Test Server Feedback

Basically what I meant by my post is that while some people like the idea of blasters doing a lot of damage at close range; and the idea of railguns doing lesser damage at longer ranges the two inherently conflict with current game mechanics. This is because it is easy to warp on to someone who is using rail-guns therefore their advantage is negated. Blaster ships are difficult to get in within range in PVP combat because in-game Caldari ships are slow and armor-tanked Gallente things are also slow as well.

So why not unify the two with a few penalties? I keep mentioning it, but most of the people on this thread keep ignoring it besides Monger Man. Even if rails were buffed slightly they'd still be relatively-low damage long-range weapons which wouldn't stand a chance in close-range combat. Is that what you want?

If the SiSi changes to hybrid turrets were reverted and all the optimal ranges of the turrets were kept the same, but the experimental mechanic of the turrets switching out to either blaster or railgun turrets depending on range was put in place. Hybrid turrets would still be ineffective between the ranges of ~17km-35km, (Assuming large neutron blaster and 425mm,) because of tracking and optimal range issues and it is intuitive to see that this problem exists even with SiSi's 5% tracking bonuses on either rail-guns or blasters. This experimental mechanic would be cool to test please think about it CCP.

I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns.

I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.

Rail guns inherent advantage - hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade.

Railguns should not be noodle hard. 300 DPS is not worth it, noodle soft weaponry is nothing like Caldari.

This is the first suggestion that I think would make railguns interesting and unique . . . battleship sized guns doing full damage to cruisers at long range would definitely be a niche that could be filled

Any ideas for blasters?

I was thinking highest close range alpha maybe . . . remove the cap buff, nerf ROF by 200% and increase damage by 250%?

That still wouldnt help them get in range, but they'd only have to get in range once to make you wish they hadnt . . .

Never Happen. Why.... Becuase that Alpha would be so freakin huge. It would take like 6 talos to suicide gank a freighter, arties alpha is tempered with poor DPS, which is why its not OP. But a blaster with 4-5x the dps of arties with an arty sized alpha would lead to too much high sec ganking.

One last thought from me:
Why Warp Scramblers prevent from warping AND prevent from using MWD?
Lets change this module to only prevent from using MWD. You still can use Warp Disruptors.

That way the oponent also needs to use one additional slot for a scrambler.
The blaster guy even doesn't need a web becouse he is faster with MWD.

There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.

I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.

Tracking doesn't work like that. Decreasing a turret's signature resolution by 10% has eactly the same effect as increasing its tracking speed by 10%.