These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Small Navy Cap Boosters

First post
Dirk Gentry
Gallente Federation
#101 - 2013-06-01 07:52:05 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#102 - 2013-06-01 11:57:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
So you're disagreeing with Fozzie and saying they don't need a range nerf considering T1 HAMS have almost the same range as the T2 ammo on guns like barrage and scorch and null?
range mods is something they will add to missiles in the form of TE's/TC's but saying they are normal for their size since they have the same range as torps (battleship) weapon is just plain wrong.

Yes I do. You don't compare oranges with apples, how far can you shoot with T1 projectile ammo?
Do you see any bonus on T1 HAM's reducing explosion radius like projectiles have +tracking?
Are you sure you want to compare both knowing at mid size you haveT2 425mm 220mm 180mm vs 1 T2 launcher type?

First T1 HAMs ho uses those? Does that ammo get more or less CPU from launchers depending on the ammo type?
Do they pick more or less capacitor activation depending on the ammo type?
NO? -then leave it, T1 ammo has crap DPS and it's just good to change it for faction, now if you're talking about faction ammo then it's another thread but imho it's balanced.

Since when T1 ammo is base for balance? -because my hybrids ammo would like to have a talk with Fozzie and ask him what does he think about T1 projectile ammo, the number of useless T1 hybrid ammo and why the feck this or that ammo gets more or less capacitor from your ship using guns that already use cap on activation...??? WTF??

If Fozzie really have some time to waste he can always take another well deserved look at hybrid ammo and make it something a bit more reasonable knowing ships bonus from now on it's not %dmg anymore but %ROF and how this will impact even more the use of hybrid ships for long run fights.

Last but non least: you say "they will" I say "or they will not", predicting whatever CCP will do 10 years from now and start messing with stuff that doesn't need any messing, it's silly.
HM's are nerf to oblivion when those were far too good and I'm ok with some tweak but now those are just plain crap, are you happy?-well I am not, I think they need a little buff now.
HAM's got a well deserved buff, are not OP but decent and some want to get them nerf because they got their but hurt?

Unfortunately Fozzie can't fix stupid with auto canons.

You don't get it, if I can spew large shortest range projectile ammo with arty at over 100km, over 60 with auto canons and if you think it's normal then Torps should do as much.
You don't fix anything by nerf HAMs range, it's just stupid, fix Torps because those are in need of fix, not HAMs.

On topic: S and M ASB's might be a bit OP with new navy caps but whatever, buff S and M AARs at the same level, problem solved, stop nerf everything.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#103 - 2013-06-01 13:43:28 UTC
Christ sergeant Scultz....thats some rant with a lot of misleading info there.

First off projectile ammo T1 level range is no more than 20km HAMS do that now but without any damage loss at that range.
T1 HAMS have good tracking which is why people use faction HAMS instead of rage for better application.
also there is RML's at cruiser level which will track better than 180's with better range.

T1 is the base for everything in this game..... faction is plain improvement ..T2 then specializes...
missile T1 ammo is in better state than most gun ammo types at T1 level.

Fozzie has said torps are fine so don't expect any changes there and HAMS and torps can't occupy the same range ...
I think you overestimate how good autocannnon range and damage is at best they do 70% of damage at HAM range and rapidly decreases deeper into falloff they go where as missiles are always at optimal range when they hit so 100% damage potential.

also don't compare LR guns with medium short range missiles although it kind of does the work for me that you have to resort to that nonsense..

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#104 - 2013-06-01 13:46:56 UTC
Vaihto Ehto wrote:
I can't but agree with those who wonder why on earth need MASB setups be buffed? Stuff like dual MASB Hawks are already way too strong, imho.

Garviel Tarrant wrote:


Also you should have used your time to nerf long range ammo.. scorch is mentally handicapped (Stupid profanity filter)

Scorch is very good. Pulse lasers as a whole, even with Scorch, are far from OP and easily crippled by neuts/TDs. T1 long range ammo obviously needs fixing, though.

Scorch makes beams largely a useless choice

t2 long range ammo in general has too much dps at range imo.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

#105 - 2013-06-01 14:57:40 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:

Since when T1 ammo is base for balance? -because my hybrids ammo would like to have a talk with Fozzie and ask him what does he think about T1 projectile ammo, the number of useless T1 hybrid ammo and why the feck this or that ammo gets more or less capacitor from your ship using guns that already use cap on activation...??? WTF??

I have lobbied unsucessfully for years to have tech I ammo for hybrids looked at... (i guess its stayed on the low priority for that long)

The idea has been changed but the base part of it is to swtich the ammo to 3 base ranges -50% 0% and 60%

i would then devide the ammo damage types between 3 for 80% thermal damange and 20% kin and 3 for 80% kin and 20% therm and then two for 50/50 split of damage types.

so antimater and Iridium will both do 50/50 split kin/thermal damage and instead of a cap reduction bonus they get a damage bonus

then you have Plutonium, Thorium and Tungsten doing 80/20 thermal/kin damage and instead of a cap reduction bonus they get a tracking bonus

then you have Uranium, lead , and Iron being 80/20 kin/thermal and instead of a cap reduction bonus they get a rate of fire bonus.

i would then reduce the cap activation on all hybrid turrets by 50% (like if you had regular lead charge)

so here is a bigger break down: i use large ammo as example:

close range ammo:
-50% to optimal range
antimater: 24 kin damage 24 thermal damage 5% increase in damage multiplier
Plutonium: 38.4 thermal damage 9.6 kin damage 5% increase in tracking
Uranium: 38.4 kin damage 9.6 thermal and 5% increase in rate of fire

then mid range ammo:
0% to optimal range
Thorium: 25.6 thermal damage 6.4 and 10% bonus in tracking
lead: 25.6 kin damage and 6.4 thermal 10% bonus in rate of fire

then long range ammo:
60% increase in optimal range
Iridium: 10 kin damage, 10 thermal damage and 15% increase in damage multiplier
Tungsten: 16 thermal damage, 4 kin damage and 15% increase in tracking
iron: 16 kin damage, 4 thermal damage and 15% increase in rate of fire

this would make tech i and faction hybrid ammo really interesting you have to choose from either high burst ammo high tracking ammo or high dps ammo.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Berluth Luthian
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#106 - 2013-06-04 03:23:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Berluth Luthian
Will the navy 25's be .75 m3?

::EDIT:: nevermind. Loaded Sisi last night and found that Navy Cap 25's were .8 m3. Not sure if that is rounded? It'd be the difference between holding 8 and 9 charges for a small ASB.
Urkhan Law
Black Rebel Rifter Club
The Devil's Tattoo
#107 - 2013-06-04 11:19:33 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:

- rocket range being too high
- rocket explosion radius being far too low

No experience with HAMs/Torps, but there is a problem with rockets range?
At what range do you think I should fight with my rocket Breacher then?

What ranges do you have in mind? for faction, rages and javelins?
There are missile ships without bonus to missile velocity, are rockets/hams op on those (honest question).
Maximus Aerelius
#108 - 2013-06-06 20:45:43 UTC
When are these going be unstickied to give Page 1 back to Player Posts? Odyssey is in and the Feedback and Issues threads are active. Why not replace these with a "Link Sticky" to those two threads?

We all know how lazy we are to go clicking...wait for it...past Page 3 of this Forum section. Blink
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#109 - 2013-06-07 18:23:34 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
ExAstra wrote:
Good lord please don't sticky this one you're crowding up our think space.

Aside from that, +1 to adding extra boosters. And the cost increase doesn't seem big enough for me to complain about it so, not bad.

Edit: Oh my god you stickied it.

They'll be gone soon. Sorry. What?

Noooo, that's perfectly fine! (no sarcasm)

I see it from the other side.

I must disagree on the "zomg too many stickies" thing. I don't see any problem with these stickies flooding the place, for they are tackling hot topics and subjects on fixing/improving. In other words, it is especially these important stickies that shouldn't be limited just because of "first page flooding".

Clicking on page two or three isn't that hard either, so I'm just going to pull the troll move and say HTFU and click on page 2.

However, we're right on the verge to June, so not much can be added. But in the future, I hope we'll see more stickies because they tackling important stuff and gamechanging things. Could care less for better or worse because it is simply something new.

Nevertheless, sure, there is a way to make it better for everybody:
There has been quite a desire to have the forum be split up a bit so there is subfoum solely for big stickies like these.

Confusingly though, the idea gets shot up and down by the community - and of course trolled down by no plausible reasonings.

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.