These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Test Server Feedback

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

First post First post
Genos Occidere
#21 - 2011-11-04 18:43:05 UTC
Harotak wrote:
Additional changes I want;

Small Blasters +5% DMG
Medium Blasters + 15% DMG
Large Blasters +10% DMG

At least this is needed. Hybrid ammo changes would help as well.
Kalot Sakaar
#22 - 2011-11-04 18:43:48 UTC
Mariner6 wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
please remove speed penalties from armor rigs, or just make Gall ships shield-tankers.

Disagree. Make the speed changes directly to the Gallente ships. If you do it to rigs then you just make the other races (mostly ammar even more badass to fly. An armor tanked cane with its tiny sig radius and full speed would be absolutely devastating.)

Agree with this. Leave rigs alone. Just finished some testing. Couldn't really see any difference that make me overcome my complete happiness with what I already fly (Amarr and Minmatar). Gallente buffs simply meh. I need to go see how a hurricane will do with the new Hail. I haven't checked to see yet if that change has been applied.
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2011-11-04 18:57:42 UTC  |  Edited by: xo3e
blaster boats need more mobility or features like web range bonus on every boat. (no joking)
or blasters should have much more dps to be able to kill kiting boats even if they (blaster boats) got into their optimal after some time.

because now even if blaster boat pilot is skilled enough to get into close range to his opponent - its already too late, too much damage taken and blasters dps cant compensate time spent on getting into scramrange.

moving gallente to shield tank is also a go.

Signature removed. Navigator

Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2011-11-04 19:01:46 UTC
thanks for another Minnie buff CCP. i guess? cuz thats what we needed.
#25 - 2011-11-04 19:32:21 UTC
Raimo wrote:
Harotak wrote:
Additional changes I want;

Small Blasters +5% DMG
Medium Blasters + 15% DMG
Large Blasters +10% DMG

At least this is needed. Hybrid ammo changes would help as well.

or how about 10% across the board but to achieve this do a 50% increase to base damage a 30% reduction in rate of fire...

that way you get a nice alpha boost tooboot! and only shoot 1-1.5 seconds slower...

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Jiji Hamin
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-11-04 19:53:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jiji Hamin
while I think it's interesting to push for more hybrid ammo buffage, i also think that many people in this thread are thinking about this the wrong way.

there's a certain point at which we need to agree that we want ship diversity, and that hybrids should be balanced to do something particular, and do it will, rather than to just demand that they be able to do what other guns can. So, I actually disagree that range is what we need, we need damage, tracking and ease of fitting on blasters, and give up on the idea of their being useable in fleets. Make them hard to get in range, but epic in dps, for smaller fights, and then just buff rail tracking/dps until they can pick up the slack and cover medium ranges. web bonuses give me a boner.

similarly, we do need to figure out cladari hybrid platforms, and what can be done with them that keeps them substantively different from gellente hybrid platforms, because until caldari hybrid platforms have dronebays and damage bonuses they will always be worse at the whole "Antimatter slugger" thing then gal. so what do we want them to do? be the same? and if not, then what? design them from the ground up as railgun ships? well, that's what we already have. design them to be epic when using null? well, there's a cool idea.

finally, i'm not certain that I want to see the active armor rep bonus go. sorry, everyone. i love a triple rep hyperion. i love double rep and triple rep myrmidon. and i think that anyone who advocates those bonuses being applied to incoming RR are complete imbeciles. While some of those ships may need buffs, whether it be more agility or better hybrids or better base shield HP or resists or better armor resists or armor reps getting their HP at the beginning of the cycle or WHATEVER, but I don't think we should give up on that bonus.

ps i saw someone in this thread make a comment about amarr being overshadowed/outperformed by minmatar. never say that amarr pilots have it rough. we don't. amarr are in no need of buffing as a shipline (although i will admit that legion bites) because lasers are totally epic and we have no shortage of drones or utility highs or low slots or armor resist bonuses or neut bonuses.
Genos Occidere
#27 - 2011-11-04 19:58:20 UTC
I'm crossposting this even though it's technically off topic... However very relevant even to the interests of this very thread:

If you want to appear as a "new" improved and caring CCP, I strongly suggest seeding the common faction ammos on SISI right about now. Asking us to test things and even test balance on SISI and *still* neglecting to provide the most used on TQ PVP ammo is so "old" (*AWESOME*) CCP. It cannot be that hard, can it?
Jiji Hamin
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2011-11-04 20:00:06 UTC
Raimo wrote:
I'm crossposting this even though it's technically off topic... However very relevant even to the interests of this very thread:

If you want to appear as a "new" improved and caring CCP, I strongly suggest seeding the common faction ammos on SISI right about now. Asking us to test things and even test balance on SISI and *still* neglecting to provide the most used on TQ PVP ammo is so "old" (*AWESOME*) CCP. It cannot be that hard, can it?

Kyoko Sakoda
Achura-Waschi Exchange
Monyusaiya Industry Trade Group
#29 - 2011-11-04 20:15:04 UTC
There is still a little too much cap use. A Rokh with 8x 425mm Railgun IIs and 2x Power Diagnostic System IIs still has some issues maintaining capacitor. I of course think that if the ship is capped out, it shouldn't be able to fire, but it should be able to sustain fire on its own.
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
#30 - 2011-11-04 20:26:21 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Every Gallente ship with an active tanking bonus needs a change also (though not necessarily the tanking bonus)

Active tanking in general needs looks at. Changing the rep bonus to

7.5% bonus to armor repair amount of armor repair systems and remote repair received per level.

might be a start. Changing the penalty for active armour rigs (and only active rigs, not Trimarks) to something else might help; pg/cpu/cap use of reps, agility maybe. I get that you're supposed to be trading off speed tank for other types of tank, but losing range control at the same time is a killer. Maybe a sig radius penalty...?

I'm not fond of the shield tanking solution. It'd require reworking the slot layouts of most of the Gallente lineup, and would screw over any Gallente pilot who hasn't cross-specced into armour. I think we should at least try to make the current paradigm work before we burn it down and start over.

I don't want to EFT warrior, so I'm not going to comment on the changes so far until I've actually tested them... but I do think a (small) DPS buff to blasters or a nerf to ACs (and maybe pulses at short range) might be warranted. Something to give the greens a real edge in point blank damage output.
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2011-11-04 20:41:02 UTC
Performance issues aside, Why do Hybrids have no inert advantages like missiles, lasers, and projectiles have?

MIssiles: no cap, pick damage type
Lasers: insta load ammo, pick ammo range and actually use it because of instant loading ammo.
Projectiles: no Cap, can pick damage type, can pick ammo range (to an extent, has load time)

Hybrids: can pick range but cant take advantage because of 10 second load time. But they also use cap, stuck to therm, kin damage, and extremely short range. all this for an extra 17% damage over lasers and 27% over projectiles (but only up to 10km..)

Really Hybrids need an inert advantage, then they need all the other stuff.
Weatherlight Industry
#32 - 2011-11-04 20:45:30 UTC
Mariner6 wrote:
So that's my piece of advice that will absolutely get ignored and probably trolled.

We better not let that happen, ccp please take a look a this guys contribution, he points out all the good points, that really need to be taken a look at, fixing hybrids will be a bigger work then just fixing afew stats here and there, they been left alone for so long that it'll take a bit of work getting them back on track now.
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2011-11-04 21:03:01 UTC
Also having an offensive weapon system using cap combined with ship bonuses that give advantages to active tanking seems odd. Perhaps change the 7.5% armor rep amount to a 5% armor hp amount per level which at level 5 would be equal to about 3 trimarks (give or take). This would allow Gallente to use DPS rigs instead of trimarks so we are not gimping our speed for tank and we can get the DPS boost we want.

Also would love to see a 50% boost to damage and 30% reduction in RoF like others have suggested giving a 10% overall boost to DPS but also would slightly lower cap use as well.
Holy Cheater
Monks of War
#34 - 2011-11-04 21:07:03 UTC
CCP Tallest wrote:

Please post your feedback about hybrid turret balancing in this thread.

Your Tallest.

No offense, but in my opinion you got it all wrong.

The proposed changes won't do much good for blaster boats. They do not have significant difference in speed or damage. But they do lack firing range. How do one supposed to get in range of blasters to make some damage before destruction?

Okay, blasters are very short range weapons, blaster boats risk themselves by getting in this range. But is it worth the risk? It takes time while you catching someone and there's a chance you won't catch anybody. And if you do - you make damage which can't be exactly described as devastating.

And now compare it to the minmatar autocannon boats. You choose the damage type, you make some distance between you and your target, you can outrun your enemies.

Also, armor tanking and blasters do not fit for each other. It takes precious slots for damage mods, it further reduces your speed making it harder to make the damage which is not worth the risk. Take an autocannon-boat, you wouldn't risk a thing and still kill your target.

So blaster boats needs something which would make them worth of flying. Whether the change would be increasing damage/shipspeed, increasing firing range, changing tanktype from armor to shield or even maybe make some unique properties which would allow them to escape their enemies from short range distances - the change is needed.
Dare Devel
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2011-11-04 21:18:17 UTC
In test server

8x 425 mm Railgun II
4x Mag Stab
Javelin L - DPS = 689
Optimal- 27 KM / Falloff-28.8 KM / Tracking-0.015

CN Animatar L - DPS = 679
Optimal- 54 KM / Falloff-28.8 KM / Tracking-0.012

111k EHP
(2x Large Shield Extd, 2x Invul t2, 1x DC, 3x Core Def Shield Extend 1)

DPS wise this is fail.
BCs can do better damage.
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#36 - 2011-11-04 21:22:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
Hello Tallest,

As you can’t yet tinker with ships/bonuses a'la 'Gallente MkII' (Blink) I’ll be as succinct as possible with thoughts regarding blasters:

1. Try iterating the tracking boost between values 20 % and 50% while nerfing the tracking on Null correspondingly.

2. Iterate the overload bonus from 15% to values between 30-50% (30% represents parity with an overloaded armour repairer).

3. Reduced fitting has slightly helped, opening up a couple more possible fits.

4. Cap usage – cap injectors still mandatory on the larger boats, but this does help the die-most and Thorax. Has nicely balanced out the cap usage on the Moros meaning you can actually take advantage of that ROF bonus.

5. Agility/speed changes are somewhat noticeable; 2 MWD cycles to get up to ¾ speed in my Megathron, albeit still far slower than back in its prime.

War Machine:

#37 - 2011-11-04 21:41:24 UTC
Well, lets see, Yes Tallest they are better. But nothing really game changing. Don't see anything here that would even come close to enticing me really focus on these guns vice the other options out there. Still just too many draw backs on the rails vice arty and torps. The blasters? Well, again, they are a bit better, but again, no way I'd stick my neck out in a fight with these. Which frankly is fine by me. I enjoy seeing Gallente ships die. I'm just fine with missiles.
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#38 - 2011-11-04 21:50:54 UTC  |  Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
Much of what Mariner6 said earlier i do approve of.

Gallente Blaster boats commit 100% so yes they fight in scram/web/neut range. Because of this Gallente Blaster boats need to be made of sturdier stuff than they are now.
Boost armor RESISTS! not HP amount as that will affect performance. The Drake is a tech1 BC yet it has 5% to all Shield resists per lvl. Apply some of the same thoughts to gallente boats.

and as much as some people are wanting a switch from armor to shield tanking for gallente, i really still feel gallente should stay armor tanky!

Also im unsure of this but i believe gallente ships should have either a buff to cap capacity or a buff to cap regen to make them more resilient in neut range compared to other platforms.
Making hybrids less cap intensive is a buff to all ships that want to use hybrids. Gallente ships should be built to withstand the cap intensive nature of hybrids a LOT more than other ships!

Also T2 Hybrid ammos need more love as been said previously!
Hail defintiely needs a 50% to optimal and falloff.
Void still needs a damage bonus more than it has so far.

in general Gallente's secondary bonuses should be considered to be web range if anything, for example 10% per lvl to range, NOT to velocity factor! even with a domination web ur not getting to max t2 point range and ur not encroaching on rapiers range territory.
Yet it WILL actually bring some level of catch it kill it to gallente design.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#39 - 2011-11-04 22:04:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
New hybrid changes are great - still got more to work on though...

  • Leave them as they are

Hybrid guns?
  • Proposed alterations sounds good, however I would make sure the new fittings doesn't lead to extinction of smaller tier hybrids. Perhaps make sure the tracking beats the bigger tiers a lot to make them attractive. Low tier guns have been neglected for like forever..

Hybrid ammo
  • Nobody will ever change ammo in pvp more than once with the current often useless hybrid ammo. Consider dropping hybrid reload time from 10 to 5 secs and people might consider it.
  • Change attributes on ammo to have 1 short range, 1 mid range and 1 long range. Each having 3 variants of damage distribution (20/80, 50/50 and 80/20 therm/kinetic - maybe change 50/50 to include 3rd damage type if it doesn't break anything)
  • Forget penalties for T2 ammo.
  • Reduce charge size plz...

Ship stats
  • Give the Gallente blaster ships a signature buff on top of the other changes. Taking longer for others to lock them up they should have a few more seconds to catch targets, a few more seconds without taking damage and they should be able to avoid more dps at least from bigger weapons. Thisalong with the changes should be more than enough to compete with Minmawinners.

Ship bonus
  • The hybrid buff alone will never make ships like the Moa, Ferox and Rokh work well. Explanations are many but in short pvp today makes it very, very difficult to obtain any advantage from having an optimal bonus. Even making it a optimal+fall-off bonus won't cut it. The shield based hybrid ships need an extra medslot (for a hi/lowslot) making them able to either tank longer as compensation to their missing damage bonus or using tracking computers or webifiers to avoid getting roflstomped completely by anything solo, in groups or in fleets.
  • It is my sincere opinion that Hybrid ships need more medslots than a missile ship of the same class to work effeciently and it might be exactly what it takes to get Railguns back in fleets while making the Ferox and Moa work for PvP without gimping their tanks while they do less dps from the start...


EDIT: oh my a lot of people have idea and comparisons lacking background and consideration. I guess we're all getting emo because we love this game but still...
Bhaal Chinnian
#40 - 2011-11-04 22:22:16 UTC
1) TY for reducing the charge size \0/ 80 large void per gun is nice.
2) maybe reduce the reload time to 5 secs(or none at all)?
3) maybe buff the damage on void & null slightly(yes, I know it has been, but blasters should do epic short range damage hello)

Off topic regarding the Talos----> maybe decrease the cpu requirement slightly.

My sisi initial Talos fit :8 large T2 neutrons, 2 T2 Webs, 1 meta 4 mwd, 1 TC2, 1 DC2, 2 T2 EANMs, 1 1600mm plate, 1 Reactive plating left me with just 1 cpu left \0/ nice and tight! :)

'A Good Plan executed today is better than a perfect plan executed next week'-- George Patton