These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#61 - 2013-07-18 14:44:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Akimo Heth
Malcanis wrote:
Akimo Heth wrote:
CCP Rise or Malcanis,

What's the reasoning in not changing Heavy Missiles along with everything else? Weren't they originally nerfed because they didn't line up with the other long range weapon types and now they're being left behind in changes?


Ironic, isn't it?


It does have a bit of symmetry, but it wasn't HML users fault they were OP before the nerf, so please don't punish them now by leaving them behind in the buffs making them underpowered relatively. Let's fix them now so we're not revisiting this topic a month from now.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#62 - 2013-07-18 14:50:06 UTC
Akimo Heth wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Akimo Heth wrote:
CCP Rise or Malcanis,

What's the reasoning in not changing Heavy Missiles along with everything else? Weren't they originally nerfed because they didn't line up with the other long range weapon types and now they're being left behind in changes?


Ironic, isn't it?


It does have a bit of symmetry, but it wasn't HML users fault they were OP before so there's no reason to leave them behind now that they're nerfed. Let's fix them now so we're not revisiting this topic a month from now.


What would help HML is adding missiles to TE/TC's .. better tracking is more applied dps

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Onnen Mentar
Murientor Tribe
#63 - 2013-07-18 14:51:43 UTC
Overall these changes look pretty good. It seems pretty well balanced to have medium guns track horribly but still do ok damage. It's a clear weakness that you can avoid by flying cleverly and good gang compositions.

Heavy missiles really are far too weak in comparison now though. The main issue here is that you can negate the bad tracking of guns by flying cleverly. The only way you can negate the lousy explosion velocity of missiles is using a web or a scram.. Something quite unlikely if you're kiting. So if nothing else, buff the explosion velocity of heavy missiles or their raw DPS.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#64 - 2013-07-18 15:04:55 UTC
This is absolutely excellent news.

Those Beams look sexy, those Rails now look really good and arty despite loosing a bit of tracking already had the highest alpha volley that make them so interesting.

After HAMs rebalance, this is quite fantastic but I'd like HM's to get back a bit, maybe can you try to get them in line with new med guns also? -imho the nerf was a bit too big dmg wise but range and explo radius is ok now.

Finally rails rax/deimos/eagle/Moa, and that Blaster Eagle should now be a pesky thing to get rid of, really awesome looking changes.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Sarkelias Anophius
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2013-07-18 15:05:07 UTC
I wholeheartedly support these changes and I believe they will introduce some fun new life into previously unusable weapons and ships.

However, the ability to fit these weapons has not been addressed. 250mm railguns need at minimum a 10% reduction in PG requirements to be fit with a tank on anything but a Proteus. Likewise, beams need at least 5% reduced PG and 10% reduced cap demand, or they simply are not usable in a practical way.

Again, Rise, I fully endorse the current changes, but a few fitting tweaks must be made for any practical use to be made of these weapons.

Unless this is your way of telling us that larger size guns are strictly for larger size ships, in which case I say fie, sir, fie on you.
Novacrow
Moosearmy
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#66 - 2013-07-18 15:11:26 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Grarr Dexx wrote:
Capacitor usage of beams is still ****, even a 25% damage bonus is not going to make people use them instead of scorch heavy pulse or tachyon oracles.


A 25% damage buff is equivalent to a 20% improvement in their cap efficiency. I dunno but that seems like a pretty huge improvement.


So we are expected to pulse our guns or to fit one less gun than our highs can support (honest question not trying to be snarky)?

Was this balance change done with the mindset that fittings would be tight and that we would have to sacrifice tank for gank? Or just fit less guns to have our same amount of tank?

I think it would make sense for longer range ships to be more fragile. But does the fragility + tracking hit warrant the range? I think it will be interesting how many people will start to use rails/beams.
Laechyd Eldgorn
Avanto
Hole Control
#67 - 2013-07-18 15:12:02 UTC
will 10% rof bonus give more volleys before concord arrives?
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#68 - 2013-07-18 15:15:46 UTC
Heavy Missiles were previously so powerful because there was no short range medium missile weapon system. The introduction of HAMs changed that, but they were bad and heavy missiles still too good, thus the combo buff/nerf to distinguish them from each other more.

HMs retain the classic missile advantages over guns of being "immune" to tracking (you can't get an advantage over them by simply getting in close) and static damage profile (I do the same DPS at 0km as at 60km). I'll need to dig into numbers once someone gets EFT updated, but HMs are probably still just fine in comparison to the new long range guns for those reasons.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#69 - 2013-07-18 15:22:26 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Heavy Missiles were previously so powerful because there was no short range medium missile weapon system. The introduction of HAMs changed that, but they were bad and heavy missiles still too good, thus the combo buff/nerf to distinguish them from each other more.

HMs retain the classic missile advantages over guns of being "immune" to tracking (you can't get an advantage over them by simply getting in close) and static damage profile (I do the same DPS at 0km as at 60km). I'll need to dig into numbers once someone gets EFT updated, but HMs are probably still just fine in comparison to the new long range guns for those reasons.


any timeline on adding missiles to TE's TC's etc. ?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Naomi Anthar
#70 - 2013-07-18 15:27:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Anthar
Harvey James wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Heavy Missiles were previously so powerful because there was no short range medium missile weapon system. The introduction of HAMs changed that, but they were bad and heavy missiles still too good, thus the combo buff/nerf to distinguish them from each other more.

HMs retain the classic missile advantages over guns of being "immune" to tracking (you can't get an advantage over them by simply getting in close) and static damage profile (I do the same DPS at 0km as at 60km). I'll need to dig into numbers once someone gets EFT updated, but HMs are probably still just fine in comparison to the new long range guns for those reasons.


any timeline on adding missiles to TE's TC's etc. ?


And TD ... seems fair if you want our cookies , take our pain too.

BTW +1 to those changes. I'm really not that bad person . Not complaining as always :P. But i do when changes are terrible. This one is nice and seems in order. What i would also change is T2 crystals. Seems like no matter what you do with guns itself people don't want to use those.

Ah and one more thing <3 CCP for increasing damage on beams without increasing RoF. Seems like you are starting to see where Amarr problem is.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#71 - 2013-07-18 15:34:07 UTC
Looks good, there is now a reason to use medium rails.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#72 - 2013-07-18 15:34:39 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Heavy Missiles were previously so powerful because there was no short range medium missile weapon system. The introduction of HAMs changed that, but they were bad and heavy missiles still too good, thus the combo buff/nerf to distinguish them from each other more.

HMs retain the classic missile advantages over guns of being "immune" to tracking (you can't get an advantage over them by simply getting in close) and static damage profile (I do the same DPS at 0km as at 60km). I'll need to dig into numbers once someone gets EFT updated, but HMs are probably still just fine in comparison to the new long range guns for those reasons.


any timeline on adding missiles to TE's TC's etc. ?


And TD ... seems fair if you want our cookies , take our pain too.

BTW +1 to those changes. I'm really not that bad person . Not complaining as always :P. But i do when changes are terrible. This one is nice and seems in order. What i would also change is T2 crystals. Seems like no matter what you do with guns itself people don't want to use those.

Ah and one more thing <3 CCP for increasing damage on beams without increasing RoF. Seems like you are starting to see where Amarr problem is.


Heat sinks ROF bonus comes to mind here perhaps a swap of damage for ROF would be possible CCP?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Lixia Saran
Perkone
Caldari State
#73 - 2013-07-18 15:35:43 UTC
I'm eager to go start crunching numbers and test out to see if a rail tengu will now be a viable (PVE) alternative to the current hml/ham setup with the AEB subsystem.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#74 - 2013-07-18 15:41:11 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Heavy Missiles were previously so powerful because there was no short range medium missile weapon system. The introduction of HAMs changed that, but they were bad and heavy missiles still too good, thus the combo buff/nerf to distinguish them from each other more.

HMs retain the classic missile advantages over guns of being "immune" to tracking (you can't get an advantage over them by simply getting in close) and static damage profile (I do the same DPS at 0km as at 60km). I'll need to dig into numbers once someone gets EFT updated, but HMs are probably still just fine in comparison to the new long range guns for those reasons.


any timeline on adding missiles to TE's TC's etc. ?


That's a question for CCP, though I'll ask it again. Blink

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#75 - 2013-07-18 15:52:05 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Heavy Missiles were previously so powerful because there was no short range medium missile weapon system. The introduction of HAMs changed that, but they were bad and heavy missiles still too good, thus the combo buff/nerf to distinguish them from each other more.

HMs retain the classic missile advantages over guns of being "immune" to tracking (you can't get an advantage over them by simply getting in close) and static damage profile (I do the same DPS at 0km as at 60km). I'll need to dig into numbers once someone gets EFT updated, but HMs are probably still just fine in comparison to the new long range guns for those reasons.


imho they are now lacking of something, while I fully agree silly flight time had to go away and increase a bit explosion radius at the same time a dps nerf was also added and this one it's imho what is killing heavies rights now.

75km with javelins is nothing hard to achieve, 55 still gives you room for either more rof or tank rigs but we have to look at this opportunity as an extreme fit for a specific purpose, while 75km will be more of a pve ship the 55 one can perfectly achieve a pvp role so much better than using HMs, notice at these distances you're still doing around 600dps using faction bcu's.

I'm probably wrong and not having the good vision of the bigger picture but I still think HM's need a little dmg increase about 3%

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#76 - 2013-07-18 15:55:06 UTC
Lixia Saran wrote:
I'm eager to go start crunching numbers and test out to see if a rail tengu will now be a viable (PVE) alternative to the current hml/ham setup with the AEB subsystem.


Indeed, this would be fantastic even if I have some doubts about the viability of such fit for pvp over an Eagle, alternative are good thou.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Rina Kondur
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#77 - 2013-07-18 16:39:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Rina Kondur
CCP Rise wrote:
One of the discussions we had with the CSM on this topic (there were a lot) revolved around a situation where you get to choose which ship to bring to a fight where you will be shooting at Talwars. Do you want a new medium long-range gun ship, or an Attack BC with large short-range guns. So I made a DPS graph here showing three fits: a 200mm Rail Thorax, a 250mm Rail Deimos, and a Neutron Talos, all of which have 2 tracking enhancers fit. The situation shown would be if the Talwar has MWD on and is moving at full speed at an angle of 60 degrees (hopefully fairly average, though it will vary a lot). You can see what that looks like here: DAMAGE GRAPH


Or you know, you could fight something within the same class. You don't always have to overship to win fights. Why can't a specialized destroyer fit be good against larger ships? It was something really fun for new players to get into.

Also here's a direct counter to Talwars. You're welcome.
Princess Nexxala
Federal Navy Academy
#78 - 2013-07-18 16:49:56 UTC
Good ****


Haters gonna hate, keep up the good work ccp

nom nom

Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#79 - 2013-07-18 16:55:47 UTC
CCP Rise - one thing, while You gave nice boost to guns, You left out something.

After this HML will be 100% unusable - outclassed with damage from their gun counterparts.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#80 - 2013-07-18 17:01:31 UTC
As someone who - like oh so many - flies this ship and that ship one day and another, I salute your decision to make us chose amongst 5 weapon systems instead of 4!

I don't see those buffed pulses putting a lot of pressure on scorch HPLs, but guessing Scorch is just a necessity to amarr laserships as it is.
Looks like LR turrets will be on par with Heavy Missiles for the most part. (Still do not trust those med. beams)