These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Polarized weaponry (affectionately known as glass cannons)

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Wolfgang Achari
Morior Invictus.
#241 - 2014-10-23 18:54:07 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Cant tell Ifserious wrote:
The use of these weapons on existing ships with their current stats and price can't be justified.

You sacrifice: Lots of ISK, all of your tank, 25% optimal, 50% falloff
You gain: ~15% DPS, ~10% tracking

You can't brawl because 0 tank
You can't kite because crappy range
You can't snipe effectively because crappy range
You can't gank because high price

so whats the catch?

Also the name should be "HYPER" 800mm auto cannon .....etc imo

Fixed that for you. I'd suggest waiting until we see that these T3 destroyers bring before passing final judgement. Maybe they have bonuses cancelling the penalty of these weapons? If that's the case, they'd be awesome.


What about the medium/large sized variants?
Soden Rah
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#242 - 2014-10-23 18:57:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Soden Rah
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Cant tell Ifserious wrote:
The use of these weapons on existing ships with their current stats and price can't be justified.

You sacrifice: Lots of ISK, all of your tank, 25% optimal, 50% falloff
You gain: ~15% DPS, ~10% tracking

You can't brawl because 0 tank
You can't kite because crappy range
You can't snipe effectively because crappy range
You can't gank because high price

so whats the catch?

Also the name should be "HYPER" 800mm auto cannon .....etc imo

Fixed that for you. I'd suggest waiting until we see that these T3 destroyers bring before passing final judgement. Maybe they have bonuses cancelling the penalty of these weapons? If that's the case, they'd be awesome.



If these modules are supposed to be used in conjunction with a new ship then we need the new ship to test them on.
These are not currently being advertised as being compliments to the new T3 ships, and we don't have those T3
ships to test with. Also these modules have no special restrictions linking them to the T3 ships [unlike say cov ops
cloaks].
So it's reasonable to assume that they have no particular link to these new T3 ships we know almost nothing about
and can't test with and work under the assumption that they are for general use.

Incidentally are these turrets seeded anywhere outside of the test systems?
Because there none seeded in the system/region I'm testing in atm.



EDIT: also what the post above said...
WillusKillus
Hooded Underworld Guys
Brotherhood of Spacers
#243 - 2014-10-23 19:05:14 UTC
This is just a really bizarre and pointless idea.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#244 - 2014-10-23 19:08:42 UTC
Wolfgang Achari wrote:

What about the medium/large sized variants?

Bombers and Attack Battlecruisers can use over-sized weapons, so there is some precedent for it.

Honestly, I'm really just hoping that they're for use with the T3 destroyers because they seem so underwhelming on their own.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Cant tell Ifserious
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#245 - 2014-10-23 19:51:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Cant tell Ifserious
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Cant tell Ifserious wrote:
The use of these weapons on existing ships with their current stats and price can't be justified.

You sacrifice: Lots of ISK, all of your tank, 25% optimal, 50% falloff
You gain: ~15% DPS, ~10% tracking

You can't brawl because 0 tank
You can't kite because crappy range
You can't snipe effectively because crappy range
You can't gank because high price

so whats the catch?

Also the name should be "HYPER" 800mm auto cannon .....etc imo

Fixed that for you. I'd suggest waiting until we see that these T3 destroyers bring before passing final judgement. Maybe they have bonuses cancelling the penalty of these weapons? If that's the case, they'd be awesome.



So the t3 destroyers will be able to fit the medium and large guns? no they wont......... You cant make guns just for one ship. All you guys are trying to compare these guns with the T3 destroyers. which is a very niche group and will most likely be nothing but elite pvp/ small gang pvp ships after awhile. Once people buy a t3 dessie and spin it in their hanger, the appeal will be gone and they will be just another ship. These guns need a larger dps boost and apparently ccp doesnt want you to snipe with them so they are messing with the fall off. :(
Lynne Rankin
Slow Chidlren at Play
SL0W CHILDREN AT PLAY
#246 - 2014-10-23 20:19:21 UTC
After watching Zaqq's video about the Blighted weaponry, an interesting concept came up.

Why not have the blighted weaponry's negative affects be the following:

Shield Resistances Reduced by 100% Despite Resistance Module Bonuses
Armor Resistances Reduced by 100% Despite Resistance Module Bonuses
Structure Resistances Reduced by 100%

If Damage Control is fitted:
Shield Resistance addition ignored
Armor Resistance addition ignored
Structure Resistance addition halved to 30% rather than 60%


This would give ships with Blighted weaponry at least some sort of tank, and be the only setup to effectively use hull-tanking (excluding freighters).

Hull-tanking, including a potential buff to hull reppers, could in theory become a thing.



Keep in mind, this is a suggestion if CCP goes with the plan that all resistances are brought to zero, rather than only base resistances.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#247 - 2014-10-23 20:25:34 UTC
what bothers me most about the idea is that it doesn't make any sense in a scifi world. Sure you say that many things don't make sense in eve but this doesn't mean you have to ad more to it. Good scifi is believable.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#248 - 2014-10-23 20:31:23 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
what bothers me most about the idea is that it doesn't make any sense in a scifi world. Sure you say that many things don't make sense in eve but this doesn't mean you have to ad more to it. Good scifi is believable.

Well, with the proper backing in the lore, I could see a weapon sucking all power from the shields to achieve an overheated-like effect. Naturally, sucking power only from shields would give armor tanked ships a huge edge so they have to remove armor resists as well, which is where it loses it's believability.
Soden Rah
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#249 - 2014-10-23 20:37:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Soden Rah
Ok.
First impressions...

After having a look at these turrets on SiSi with their current stats I just cannot see the point.

I have played with a number of different fitting options and the only viable strategy I can see for
general use is for kiting/speed tank ships.

And these weapons just don't have the range, or enough dps boost to be worth while.

If you are keeping the no resists thing then I think they need to be in the 100%+ dps boost,
AND have an increased range over their T2 counterparts.

When I first heard about these I thought that they might be an interesting and dynamic option for
creating fast kiting fits that are paper thin but do awesome dps...

But the tiny dps boost coupled with REDUCED range kills this as a viable option.

The only viable way of adding hitpoints to these ships is shield expanders/plates... which make ships
slower/easier to target and hit. and negates speed tanking which is what glass cannons are all about.

If you want to build a glass cannon you make it fast and agile so that it can get to range and lay down dps
as fast as possible. You also make it cheep... Because glass cannons die.

I used to love going out in a cheap glass cannon fit T-Rex, fast tackle/dps boat. It got high up the damage
lists on many a kill by getting their first and doing good/great dps when there. And it survived until the
opposing gang picked you as primary and then it popped. My FC's would have thrown a fit if I stuck
Faction priced mods on it for a 50%+ drop in ehp and only a ~10% boost in dps with reduced range.

To me, these weapons don't make sense.

I cannot see them working in their current form.


Also: info windows on SiSi have just stopped working for me... submitting bug repport.



EDIT: done some playtesting, and so far it seems that practice is matching theory.
The loss of ehp is too extreme to make this viable... Will run some more test tomorrow.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#250 - 2014-10-23 20:52:08 UTC
With all due respect, I think most of us here would really like to hear why EVE needs weapons like this in the first place. Perhaps if we knew that, we could give better feedback as to what direction they should go.
edeity
Holy Amarrian Battlemonk
Crimson Inquisicion
#251 - 2014-10-23 20:59:54 UTC
SO I CAN FIT GEMS? WILL THE ENCHANTRESS REROLL STATS OR DO I HAVE TO GET THE EXPANSION?
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#252 - 2014-10-23 21:05:06 UTC
Soon I shall don my +3 Helm of Disintegration and smite thee with my +7 Wild Axe Mace of Doom.


I needed to stow my +4 Holy Shield of Protection in order to use my +7 Wild Axe Mace of Doom... its a two handed weapon.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Kamahl Daikun
State War Academy
Caldari State
#253 - 2014-10-23 23:37:53 UTC
To toss in my few cents regarding the missiles.

Rockets are kind of hit and miss. In a way, they make sense. In another way, they make no sense at all. Even fitting a buffer on a frigate, 0% resists means you're going still taking heavy damage. Moreso than if you just used a normal fit.
On a Hookbill, for instance, sure you can push 14km range on Rockets but exactly how many slots will you have to sacrifice to either survive long enough to kill someone or wreck their sensors so they can't even fight back?

HAMs and Torpedos just make no sense. Torpedos are mainly only a viable option for Stealth Bombers. Considering most SBs don't fit buffer or tank at all, this makes sense for them. However, adding a completely new weapon system for 4 ships? Seriously?
I can't think of a valid use for HAMs either, even in PvE. The only situation where HAMs would be remotely viable would be Lvl 3's in a Drake. In which case you're tossing the Drake as soon as you hit Lvl 4's anyway.

Lastly, let's face it, for the BCs that do use HAMs or Torps, they're hardly ever seen anymore because BCs just don't fit into a lot of fleet comps. The poor mobility and poor warp speeds make that a bit too difficult right now.

This is a reasonably bad idea. I wouldn't mind it too much if useful missile turrets were offered, like LMLs, RLMLs, and CMs.
Because, let's face it, Rockets and LML/RLML are the only missile fits used these days in PvP. CMs are awesome for PvE and PvP.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#254 - 2014-10-24 00:53:14 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Kamahl Daikun wrote:
To toss in my few cents regarding the missiles.

Rockets are kind of hit and miss. In a way, they make sense. In another way, they make no sense at all. Even fitting a buffer on a frigate, 0% resists means you're going still taking heavy damage. Moreso than if you just used a normal fit.
On a Hookbill, for instance, sure you can push 14km range on Rockets but exactly how many slots will you have to sacrifice to either survive long enough to kill someone or wreck their sensors so they can't even fight back?

HAMs and Torpedos just make no sense. Torpedos are mainly only a viable option for Stealth Bombers. Considering most SBs don't fit buffer or tank at all, this makes sense for them. However, adding a completely new weapon system for 4 ships? Seriously?
I can't think of a valid use for HAMs either, even in PvE. The only situation where HAMs would be remotely viable would be Lvl 3's in a Drake. In which case you're tossing the Drake as soon as you hit Lvl 4's anyway.

Lastly, let's face it, for the BCs that do use HAMs or Torps, they're hardly ever seen anymore because BCs just don't fit into a lot of fleet comps. The poor mobility and poor warp speeds make that a bit too difficult right now.

This is a reasonably bad idea. I wouldn't mind it too much if useful missile turrets were offered, like LMLs, RLMLs, and CMs.
Because, let's face it, Rockets and LML/RLML are the only missile fits used these days in PvP. CMs are awesome for PvE and PvP.

Don't forget that, in the case of SB's, you would be fitting faction weapons at faction cost on a frig with 0 resist and no tank. Some people will, but for the majority I would say that there isn't much reason to.
As for HAMs and torps, they're for structure grinding. That's the only case in which I can see someone willingly dropping their entire resist profile for damage. Also, the turrets get tracking bonuses and damage increase whereas missiles get the shaft yet again by only getting the RoF bonus and not even so much as an ammo cap increase. Just saying...

Also, I should stop drinking and posting maybe...
Dr Wernstrom
Tri.City.Trading.Co
#255 - 2014-10-24 01:16:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Wernstrom
Ok got to ask... these are supposed to be glass cannon weapon guns true?

This then implies high firepower at long range? So why were the short range variations of each weapon system chosen?

Gun Type......Short Range........Long Range
Laser.............Pulse....................Beam
Hybrid............Blaster..................Railgun
Projectile.......Autocannon.........Artillery
Missiles a bit different...

To me, there is the Paradox.

As an industrialist, I feed your war click after click after click.... 
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#256 - 2014-10-24 01:56:07 UTC
Ok just got back from test server and I tried all the 'blighted' lasers of each size. Small, Medium and Large. The damage was ok but imho not worth the trade off for 0 resists. Just seems to harsh for the amount of damage gained over their normal T2 counterparts. I suggest either raising the DPS up or giving us back some resist. As it stands I don't see theses guns getting much use other than on SB's or attack battlecruisers (tier 3).

Also when in Bastion Mode why not let marauders have the bonus of just the bastion module given resists when 'blighted' guns are fitted

And please god change the name

Oderint Dum Metuant
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#257 - 2014-10-24 02:25:45 UTC
I also just thought of something...you might gain an increase in DPS by what 15%-18% but your opponent gains an increase up to 100% with your 0% resists. Just not worth it.

Oderint Dum Metuant
290xanaots
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#258 - 2014-10-24 02:57:30 UTC
Aralieus wrote:
I also just thought of something...you might gain an increase in DPS by what 15%-18% but your opponent gains an increase up to 100% with your 0% resists. Just not worth it.



^^^This exactly. I was pretty excited about these, but I just hopped on the test server to try them out. I was expecting a significant increase in DPS, but as they are, they're just not worth it.

They're so obviously not worth it that it's not even worth my time to go looking for the sites I would want to run with them on Sisi. Let's start talking about numbers closer to the 50% mark and I'll go through the effort of finding sites and testing them.
Gjallarhund
Mutilation.
#259 - 2014-10-24 04:29:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Gjallarhund
I'd just like to say the following image is a better idea than this whole blighted gun thing seeing how worthless such a small increase in DPS vs loss of resists


decent idea


ninja edit: not a troll link either seriously. Blighted ammo makes a shitload more sense, you could do it in different grades offering different levels of dps increase vs resistance loss and make the whole idea not 100% worthless outside of fitting blighted small blasters to gank catalysts
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#260 - 2014-10-24 04:37:37 UTC
alternative idea: a ship setting which allows you to permanently overheat your guns without damaging them but it removes most or all ship resistances.

no need for a new item.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value