thermal and kinetic damage, such as 20/80, 50/50 and 80/20.


Listen to this guy, he knows what he's talking about. Make it happen!


What they said. Make it so. Maybe the Rohk will be usefull then. Reduction too cap needs was in the right direction. So was most of the changes, but they all just need to be MOAR. MOAR of it all.


the 20/80 50/50 and 80/20 damage solution is quite nice, allows to you somewhat swap some of your damage around atleast, not sure about boosting antimatter damage, but rails don't have any benefits at all over the other turrets(apart from a tiny range boost) give them another 5% or so damage buff and they'll atleast do decent/good dps.