Player Features and Ideas Discussion

" Brawler ruppy will get killed by other blaster brawlers if theyre smart enough to fit cap booster(most do), due to the shear dps advantage blasters have.

However, this thread is about ac application at falloff/kite ranges though. im ok with acs in brawl range, mainly due to trade off for neuts and capless weapons. At least they can apply the majority of their dps there. At range, though, with it being drones, light missiles, rails and in some cases blasters flooding the meta, the poor application of ac at kite range is really unattractive in comparison. "


Yet since the last post, I've popped a Brawler Ruppy in a Kite Stabber and a Blaster Throax in a Brawler Ruppy.

You say this thread is only about ac application at falloff, but your buffing a whole weapon system, which I feel is unnecessary. AC's are in a pretty decent place atm, unlike drones and links.

I'm not saying the Vaga/Cyna are the best in class, but there is no need to alter all med AC's when the problem lies with a couple of hulls. The Angel Cartel ships give a bonus to warp speed and warp acceleration which makes it a bit easier to engageing/disengaging . Not eveyone warps to a BM, quite a few leave the gate and warp to a belt or straight to a plex. Orbit the gate and see where they go, kill them. It's not all about EFT numbers.

Never said you couldn't kill a buffer fit rupture (XLASB is buffer). But something with an active tank at range would be very tedious to kill. The ruppy you killed was XLASB, with an afterburner and 180's. Pretty one sided fight when you had 425's and double RLML and MWD.

Thorax/ruppy looked to be pretty even, so you proved me wrong. No argument there.



A whole weapon system who's role is medium engagements, not only brawling. A base fall-off increase will have almost no change to brawler fit autocannons (+1-3km fall-off), but will make it slightly more feasible to kite with hulls that don't have fall-off bonuses. At the same time allowing fall-off bonused "kite" hulls to apply slightly more dps down range. A "kite" ruppy, cane, scyfi, stabber FI, wolf, sabre, rifter might be more viable after the buff. I'm mainly talking about buffing smalls and mediums. Larges are in good shape.




Why are only the vaga and cyna the problem? You are omitting the rest of the minmatar ships without fall-off bonuses. EVE is a sandbox, why are we restricting ships to only certain fits? Thats bad, and makes things boring. Sure, some things cannot be done, but in most cases you have long/short range fits viable for almost any hull.

For minmatar this is difficult because artillery gimps fits by forcing you into multiple fitting mods, only on a couple ships is it manageable. And because its manageable, we're seeing a trend where artillery is favored over a/c's on fall-off bonused hulls. Arty cynabals are becoming more common because people are realize they put more dps down range than a/c's at the same range. They're ranked 2nd most used weapon system on KB currently, 33% less kills than a/c. People still fly a/c cynabals more, maybe for nostalgic's sake, because their fitting skills aren't good enough for artillery, or just don't want to gimp their fit. And warp speed bonus is ok i suppose in niche` circumstances, or when traveling in a frig gang. "Cynabal, the best at running away".

If i can't fit artillery + a reasonable tank like other kite ships, to have a feasible "long range weapon", then a/c's need to be viable across the board. Meaning, artillery keeps its gank/alpha niche` and a/c's are more flexible in their targets and non fall-off bonused ships being more viable as a/c kiters.

WE DID IT, OP SUCCES.

"7.5%" OH WAIT NO NO NO NO.

Yep, fausse joie.

Minmatar weapons persist by one rule and one rule only...

If it's there, i can shoot it... 5k away or 50K away... I may have better hits on a 5k target versus a 50K target but even so i'll still hit the further target AND not use cap doing it... gives me more room to keep the blighter at distance while I pelt it with Plasma-coated rocks.

At least it's something. I'm happy with the change. Here is a link to the changes for everyone who is too lazy to look themselves.


Falloff Change

Agreed. Also, I would prefer that they creep up a proper balance as opposed to over-buffing, my Vaga will appreciate the changes but hopefully they will be ready with tweaks, say 8.5% hypothetically, if the proposed changes turn out to be underwhelming. Or even tweaks to hulls that need them after mass testing highlights issues.

the recent autocannon rebalance didn't really solve anything it seems too have been a stop gap or token change, cos they did the same with scorch and lasers.

changes needed
- all ammo too be falloff based instead of optimal range based
- reduce reload time at least on autocannons, maybe it should be a bonus for SR over LR weapons
- i think ammo should be capped at 30% bonuses/penalties, so that the base stats of a weapon means a lot more.
- higher RoF is needed

also the overdue nerf too HAM range would help here indirectly

HAMS have the same range as torps do