These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Hybrid Turrets

First post First post
Author
Shpenat
General Defense Union
#541 - 2011-11-11 14:04:34 UTC
I think the proposed changes are good. But I have few thinks to consider (they are not mine originally)


  • Consider ammo reload time based on fire rate rather than constant time. For example with 10s reload time small electron blaster will miss 5 shots while reloading which is a lot. On the other hand Neutron Blaster Cannon (Large) will skip only 1.2 shot which is not that much. Do the same for projectiles (with longer time though).

  • Maybe add some diversity. remove some ranges of ammo from hybrids. Allow blasters to fire auxiliary rounds (0 damage, do some other effect like slightly bumps the targeted ship). Allow rails to fire penetration ammo (ammo is hitting shields, armor and/or hull at the same time (with different percentage).
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#542 - 2011-11-11 14:11:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Here are the stats I posted the other day and some ship examples with guns and damage mods...

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b180/pinky_81/SisiStatsNovember.jpg

There are a few guns sticking out with weird stats, but the guns look pretty fine if you at the same time look into drone bays, amount of available lowslots and secondary bonuses.

Still waiting for:

  • Additional speed/acceleration balance between Gallente/minmatar
  • Hybrid ammunition clean-up
  • Fall-off nerf on Tracking enhancers / Tracking computers
  • Armor rig penalty replacement (with sensor strength?)
  • Caldari optimal bonus -> damage bonus *

* To give Gallente an advantage over the caldari dps wise:
  • Suggestion 1 : Hyperion damage bonus -> ROF bonus (Hype get 6,4% more dps)
  • Suggestion 2 : Remove 1 gun on Rokh (Rokh gets 9,375% more dps total - 12,5% less than Hype)

Also while doing those bonus plz change bonus for Apoc and Prophecy. They will benefit a lot from losing their optimal bonus and their laser bonus.

Also when all above is done it's time to tweak single ships 1 at a time I think :-)



Urgghhh. Caldari doesn't need the range bonus changing, it needs tank bonus to Caldari Hybrid ships only; Less spank with more tank = balance. The idea that every ship in the game should do the same damage at the same range, and all go the same speed will make EvE dull and ship choice just cosmetic.

And because the Hyperion sucks you want to make the Rokh even suckier? I know you might not see fleets full of Hyperions, but Gallente have this other ship called a Megathron. Caldari? When was the last time you saw a fleet of Ravens and Rokhs bearing down on you? And half of scorpions are armor fit because so many gangs roll armor, and they tank great with armor right? ;-)

Hyperion gets more low slots, a damage bonus, and more mid slots to fit things other than a tank. Rokh can do none of those things, all its mid slots are needed for a MWD and tank, and then it still has 90,000 less EHP than a similar fit Abaddon (It's direct Armor equivlant) with 5% lower resists when finished, 50% larger signature once all those shield extenders and rigs are installed and the boat still moves the same speed as a pack mule with three legs and one of those legs is lame. And you want to nerf it?

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Sir Fury
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#543 - 2011-11-11 14:19:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Fury
Jazz Styles wrote:
It all comes down to getting the ship into the engagement zone of its weapons. In this instance, Gallente blaster boats either need to:

a) Be the fastest and most agile, ....



Speed & agility are not mutually inclusive. Speed will be enough. & I'm in favour of a conditional speed (AB/MWD bonused) as opposed to simply making Gallente the default fast race. (I wouldn't mind if they were from the start, but I think the CCP Devs won't be willing to go that far, as besides affecting the lore aspects, will need changes to the speed bonused Minmatar hulls like the Vigil, Stabber, Vagabond, etc, to be consistent with that new philosophy. thats too much of a hassle in itself, & not really feasible).

The bull needs the speed. The matador needs agility. Not the best of analogies, but there you have it.
Allfa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#544 - 2011-11-11 14:36:11 UTC

Don;t make the gallente the fastest but instead:

-Give blasters more damage to make them worth it

-Make a new niche for rails, the curent one is uselles (make them the best trakers with the best ROF for medium/high ranges, wit low/medium DPS), you get ships which are better for fighting smaller ships at range

Galltene huls: DO NOT MAKE THEM THE FASTEST..instead, put medium (not light) webing drones, that have increased cargo size so Gallente make the most of them (bigger drones bay)

So what we have is:

A Deimos will be kited and killed by a Vaga (Exactly as is should be) if:

1 H dosen't land on 0 or the vaga pilot make's a mistake (curent state of broken balance)
2 He dosen't have webing drones, which will give him a window to kil the vaga
Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
#545 - 2011-11-11 14:40:27 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Here are the stats I posted the other day and some ship examples with guns and damage mods...

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b180/pinky_81/SisiStatsNovember.jpg

Those numbers seem odd to me. What ammo are you using? Hype with AM (just vanilla AM, not even Navy) + 2 damage mods does 826 dps in my pyfa. Up to 985 with 4.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#546 - 2011-11-11 14:48:09 UTC
Moon - I personally love the Hyperion... It's is a beautifull and dangerous ship, however what is severely broken is the active repairing for PvP. Give the repper modules a boost and the Hyperion will shine for small and medium scale engagements while you still have the Megathron for large Fleet scale operation.
Also the new hybrids even if still lacking a clear role looks pretty nice to me...

And yes I agree the range bonus might be usefull on many ships the battleships certainly get a disadvantage. Thats why I wanted to close the gap of dps between the Caldari and Gallente.

The extreme range has a few advantages that will rarely work in practice in the current TQ environment. You cannot fly them with other ships because the ranges doesn't match and the damage usually applied will be too little...

And yes there are many suggestions to fix the rokh - I would love for the Rokh to have a hi-slot moved to a medslot, but I would insist on getting the optimal bonus changed to damage... As mentioned only to make it viable and not to make it identical.

Pinky
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#547 - 2011-11-11 15:14:15 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Moon - I personally love the Hyperion... It's is a beautifull and dangerous ship, however what is severely broken is the active repairing for PvP. Give the repper modules a boost and the Hyperion will shine for small and medium scale engagements while you still have the Megathron for large Fleet scale operation.
Also the new hybrids even if still lacking a clear role looks pretty nice to me...

And yes I agree the range bonus might be usefull on many ships the battleships certainly get a disadvantage. Thats why I wanted to close the gap of dps between the Caldari and Gallente.

The extreme range has a few advantages that will rarely work in practice in the current TQ environment. You cannot fly them with other ships because the ranges doesn't match and the damage usually applied will be too little...

And yes there are many suggestions to fix the rokh - I would love for the Rokh to have a hi-slot moved to a medslot, but I would insist on getting the optimal bonus changed to damage... As mentioned only to make it viable and not to make it identical.

Pinky


Hey Pinky,

First off, I agree the gallente need 'fixing' and I have posted suggestions regarding that.

But I think you're thinking that the only fleet fit for Rokh is with Rails and at longer range. Personally I would roll them out with blasters, where the range bonus is very useful to make the ship viable at close and medium range engagements. This is why they have a 5% shield bonus to survive close range. But they can't compete with Amarr. Even with the range bonus, Pulse Lasers reach further and do more damage. That is fine, but then Amarr get all the other bonuses I previously mentioned (such as being the best buffer tank in the game) while Caldari get lumped with a fat signature and less EHP. The Abaddon even has mid slots to extend the laser range and tracking with scripts if need be without affecting the tank.

I would go the other way, and remove a low slot on the Rokh and put it in the mid along with a 7.5% resist bonus instead of 5%. It is a gun boat, that is it's role, and a role it can't really fulfil at present, let alone if you give it one less gun - and for what - to fix it for one vs one against Hyperions? To fit an active tank on a Rokh is a nightmare, with not enough power or CPU to do it properly, all the rigs are power grid rigs etc. It's not meant for that role, so I don't think it can be compared to a Hyperion that is meant for smaller gangs and solo (given it's tank bonus).

If the Rokh was perfect at present, people would use it in fleets, but they don't - and it really was designed to be the Caldari Fleet boat in the same way the Megathron is etc - it even says as much in the Rokh description.

Comparing DPS graphs does not take into account all the other variables such as speed, tank numbers and types of fits etc, and so I don't think it is so easy to look at that and say give this more dps etc. Thats why Caldari Hybrid boats need better buffer tanks to truly represent the shield version of what Amarr is to armor.

In this way, the Rokh would be viable, but just giving it more damage, still leaves it weaker than the Abaddon with lower resists, which makes a massive difference in fleet logistics and their ability to tank bigger fleets.

If you are going to compare active tanked ships, the Caldari equivalent of the Hyperion is the Raven, which gets the active shield bonus, and on the DPS graph, it needs to be compared to a Megathron as a fleet boat.

Anyway, good debate. But where is the chase and how do I cut to it. At this stage I would sort of like to hear what CCP Tallest think to all the feedback on this thread.


"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Magosian
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#548 - 2011-11-11 17:50:52 UTC
This overall effort by players and devs alike is NOT getting anywhere. Before you look at stats, ships, ammo/fitting bonuses, there is only one question that needs to be asked (thank you Gypsio III):

Can hybrids do something which can't be done by lasers or projectiles? BTW the answer is NO.

Hybrids do not provide a passive, inherent advantage to the pilot. This is the SOLE reason why hybrids are an afterthought. The upcoming winter expansion MUST provide pilots with an absolute/distinct/passive/core/unique/effective benefit BEFORE an engagement ensues.

CCP, I've gone through this ENTIRE thread and presented the #1 problem for you. I saved you the trouble of reading and deciphering it. I probably missed MANY more, but the concensus remains: the PLAYER COMMUNITY has established a core shortcoming of hybrids and this is why they are not used. It must be addressed BEFORE statistics to hybrids are changed because projectiles and lasers are chosen for passive benefits BEFORE turret stats are considered. Give hybrids a reason to be used. Give hybrids a single, core, unique benefit which is NOT offered by lasers or projectiles. Do this and you have tackled the biggest thing plaguing hybrids. If hybrids are to have any chance at being viable and popular turret, THIS ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ADDRESSED!


That aside, you should still look into tweaking the hybrid stats as you've been; there are plenty of other secondary problems with hybrids. But understand modifying turret stats and making small modifications to ship stats is not going to make anyone think "Hrm, hybrids would be great weapon to use because, as a pilot, I like to do A B and C...."

And please don't take my word for it, take theirs:


  • #19 Mariner6: HYBRIDS: Ok, Blasters. They have the worst aspects of lasers and projectiles and none of the benefits
  • #31 Imawuss: Performance issues aside, Why do Hybrids have no inert advantages like missiles, lasers, and projectiles have?
  • #31 Imawuss: Really Hybrids need an inert advantage, then they need all the other stuff
  • #37 Narjack: 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
  • #55 Mekhana: the design in itself is flawed. Unless CCP is willing to redesign hybrids and Gallente ships from the ground up or making every kind of gun similar to each other we'll never get anywhere
  • #84 Mr Painless: As I see it the main problem with hybrids is that they are inferior to other turret systems
  • #101 Gypsio III: To fix hybrids, you need to fix that problem - intrusion of lasers and projectiles into hybrids' home territory
  • #114 Vilgan Mazran: Rails in general seem to suffer from an identity crisis. What is their role?
  • #119 Jiji Hamin: hybrids are still pretty much utterly worthless for anything larger than a frigate with these changes. if it is not readily apparent why, then you deserve to be fired
  • #129 Alice Katsuko: it doesn't address the underlying issue of hybrids being underwhelming as a weapons platform
  • #134 Imawuss: If you make them behave like pulses and AC's they become that.... that wont happen either. They must be unique
  • #138 Pinky Denmark: Currently we have a change of stats that makes hybrids better but the hybrids still need a UNIQUE ROLE to fit the current game mechanics
  • #149 Yvan Ratamnim: It's quite simple, hybrids have every negative
  • #151 Jiji Hamin: This list of changes is pretty much the minimum that I could imagine for making hybrids worthwhile, keeping blasters interesting, maintaining ship diversity, and so on without revamping both gallente and hybrids from the ground up
  • #162 Deviana Sevidon: I fear we will end up with a train-wreck of a half-assed attempt to fix hybrid weapons but without a concept for the weapons
  • #180 Monger Man: What if hybrids instead changed how they worked
  • #186 Gecko O'Bac: I'd take "effective" over "exciting" any day
  • #190 PinkKnife: Hybrids have no real gains over the other turrets, ignoring raw numbers
  • #211 Cuane Jeran: After more playing (and comparing) Hybrids really need something else
  • #255 Hungry Eyes: i really hope the ship and ammo buffs are mind-blowing, because as is, rails and blasters are still useless on the current ships
  • #259 Mag's: I still don't see a reason to fly blaster ships with these changes
  • #300 Hungry Eyes: CCP, no one will be flying hybrid platforms
  • #323 Gypsio III: addressing the problem of intrusion of lasers and projectiles into blasters' and rails' niches
  • #344 Dare Devel: In my humble opinion, at the moment after the next round of changes announced, we are still 75% behind the optimum buff to rebalance Hybrids
  • #360 Jerick Ludhowe: What we need is something unique, something not present or available from any other weapon system
  • #367 Gypsio III: Put simply, hybrids do nothing that cannot also be done with lasers or projectiles. As long as this situations exists, there is still no reason to use hybrids
  • #371 Gypsio III: Flexibility is important, and hybrids simply don't have it
  • #381 Julius FOederatus: I appreciate that CCP is looking at this issue, but frankly I don't think you guys are appreciating the magnitude of hybrid inadequacy
  • #412 Gypsio III: [Tallest,] discuss the environments in which they're supposed to excel and where they should be inferior, and the capabilities that allow them to fulfil their intended design
  • #437 Keen Fallsword: Changes that are on SiSi are not enough
  • #446 Grimpak: test server changes on both blaster hulls and blaster themselves are just half-assed attempts in all honesty...these tiny changes simply served to make the glaring issues less glaring
  • #508 Shadow Lord77: What advantage do hybrid weapons have?
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#549 - 2011-11-11 18:11:09 UTC
hi mom.

anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments?
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
#550 - 2011-11-11 19:39:35 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:
anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments?


Smart money is on "this is will require more booze, err- thought, than we considered. See you next week!"
Keen Fallsword
Skyway Patrol
#551 - 2011-11-11 20:06:42 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:
hi mom.

anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments?


Yep we are waiting guys...

I was on SiSi today. I was flying almost any hybrid ship.. Its a Joke ? Or a Crap ? or Bullshit ?
Everything in mid ships lvl is the same unplayable as it was. I think that the bigest issue with "so called hybrids re-balancing" is that Devs are doing it in Ms Excel Everything is nice on paper but its not PRO way to do this. Go on Sisi and TRY it...
Miriiah
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#552 - 2011-11-11 20:21:27 UTC
Not a ranting post or anything, but I'd like to hear CCP's work so far since last sisi update, some ideas they might have or whatever.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#553 - 2011-11-11 21:41:26 UTC
Keen Fallsword wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
hi mom.

anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments?


Yep we are waiting guys...

I was on SiSi today. I was flying almost any hybrid ship.. Its a Joke ? Or a Crap ? or Bullshit ?
Everything in mid ships lvl is the same unplayable as it was. I think that the bigest issue with "so called hybrids re-balancing" is that Devs are doing it in Ms Excel Everything is nice on paper but its not PRO way to do this. Go on Sisi and TRY it...

nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#554 - 2011-11-11 21:47:32 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
Keen Fallsword wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
hi mom.

anyway, devs seriously whats the word on the latest hybrid developments?


Yep we are waiting guys...

I was on SiSi today. I was flying almost any hybrid ship.. Its a Joke ? Or a Crap ? or Bullshit ?
Everything in mid ships lvl is the same unplayable as it was. I think that the bigest issue with "so called hybrids re-balancing" is that Devs are doing it in Ms Excel Everything is nice on paper but its not PRO way to do this. Go on Sisi and TRY it...

nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is


Patience, give them two or three more years, they just started to work on it.
Zircon Dasher
#555 - 2011-11-11 21:48:13 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is


Have the optimal fits for all ships been decided upon already?

Crap.

I have been slacking on my EFT warrior time. Sad

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#556 - 2011-11-11 21:54:15 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Naomi Knight wrote:
nah they use the new fitting probably with suboptimal/pve fits , and cant gasp what our problem is


Have the optimal fits for all ships been decided upon already?

Crap.

I have been slacking on my EFT warrior time. Sad

there is a button for it in the newest version , top left use it
Zircon Dasher
#557 - 2011-11-11 22:01:35 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
there is a button for it in the newest version , top left use it


push button recieve 'leet fit??

I dont know if I should cheer or cry.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#558 - 2011-11-11 22:03:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Magosian wrote:
This overall effort by players and devs alike is NOT getting anywhere. Before you look at stats, ships, ammo/fitting bonuses, there is only one question that needs to be asked (thank you Gypsio III):

Can hybrids do something which can't be done by lasers or projectiles? BTW the answer is NO.

Hybrids do not provide a passive, inherent advantage to the pilot. This is the SOLE reason why hybrids are an afterthought. The upcoming winter expansion MUST provide pilots with an absolute/distinct/passive/core/unique/effective benefit BEFORE an engagement ensues.

CCP, I've gone through this ENTIRE thread and presented the #1 problem for you. I saved you the trouble of reading and deciphering it. I probably missed MANY more, but the concensus remains: the PLAYER COMMUNITY has established a core shortcoming of hybrids and this is why they are not used. It must be addressed BEFORE statistics to hybrids are changed because projectiles and lasers are chosen for passive benefits BEFORE turret stats are considered. Give hybrids a reason to be used. Give hybrids a single, core, unique benefit which is NOT offered by lasers or projectiles. Do this and you have tackled the biggest thing plaguing hybrids. If hybrids are to have any chance at being viable and popular turret, THIS ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ADDRESSED!


That aside, you should still look into tweaking the hybrid stats as you've been; there are plenty of other secondary problems with hybrids. But understand modifying turret stats and making small modifications to ship stats is not going to make anyone think "Hrm, hybrids would be great weapon to use because, as a pilot, I like to do A B and C...."

And please don't take my word for it, take theirs:


  • #19 Mariner6: HYBRIDS: Ok, Blasters. They have the worst aspects of lasers and projectiles and none of the benefits
  • ...
    ...
    ...
  • #508 Shadow Lord77: What advantage do hybrid weapons have?



Edited and cleaned up.
Nice summary. Blasters have damage advantages in close range when tracking isn't an issue. Railguns have a range and optimal advantage which they don't do much dps in. The debate is that it becomes rare when you can use blasters at short range and railguns simply do not compete at short-range which is where most PVP combat plays out.

Even with the proposed changes hybrids will be the under achieving. I'm asking myself why I would use railguns when I can use artillery. And why use blasters when auto-cannons perform better?

Hot-drops happen often, gate battles, station battles, SBU battles, etc are all usually close range. Rails don't perform well in those scenarios. Minmatar ships may damage blaster boats out of their range. Hybrids aren't competitive except for the occasional time you can get in range on a blaster boat. Compared to the relative strengths of other weapons platforms and all their draw-backs, (cap usage, etc), they don't perform well.

Who would use them except for a person which like the idea of Hybrids and doesn't care about feasibility?

Don't judge anyone's post by their character's face, or their characters name, judge it by the ideas. Basically I think that because hybrid weapons may either have mediocre performance at a distance, or superior performance close up, why not unify the two? Forget my ammo idea. Just unify the turrets so they can morph into each other. Be a rail at distance, and a blaster system close up. If the system appears unbalanced, nerf rail tracking even more, and blaster optimals and falloffs.

Then the draw-backs of such a system is that a 425mm rail can only snipe if the enemy ship is stationary around 25km or so, which I'm not so sure is different than what it currently is. And blasters can only fire when close up. But you don't have to worry that your system isn't competitive.

They'll be used because they can compete against any other weapons platform and that's something projectile, laser, and missile weapons can already do. It's nothing new. Projectile weapons would still be kings at long range, (artillery alpha), and medium-to-short range, (large/medium auto-cannons). Laser weapons would still have terrific DPS at medium to short range while having good ammunition logistics. While hybrids would become okay at long range, and superior at the extreme close range.

That seems fair and balanced and creates a niche. It wouldn't be "Hybrid or Die" if it were balanced properly and rails would still likely require some fleet assistance to work properly.
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#559 - 2011-11-11 22:45:06 UTC
We do not need to post any more ideas or thoughts about hybrids or how to fix them.
Everything that needed to be said has been said in this thread, it is full of great ideas, solutions and possibilities.
So instead of posting ideas and solutions we should only post one sentence and hope CCP will read it:

LISTEN TO YOUR COMMUNITY AND FIX HYBRIDS PROPERLY.

After you have fixed the hybrids fix all the other issues, there is a lot to do so stop talking start doing!
There is nothing else left to say in this thread.
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Industries I
#560 - 2011-11-11 22:54:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Shadow Lord77
Basically what I meant by my post is that while some people like the idea of blasters doing a lot of damage at close range; and the idea of railguns doing lesser damage at longer ranges the two inherently conflict with current game mechanics. This is because it is easy to warp on to someone who is using rail-guns. Therefore their advantage is negated. Blaster ships are somewhat difficult to get within range in of other PVP ships in combat. Caldari ships being slow doesn't help this; I'm not sure about Gallente.

So why not unify the two with a few penalties? I keep mentioning it, but most of the people on this thread keep ignoring it besides Monger Man. Even if rails were buffed slightly they'd still be relatively-low damage long-range weapons which wouldn't stand a chance in close-range combat. Is that what you want?

If the SiSi changes to hybrid turrets were reverted and all the optimal ranges of the turrets were kept the same, but the experimental mechanic of the turrets switching out to either blaster or railgun turrets depending on range was put in place. Hybrid turrets would still be ineffective between the ranges of ~17km-35km, (Assuming large neutron blaster and 425mm,) because of tracking and optimal range issues and it is intuitive to see that this problem exists even with SiSi's 5% tracking bonuses on either rail-guns or blasters. This experimental mechanic would be cool to test please think about it CCP.