These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Medium Rail, Beam and Artillery rebalance

First post First post First post
Author
Shahai Shintaro
Caldari Manufacturing and Design
#181 - 2013-07-19 20:07:24 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Shahai Shintaro wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:

Also, this falloff bonus is stupid for railguns, adds less and less as you go up the ranges. Should switch all gallente range bonuses to optimal, then make blasters more optimally than falloffy.


I think that's the point and the difference between a gallente hybrid boat and a Caldari one. The gallente boat is designed to be strapped with blasters hence falloff and tracking bonuses while the Caldari boats are designed for rails and hence get optimal bonuses



The deimos is quite clearly NOT designed to be strapped with blasters.. Its pretty awful at it.

Not that its amazing at rails, like trouser said, its fittings can't accommodate armor tanking and rails. Also its slow.. Bringing us back to the Why the **** is the Vaga so fast compared to the deimos thing.


I don't fly HACs so I could be completely wrong here, but the description of the Deimos specifically says and I quote, "The Deimos represents the final word in up and close personal cruiser combat." Therefore, yes the Deimos is designed to be strapped with blasters. It may be awful at it, but that's a discussion for a different thread.
Fal Dara
Free Terrans League
Legendary-Rejects
#182 - 2013-07-19 20:45:21 UTC
the problem, CCP, is not with medium guns...

it's with BS sized guns. This is true even for missiles. Nearly all battleships, after your last pass through, are capped at around 700-800 dps with long range weapons, and lvl 5 skills. That is where the problem lies. People expect that a battlehsip should face a significant improvment in dps over their medium setups, and in most cases, it's not.

The jump in dps from small ships to medium is huge. from 200 dps to 500, or 700, or sometimes 800. Then we move from the cruisers/battlecriusers getting 700, to a battlehsip getting 750.

the PROBLEM, ccp, is that battlehsips NEED 20% more damage on every weapons system, across the board... and torps/large blasters need 15-20% more BASE range.

i know you're afraid of power creep...

that is obvious, when you have made EVERY caldari bs with missiles (Navy raven, navy scorp, and golem), EXACTLY the same dps, exactly. you're afraid to create diversity, and it's KILLING your ships. nearly every BS out there gets within 50 dps of other races, other weapons systems. that's BROKEN. dont make the dps the same, and hope the other ship roles make them viable.

and battleships shouldnt be somehting that you're afraid to let some power into.

dont nerf the hell out of medium rails (who track terribly anyway), buff the larges! they dont have enough dps, by a LONG ways. they dont have enough dps on ANY platform.

but i've only been playing 9 years, with every race...

maybe all that first hand experience is wrong.

and you're also making ships REQUIRE a rig to get a fit on... a standard, baseline, everyone should be using it fit--needs fitting rigs. STOP THAT.

thanks.
I'm Down
Perkone
Caldari State
#183 - 2013-07-19 20:48:24 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:
the problem, CCP, is not with medium guns...

it's with BS sized guns. This is true even for missiles. Nearly all battleships, after your last pass through, are capped at around 700-800 dps with long range weapons, and lvl 5 skills. That is where the problem lies. People expect that a battlehsip should face a significant improvment in dps over their medium setups, and in most cases, it's not.

The jump in dps from small ships to medium is huge. from 200 dps to 500, or 700, or sometimes 800. Then we move from the cruisers/battlecriusers getting 700, to a battlehsip getting 750.

the PROBLEM, ccp, is that battlehsips NEED 20% more damage on every weapons system, across the board... and torps/large blasters need 15-20% more BASE range.

i know you're afraid of power creep...

that is obvious, when you have made EVERY caldari bs with missiles (Navy raven, navy scorp, and golem), EXACTLY the same dps, exactly. you're afraid to create diversity, and it's KILLING your ships. nearly every BS out there gets within 50 dps of other races, other weapons systems. that's BROKEN. dont make the dps the same, and hope the other ship roles make them viable.

and battleships shouldnt be somehting that you're afraid to let some power into.

dont nerf the hell out of medium rails (who track terribly anyway), buff the larges! they dont have enough dps, by a LONG ways. they dont have enough dps on ANY platform.

but i've only been playing 9 years, with every race...

maybe all that first hand experience is wrong.

and you're also making ships REQUIRE a rig to get a fit on... a standard, baseline, everyone should be using it fit--needs fitting rigs. STOP THAT.

thanks.


Are you seriously comparing cruiser close range dps to bs long range dps to make a really bad point? BS top out at 1200-1500 dps with CR weapons Cruisers top out at 400-550 dps with long range weapons. Get your facts straight.
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
#184 - 2013-07-19 21:03:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Crazy KSK
858dps rail astarte 1016 with drones @ 20o+27f

Confirming rails are now OP and need to be nerfed

a bit out of whack maybe? maybe its just the Astarte that's broken, which would be odd since no one ever complained about it?

Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.

Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#185 - 2013-07-19 21:06:24 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:
the PROBLEM, ccp, is that battlehsips NEED 20% more damage on every weapons system, across the board... and torps/large blasters need 15-20% more BASE range.


Damage:
Battleships don't need more damage.
- CNR does 900+ dps with long range missiles.
- Vindicator does 1500+ dps with blasters.
- Nightmare does 1000+ dps with Tachyons.

Range:
Battleships don't need more range.
Rokh and Raven can shoot targets at... Let's just say they could shoot targets at ranges you can't even target anything.
Fal Dara
Free Terrans League
Legendary-Rejects
#186 - 2013-07-19 21:14:31 UTC
I'm Down wrote:


Are you seriously comparing cruiser close range dps to bs long range dps to make a really bad point? BS top out at 1200-1500 dps with CR weapons Cruisers top out at 400-550 dps with long range weapons. Get your facts straight.


No, i'm not...

i suppose it would be battlecruisers... you're looking at 700 dps or so from rails in something like an astarte, and 750 from rails in a navy mega...

any t2 ship, with a double damage bonus, makes about BS level damage with those guns. On some ships that arry 7 guns, and also have that, they match a BS in damage.

so what i'm saying, is that BS's need more than just the 25% more damage than mediums.

SO HERE is the answer.

a deimos gets 2 damage bonuses to guns--TWO.

a naga (just for ccps sake, that is what they used to compare), gets ONE damage bonus to large guns.

therefore, the mediums KEEP UP. it's the double bonus that's making it SEEM like mediums are keeping up with a large--when in reality, the base for the large needs to go up, to distance itself from the mediums.

to give another astarte example, i never mentioned it having blasters--but for your sake lets do that. it gets 1100 dps. large blasters on mega would get 1200. that's LESS than 10% difference...

the battleship should get more. every time. a LOT more. without having to put in faction gear.

the base of a battleship gun needs to go up 20% or more... because there are medium platforms with bouble damage bonuses, and CCP is using those to compare with single bonus BS ones. BS's dont get double damage bonuses. THAT is the problem.



Darth Brole
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#187 - 2013-07-19 21:21:46 UTC
Where are the missiles in all this?
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#188 - 2013-07-19 21:32:18 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:
therefore, the mediums KEEP UP. it's the double bonus that's making it SEEM like mediums are keeping up with a large--when in reality, the base for the large needs to go up, to distance itself from the mediums.


Yes, in damage but not in similar ranges.

Darth Brole wrote:
Where are the missiles in all this?


There's no need to tweak missiles. Defenders and auto-targeting missiles probably need a look at but nothing serious.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#189 - 2013-07-19 21:56:45 UTC
CCP, I appreciate the love for medium rails (and beams)! Please, though, stop avoiding the white elephant in the room. The T3 BCs (Attack BCs) are wrecking everything. You can't balance HACs (long- or close-range) or medium long-range weapons as long as you have these OP monsters in the room.

They are wrecking balance. They're still too fast, too strong, and too agile to not wreck other ships. They don't have as good tracking and their bullets are larger? --Doesn't matter. The buff they get from raw damage--8 bonused large turrets!!--outweighs any loss they get from tracking or the fact that their target is generally smaller than the charge signature. You guys ought to do something drastic like knock them down to 7 or even 6 turrets and then maybe you can find a compelling argument to how the medium long-range weapons systems fit into the picture.

I'm glad you're tackling the medium long-range weapons imbalance. It will genuinely be nice to have an option to use rails or beams, but as long as those T3 BCs are out there, you guys will continually be playing catch up to them, be it kiting fits, dps numbers, etc. The Attack Battlecruisers are the problem. Start there first. Then everything else will be loads easier to work around.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Shahai Shintaro
Caldari Manufacturing and Design
#190 - 2013-07-19 22:05:18 UTC
People seem to have issues with the T3 BC. But honestly, aren't they just less tanky battleships? All of their damage numbers should be similar to that of a battleship and they should be much easier to kill thanks to their weak tanks. So what am I missing that they are seen as over powered?
mama guru
Yazatas.
#191 - 2013-07-19 22:43:36 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise is there any intention to do a ammo review ?
-50% and -75% penalties are too high for long range guns


This right here.

These bonuses MUST be reviewed if all LR medium guns take about 10% additional tracking penalties.

EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#192 - 2013-07-19 22:43:50 UTC
Shahai Shintaro wrote:
People seem to have issues with the T3 BC. But honestly, aren't they just less tanky battleships? All of their damage numbers should be similar to that of a battleship and they should be much easier to kill thanks to their weak tanks. So what am I missing that they are seen as over powered?

BS level damage + projection with what is essentially cruiser level mobility .. doesn't matter that they have cruiser tanks if you have a hard time locking the damn things before they relocate for more volley fire.

Plus they are comparatively dirt cheap .. guns are pricey but that about it. Like brand new BS picked up in the bargain bin Smile

With the new HACs being hashed out and these medium gun changes the A.BCs needs a good whack if HAC/M.Gun changes are to have a chance in game ...
But then again probing was just made even easier than before so I guess CCP has decided that sniping shall never be part of Eve again, leaving HACs out among the lions, tigers and bears with nothing but triple digit price tags to their names Big smile
mama guru
Yazatas.
#193 - 2013-07-19 23:08:53 UTC
All power to you then.


As an added note, Rise please don't forget about medium railgun capacitor consumption. It's obscenely high for a hybrid weapon. Currently I Cap out a ferox in about 7 minutes with just hardeners and AM loaded 250mm's running. It's gonna be even less with the 15% rate of fire.

EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.

Vic Teishikuro
Tactical Chaos Corp
#194 - 2013-07-19 23:30:25 UTC
Wow Wow WOW



I just realized something. CCP is buffing medium long range turrents without fixing drones!!!!


Why is CCP Buffing Medium long range Turrents while leaving drones and Sentry's F*cked?
goldddigger
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#195 - 2013-07-19 23:35:32 UTC
Vic Teishikuro wrote:
Wow Wow WOW



I just realized something. CCP is buffing medium long range turrents without fixing drones!!!!


Why is CCP Buffing Medium long range Turrents while leaving drones and Sentry's F*cked?


if you would have readet they do not get buffed

they get NERVED
Lister Vindaloo
5 Tons of Flax
#196 - 2013-07-19 23:46:23 UTC
I'd rather see a 10% tracking penalty to rails, 15 seems a bit harsh, maybe drop the rof bonus to 10 if you feel it would balance better.

And as already pointed out maybe now is the time to tweak ammo as well? Not just T2 (which definitely needs adjustment now). It's all well and good to say antimatter is synonymous with rails atm, but that's mostly due to their terrible dps, we just had to live with medium range, long range turrets.

It's good to finally see some love for the medium rails (I don't use the others so I will limit my comments to what I use) but I think this is a warm up pass......
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#197 - 2013-07-20 00:03:28 UTC
mama guru wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise is there any intention to do a ammo review ?
-50% and -75% penalties are too high for long range guns


This right here.

These bonuses MUST be reviewed if all LR medium guns take about 10% additional tracking penalties.


More like SR gun t2 ammo should have penalties as high as that.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Baren
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#198 - 2013-07-20 02:51:18 UTC
goldddigger wrote:
Vic Teishikuro wrote:
Wow Wow WOW



I just realized something. CCP is buffing medium long range turrents without fixing drones!!!!


Why is CCP Buffing Medium long range Turrents while leaving drones and Sentry's F*cked?


if you would have readet they do not get buffed

they get NERVED



I agree the tracking reductions are tooo Harsh

this is partly a nerf to medium weapons


but still dispite that.. this will still create and even great gap between drone boats and everything else.

CCP please buff drones and missles it will really hurt drone boats and make missles even worse than they are already
Baren
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#199 - 2013-07-20 02:52:43 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
mama guru wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise is there any intention to do a ammo review ?
-50% and -75% penalties are too high for long range guns


This right here.

These bonuses MUST be reviewed if all LR medium guns take about 10% additional tracking penalties.


More like SR gun t2 ammo should have penalties as high as that.



No No NO short range weapons are already very very little and have very small "sweet spots" to get full dps..

nerfing SR guns is not the answer
Gorgoth24
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#200 - 2013-07-20 03:51:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Gorgoth24
I really like these changes (can't say the same for HACs).

I was just posting almost the exact same ideas about long range medium weapons in a thread just a few weeks ago. It's almost deja vu and I love it.

+1 guys, but I would suggest re-evaluating your HAC changes:)

EDIT: Also, where's the love for missiles and drones? (I hope y'all are getting to that)
EDIT of edit: After watching some ATXI footage I see where you're going with these drones changes