These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: The Svipul Tactical Destroyer andProjectile Changes

First post First post
Author
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#141 - 2015-01-21 17:36:57 UTC
Aiyshimin wrote:
Nahzgul wrote:
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.

I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.

As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?


As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried.

Or something.



You should scram kite with jag. Its pretty potent. Or thrasher. 1k alpha, decent mobility. Hold at scram range and blap away. Arty can be brutal in scram range, as long as you have a tracking bonus and web(s).
Solhild
Doomheim
#142 - 2015-01-21 18:01:45 UTC
I've been through the whole thread and it seems that both tank and projectile bonuses are perceived to be borked. Good luck in getting those changed.

As for the model itself, it looks great but I'm worried that the ship thrusters will look completely unbalanced in a vertical mode. Looking forward to seeing more.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#143 - 2015-01-21 18:23:05 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:
I think CCP is disregarding Power Creep, T3 destroyers are ludicrous overpowered.


they are eerily like T3 cruisers

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#144 - 2015-01-21 18:56:06 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Aiyshimin wrote:
Nahzgul wrote:
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.

I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.

As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?


As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried.

Or something.



You should scram kite with jag. Its pretty potent. Or thrasher. 1k alpha, decent mobility. Hold at scram range and blap away. Arty can be brutal in scram range, as long as you have a tracking bonus and web(s).


jaguars are laughable. 3 guns and a wasted bonus? it has no dps at all. and ccp tried to fix it by giving it an extra slot, even though the obvious thing it lacks compared to all other AFs is a gun.
J A Aloysiusz
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#145 - 2015-01-21 19:11:52 UTC
+1 on the svipul and the projectile changes.

but really, "...while reducing the reliance on the excellent Barrage T2 ammo type."

Do you even eve? Barrage is almost never the correct ammo choice.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#146 - 2015-01-21 19:22:49 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Aiyshimin wrote:
Nahzgul wrote:
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.

I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.

As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?


As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried.

Or something.



You should scram kite with jag. Its pretty potent. Or thrasher. 1k alpha, decent mobility. Hold at scram range and blap away. Arty can be brutal in scram range, as long as you have a tracking bonus and web(s).


jaguars are laughable. 3 guns and a wasted bonus? it has no dps at all. and ccp tried to fix it by giving it an extra slot, even though the obvious thing it lacks compared to all other AFs is a gun.


What wasted bonus? Optimal? Its an arty boat, not an ac boat. Optimal works well with small scram/kite arty. Arty isnt meant for dps, but alpha. My 280 jag hits for about 1k, but does like 160dps. Still projects out to long point range as well.That translates to curb stomping dual rep incursus or breachers. As you alpha straight through their reps. Can go double web aar, or single web/mse. Course you need 2PG mods and an implant to do that. Thats why arty really needs a reduction in PG. Least for small/medium.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2015-01-21 21:29:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Looking forward to the Svipul!


I feel that the autocannon ammo rebalance is heading in the wrong direction and ignoring the heart of the problem. The true imbalance lies in the tech 1 ammo, as tech 1 projectile ammo does not balance alongside other turrets the way tech 2 ammo does. This causes tech 2 ammo to compare with tech 1 faction navy ammo very differently in some cases than in others.

Here are the major changes that happen when you switch from tech 1 medium range ammo to:
Tech 1 short range ammo:
Pulse Lasers: high damage at heavy cost to range
Blasters: high damage at moderate cost to range
Autocannons: high damage at almost no cost to range - but instead they sacrifice tracking

Tech 1 long range ammo:
Pulse Lasers: much longer range at heavy cost to damage
Blasters: significantly longer range at heavy cost to damage
Autocannons: insignificantly longer range at heavy cost to damage, also lower tracking (useless ammo for autocannons)


Now the major changes that happen when you switch from:
Navy short range to Tech 2 short range ammo:
Pulse Lasers: higher damage at same range, cost is instead to tracking and capacitor cost
Blasters: higher damage at a bit less range, also loses tracking and costs more capacitor
Autocannons: higher damage at a bit less range, also loses tracking

**this is where you see the imbalance**
Navy long range to Tech 2 long range ammo:
Pulse Lasers: less tracking and slightly less range at tremendous gain to damage
Blasters: less tracking and slightly more range with tremendous gain to damage
Autocannons: less tracking and significantly more range with tremendous gain to damage



When you look at it this way, you see a range imbalance in the tech 2 ammo. But I submit to you that the range imbalance exists in tech 1 and manifests in tech 2 when you switch from tech 1 to tech 2. This results in Barrage being a staple of autocannon ammo because it is the only viable long range option for autocannons. Choosing longer range variants within tech 1 and faction ammo just doesn't affect the range much.


My solution? Give tech 1 long range projectile ammo a falloff bonus, and cut its optimal bonus a bit to keep artillery at the same range as before. Now people actually put Proton in an autocannon because it actually boosts range over heavier-hitting and faster-tracking Depleted Uranium.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#148 - 2015-01-21 22:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

Words and things


The problem here is you're comparing Navy Radio to Pulse, and Iron to Null. Nobody uses Radio or Iron unless they don't have T2 weapons, in which case this comparison is useless.

If you compare Multifrequency to Scorch, Antimatter to null, and EMP to Barrage, you'll see that your worries are unfounded. Most people only carry two or three ammos (EMP and Barrage/Multifreq and Scorch/Antimatter, Void and Null)

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#149 - 2015-01-21 22:38:53 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
If you compare Multifrequency to Scorch, Antimatter to null, and EMP to Barrage, you'll see that your worries are unfounded.

That's based on the assumption that T1 short range ammo is already balanced. If it is, then t1 medium range isn't.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#150 - 2015-01-21 23:10:02 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
If you compare Multifrequency to Scorch, Antimatter to null, and EMP to Barrage, you'll see that your worries are unfounded.

That's based on the assumption that T1 short range ammo is already balanced. If it is, then t1 medium range isn't.


Well since T1/Faction short range ammo hasn't seen a balance pass, or any complaints, in my EVE career I think it's fairly safe to assume it is balanced.

Whether medium projectile ammo is balanced, I don't have a problem with it. Autocannons aren't unbalanced because of it. (It may be a problem for people with T1 autos, but people agree that the train into T2s is required for all weapons systems anyway.)

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2015-01-21 23:27:39 UTC
T2 anything should always be a great boost, but rookie players should never be marginalized. Not everyone has had time to train T2 weapons.

Furthermore, my original point still stands even when you compare tech 1 short range to tech 2 long range:

Multifrequency to Scorch: damage goes down, range goes WAY up
Antimatter to Null: damage goes down, range goes up a lot
Fusion to Barrage: damage goes down, range goes up a bit

The difference is clear, autocannon range doesn't change much with ammo, so just pick the highest damage ammo. Barrage is useful because it's the only ammo that actually does bring the range up and sometimes that range is important for scoring hits at all. But this change is further diminishing its already tiny advantage, further boosting the comparative power of other tech 2 long range ammos and further marginalizing an already marginal ammo. All this change does is remove ammo options from autocannons in favor of just picking the one with the most damage.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Pliskkenn
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#152 - 2015-01-22 00:06:01 UTC
Looks lovely.

Sad there is no native falloff bonus. Could have been a baby Stabber :3
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2015-01-22 00:49:29 UTC
Pliskkenn wrote:
baby Stabber :3

With a bib for a frill? I want one!

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#154 - 2015-01-22 01:23:56 UTC
The design is bold and I like it. I wonder what the camera will do, and whether it will break like the Blackbird...
Nahzgul
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#155 - 2015-01-22 02:51:15 UTC
Aiyshimin wrote:
Nahzgul wrote:
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.

I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.

As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?


As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried.

Or something.




I thought the draw to these ships was their versatility and the situation you describe propulsion would be a bit more beneficial I think.
Dea Imperium
Ascending Empire
#156 - 2015-01-22 03:04:50 UTC
I would like to see a dev team's research on the prevalence of turret types in the game. My impression over the years has been that projectile turrets are used more than either of the other flavors due to the lack of capacitor drain and their having the highest alpha of the weapon types, but unlike the devs I have no access to actual metrics from the game's database. Seeing Amarr and Gallente turret boats cruising around with artillery mounted instead of their racial bonused turret types has given me the feeling that hybrids and lasers need considerably more attention than projectiles at the moment, however.
Acel Tokalov
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2015-01-22 03:44:42 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
T2 anything should always be a great boost, but rookie players should never be marginalized. Not everyone has had time to train T2 weapons.

Furthermore, my original point still stands even when you compare tech 1 short range to tech 2 long range:

Multifrequency to Scorch: damage goes down, range goes WAY up
Antimatter to Null: damage goes down, range goes up a lot
Fusion to Barrage: damage goes down, range goes up a bit

The difference is clear, autocannon range doesn't change much with ammo, so just pick the highest damage ammo. Barrage is useful because it's the only ammo that actually does bring the range up and sometimes that range is important for scoring hits at all. But this change is further diminishing its already tiny advantage, further boosting the comparative power of other tech 2 long range ammos and further marginalizing an already marginal ammo. All this change does is remove ammo options from autocannons in favor of just picking the one with the most damage.


Clearly you have never flown Minmatar. Barrage is the only ammo you ever load in a Vagabond because you need that falloff to stay out of scram/web range. If you are kiting with ACs you need barrage.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#158 - 2015-01-22 04:10:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Acel Tokalov wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
All this change does is remove ammo options from autocannons in favor of just picking the one with the most damage.


Clearly you have never flown Minmatar. Barrage is the only ammo you ever load in a Vagabond because you need that falloff to stay out of scram/web range. If you are kiting with ACs you need barrage.

Good job not even reading my post. I understand the need for higher range. When one ammo gives slightly more range, even if it's got a lot less damage, it's still going to get used pretty often. Most tech 2 long range ammos dominate over tech 1 long range because they have better range and MUCH better damage. But in the case of projectile ammo, tech 1 long range doesn't really count as long range, so tech 2 is the only longer range option. It's not much longer and so the DPS loss is much more apparent, but still leaves it viable because of the importance of range.

TL;DR: Barrage needs MORE of a range advantage over short range ammo, not less. And long range t1 projectile ammo needs a falloff bonus.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#159 - 2015-01-22 04:22:55 UTC
Dea Imperium wrote:
I would like to see a dev team's research on the prevalence of turret types in the game. My impression over the years has been that projectile turrets are used more than either of the other flavors due to the lack of capacitor drain and their having the highest alpha of the weapon types, but unlike the devs I have no access to actual metrics from the game's database. Seeing Amarr and Gallente turret boats cruising around with artillery mounted instead of their racial bonused turret types has given me the feeling that hybrids and lasers need considerably more attention than projectiles at the moment, however.


What gal/amarr ships are fitting arty? The last ship i heard that did that were the old hellcats (abaddon's with 1400's), but that was a few years ago.

Hybrids and lasers are actually in a good spot atm. Hybrids more than lasers. Scorch is still very powerful, and small beams were just buffed. Lasers could prob use some more tweaking, but it surely isn't making people put arty on their ships. In fact, it probably has less to do with the weapon system, than the hull bonus on the ship. Example would be the punisher, i think people put w/e gun fits.
Khald Hilitari
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#160 - 2015-01-22 04:41:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Khald Hilitari
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

TL;DR: Barrage needs MORE of a range advantage over short range ammo, not less. And long range t1 projectile ammo needs a falloff bonus.


This is where I'm gonna have to disagree a bit with you.

It's not that Barrage needs more range advantage, it's that we need more viable choices in ammo selection.

None of the t1 projectile ammos effect range one way or the other so if we want damage we take Fusion or Phased Plasma and if we need range we have to take Barrage. Can't take Hail because the tracking penalty is way too high for the ranges it is used at, EMP suffers from split damages, and the others do less damage at closer effective ranges than Barrage.

To fix this I would suggest changing all projectile ammos to modify both falloff and optimal in such a way that the ranges they're used at on artilleries stay roughly the same, but so that autocannons can get some variation in ranges when switching ammo. This may also require tweaking the base ranges on some autocannons. And while they'd be at it it'd be awesome if CCP could maybe tone down the overkill that is 30% tracking reduction. That kind of tracking hit practically requires lining up to trade broadside volleys.