These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Gallente (+Some Caldari Lovin)

First post
Jon Marburg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#21 - 2011-09-28 13:48:55 UTC
Really like most of these changes! The ship changes are pretty much right on. While Gallente ships should remain slower than Minmatar ships, they should be able to accelerate up to top speed much faster than they are currently able. As I see it tanking roles should be Caldari= shield, Minmatar= shield/speed, Gallente= armor/speed, and Amarr= armor. However, right now if you fit a plate on a blasterboat you have almost no chance of getting your guns in range to apply damage or effectively maneuver to avoid it making the ships currently unviable to fly for pvp.

I'm against increasing damage on blasters as right now the dps numbers are where they should be (at point blank anyways). One change that I'd suggest in place of this is to change the hybrid ammo around a little. Base hybrid turret range is essentially half optimal and half falloff and the ammo should reflect this. The ammo should be partial range reductions for both rather than just optimal. As an example, a Neutron Blaster Cannon II with Antimatter ammo currently gets with max skills 4.5 km optimal and 12.5 falloff for a max effective range of 17 km. If the ammo was changed to something like -20%/-20% you'd get a slight range increase of 7.2+10 as well as get a better damage projection envelope. I personally wouldn't mind if the base turret stats were changed to place effective range for close range hybrid ammo closer to 20km for the discussed turret. In case you want to compare, currently Mega Pulse Laser II has range of 15+10 and 800mm Repeating Artillery II has a range of 3+24 with close range ammo.

An additional bonus of changing the ammo formula around is that blaster tracking might not need such a significant increasing as the optimal ranges would be more in line with current tracking figures.

I like the idea that sentries could follow you at limited speed, but I'd really just settle for them being able to return to the dronebay without me needing to be right on top of them (they do have maneuvering thrusters >.>).

The only change you suggested that kind of scares me is the active tanking ones as with your current numbers I can see plenty of opportunities for abuse.
Brandoe Chung
#22 - 2011-09-28 14:07:35 UTC
Very well thought out and concise. You obviously have spent some brain time on this. And out of all the threads on Hyrids and Gallente I found this one to touch on all the things my corpmates and I have been talking about for years.

Since cross training I don't think I have flown a Gallente ship in combat with the exception of a Mega for a POS bash once.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#23 - 2011-09-28 15:10:40 UTC
Blasters. More DPS is fair enough. I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve on the tracking changes though. The tracking increases are insufficient to give blasters the ability to hit smaller-class ships effectively, and you don't mention the (IMO) excessive ability of ACs and Pulse to apply damage at blasters' optimal range. I really think there needs to be a tracking decrease for Pulse and ACs, they're too effective at close range.

Ship changes. Makes sense mostly. Brutix is really tight on PG and may need more. But the Megathron doesn't need any more PG for a blaster role, and it shouldn't be specifically boosted in a rail role - that's the Rokh's job.

Rails. Targeting range increase - sure.
Minimum warp-to distance - make it more than 200 km, tbh. Maybe ban all on-grid warps.
33% range increase. Be very careful that the Megathron doesn't obsolete the Rokh. The Rokh is supposed to be a better sniper, although we can certainly discuss exactly what is meant by "better"!

Moving sentry drones. I'm not keen. This really is deployable, ewar-proof turrets. I think they're good enough and don't need boosting.
Myrmidon - sure.
Command ships. All Field CS need a rework, they are all obsolete.

Active tanks. I don't understand the overload idea. I thought it meant increasing the magnitude of the overload bonus, but you seem to mention resists.
Increased magnitude to 10% - also good, but be careful that this doesn't help Minmatar more than it helps Gallente.
Rig change to agility from speed. Erm. Not hugely helpful. You need to explain your vision of Gallente-Minmatar balance regarding mobility better here.

Cap batteries. Not keen, it's too powerful, and they're too hard to fit, creating a rather binary balance situation. If neuts are too powerful (which I don't think they are), then I'd boost the drain amount or reduce the fitting requirements of Nos instead.

Gang links. Overload bonus - nice idea.
Tracking speed link. Hmm, okay.
Capacitor size. Should really be an Amarr link, but okay.
I've always favoured restricting Interdiction Manoeuvres to web range only, and giving Gallente a disruptor/scrambler range link. One possible problem with your ideas is that they're not very Gallente-specific. Hmmm. Personally, I'd rework all gang links at the same times as command ships.

Battlecruisers. Tier 2 BCs are too powerful and too common. They obsolete cruisers and close-range HACs. Cut them down to tier 1 levels, rather than boosting the tier 1s.

Roden. Split weapons don't need to be bad. In fact, ship unpredictability of fit can be a good thing. I'd like to see the split weapon flavour kept, with the hulls/fittings being boosted instead.
Atomic Heroes
#24 - 2011-09-28 16:57:33 UTC
I'd also still like to see the ammo change time for all hybrids be altered to 3.5s. For weapon systems that rely on ammo for range this is a killer. For a change of damage type I'd keep the projectiles at 10s, this is a luxury compared to range selection which the lasers do instantly. A great imbalance that needs adjusting.
Duchess Starbuckington
#25 - 2011-09-28 17:12:56 UTC

Battlecruisers. Tier 2 BCs are too powerful and too common. They obsolete cruisers and close-range HACs. Cut them down to tier 1 levels, rather than boosting the tier 1s.

This. That's the major problem I have with the OP, a lot of the rest sounds pretty good.
Pattern Clarc
#26 - 2011-09-28 21:50:39 UTC
Some notes:

The tracking increase is as high as it is because blasters do not hit for 100% (with webbed transversal) vs same size/speed targets. Unlike Autocannons or Lasers, there is technically no optimal range unless there is 0 transferral or the target is huge.

Although increasing the optimal range is an option, it creates less diversity between the turret classes, and given that one of the focuses of the op was to make Gallente "better at what we did", impressive tracking at range seemed to be the most congruent option.

Sentry drones not returning is one of the biggest issues I have with drones, especially in siege with a moros. Anything between 70m/s and 200m/s would be good.

The rationale for active tanking bonus providing ship resists follows as thus. The question I asked my self was "what would make you fly active tanking again?"

1) Being able to deal with burst dps better than plates (ie lasting longer in a battleship whilst being shot up at +2000dps)
2) Less vulnerable to cap warfare
3) A less ******** opportunity cost (eg: in fittings and capacitor vs higher tier guns or neuts)
In addition it had to be able to:
a) Not **** up PvE
b) Not **** up 1v1's

First iteration involved a straight increase to the boost amount of the overloaded state, but it meant that a player, in a 1v1, could pulse a repper on overload fully restoring shield/armour HP in a short number of cycles.
This version increases your resistances, so your no longer able to overload-pulse your reps, however your ship now becomes reinforced increasing your local tank, resistances for RR, and your HP to a level I don't think is overpowered, without having to over-compensate (with RAW repping potential) or really mess with module fittings etc.

The Rokh is Dead, long live the Rokh. It Died after the Titan DD nerf FYI. The only difference now is that the rokh can do what it did with spike, with Thorium (IE, without tracking penalties). Oh, it'll also be able to hit with antimatter out to 120+58kms (with strong frentix).

RE: Gallente specific Warfare links... Are any of the other warfare links race specific? I guess caldari's seige bonuses are the closest just because so few ships right now can properly utilise them. The Assault warfare links are more "Gallente" than the Infowarfare links, which would probably have been a better fit for Caldari.

The cap battery "binary" situation is a result of the energy neutraliser binary mechanics. If you can lock a target, you have cap, and it's in range, it gets neuted. No attenuation, no real way of dealing with it beyond going passive (because your injectors won't run your tank, guns or MWD and save you from neuts tbh.) The plan mentioned in the op serves as some kind of option for those who want to run hybrids and a MWD without an injector, however the I'm open to suggestions...

Tier 1 battlecruisers have always been poor. Pretty much under-used since inception just because of all the little things (fittings, roles, dps, bonuses?) that just didn't work together. Nerfing Tier 2 to that level would be a step backwards, in much as the same way nerfing the Myrmidon was/is. Tech 1 cruisers are a wash, their good in places like Red v Blue, are as destroyers, but there not fast enough to survive with so little EHP.

Split weapons = Having 8 hardpopints split evenly between turrets and missiles. THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL UNPREDICTABLY, NO BENEFIT, JUST PAIN. Unless your ship provides extreme advantages (like an apreciable dps advantage) - there is no game design reason why a one ship would require double the (damage/tracking) mods and double the skill points to fully utilities it's weapons over the other.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Pattern Clarc
#27 - 2011-09-29 10:35:14 UTC
Daily bump

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#28 - 2011-09-30 07:56:18 UTC
Fuckign forum ate my post. Ugh
Pattern Clarc
#29 - 2011-09-30 16:30:54 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Fuckign forum ate my post. Ugh

I hit the back button whenever that happens. If you used quick post, hitting the button usually restores the post...

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#30 - 2011-09-30 18:03:20 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
- Becomes Field Commandship
- Gains 50mb in drone bandwidth
- Info warfare bonus becomes turret falloff bonus

No. Don't worry. The T2 Myrmidon will have the drone power you are looking for. While I agree that the ship needs changes, it should stay a fleet command ship. Right now I think an EW drone bonus would be appropriate. It would be in line with the defensive nature of fleet command ships and in line with Gallente drone use.
Pattern Clarc
#31 - 2011-10-01 16:49:32 UTC
Obsidiana wrote:

No. Don't worry. The T2 Myrmidon will have the drone power you are looking for.

Is that in hope or in expectation?

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Raw Matters
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2011-10-02 07:03:08 UTC
Could you please add some numbers to your ideas? I mean increasing Gallente ships is ok, but how did you come up with these numbers?
Pattern Clarc
#33 - 2011-10-03 16:50:57 UTC
Raw Matters wrote:
Could you please add some numbers to your ideas? I mean increasing Gallente ships is ok, but how did you come up with these numbers?

If I added numbers and specific changes to the OP, the whole thing would be too long.

These are not "across the board" changes to gallente hulls, each would have there own specific fixes and tweaks but roughly, the speed increase is equivalent to fitting overdrive, with agility increases equal to fitting inertial stabiliser with power grid changes that allow most blaster ships to fit a decent active tank with Ion blasters.

If you want any specific examples of the changes let me know and I'll see what I can cook up.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2011-10-04 05:09:19 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:

If you want any specific examples of the changes let me know and I'll see what I can cook up.

Can you post a brutix fit that is possible now and then post the improved version of that fit that would be possible were the OP changes put into effect?
Pattern Clarc
#35 - 2011-10-05 14:24:07 UTC
Svaste wrote:
Pattern Clarc wrote:

If you want any specific examples of the changes let me know and I'll see what I can cook up.

Can you post a brutix fit that is possible now and then post the improved version of that fit that would be possible were the OP changes put into effect?


1) Tiericide provides the Brutix with an additional low slot, increased fittings and HP.
- Can now fit injector, dual rep +ions.

2) Combat: Blastership provides the Brutix with additional increases to:
- Dronebay increases to 75m3
- Increased speed (MWD speed now around 1250ms up from 1112ms), improved agility and acceleration
- Increased turret DPS (10% increase to Ion Blaster DPS, 50% increase to tracking.) DPS increases from 423dps (electron +ion blaster mix with void. 581 dps +drones) to 484 dps (642 with drones) before damage mods.

3) Active tanking
- Bonuses change from 7.5% per level, to 10% per level
- Active tank (with dual rep, dcu, EANM and 3x ANP rigs) increases from 342 dps, to 385
- Overloaded, Armour EHP increases by 17.5%, overloaded active tanking increases from (with the same tank as above) 436 dps tanked, to about 580 DPS.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Pattern Clarc
#36 - 2011-10-05 18:09:44 UTC
@CCP No gallente boost will be complete by looking at Hybrids on their own.

Ships, Active Tanking, Commandships and Battlecruisers... They are all interrelated.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

m0cking bird
#37 - 2011-10-05 20:29:04 UTC  |  Edited by: m0cking bird
I don't agree with most of your proposed changes. Active armor tanking is already VERY viable. The suggested changes to tracking, while ignoring a class where tracking is the most important (frigates). Suggest you don't understand the current environment, mechanics, setups and common game-play. The only thing you've suggested I agree with is the changes to the Eos and Myrmidon. 125m bandwidth!
I believe there should be a blanket increase to damage across the board (small, medium, large). That does Include small blasters! This is to compensate for the increase in damage, damage projection, and selective damage types (More focused damage) small projectiles received.

Here are some ideas:

-Other than other small changes that would accumulatively increase the viability of blasters close-range. I suggest a increase in stasis webifier 2 range, from 10km - 12km.

-Another idea I had was a change or addendum to the current overheat mechanics. Over Heated turrets should also have a increase in tracking along with increasing turret rate of fire. Currently that's not the case.

-In the past, I did suggest blasters should have ridiculous tracking! This in it self would not fix most pilots main issue with the weapon system (range and damage application), but would be more inline with the close range focus. Increasing medium turret tracking and lowering signature. To the point, medium turrets could track frigates and large turrets could track cruisers or destroyers. Frigates will still be able to fly out of medium blaster range (under scram range), but will be esploded if they get to close.

Some parting thoughts/rant:

As long as range is not the focus of CCP's changes to Blasters. Any other reasonable changes will not satisfy the wider eve community. You cant increase damage enough for them to be OMG pwn, because Serpents is p close to that and Serpents ships are pretty terrible. Serpentis ships are not viable in fleet engagements, even though they have increased damage and the whole 90% stasis webifier thing.

IF! CCP does not increase blaster range. They MUST increase stasis webifier range ATLEAST! Gallente ships will STILL be garbage in fleet combat, for the most part, which is where this game is going and what this game is about. Ships focus only for solo warfare seems a bit ********, in a massively multiplayer game. Not to mention, most ships that excel in fleets, also excel solo. Minmatar ships more so than others of course.

To reiterate:

BLASTERS are like adding a ROCK as a selectable weapon in counterstrike source. If that seems ******** to you. Then you realize that this is a multi-player game. The game-play is moving more and more towards fleet warfare ONLY. With that all said, solo pvp will still be alive, but more difficult (not contradicting myself) .

David Xavier
The Capsuleers of Unconscious Thought
#38 - 2011-10-05 21:16:46 UTC  |  Edited by: David Xavier
Rails need something more than a mere optimal range increase, you should share the tracking love.

Any reason why leaving out the Dominix the battleship sized drone carrier from your renovation ? It can not fit a full rack of (5) T2 425mm rails and a proper fit without the need of fitting mods, also slow. Or was it your intention to make it absolutely obsolete by making the EoS and Myrmidon able to field 5 heavy drones ?

I don't suffer from insanity.. I enjoy it !

Mara Abraham
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2011-10-06 15:36:45 UTC
Good day:

I saw the Incusus and Tristan listed... but not the Taranis. Did someone forget this and the Enyo are also blaster boats?

Thank you.

--- Mara Abraham

Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2011-10-06 19:24:16 UTC
I agree with this:
Hybrids and Gallente do need some LOVE from CCP, however I do not agree with most of the proposed suggestions.
I think the original author of this thread wanted to make Gallente the new Matari, the ideal and perfect all arounder... Instead we should examine where Gallente with hybrid is worse than other race's ships for the same purpose.

Active tanking:
proposed change: from 7.5 to 10%
I believe that gallente is - more or less - in pair with matari and caldari for tanking. Hyberion ~ Maelstrom ~ Rokh or Myrm ~ Drake > Cyclone and for cruisers Thorax wins overall...
Amarr is a bit different tho... They are very good tankers due to their extra 1-2 lowslots but they are a lot weaker in the meds.
Gallente fits should somehow portrait the fact that there is usually 1 extra medslot for Gallente which should be usable to overcome the speed/range/tracking etc problems.
In current fits/days 4 medslots are abolutely necessary for Gallente for everything: MWD, Scram, Web, cap booster. No cap, no ship. No Web, you won't hit. No Scram, he gets away, No MWD - you try to PVP?

Blasters are very good to deal high DPS at point blank range with WEB on the enemy.
Instead of trying to increase damage/range of the blasters, there should be a way for the pilots to get to point blank range to deal the current damage. And again here comes the extra medslot which pretty much doesn't exists due to the fact that they all are needed just to chase the targets around... No good overall idea here.. Maybe the reduction in mess for the ships is a good idea -> faster MWD/AB speed.

Drone bandwidth and capacity
I don't really use sentrys and for small gang/solo work they aren't the best option IMO. Thus having small/medium sized ones is useless.
Drone damage is good - could be better but not complaining here... eg: vexor DPS? -, many ships already give bonus to it. However consider the fact that those drones need time to get to the target and that sometimes you need to call them back. So you do 1000 DPS with 5 heavies and turrets (700 - 300 ratio to guns) but you can't apply all that damage when the drones are in your drone bay or travelling. Since gallente ships aren't that high on EHP (as say amarr), they have decreased chances to survive the extra time they'd need to effectively apply all the extra damage.
Thus making gallente ships to give say 5% bonus to drone speed would increase the overall damage output of the ship.

IMO PVP has 2 important factor:
  • how much damage you are able to apply on given target
  • and how long you can keep doing it... longer than the opposing turret based higher EHP but slightly lower DPSed ship? (eg: baddon vs. mega or mega vs. mael)
  • [list]