These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Leslie Chow
Perkone
Caldari State
#501 - 2013-09-04 13:52:11 UTC
I was so excited to fly my rail thorax again. Then i tried to kill a cal navy cruiser orbiting (at optimal) with mwd off and it took about a full minute. Wheres that 550 DPS I was promised. Was using 200mm btw. yeah take back that damage and return the tracking.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#502 - 2013-09-04 13:59:18 UTC
Leslie Chow wrote:
I was so excited to fly my rail thorax again. Then i tried to kill a cal navy cruiser orbiting (at optimal) with mwd off and it took about a full minute. Wheres that 550 DPS I was promised. Was using 200mm btw. yeah take back that damage and return the tracking.


The 550 DPS is there... if you're running in a straight line. ;)

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Leslie Chow
Perkone
Caldari State
#503 - 2013-09-04 14:11:34 UTC
So true. How silly of me not to be continuously chasing or running away from my target like a 5 year old. ;) Yeah I know it's possible to use but honestly CCP you are killing solo kite ships. I mean this fit is DC tanked because that's all it can fit. What do you guys want us to do. Oh yeah fit scram web, etc. get armor logi check.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#504 - 2013-09-04 14:15:43 UTC
Leslie Chow wrote:
So true. How silly of me not to be continuously chasing or running away from my target like a 5 year old. ;) Yeah I know it's possible to use but honestly CCP you are killing solo kite ships. I mean this fit is DC tanked because that's all it can fit. What do you guys want us to do. Oh yeah fit scram web, etc. get armor logi check.


If you're not running away, you're doing it wrong. ;) I went back to blasters and a MWD.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Leslie Chow
Perkone
Caldari State
#505 - 2013-09-04 14:22:51 UTC
I'll probably do the same. :)
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#506 - 2013-09-04 14:50:29 UTC
Leslie Chow wrote:
I'll probably do the same. :)


It's what all the cool kids are fielding now. :D

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#507 - 2013-09-04 15:55:07 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Leslie Chow wrote:
I'll probably do the same. :)


It's what all the cool kids are fielding now. :D


I did MWD and blasters before it was cool.

How cool is that?

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Cade Windstalker
#508 - 2013-09-04 20:27:06 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
With the best will in the world, scanning a dread, getting into warp and landing in sufficiently short time to get a target lock takes very close to, or more than, 30 seconds. Most of your warp time is acceleration and deceleration. Not actual 6AU/second warping.

Even if a defending fleet had enough scrambling probe ships to lock down all the incoming dreads, what then?

It only takes a subcap or two to warp to each stricken dread to clean off the offending player.

OK, so the battlefield might suddenly shift to somewhere new if the defender decides to blob one dread.

Cool! A new dynamic and crazy fleet battle ensues, with neither side having an the unfair advantage of sitting on grid with logistics, sensor boosters and drone assist primed and ready to go.

This is better.


You may feel it's better but it's still never going to happen.

I decided to test your theory and warped from a station to a start 3 AU away. I landed on-grid exactly 30 seconds later. Now, dreads don't jump through a Cyno cloaked. They land on-grid before the player actually loads it (we learned this the hard way back before TIDI when a 200 man fleet landing on grid could crash out both sides).

So, we have the time lost where he loads grid, and the FC loads grid. FC then needs to get his bearings, call a warp, and the ships need to then hit align and warp. With absolutely maxed out skills it's 30 seconds. With anything less it gets closer and closer to being over a minute. When we factor in everyone's reaction times to the situation I think it wouldn't be out of line to say that half the caps they probe down would be tackled.

The attacking FC now has to send response squads all over the system as well as protect the main body of his fleet. There is really no way around it, he is going to lose caps before he's even on-grid with the objective.

This means that to have an "even" fight the attackers need to bring more ships than the defenders and the defenders are already going to be more able to re-ship because of home-field advantage.

As for the defenders blobbing one dread, they don't have to. You can burn a dread down in less than a minute when it's that low on capacitor with ~20-30 people in battleships. Any dread the FC warps to is going to be half dead by the time he gets there and if the dread sieged he can't even save it, just hope to take out enough enemy ships to make up for the loss.

If you want a more reasonable suggestion, let Interdictors launch cyno-jammers for just the local grid that last about half an hour but can be destroyed and have Battlecruiser EHP. If a target starts going for it you know he's likely about to batphone help and you can run for it.

We can even throw the miners a bone against cloaky hotdrops and let the Rorqual fit one.
Sarkelias Anophius
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#509 - 2013-09-04 22:59:40 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
Soporo wrote:
News Flash: Medium Rails continue to be horrible unless hitting far, far above your weight or have something mass tackled.

-15% tracking on medium hybrids. Poor rail Eagle, poor rail Moa, poor rail Ferox. Sad



I will continue dualboxing Proteus/Loki and Deimos/Rapier and mock everyone who thinks rails are bad.


I like how you mentioned only Gallente hybrid cruisers in that post.


I like how I responded to a blanket statement that rails were bad, ignoring ships they are very effective on.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#510 - 2013-09-04 23:24:38 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
stuff...
This is better.


more stuff...


You forgot the probe scan time, you're assuming that a defending fleet will perfectly allocate scanners to dreads 1:1, and you're forgetting that if 20-30 battleships warp to a dread, they are not somewhere else defending what they should be defending.

But let's focus on what we do agree on: hotdrops that drop everyone on the cyno beacon are bad for skirmish/roaming pvp, which most of us would like to see more of.

I'm sure it can be solved in a multitude of ways, but let's push CCP to solve it, because that's good for Eve. Marauders won't change the game overall for the better. Fixing hotdrop crappiness absolutely will.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#511 - 2013-09-05 11:12:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
CCP rise, was the tracking of the artillery guns overpowered in comparison to the other weapons, pre-patch?

The 10% to ROF was pretty pointless imo. It only reduces the cycle time by 1 second and i think it would have been better if you increased the damage multiplier by 5% to play to the strength of artillery weapons.

Please reconsider this action.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#512 - 2013-09-05 11:15:03 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
CCP rise, was the tracking of the artillery guns overpowered in comparison to the other weapons, pre-patch?

The 15% to ROF was pretty pointless imo. It only reduces the cycle time by 1 second and i think it would have been better if you increased the damage multiplier by 5% to play to the strength of artillery weapons.

Please reconsider this action.


I'm pretty sure they were keen not to make the alpha from artillery any more devastating than it already is

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#513 - 2013-09-05 11:20:24 UTC
You are probably right but i still think the rof buff wasn't worth it and they should have just kept the weapon the same. I view the change as a nerf more than anything.

Do you view pre-patch artillery as OP in comparison to post-patch rails?

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#514 - 2013-09-05 11:49:08 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
You are probably right but i still think the rof buff wasn't worth it and they should have just kept the weapon the same. I view the change as a nerf more than anything.

Do you view pre-patch artillery as OP in comparison to post-patch rails?

So, let me get this straight: You view an 11.1% DPS increase in return for a small tracking loss a nerf on a sniping weapon system?
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#515 - 2013-09-05 12:22:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
You are probably right but i still think the rof buff wasn't worth it and they should have just kept the weapon the same. I view the change as a nerf more than anything.

Do you view pre-patch artillery as OP in comparison to post-patch rails?

So, let me get this straight: You view an 11.1% DPS increase in return for a small tracking loss a nerf on a sniping weapon system?



Bingo, you go it kid!

Who gives a damn about DPS when the alpha strike is the most important factor? Personally, i would prefer to apply that damage better (+5% tracking) over being able to shoot 1 second earlier.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Alice Doombringer
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#516 - 2013-09-05 14:32:42 UTC
Im just wondering is it feasible that Legion with t2 medium beam lasers is capable to do more dmg than t2 dps cruise missiles on navy raven or raven. Beam is kinda comparable to cruises as both seems to be originating as long range weapons. To beat medium beam laser on legion requires you to have T2 dps torpedoes that i would somewhat compare to pulse laser weaponry as both designated originally as short range weaponry.
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#517 - 2013-09-05 14:49:34 UTC
Alice Doombringer wrote:
Im just wondering is it feasible that Legion with t2 medium beam lasers is capable to do more dmg than t2 dps cruise missiles on navy raven or raven. Beam is kinda comparable to cruises as both seems to be originating as long range weapons. To beat medium beam laser on legion requires you to have T2 dps torpedoes that i would somewhat compare to pulse laser weaponry as both designated originally as short range weaponry.


You mean heavies and HAM's right not torps and cruises?

Missiles should do less DPS than lasers because lasers are gimped in so many ways.

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
Alice Doombringer
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#518 - 2013-09-05 14:59:31 UTC
no i compared right those things.. cruise missiles does less dps than medium beam laser with legion.
Kyon Rheyne
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#519 - 2013-09-05 22:26:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyon Rheyne
Kyon Rheyne wrote:

But where is the problem here? Just make them ALL drop to one place, but this place should be chosen randomly (or, even better, there should be some "warp's destination coordinates' skew" and whole blob will be dropped in some proximity to the cynofield, at a random spot in an area of, say, 5 au around the cynofield.)


Well, I've been thinking about that idea recently, and was able to come up with following compromise:
1) Some randomness in determining entry point of fleet jumping to cynofield has to be introduced. When some vessel turns on cynofield generator, the cynofield itself will be created in random spot within an area of several au around it.
2) This cynofield still will appear in overview (or won't, if it is covert one), as it would normally.
3) Conception of Guided Cynoshural Positioning (name it yourself as you like) has to be introduced: Stations/Starbases can lend a hand in stabilizing cynofiled being created what allows for its more precise placing in space. This simply means that whenever cynofield is being generated in close proximity to any non-hostile station or POS, it will always appears near vessel which initiated the process (again, as it would happen under rules of current mechanics). So this change won't break jump freighter logistics significantly.

Yes, still it allows for hotdrop tactics. But at least its now bound to specific location (very close to stations/POSes) which can be treated with caution. And it won't change the current cyno mechanics that much.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#520 - 2013-09-06 13:42:51 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
You are probably right but i still think the rof buff wasn't worth it and they should have just kept the weapon the same. I view the change as a nerf more than anything.

Do you view pre-patch artillery as OP in comparison to post-patch rails?

So, let me get this straight: You view an 11.1% DPS increase in return for a small tracking loss a nerf on a sniping weapon system?



Bingo, you go it kid!

Who gives a damn about DPS when the alpha strike is the most important factor? Personally, i would prefer to apply that damage better (+5% tracking) over being able to shoot 1 second earlier.


I agree actually.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".