These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jaigar
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1201 - 2011-11-27 02:17:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaigar
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:
the solution is simple: let's extend locking range and warp-to range. That's makes the battlefield bigger, that's only fun. I can easily set up my Rokh to hit at 280 km, and that's not even all lvl 5's. Gun's optimal exceeding your locking range is silly. People warping to your sniper is also silly.


This is why hybrid balance is so intertangled with everything else. We can play with hybrid statistics all day long, or we theorize about game mechanic changes that would breathe new life into railguns.
Quote:
I'm all for expanding the battlespace, but rail dps only tickles from those sorts of ranges. Rails need another serious damage boost, to the point where they do more dps than beams. It's the only way to make them at all viable.

I think railguns could be made more unique by decreasing the damage penalty for long range ammos. That way 425mm Railguns would do more damage than tachs at long ranges (say over 125k), but within that range Tachs would do more. Currently a Rokh will only outdmg an Apoc if the Apoc is out of its optimal, and this happens around 175km range (which creates that warp-to problem like stated above).

EDIT: I forgot about the damage buff to rails, it affects the numbers, and I'm unsure what the current FOTM sniper is (arty abaddon?) Either way, the problem is still there.
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1202 - 2011-11-27 02:37:45 UTC
Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part.
Daedalus Arcova
The Scope
#1203 - 2011-11-27 13:11:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Daedalus Arcova
Ganthrithor wrote:
Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part.


Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1204 - 2011-11-27 14:43:53 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Ganthrithor wrote:
Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part.


Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed.

so change them
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1205 - 2011-11-27 14:49:55 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Ganthrithor wrote:
Noone snipes anymore. Its all mid range (50-100km) fights for the most part.


Nobody snipes because of the scanning and warp-to mechanics. It's precisely because the range of most engagements is <100km (which therefore determines popular fitting doctrine) that sniping would become relevant again if the probing/warping mechanics were changed.

so change them

Exactly, designing spaceships is not rocket-science.
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1206 - 2011-11-27 17:57:39 UTC
nobody cares about sniping. make all hybrids viable at close-mid range, and rails further out. start with that first.
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1207 - 2011-11-27 18:31:52 UTC
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


narrow minded person trying to say their opinion is everyones.

Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1208 - 2011-11-27 18:33:31 UTC
not my fault you cant see whats going on. im saying nobody cares about sniping UNTIL the basics are fixed.
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1209 - 2011-11-27 19:52:58 UTC
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


narrow minded person trying to say their opinion is everyones.



Your posts still aren't constructive...
Ziester
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1210 - 2011-11-28 00:35:16 UTC
Oh sweet Moses, X-Mas before the time ?

Pop, rock, Metal radio station
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
#1211 - 2011-11-28 01:00:45 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
On the other hand Proteus is the single T3 that can get the most insane buffer tank sporting 400k EHP or more - Maybe they accidentally switched a few stats between the Proteus and the Legion?



Screw that. Even if it is a Tech 3 ships we need at least 1 fly blaster boat to make up for all the crap ones.

Is it a rock point a lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship point a lazer at it and profit. I dont see any problems here.
Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1212 - 2011-11-28 13:04:49 UTC
Tanya Powers wrote:
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:


Seems a bit odd that the Proteus is only marginally faster than the Tengu, and significantly slower than the Legion (which in turn, is not much slower than a Loki). It's not like the Amarr are renowned for their mobility, is it?

The Proteus was overlooked in the Crucible blaster boat speed buff. It looks like it do with a serious boost. An immobile brick with massive ehp and a long point is a bit too limited a role for a T3 ship. Give it a serious speed buff.

that is stupid indeed. Why the hell is amarr faster? That does not make sense, CCP, plz fix/



Ho dammit very sure every sub combination were tested to arrive at this awesome conclusion right?
Because atm the only way to make that legion be faster is by sacrificing another stat of those propulsion subs , unless I'm wrong and taking in account subs fitted only, no mods prop whatsoever.

What subs did you fitted for each? -I mean you can say a lot of stuff but without numbers, and from what I can see on SISI, my prot is not bad, slightly better than before. + definitive changes aren't sat since CCP tallest is about to improve ship by ship what's needed to make those work properly.



People currently fit AC onto hybrid ships. Making the ships even better just means people will still fit AC onto hybrid ships. Over all the ship will still be more effective but the reason this happens and will continue to happen is that hybrids suck and still will after the patch.
Ziester
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1213 - 2011-11-28 16:03:42 UTC
All those changes seem yummy, but I don't see anything related to buffing the range of blasters. Wasn't that the main issue blasters had originally ?

Pop, rock, Metal radio station
LordBison
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1214 - 2011-11-28 17:00:03 UTC
The final changes still leave hybrids neglected blasters will not get in range despite only a single digit /ms buff? how does a few ms change anything? Tallest is being lazy into actively changing this stuff... how many updates? 3 changes since the announcement? And yet he doesn't state a single reason why these teeny tiny changes benefit certain roles because of what he sees is lacking. We can see what is being changed and what they can apply to but I want a good reason from CCP's perspective into what intended roles hybrids are intended for. I have been flying Sniper Rokh's in defending systems and yet i see very little to benefit from long range ammo like spike. I can barely do any DPS anything at 200km (optimal) when they come to the gate. Against other BS's at that range a huge laughable DPS that they can just ignore me. (Switched to dictors since)
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1215 - 2011-11-28 17:36:18 UTC
The patch notes state that Hail has had its falloff penalty removed completly.

Can someone please confirm this to be the case? If so can Void be changed as well please.
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1216 - 2011-11-28 18:26:59 UTC
Ziester wrote:
All those changes seem yummy, but I don't see anything related to buffing the range of blasters. Wasn't that the main issue blasters had originally ?

Yes. And it went entirely unaddressed. Makes you wonder what they're doing at CCP....

Alticus C Bear wrote:
The patch notes state that Hail has had its falloff penalty removed completly.

Can someone please confirm this to be the case? If so can Void be changed as well please.

Does it matter? Even if Hail sucked, projectile users still had plenty of "explosive" kick in RF Fusion. It blows my mind to the nth degree. Crucible was supposed to balance hybrids, yet this one single change to Hail is going to outshine all of the hybrid "buffs" and make projectiles even better than "the best" they already are. I've seen reports of reducing the falloff penalty, and I've seen reports of the penalty being removed completely. I haven't bothered to check it since I'm more interested in THE TOPIC AT HAND. Still, how can you not laugh when, in an effort to buff hybrids, all that really happened was projectiles got better? It's become apparent in the last week, this thread and its theme is a running joke by design. It's fitting really, since hybrids will remain the laughing stock of EVE Online weaponry. This will never change if CCP retains the broken and illogical philosophies of dominant Minmatar speed versus the dichotome of speed-penalized, laughable range, and subpar armor-tanking blaster boats.
Tub Chil
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1217 - 2011-11-28 18:49:54 UTC
Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.

so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff?
Maxsim Goratiev
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1218 - 2011-11-28 19:19:56 UTC
Tub Chil wrote:
Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.

so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff?

exactly, what the hell?
Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1219 - 2011-11-28 19:44:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Magosian
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:
Tub Chil wrote:
Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.

so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff?

exactly, what the hell?


I believe he's saying that 20km + ranges were possible with autocannons using RF ammo and some TEs/TCs (making Hail a poor choice) while blasters never had/have anything close to this...not exactly made in the clearest manner but it still stands as fact.

EDIT: I should add the context of this post is with medium weapons. Still, the same problems exist with large turrets as well.
Charles Edisson
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1220 - 2011-11-28 21:56:42 UTC
Tub Chil wrote:
Besides obvious advantages of Minmatar, they always had a stealth advantage of not being penalized by using highest damage ammo on autocannons. Hail was the only "fair" one tbh.

so now when you "fixed" it, why does void still have -25% AND -50% penalty on optimal and falloff?


Because Talest is either predudice and mostly uses Winmitar characters, or due to his holiday before the patch change freeze he missed the boat.
Corruption or incompitence, take your pick.