These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Factional Ammo Damage
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#1 - 2013-05-26 03:30:04 UTC
Currently, faction ammo simply causes better damage, regardless of the faction. I propose that the damage types be determined by the faction's own preferred damage type.

Currently, Caldari Navy and Federation Navy ammo have the same damage type as the standard charge +15%.
Instead, the Caldari would favor kinetic damage while the Gallente favor thermal damage.

Antimatter Charge S Damage (Current)
-7 Kinetic
-5 Thermal

Navy Antimatter Charge S Damage (Current)
-8.05 Kinetic
-5.75 Thermal

Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S Damage (After)
-7 Kinetic
-6.8 Thermal

Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S Damage (After)
-8.8 Kinetic
-5 Thermal

The base damage remains the same.

As for the pirate ammo, something else occurs.

The Guristas, being partially Caldari and Gallente, stay untouched and still receive both thermal and kinetic bonuses.
The Serpentis (Shadow and Guardian ammo), however, get a different bonus, being partially Minmatar.

Shadow/Guardian Antimatter Charge S Damage (After)
-7 | 7 Kinetic
-5.6 | 6.2 Thermal
-0.6 | 1.2 Explosive

The Serpentis ammo gains a boost to explosive and thermal damage instead of to kinetic and thermal damage. The same occurs with other factions, with the Angel Cartel gaining bonuses to thermal damage, Sansha's Nation gaining bonuses to kinetic damage (bear with me here), and Blood Raiders gaining bonuses to explosive damage (really bear with me here). The Amarr gain bonuses to EM damage and the Minmatar gain bonuses to Explosive Damage.

As for missiles? Well, sure, but only once all the factions that use missiles get them.

Why, you may be asking, is this important? Well, as we all know, the different factions don't actually have any differences between them when it comes to ammo. I believe this would solve that. Make factional differences unique and all. And why stop there? We could do a similar thing with ship modules. I will not get into that, though.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#2 - 2013-05-26 07:03:09 UTC
So many dev posts it hurts.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2013-05-26 07:20:12 UTC
It could be interesting, or we could also have an effect like what we see with the railguns.

Caldari rails and gallente rails aren't the same (unlike the myriad faction lasers). Caldari rails get +10% range, whereas gallente rails get +5% damage.

We could give caldari ammo better range modifiers, while gallente get better base damage... or give them the same base damage, gallente ammo get a tracking or falloff boost, caldari gets an optimal boost...

Etc

I do agree that it would be interesting if the ammo wasn't homogenous
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#4 - 2013-05-26 07:24:48 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:
So many dev posts it hurts.

You must have quite high view of yourself if you expect devs rushing to answer your thread on Sunday morning, within mere hours from posting. ;)

To stay on topic, I'm not convinced it would differentiate game play. Rather opposite, if as hybrids user I could find any damage profile for my ammo it would mean it is actually homogenized. Yes, faction this, faction that but even if I'm Gallente, there's nothing stopping me from using any other faction's ammo. Now multiply this by every other weapon+ammo system.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#5 - 2013-05-26 07:39:37 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:
So many dev posts it hurts.

You must have quite high view of yourself if you expect devs rushing to answer your thread on Sunday morning, within mere hours from posting. ;)

*facepalm* I wasn't being sarcastic, and I wasn't talking about on this thread.

hmskrecik wrote:
To stay on topic, I'm not convinced it would differentiate game play. Rather opposite, if as hybrids user I could find any damage profile for my ammo it would mean it is actually homogenized. Yes, faction this, faction that but even if I'm Gallente, there's nothing stopping me from using any other faction's ammo. Now multiply this by every other weapon+ammo system.

It's not supposed to differentiate gameplay, it's supposed to differentiate faction ammunition.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#6 - 2013-05-26 07:45:51 UTC
Felsusguy wrote:

hmskrecik wrote:
To stay on topic, I'm not convinced it would differentiate game play. Rather opposite, if as hybrids user I could find any damage profile for my ammo it would mean it is actually homogenized. Yes, faction this, faction that but even if I'm Gallente, there's nothing stopping me from using any other faction's ammo. Now multiply this by every other weapon+ammo system.

It's not supposed to differentiate gameplay, it's supposed to differentiate faction ammunition.

Why? What improvement in the game do you want to achieve with that?

I ask, because there should be something to balance out one obvious disadvantage: instead of maintaining one or two caches of ammo (faction and/or ordinary) I'd be forced to maintain multiple such caches. What should be the gain?
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#7 - 2013-05-26 08:01:32 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:

hmskrecik wrote:
To stay on topic, I'm not convinced it would differentiate game play. Rather opposite, if as hybrids user I could find any damage profile for my ammo it would mean it is actually homogenized. Yes, faction this, faction that but even if I'm Gallente, there's nothing stopping me from using any other faction's ammo. Now multiply this by every other weapon+ammo system.

It's not supposed to differentiate gameplay, it's supposed to differentiate faction ammunition.

Why? What improvement in the game do you want to achieve with that?

I ask, because there should be something to balance out one obvious disadvantage: instead of maintaining one or two caches of ammo (faction and/or ordinary) I'd be forced to maintain multiple such caches. What should be the gain?

You wouldn't have to carry multiple types of ammunition anymore than you currently do. For hybrid, you can simply carry Guristas. For projectile, you are probably carrying quite a bit anyway. For laser, well... The crystals are rather small anyway.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2013-05-26 08:05:30 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:
Felsusguy wrote:

hmskrecik wrote:
To stay on topic, I'm not convinced it would differentiate game play. Rather opposite, if as hybrids user I could find any damage profile for my ammo it would mean it is actually homogenized. Yes, faction this, faction that but even if I'm Gallente, there's nothing stopping me from using any other faction's ammo. Now multiply this by every other weapon+ammo system.

It's not supposed to differentiate gameplay, it's supposed to differentiate faction ammunition.

Why? What improvement in the game do you want to achieve with that?

I ask, because there should be something to balance out one obvious disadvantage: instead of maintaining one or two caches of ammo (faction and/or ordinary) I'd be forced to maintain multiple such caches. What should be the gain?


Versatility.... use FN if they are more weak against therm, us CN if they are more weak again Kin.
But often the two resists are quite similar, its not like EM vs Exp, I'm not sure players would bother much with it, but range vs tracking vs damage would be more desirable I think.

Give gallente ammo more falloff, CN ammo more optimal -> gallente ammo for blasters, CN ammo for rails
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#9 - 2013-05-26 08:25:37 UTC  |  Edited by: hmskrecik
Felsusguy wrote:
You wouldn't have to carry multiple types of ammunition anymore than you currently do. For hybrid, you can simply carry Guristas. For projectile, you are probably carrying quite a bit anyway. For laser, well... The crystals are rather small anyway.

Maybe we're on different pages so let me explain where I stand.

I believe that the purpose of game mechanics is to create tactical and strategical options, which shouldn't be too-easily optimizable. In consequence, if you introduce something new to game, these options should at the same time:
1. Be quite distinct, so it matters which one is being choosen.
2. Be balanced so it's not that one of them dominates the others in usage.

As seen in awfully lot of modern games, typical game designer's move of increasing complexity increases numbers of options but more often than not they are quite trivial to optimize, or don't matter, or both.

Now, please show me this is not the case.

Verity Sovereign wrote:

Give gallente ammo more falloff, CN ammo more optimal -> gallente ammo for blasters, CN ammo for rails

Yes, that would be move in the direction I'm talking about. But for the sake of hard-to-optimize there should be penalties too.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#10 - 2013-05-26 10:21:56 UTC
Good suggestion, +1

.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#11 - 2013-05-26 22:04:07 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:
It could be interesting, or we could also have an effect like what we see with the railguns.

Caldari rails and gallente rails aren't the same (unlike the myriad faction lasers). Caldari rails get +10% range, whereas gallente rails get +5% damage.

We could give caldari ammo better range modifiers, while gallente get better base damage... or give them the same base damage, gallente ammo get a tracking or falloff boost, caldari gets an optimal boost...

That would be interesting. I'll have to think about it.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Jen Ann Tonique
Doomheim
#12 - 2013-05-26 22:30:00 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:

Versatility.... use FN if they are more weak against therm, us CN if they are more weak again Kin.



This. I hate when people object to more choice in this game as well. You should welcome it not discourage it.

Jen Ann Tonique does not approve of this product and/or service. Any comments contained herin are to be taken not seriously and no person/s shall hold Jen Ann Tonique responsible for any damage real and/or imagined due to use or misuse of above comment. By reading this statement you agree to the above terms.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#13 - 2013-05-27 20:30:04 UTC  |  Edited by: hmskrecik
Jen Ann Tonique wrote:
Verity Sovereign wrote:

Versatility.... use FN if they are more weak against therm, us CN if they are more weak again Kin.



This. I hate when people object to more choice in this game as well. You should welcome it not discourage it.

I hate complexity for sake of complexity.

If you add variety but no real game play difference, like one ammo makes red explosion, the other blue explosion, it's okay. I'm fine with such cosmetic variations.

If you add variety but choices have small game play difference, it is not okay. The game is already quite heavy on excel-in-space and you want more rows and columns to be added.

If you add variety, choices have big difference but are not balanced it is not okay either. I hope I don't have to explain why.

I'm not against the proposal. I just asked for an argument that options are significant and balanced at the same time.
Jen Ann Tonique
Doomheim
#14 - 2013-05-27 22:25:59 UTC
Fed Navy Antimatter Large - 20kin/10ther
Caldari Navy Antimatter Large - 20Ther/10Kin
(numbers used are to make things easy)

If this was implemented it would actually give a reason in game to have both ammo types, right now I only check to see which one is available for a few ISK less. It makes no difference at all. It just adds to market clutter, storage clutter, etc since they can't be stacked together. They both might as well be "Navy Antimatter Large", would make more sense in their current state when you think about it.

With the proposed changes, not much would change and both types would actually have a reason for coexisting.

Jen Ann Tonique does not approve of this product and/or service. Any comments contained herin are to be taken not seriously and no person/s shall hold Jen Ann Tonique responsible for any damage real and/or imagined due to use or misuse of above comment. By reading this statement you agree to the above terms.