These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Are hybrids inherently broken and impossible to fix?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#61 - 2011-10-30 09:45:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia
As long as blasters have a very high damage output and ability to apply that damage (tracking) I think they are fine. The real question is just how high damage should they be? Will the current improvements be enough? We shall see.

Railguns are a bit tougher. I think they should be a shorter range, low alpha but high dps and mag capacity. Matched with lower fitting req leaving room for tank/toys. Shining as just beyond mid-range standoff platform. This would also allow them to take advantage of what is usually a larger drone compliment.

Actually, both should have lower fitting requirements.

I think more could be accomplished with a look at hybrid damage nature (increase heat? more damage type options with the different ammo types?) than most would realize.

But you don't want to do too much at once, the key to fine tuning is fine.

Both blasters and rails saw better days and they will again. The Gal hulls are decent as they are. There are a lot of good ideas and points in here but people just may be over-thinking things. I don't think a paradigm shift is required. Yeah, they have a problem getting in range sometimes, but all ships need these inherent flaws. If they had the highest DPS weapons and they were the fastest... you'd find they'd be overpowered. (Remember, when they get there they are really laying it on, they just may need luck/good planning/support to do that.)

Above all, I'd hate to see a blurring of the lines for the weapon systems. The disparity, the differences are what keeps combat interesting. All should have their niche and their drawbacks.

As an aside, don't try to use current fleet/gang mentalities to make a balance discussion.... fact is Gal have been out of the loop awhile and if their weapons systems are brought back into balance you'll find fleet/gang mentality will change to take advantage of them.

I'm excited to see the change to blasters, I think people might be surprised by them. As for the railguns they will almost definitely need a bit more work (again I think some ammo changes might be best).... and I hope that happens because I want to actually scare people with my Eagle again.
Rod Blaine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2011-10-30 11:23:06 UTC
You know what's funny? The current state of gunnery balance is nearly identical to (might be somewhat off,but not much) 2004-2006.

We have hybrid boats fitting arties (used ot be lasers too, so something got better at least), pulses and autos outdoing blasters at blaster optimal, rail dps only decent on paper but crappy in practice due to popular tank fits. It's all just like back then.

Last time pulses got nerfed a bit , and arties got nerfed a bit, while rails got a range/dps buff and blasters realy didnt get anything at all. It didn't change enough to make a real difference. Blaster boats never really took off, railboats never really had a specific role (although they worked well enough in sniper doctrines for a while due to good dps).

So excuse me for being sceptical about the preliminary buffs and suggestions here that do nothing but repeat the same thing tried before.

As i see it these are the three gallente 'niches' in pvp/pve:

- short range, high agility ships with face melting dps and a mediocre tank, centered around an ambush, kill, gtfo -doctrine, great for small scale pvp and viable at med scale with logis and an EHP tank. Problems: fail practical dps in optimal, fail tracking in optimal, fail agility, fail cap reservoirs (death by neut). Needs web and scram range bonused or tackle support to work, which is fine.

- long range railboats that do high dps at extreme range with high tracking and low alpha, used for fleet snipe stuff. Decent armor tanks make this a decent pve option as well, especially for low-sp pilots. Problems: this is not a true niche + cap use for rails/cap reservoir on railboats is fail. pve fits need too many concessions to cap stability with a full-size rail fit, taking away med, low and rig slots you should be using to fit that niche: damage, tracking, range, sb's.

- med range drone boats. Relying on damage projection at med range by dorne use and a good armor tank, combiend with some EW capabilities there's a viable pve and pvp niche here. As far as I can see this works well in pve, but not too well in pvp. Incorporating a bit more EW capability into these ships might be nice for that.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2011-10-30 11:40:51 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
Since some people are suggesting all sorts of crazy things:

It could be argued that the problem is not so much blasters but the ships they are on. I have floated the idea before to mak Gallente ships have the best agility in the game while the minmatar keep their traditional speed advantage but get a slight nurf in terms of agility.

This means that while Gallente ships would not be the fastest, they get to speed the fastest and are more maneuverable then any other race. While Minmatar ships, while the fastest, do not have the structure or the power to really get up to speed or maneuver as well.

just a though.

my previous post regarding the role distinction between Projectiles and Hybrids stands.


I'd rather see the opposite that gallente becomes the fastest and minmatar the most agile. It kinda makes lorewise sense since gallente are the high tech ones so they should have invented superior engines for their ships in order to get in blaster range while minmatar ships are lightweight and thus should have high agility and accelration.
Vigdis Thorisdottir
Doomheim
#64 - 2011-10-30 12:01:33 UTC
What about introducing tracking link drones, to help with the blaster tracking issue. Would seem to be a very gallente solution.
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2011-10-31 02:04:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariner6
DarkAegix wrote:
It is possible that a satisfactory hybrid rebalance will remain unattainable for CCP. I'll be using blasters as an example, since they're the main point of my concern.


TL;DR - Blaster boats are too slow, and will always remain that way.


Let's go over the flaws of blasters:
-Barely any extra DPS compared to other weapon systems (Can be fixed, of course)
-Terrible range (This is by design, and thus must be kept short)
-Awful tracking for their operational range (Can be fixed)
-Absurd fitting requirements (Simply reduce blaster powergrid requirements, or buff the powergrid of blaster boats)
-Armour tanks and Gallente are slow, and enemies may simply kite them to death

Note the last point. I don't think CCP are willing to change it. I will list several options below, as well as an explanation as to why neither of them are optimal:
-Buff the range of blasters? No. Blasters are designed as close-range weapons, and not even pro-hybrid buff supporters want AC/pulse laser territory trodden on.
-Reduce the penalty of armour tanks? Dangerous! This will affect half, perhaps more, of the ships in EVE! In my opinion, the shield/armour comparative sacrifices are well balanced, and this option will skew it.
-Make Gallente faster! Seems obvious, right? Apparently this cannot happen.... CCP want Minmatar to be the fastest race, because they would like to keep the "racial stereotypes" of EVE intact. IIRC, this was said in the May CSM minutes.

There are several reasons why that last point is particularly insurmountable. If CCP were to make Gallente ever so slightly slower than Minmatar, then the armour tanks will slow down Gallente and the nanos will speed up Minmatar. There will be a large speed difference, and blaster boats will be kited, perhaps even by Cadari ships as well.

In order for Gallente to be able to get into range of all the other shield nano ships, blaster boats will need to be much faster than Minmatar so that once the armour/shield modifications come in, the gap is not as large.

Gallente could shield tank, but then where would the webs go? Furthermore, we'd basically have 2.75 shield tanking races, and then Amarr and a tiny portion of Minmatar Ugh
Gallente could receive specific bonuses to reduce the speed penalty of armour, but there are more problems.
If blaster boats all receive a a free bonus, then other ships will be missing out.
If blaster boats have one of their bonuses replaced with an armour penalty reduction bonus, then there is effectively a useless bonus there for the sole purpose of covering the flaws of a ship which shouldn't be there in the first place. Minmatar will get their double damage bonuses, Caldari will get their damage-shield resist bonuses and Amarr will get damage-armour resist bonuses. All of which are useful.

Hybrids and Gallente are incompatible by design.


You have summed it all up nicely. And your right, CCP will fail to fix this because the fixes are not palatable to them. Some more ideas:

1) Give Hybrids the ability to switch ammo instantly like a script. That damn CAP usage penalty should be paying for something. T1 ammo adjusts DPS/range depending on type (iron, plutonium etc). Lets capitalize that already existing mechanic. Improve ammo stats and this will allow Blasters to apply DPS at father ranges, albeit less the father out. But no one bothers with that as it takes too long. Obviously some details would need to be worked out but this could help. VOID should get a tracking bonus and the damage bonus. If you achieve the close range you should be able to melt the target.

2) Scram range bonus to some of the Gallente Line, like the thorax and brutix. Make it far and only SCRAM to shut down the MWD's. That will deal with kiters. Give some ships the web bonus like talked about with the Talos/Vindicator. Then they work in teams.

3) Finally, a warp scrambling drone only carried by Gallente drone boats and is related to the Myrm's 2nd bonus (vice the stupid 7.5% armor repair bonus) allowing a flight of light drones to point and shut down MWD on the target. If the target can't kill those drones faster than the other Gallente ships close, then he dies.

So all the Gallente line with ships like the Arazu to keep the target from warping off, and the above mentioned changes might build a team that can get it done.

Many of the other recommendations would help too, but CCP will not execute the paradigm shift to fix these boats. So.... fly another race basically.
Tromin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2011-10-31 02:46:15 UTC
What about fixing Blaster for better damage/tracking, then increasing the drone bays on all Gall Ships so they can field multiple flights of assorted drones, like scram ( hopefully newly introduced) drones till you get in your own scram/web range, then scoop and deploy damage drones? It seems like for Gall, drones should be just as integral to the ship as anything else.
Dunmur
Tempered Logic
#67 - 2011-10-31 03:12:12 UTC
Tromin wrote:
What about fixing Blaster for better damage/tracking, then increasing the drone bays on all Gall Ships so they can field multiple flights of assorted drones, like scram ( hopefully newly introduced) drones till you get in your own scram/web range, then scoop and deploy damage drones? It seems like for Gall, drones should be just as integral to the ship as anything else.


Extra drones are useless unless they increase the drone bandwidth on those boats to where gallente can launch 10 drones instead of the current 5 cap and I don't see them doing that. Also I feel buffing drones to compensate for a ****** weapon system will not change a thing because there is still little reason to equip blaster vs autocannons and any buff to drones is a buff to ALL weapon systems.

For example whats to stop you from using web/scram drones with Auto cannons and pulse lasers. Meaning it wont fix anything.
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
#68 - 2011-10-31 03:13:12 UTC
Rails have a lot more issues than blasters. Fixes to hybrids in general (fitting, cap usage, reload time, damage profile, etc) along with some stat tweaks will go a logn way for blasters. Such tweaks won't scratch the surface of rail boats. They, along with rails themselves, need to be completely re-imagined.

I'm with the suggestion for making them the shorter of the long-range weapon types (giving the caldari range bonus something more than "lol," status) with some other trait that makes them unique.
Dunmur
Tempered Logic
#69 - 2011-10-31 23:04:55 UTC
I think ccp just proved today that not only is this thread correct, they also showed they really have no idea how to fix the problem.
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp
#70 - 2011-11-01 00:52:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Calapine
Well, what about:


  1. Slightly reduce the TE falloff bonus. (for example from 30% down to 25-20%)
  2. Again, slightly, reduce pulse tracking and reduce scorch DPS. Currently scorch simply obsoletes 2/3 of faction crystals.
  3. Apply the 10% damage buff from Rails to Blasters as well. Don't touch range or falloff, to avoid the mentioned homogenization of weapon systems.
  4. Additionally keep the already announced changes. (Speed buff, agility, fitting)


Cala

Pain is short, and joy is eternal.
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#71 - 2011-11-01 01:02:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Large Collidable Object
Just remove the MWD disabling effect of scrams and keep the upcoming changes and blasters will be fine again.

Considering rails, they're just as useless as any long range turret except arties, so who cares?
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Sara XIII
The Carnifex Corp
#72 - 2011-11-01 01:17:30 UTC
Rails: The ultimate sniper weapon

1) Big cost in cap to fire.
2) Longer tracking times.
2) Ship speed penalty when tracking a target.
3) Longer cooldowns between shots.
4) No optimal ranges at all. Falloff of course though.

This in exchange for MASSIVE kinetic damage.

just some thoughts

Between Ignorance and Wisdom
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#73 - 2011-11-01 02:12:46 UTC
Damn forums ate my post again. Plz, for the love of God, fix this!

Back on topic, I keep seeing references to some mystical Gallente ship that ahs web bonuses. Linkage? Last I checked, only minmatar ships get web bonuses. Gallente get warp disruptor/scrmabler range bonuses and sensor damp effectiveness bonuses.

Also, someone was lamenting the lack of a HAC equivalent of an Arazu or Keres. That would the Gallente Combat Recon, Lachesis.

As far as hybrids go, yeah they suck. But we as pilots can compensate for their short-coming by flying those ships in they way they are intended. Frankly, Gallente and Caldari both benefit greatly from support ships. Gallente with short range guns really benefit from having range-scripted sensor damps in fleet as well as drones. Caldari get the ECM ships.

That being said, I think we need to see the smaller variants of webbing and scramming drones, though at reduced strength, so as to avoid OP. Give small web drones maybe -5 or 10% velocity webs. They should scale nicely with the large ones. Small warp disruption drones, well... this can be broken easily. Not sure there.

In any of these cases, I think fitting small neutron blasters with antimatter ammo should give better than a 500m optimal. I mean, seriously? Scale back the range penalties on high dps hybrid ammo for cripes sake. That is just silly.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp
#74 - 2011-11-01 02:18:17 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Back on topic, I keep seeing references to some mystical Gallente ship that ahs web bonuses. Linkage? Last I checked, only minmatar ships get web bonuses.


Talos the new Tier 3 Gallente BC

Vindicator Gallente/Serpentis pirate battleship

Vigilant Gallente/Serpentis pirate faction cruiser

Cala

Pain is short, and joy is eternal.
Fraa Bjorn
Cell 317
#75 - 2011-11-01 02:30:40 UTC
Calapine wrote:

Talos the new Tier 3 Gallente BC


Actually, the blog doesn't state that the Talos gets a web-bonus. Have you seen any official post state this?

All games have QQ, but only Eve has Q.Q
exozone
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2011-11-01 02:37:48 UTC  |  Edited by: exozone
Calapine wrote:
Soldarius wrote:
Back on topic, I keep seeing references to some mystical Gallente ship that ahs web bonuses. Linkage? Last I checked, only minmatar ships get web bonuses.


Talos the new Tier 3 Gallente BC

Vindicator Gallente/Serpentis pirate battleship

Vigilant Gallente/Serpentis pirate faction cruiser

Cala



The talos is the only true Gal boat there, the others needing a second line of training to make the bonus available and useful, I still think it could be an avenue to inspect. The fact gal get a bonus to web strength, and minnie gets a bonus to web distance could be a piece for the devs to think about.
Calapine
Xeno Tech Corp
#77 - 2011-11-01 02:39:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Calapine
Fraa Bjorn wrote:
Actually, the blog doesn't state that the Talos gets a web-bonus. Have you seen any official post state this?


You are a hard one to please. P

We know the stats from pulled test server data.

Quote:
Talos

Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level.

95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the capacitor need of Large Energy Turrets


http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/lo9it/tornado_oracle_naga_and_talos_tier_3_bcs_stats/

Cala

Pain is short, and joy is eternal.
Cletus Graeme
Shai Dorsai
#78 - 2011-11-01 06:44:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Cletus Graeme
Igualmentedos wrote:
I agree with the other posters saying the boats need fixed, not necessarily the weapon system. Also, I would like to see a nice buff to Caldari boats.


Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
Rails have a lot more issues than blasters. Fixes to hybrids in general (fitting, cap usage, reload time, damage profile, etc) along with some stat tweaks will go a logn way for blasters. Such tweaks won't scratch the surface of rail boats. They, along with rails themselves, need to be completely re-imagined.


People seem to forget the Caldari also use hybrids and their ships also need rebalancing.

DRONES are the Gallente main weapon type just as MISSILES are the Caldari's. They both use hybrids as secondary weapons yet you hardly see any talk about how to improve rails - it's all blaster this or blaster that.

I know the Caldari can use blasters as well as rails (like the Gallente) but their ship bonuses are still designed around using rails. The same is true of their ship stats (mass, agility, speed etc.) They were always inferior with blasters compared to Gallente and this will be even more the case after the proposed changes.

I'm happy that blasters on Gallente ships are finally being fixed - it's longer overdue - but we definitely also need more discussion about rails on Caldari ships as (apart from a few exceptions) they've been "useless" for far longer.

FYI - This recent dev blog from CCP suggests they're looking at boosting hyrbids across the board before tweaking individual ship types so hopefully rails will get rebalanced properly along with blasters.
Fraa Bjorn
Cell 317
#79 - 2011-11-01 12:41:18 UTC
Calapine wrote:

You are a hard one to please. P

We know the stats from pulled test server data.

Quote:
Talos

Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level.

95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the capacitor need of Large Energy Turrets


http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/lo9it/tornado_oracle_naga_and_talos_tier_3_bcs_stats/

Cala


w000t!! NOW I'm starting to get excited. Thanks!

All games have QQ, but only Eve has Q.Q
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2011-11-01 12:53:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
Cletus Graeme wrote:


DRONES are the Gallente main weapon type just as MISSILES are the Caldari's. They both use hybrids as secondary weapons yet you hardly see any talk about how to improve rails - it's all blaster this or blaster that.



Ok lets just get rid of that idea.


Drone Ships
Frigates:
Ishkur: out of what 12 hulls?

Cruiser:
Vexor: 1/4 hulls

HAC:
Ishtar (aka better be a drone ship, fitting a plate and SMALL guns is tricky) 1/2 hulls

Recon:
What drones?

Battle Cruiser:
Myrmidon 1/2 hulls

Battleship:
Domix / Navy Dominix 2/5 hulls

Black-ops 1/1
Go Sin.....

Maurader 0/1 its an upgraded 'Thron


If drones are our main weapon, our hulls SURE AS HELL seem to favor turret bonuses.

Seriously I just listed every ship with a drone bonus.....drones aren't supposed to be the primary weapon except on the enumerated ships above.

Drones and missiles are only considered primary weapons because hybrids are that bad. Sure they can be made to workbut the fundamental issue is ALWAYS going to be voluntary getting yourself scrammed because that is the only place you gus work (blasters) and crap tracking and worse damage (rails) aside from crap fitting requirements and ridiculous ships stats.

Why the hell does a MAELSTROM have more cap than a Hyperion? Y'know the 8 cap hungery blaster active rep bonused Hype?

Rails need the range chopped and the ROF and raw damage boosted as well as a cap reduction. You can't alpha and getting DPS from an armor tanker that doesn't have 7 slots for damage mods is a loosing proposition.