These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Monger Man
D.S.A.
#561 - 2011-11-11 23:26:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Monger Man
Shadow Lord77 wrote:
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 difficult to get in within range in PVP combat because in-game Caldari ships are slow and armor-tanked Gallente things are also slow as well.

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.


You're not going to gain any traction with you're idea because you haven't helped to solve the problem with hybrids.
Under you're idea, you still have to much range with rails (to easy to warp to) and can be completely kitted with no
way to close in.

You've left 90% of the field open to the enemy.
If you unify blasters/rails into one turret governed by ammo, the idea is you can now cover all ranges by switching ammo.
The big problem is still

1. Its to powerful, you have all the answers with a turret that does all ranges very well.

or

2. Its not helpful, you have all the ranges with a turret that's to week to matter at them.

I'm partial to the idea. But I still cant see a way out of 1 or 2.
Jazz Styles
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#562 - 2011-11-12 02:33:42 UTC
I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns.

As for blasters, if they're going to stay as ultra short range weapons, then you need to make them powerful enough so that Gallente pilots will be eager to get in suicidally short range, and make other pilots regret it. Redonkulous firepower, I mean.
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#563 - 2011-11-12 02:59:12 UTC
Highest ROF?

Have you considered ammo costs? Railguns should be the most accurate weapon in game, which means very good damage vs small targets.

I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.

Rail guns inherent advantage - hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade.

Railguns should not be noodle hard. 300 DPS is not worth it, noodle soft weaponry is nothing like Caldari.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again

Jazz Styles
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#564 - 2011-11-12 03:08:54 UTC
Opertone wrote:
Have you considered ammo costs? Railguns should be the most accurate weapon in game, which means very good damage vs small targets.

Lower ammo costs then. We're only talking 10% faster ROF, so 10% cheaper to make will cover it, and might even help make blasters more attractive.

Opertone wrote:
I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.

They're already the longest range sniper weapons in the game, and apparently that's not good enough.

Opertone wrote:
hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade.

You just described every long range turret in the game. Try thinking outside the box.
X Gallentius
Easy Eight
#565 - 2011-11-12 04:12:12 UTC
Jazz Styles wrote:
I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns.
For a given dps, For a given level of dps, alpha is superior to rate of fire. How about drop arty r.o.f by another 20% to lower their dps instead?
Monger Man
D.S.A.
#566 - 2011-11-12 04:20:38 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Jazz Styles wrote:
I like the idea that hybrids should have their own unique style to differentiate them from other turrets. If artillery is the highest alpha, perhaps rail guns could be the highest rate of fire of the long-range guns.
For a given dps, For a given level of dps, alpha is superior to rate of fire. How about drop arty r.o.f by another 20% to lower their dps instead?


Its an interesting idea but I don't think CCP is going to do any nerfs at the moment.

It would be very dangerous for them to.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#567 - 2011-11-12 06:25:01 UTC
I think next move is on CCP - players pretty much gave them all we could with plenty argumentation for everything...

Also note that energy and projectiles seems rather balanced so except nerfing tracking enhancers/tracking computers for fall-off and look at gallente/minmatar speed/mass/agility we shouldn't really touch anything but the hybrids with these changes (at least for now). minmatar have the lowest dps already but a alpha 3-4x bigger than other systems with capless select damage type ammo and having ships with a double damage bonus.

So lets wait to see the additional tweaks coming from CCP
(because I severely hope for ammo, TE/TC and other mentioned issues will get adressed as well)

Happy weekend to all of you
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#568 - 2011-11-12 07:59:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Knight
I cant see where matar has the lowest dps , they easily out dps my rokh /eagle/ferox anytime.
The best part is that every matar ship gets rof bonus which is way better than the dmg bonus for dps.
And due to capless and overbuffed ammo capacity , matar dont get any disadvantes from the rof bonus , while a rail/blaster ship would use more cap and run out of ammo meaningfully quicker. Also an arty ship need like 1k ammo only for any fight, while rail ships would need 4 times as much and the projectile ammo m3 is smaller,that is just so dumb???
Sigras
Conglomo
#569 - 2011-11-12 08:31:47 UTC
Opertone wrote:
I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.

Rail guns inherent advantage - hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade.

Railguns should not be noodle hard. 300 DPS is not worth it, noodle soft weaponry is nothing like Caldari.


This is the first suggestion that I think would make railguns interesting and unique . . . battleship sized guns doing full damage to cruisers at long range would definitely be a niche that could be filled

Any ideas for blasters?

I was thinking highest close range alpha maybe . . . remove the cap buff, nerf ROF by 200% and increase damage by 250%?

That still wouldnt help them get in range, but they'd only have to get in range once to make you wish they hadnt . . .
Jazz Styles
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#570 - 2011-11-12 08:42:24 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
I think next move is on CCP - players pretty much gave them all we could with plenty argumentation for everything...

Yeah this has been a very thorough discussion, I can't think of anything else that needs coverage so I'm done here. Hoping for big improvements to hybrids real soon Big smile
Imawuss
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#571 - 2011-11-12 09:20:32 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Opertone wrote:
I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.

Rail guns inherent advantage - hit anything hard at long ranges, hit nothing at close ranges. Good trade.

Railguns should not be noodle hard. 300 DPS is not worth it, noodle soft weaponry is nothing like Caldari.


This is the first suggestion that I think would make railguns interesting and unique . . . battleship sized guns doing full damage to cruisers at long range would definitely be a niche that could be filled

Any ideas for blasters?

I was thinking highest close range alpha maybe . . . remove the cap buff, nerf ROF by 200% and increase damage by 250%?

That still wouldnt help them get in range, but they'd only have to get in range once to make you wish they hadnt . . .


Never Happen. Why.... Becuase that Alpha would be so freakin huge. It would take like 6 talos to suicide gank a freighter, arties alpha is tempered with poor DPS, which is why its not OP. But a blaster with 4-5x the dps of arties with an arty sized alpha would lead to too much high sec ganking.
Hamox
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#572 - 2011-11-12 10:29:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Hamox
One last thought from me:
Why Warp Scramblers prevent from warping AND prevent from using MWD?
Lets change this module to only prevent from using MWD. You still can use Warp Disruptors.

A blaster ship will always loose one med slot becouse it needs AB or MWD.
That way the oponent also needs to use one additional slot for a scrambler.
The blaster guy even doesn't need a web becouse he is faster with MWD.

Think about it and the combinations you could use on different ships, it is a very simple idea but it will change a lot of fittings and ship setups.
At the moment every pvp ship has a wscrambler and a web but that way you will need a disruptor, web and scrambler to fight a blaster boat. Or a MWD on your side but you will always have to spend an additional med slot, same as the blaster guy, he always needs one additional med slot for AB/MWD.

There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.

If you play Rock, Paper, Scissors you also don't have one 4th element that will win over 2 others.

Edit:
oops sorry, I forgott may sentence:

LISTEN TO YOUR COMMUNITY AND FIX HYBRIDS PROPERLY.
Sigras
Conglomo
#573 - 2011-11-12 10:29:54 UTC
Imawuss wrote:
Sigras wrote:
Any ideas for blasters?

I was thinking highest close range alpha maybe . . . remove the cap buff, nerf ROF by 200% and increase damage by 250%?

That still wouldnt help them get in range, but they'd only have to get in range once to make you wish they hadnt . . .


Never Happen. Why.... Becuase that Alpha would be so freakin huge. It would take like 6 talos to suicide gank a freighter, arties alpha is tempered with poor DPS, which is why its not OP. But a blaster with 4-5x the dps of arties with an arty sized alpha would lead to too much high sec ganking.

Interesting . . . I never thought of that . . . ummm . . . what else could it be?

I still have to think the way to set them apart is by their ammo, so maybe trade . . . cap usage for . . . range? tracking? trade tracking or signature radius for extra damage?

what do you think?
Sigras
Conglomo
#574 - 2011-11-12 10:36:24 UTC
Hamox wrote:
One last thought from me:
Why Warp Scramblers prevent from warping AND prevent from using MWD?
Lets change this module to only prevent from using MWD. You still can use Warp Disruptors.

A blaster ship will always loose one med slot becouse it needs AB or MWD.
That way the oponent also needs to use one additional slot for a scrambler.
The blaster guy even doesn't need a web becouse he is faster with MWD.

Think about it and the combinations you could use on different ships, it is a very simple idea but it will change a lot of fittings and ship setups.
At the moment every pvp ship has a wscrambler and a web but that way you will need a disruptor, web and scrambler to fight a blaster boat. Or a MWD on your side but you will always have to spend an additional med slot, same as the blaster guy, he always needs one additional med slot for AB/MWD.

There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.

If you play Rock, Paper, Scissors you also don't have one 4th element that will win over 2 others.

this changes nothing, hurricanes, cynabals, drakes et all only ever use warp disruptors anyway and they kite at 20 km, and everyone . . . seriously everyone uses a MWD. so the hurricane will still fly at 1500 m/s and the thorax will still be slower at 1200 m/s and never catch up to do any damage.
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#575 - 2011-11-12 11:04:54 UTC
Hamox wrote:
One last thought from me:
Why Warp Scramblers prevent from warping AND prevent from using MWD?
Lets change this module to only prevent from using MWD. You still can use Warp Disruptors.

Scrams are pretty much one of a blaster ships prime weapons, being in close and needing to slow down an enemy to keep them in read. This is a relatively bad idea in my opinion.

Hamox wrote:

That way the oponent also needs to use one additional slot for a scrambler.
The blaster guy even doesn't need a web becouse he is faster with MWD.


Have you flown a megathron or Hyp? You need a web at point blank.

Hamox wrote:

There is no real reason why one module should shut down warp drive and MWD drive.


It was buffed because no one used it when it didn't shut down an mwd.



Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#576 - 2011-11-12 11:06:34 UTC
I have to say, I am a bit disappointed in the lack of feedback from Tallest regarding our feedback.
A "Hey... working on the changes... thanks for the input... " would have been nice. Just to know we are
being heard.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#577 - 2011-11-12 12:11:58 UTC
Opertone wrote:
I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.


Tracking doesn't work like that. Decreasing a turret's signature resolution by 10% has eactly the same effect as increasing its tracking speed by 10%.
Mekhana
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#578 - 2011-11-12 12:52:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Mekhana
The game's pretty boring for me right now, because we always have to fly the same ships (Amarr and Minmatar) If you guys fix this I might get back into it.

Vide longe er eros di Luminaire VII, uni canse pra krage e determiniex! Sange por Sange! Descanse bravex eros, mie freires. Mortir por vostre Liberete, farmilie, ide e amis. lons Proviste sen mort! Luminaire liber mas! 

Miriiah
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#579 - 2011-11-12 14:46:47 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Opertone wrote:
I'd have more accuracy and stopping power in exchange for not being able to hit at close ranges. You are sniper fit, if something comes 30 km close, you are in trouble. Give rails small signature 125m for large, but very poor tracking. This will allow sniping and restrict close range combat.


Tracking doesn't work like that. Decreasing a turret's signature resolution by 10% has eactly the same effect as increasing its tracking speed by 10%.


Decreasing it by 50% = increasing tracking by 100%. drecreasing it by 90% = increasing tracking by 1000% Decreasing by sig by 10% = increasing tracking by 11.111(Repeating) %
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#580 - 2011-11-12 15:59:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Pattern Clarc
AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

That is the last sound we would like to hear from by our targets as they experiance the full force that will be the new Hybrids...



At the moment, with the changes on SISI it sounds like this...


What's that scratching soun.... oh.





Clearly, this is the most objective way to game balance. Take note CCP Tallest.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction