These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#101 - 2011-11-06 11:34:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
CCP,

You haven't fixed rails because:

Sniping beyond 150 km is still irrelevant because of instant probing and warping,
Artillery and Tachyons are still far superior closer in,
Large rails still offer no advantage over tachyons on optimal-bonused Apocalypse,
The Eagle still does less damage than an Aurora Zealot at 100 km, despite being fatter, much slower, and far harder to fit.

You haven't fixed blasters because:

Blasters still offer no significant applied damage advantage over Pulse and especially ACs at blaster optimal, despite suffering massive range disadvantages,
Blaster hulls are slower than AC hulls, despite also using the shortest-ragne weapons (seriously you must be on ether if you think it's sensible to put the shortest-range weapons on the slow hull).

You will not solve these problems by fiddling about with 20% tracking, 10% fitting requirements or 10% damage. The sad truth is that your previous episodes of ill-thought out power creep have enable projectiles and lasers to usurp hybrids from hybrids' niches. If lasers and projectiles are also effective in hybrids' niches, then, given the severe range limitations of hybrids, there is no reason to use hybrids. To fix hybrids, you need to fix that problem - intrusion of lasers and projectiles into hybrids' home territory.

Good luck. Straight

Oh small hybrids were basically fine and do not need a boost! Boosting them will damage frigate diversity as everyone switches to Daredevils, Taranises and Comets.
Keras Authion
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#102 - 2011-11-06 12:16:09 UTC
This might be a bad idea, but what if the hybrids got the ability to hit one size smaller craft with some kind of efficiency? By this I mean that a large rail would hit a cruiser like a medium rail would but with say 67% efficiency. The penalty is necessary so that there is a use for the smaller guns.

Now we would have a unique role for hybrids that doesn't overlap with other weapons. Lasers still have a great control over range, projectiles have the capless selectable damage type and hybrids would have more versatility in choosing the target size.

Of course this still does not solve the getting in range problem with blasters but at least rails would now have a clear advantage over the other weapons.

This post was rated "C" for capsuleer.

Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#103 - 2011-11-06 13:03:27 UTC
Dare Devel wrote:


Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range...
You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.

Does that make sense?


Not really. I mean, it does make sense from an EFT perspective, but if you ever tried blasters in a real combat (PVP) situation, you'd find out that tracking is much more of an issue on those short ranges, even accounting for the scrambler. The webber would help, but many (probably most) blaster ships aren't able to fit a webber as well as a MWD and a scrambler (and possibly tank). Especially if you consider frigates, where fitting an AB is quite a good idea, if the ship lets you do that.
Shin Dari
Covert Brigade
#104 - 2011-11-06 13:04:17 UTC

Please CCP give them some more damage, but with a different spread across damage types:

Railguns:
EM:
TH: 30%
KN: 40%
EX: 30%

Blasters:
EM: 30%
TH: 40%
KN: 30%
EX:


Thus railguns will be still weapons for the Kinetic damage race (Caldari) and be a bit more effective against Armor ships.
And Blasters will be still weapons for the Thermal damage race (Gallente) and be a bit more effective against Shield ships
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#105 - 2011-11-06 13:06:42 UTC
Keras Authion wrote:
This might be a bad idea, but what if the hybrids got the ability to hit one size smaller craft with some kind of efficiency? By this I mean that a large rail would hit a cruiser like a medium rail would but with say 67% efficiency. The penalty is necessary so that there is a use for the smaller guns.

Now we would have a unique role for hybrids that doesn't overlap with other weapons. Lasers still have a great control over range, projectiles have the capless selectable damage type and hybrids would have more versatility in choosing the target size.

Of course this still does not solve the getting in range problem with blasters but at least rails would now have a clear advantage over the other weapons.


I'd say this is a bad idea. Balance in eve depends also on relative sizes. Smaller ships can maneuver better and can thus get "under the guns" of bigger ships. Bigger ships have either to specialize in hunting smaller ships or rely on a support fleet.

If you make a weapon able to deal equally well with targets of different sizes, you're basically screwing with balance... And so you can now bring a 200 man fleet which can deal with BSs and support fleets better than a 100 man bs fleet + 100 man support fleet.
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#106 - 2011-11-06 13:36:27 UTC
Dare Devel wrote:


Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range...
You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.

Does that make sense?
Actually tracking is much more important up close because of a long standing flaw in the formula - there is no term describing relative change in target size - i.e. get really close your target should be hard to miss, except in Eve there is no accounting for this, only angular velocity - hence really short range weapons get boned.

Tried to discuss this a couple of years back, including several ways the formula could be tweaked, but it generated no Dev interest.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#107 - 2011-11-06 13:49:04 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Dare Devel wrote:


Think what happenes when a opponent ship is at closer range...
You tackle it with web scram. So higher tracking is useless. But when they are kiting you and you swap to a long range ammo (Your long range is really 25-30km) you need more tracking then.

Does that make sense?
Actually tracking is much more important up close because of a long standing flaw in the formula - there is no term describing relative change in target size - i.e. get really close your target should be hard to miss, except in Eve there is no accounting for this, only angular velocity - hence really short range weapons get boned.

Tried to discuss this a couple of years back, including several ways the formula could be tweaked, but it generated no Dev interest.


There's also another thing, which isn't obvious... While in RL a ship circling around a (static) target would have guns fixed on the target with no adjustment needed (as long as the route the ship is keeping is on the surface of a sphere centered on the target), in EVE even your speed matters, and in fact the speed which is used in calculations, IIRC, is the difference vector between your ship's speed and your target's speed. Two ships orbiting reciprocally at close range will often cause spikes in the difference vector, thus easily overwhelming the tracking of your guns.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#108 - 2011-11-06 13:52:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Different idea to help balance Gallente and add more fun to EvE combat.

A lot of folks have asked for speed boosts and I can appreciate why given the way Blasters work. Perhaps Gallente do need to become more like the Armor versions of Minmitar to make blasters work well for them, but this sort of feels a bit to easy to my mind, an alternative that could work well, would be making better use of the mid slots.

Gallente get more mids slots than Amarr, but perhaps there is a way to make those extra mid slots help with the range issues while making the Gallente more tactically interesting and relevant, basically putting pilot skill and fitting back into the equation, rather than just a raw speed boost.

My thought was the creation of some specific mid-slot modules which have a short 'burst' effect, for say, 20-30 seconds, but then have a long cool down and couldn't be used again for 5-10 minutes say, and perhaps Gallente get a bonus to reduce the cooldown or increase the length of the burst. Each race could have different bonuses even, for certain types of modules relevant to their race.

But the basic ideas is that when the pilot chooses to use the module, it has a big, but very brief impact and makes eve far more tactical and interesting.

The modules could cover a variety of different uses, and be relevant to all races perhaps, but these could have a tactical dimension that could keep the different races distinct and I think could add a lot of fun to the combat in EvE because of their long cool downs.

So for example, there could be a module that does indeed give the ship more speed, but only for 30 seconds, before the cooldown kicks in. There could be a module that briefly boosts tracking, or damage, or any number of factors in eve, from locking range, to perhaps a brief tank bonus.

I think these would add a lot of fun to EvE combat, both for fleets and one vs one and skirmish engagements, and more options to FC's and alliances in how they play. But critically, it could offer Gallente with a way to get in range, not all the time, but some of the time and at the pilots discretion, without making Gallente so fast they become overpowered.

Thoughts welcome.

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

Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#109 - 2011-11-06 14:03:54 UTC
Moonaura wrote:


Thoughts welcome.


The idea isn't bad, but I'd keep it to a propulsion only module, perhaps even just a script for the mwd, which allows it to pulse up for a couple of cycles for great speed, while having to stay shut for some time after activating... Something like

+ 200% cycle time
+ x speed (50%?)
+ acceleration (though with the speed boost, if it keeps the same acceleration as the normal mwd it's probably enough)
+ y seconds cooldown period (perhaps a minute? something long enough to avoid making it a full propulsion module, but short enough to be viable to actually catch something with it).

While this is a good idea and may solve some problems (and may be worth suggesting separately), I still think that hybrids and the focus of hybrid caldari/gallente ships should be revised on its own, mostly because it seems to me that we're trying to fit a square peg in a circle hole.
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2011-11-06 14:06:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariner6
Thanks for the +1. My only difference with your opinion is the active tank part. Buffer is the only viable option for Gallente ships due to all the things you talk about (being in close.) Once Neuted, that active tank is worthless. Active tank is only good in solo, 1v1 and PVE in my opinion. Get rid of all the active tank bonuses to these ships and give us something to help control range in a fight. SCRAM and WEB distance.
Sirinda
Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
#111 - 2011-11-06 14:08:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Sirinda
Keras Authion wrote:
This might be a bad idea, but what if the hybrids got the ability to hit one size smaller craft with some kind of efficiency? By this I mean that a large rail would hit a cruiser like a medium rail would but with say 67% efficiency. The penalty is necessary so that there is a use for the smaller guns.

Now we would have a unique role for hybrids that doesn't overlap with other weapons. Lasers still have a great control over range, projectiles have the capless selectable damage type and hybrids would have more versatility in choosing the target size.

Of course this still does not solve the getting in range problem with blasters but at least rails would now have a clear advantage over the other weapons.


I was actually talking about something like this in private chat the other day. Basically, introduce something like Aerotech bracketing to Eve gun systems. This would result in grouped guns to get a modifier on their to-hit probability on small craft by modifying their minimum signature radius and at the same time divide the damage per salvo by number of guns. A formula:

SigN = SigO / ( [ √nG] * nG / nM)

SigN = new signature radius
SigO = old signature radius (400 nm for 425mm railguns)

nG = number of guns grouped
nM = minimum number of guns needed for it to work (usually 4, since dreadnoughts with this ability == bad idea)

This would, for a ship mounting 4 425mm rails, result in 200 nm of signature radius modifier by dividing their damage by 4 if they hit. An 8-gun ship with the same guns would get around 70 nm sig modifier, dividing its damage by 8.

Also, since this doesn't touch turret tracking, it'd still be possible for small ships to get under bigger ships' guns. It'd be just a bit harder.


Another possibility would be adding some kind of spaceburst ability to hybrid and projectile ammunition. Enough shrapnel will kill anything, basically. Of course, there is no such thing as photonic shrapnel, so beams wouldn't get a bonus like this. OTOH, since they have next to no travel time, they could receive an added modifier to reflect higher accuracy in the above equation.


if either of these were to be introduced, it'd probably be via new skills.


I'm aware most of you will just say "Meh, bad idea" and shrug, but if you do, please tell me why you think it's a bad idea and if you think it's the concept that's flawed or just my attempt at fleshing it out.


Reading over this I realize I kind of missed the topic of "How To Improve Hybrids", but meh.


Also, I hate the forums for eating my first two attempts to post this.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#112 - 2011-11-06 14:11:04 UTC
Gecko O'Bac wrote:
Moonaura wrote:


Thoughts welcome.


The idea isn't bad, but I'd keep it to a propulsion only module, perhaps even just a script for the mwd, which allows it to pulse up for a couple of cycles for great speed, while having to stay shut for some time after activating... Something like

+ 200% cycle time
+ x speed (50%?)
+ acceleration (though with the speed boost, if it keeps the same acceleration as the normal mwd it's probably enough)
+ y seconds cooldown period (perhaps a minute? something long enough to avoid making it a full propulsion module, but short enough to be viable to actually catch something with it).

While this is a good idea and may solve some problems (and may be worth suggesting separately), I still think that hybrids and the focus of hybrid caldari/gallente ships should be revised on its own, mostly because it seems to me that we're trying to fit a square peg in a circle hole.


Still won't work. Even if it helped for gal vs amarr, the minmatar get more mids than gal, so they'd fit these mods for sure and become even more unstoppable. This is why it has to be something applied to ships, not new mods which everyone will access.
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#113 - 2011-11-06 14:14:18 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Gecko O'Bac wrote:
Moonaura wrote:


Thoughts welcome.


The idea isn't bad, but I'd keep it to a propulsion only module, perhaps even just a script for the mwd, which allows it to pulse up for a couple of cycles for great speed, while having to stay shut for some time after activating... Something like

+ 200% cycle time
+ x speed (50%?)
+ acceleration (though with the speed boost, if it keeps the same acceleration as the normal mwd it's probably enough)
+ y seconds cooldown period (perhaps a minute? something long enough to avoid making it a full propulsion module, but short enough to be viable to actually catch something with it).

While this is a good idea and may solve some problems (and may be worth suggesting separately), I still think that hybrids and the focus of hybrid caldari/gallente ships should be revised on its own, mostly because it seems to me that we're trying to fit a square peg in a circle hole.


Still won't work. Even if it helped for gal vs amarr, the minmatar get more mids than gal, so they'd fit these mods for sure and become even more unstoppable. This is why it has to be something applied to ships, not new mods which everyone will access.


Yeah like I said it would help in some cases, hybrids should be fixed on their own. Though for minmatar a normal MWD is probably still they way to go.
Vilgan Mazran
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#114 - 2011-11-06 14:48:20 UTC
Couple comments:

Medium rails had worse problems (imo) than their large equivalents. They might need some additional buffage. Rails in general seem to suffer from an identity crisis. What is their role?

Lot of OP suggestions in here. Blasters need a bit more facemelt imo, but not 50%. Maybe 10% bonus? Also boosting base speed up a bit more seems appropriate.

2-3 gallente ships with a role that lets them continue to MWD (but not warp) while scrammed would have some awesome possibilities. Not the frigates, maybe the hyp and brutix and deimos?

Changes seemed encouraging though. Please continue to iterate, as I think a lot of people are (reasonably) concerned that CCP tends to one and done when it comes to balancing.
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#115 - 2011-11-06 15:15:31 UTC
Vilgan Mazran wrote:

Lot of OP suggestions in here. Blasters need a bit more facemelt imo, but not 50%. Maybe 10% bonus? Also boosting base speed up a bit more seems appropriate.


I wouldn't dare suggesting a specific % of damage, but I'd say that 50% is more likely to be accurate given the situation than 10%. pulse lasers and autocannons do roughly 90% of blaster damage right now. But they have other, quite more important, advantages. Like tracking, range and overall better platforms to mount them on. Pulse lasers can outrange blasters by up to 300% IIRC, autocannons roughly have 50% to 150% more range, much better tracking and almost always have the speed advantage. Plus, they can change damage types. Lasers can change ammo type trading dps for range instantly. Autocannons don't use cap.

So Blasters have to: get in range, while getting damaged by their counterparts, fire, and hope to have enough spare HP to win the fight. Right now this means that blasters are only useful if you manage to start the fight already inside your optimal range. Which isn't exactly easy. If that's not the case, minmatar ships will simply kite you forever, outranging, outrunning and outtracking you. Amarr ships will do a lot of damage to you from extreme ranges and even if you manage to get them, they will probably kill you anyway. Hell, even close range missiles are probably better than blasters.
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2011-11-06 16:16:47 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
One other idea is to take away falloff range completely, and re-focus them with this in mind.

Increase optimal range a bit, so it's hit or miss as far as range goes. Then Give them another 30-40% increase in damage. don't increase tracking too much you don't want to overpower them.

Maybe add some kind of DoT effect so they burn through shields even if you miss a shot.

or make it so each shot nuets some cap.'

Anything to make them so different they don't have to compete with auto cannons, they just ARE different.



tbh this is what I have been saying all this time. blasters should be able to:

- do substantially more damage (40%+),
- track a bit better,
- to counterbalance, make them useless beyond 15km ranges (decrease optimal and/or falloff, or get rid of falloff entirely)


this however would only work if blaster ships themselves are able to move fast enough and withstand the approach to target, AKA "bull rush". Damage projection on blaster platforms should be provided solely by the ships' capability of getting to the target, guns be damned.. Result should be a ship that deals tank-smashing cataclysmic-level damage but at spit ranges and needs to commit to the target to bring its full brunt to bear, as blasters should have been.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

Alice Katsuko
Perkone
Caldari State
#117 - 2011-11-06 16:22:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Alice Katsuko
Might be completely off the wall, but if tracking is that much of an issue for blasters, why not give all Gallente boats a hull bonus to hybrid turret tracking speed on top of the existing tracking boost, much as Amarr get a hull bonus to laser cap use? It would keep blasters individually from being overpowered, but might encourage pilots to fit them on Gallente boats.

Rails could become viable in long-range snipe fleets, but only if (1) it takes more than 10 seconds for a decent prober to get an on-grid warp-in point, and (2) if rail-based boats are able to deal sufficient dps or alpha at range to kill something in the time it would take for a decent prober to get a warp-in point. A possible "solution" to rails' low dps might be to get rid of longer-range ammo entirely except for Iron (T1) and Spike (T2), and boost their damage output so that they have dps higher than artillery but lower than tachyons, and alpha higher than tachyons but lower than artillery. Or vice versa, although I think that artillery should remain the king of alpha and beams the king of dps. But either way rails would retain their damage-dealing ability all the way to maximum targeting range, unlike artillery and beams.

Then again, as far as fleet viability is concerned, from what I've seen, beam lasers and autocannons aren't very common in fleets nowadays either, but that does not make them broken.

Most long-range fleets nowadays focus on alpha, and not just because of lag. Forty Maelstroms or their equivalent in 1400mm artillery turrets can usually one-shot an Abaddon, making logistics and buffer tank essentially irrelevant, and don't depend on cap. It might take twice as many ships to burn through enemy logistics if tachyons or rails are used. So long-range fleets tend to use artillery, even on Abaddons and Rokhs. Tachyons may offer higher dps at the same range, but have significantly smaller alpha. Ditto for rails, which will always be the case unless rail alpha is buffed to artillery levels, and that won't be a good thing.

Pulses are still viable at short-range (50km or less) engagements because of Scorch, which allows them to deliver good dps at their maximum range. I haven't seen too many autocannon fleets, outside of some specialty fleets based around Vagabonds or Machariels or somesuch, probably because autocannons' higher dps and cap-independence doesn't compensate for their shorter range. Blasters will be in the same boat unless their range is buffed to Scorch levels, but then we're once again looking at homogenization of weapons and that is not a desirable outcome.

So maybe some factions simply shouldn't be the FOTM in fleet warfare. Ditto for being successful solo boats. Near as I understand it, being able to get into range shouldn't be an issue if you're working with fast tackle that can hold the target down.
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2011-11-06 16:41:39 UTC
Alice Katsuko wrote:

So maybe some factions simply shouldn't be the FOTM in fleet warfare. Ditto for being successful solo boats. Near as I understand it, being able to get into range shouldn't be an issue if you're working with fast tackle that can hold the target down.


I don't think fleet warfare is being discussed specifically.

30km to close on a target is still 17 seconds of unanswered fire when you are in a gallente BS. Ok... the Baddon is tackled and is not going anywhere... Decloak and start huffing and puffing 800ms to get into range... all while taking Lasers to the face. Obviously you either do not fly blaster boats. (In before the "Yes I do" : Then you are doing it wrong).

A substancial speed boost (Enough to chase down other races) with enough DPS buff to make up for taking punishment in the face while chasing them down worthwhile. (40 percent)
Jiji Hamin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2011-11-06 17:54:06 UTC
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.

there is another thread going about hybrid balance and active armor balance in case this threadnaught doesn't have enough.
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#120 - 2011-11-06 18:00:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Pattern Clarc
No to 40-50% more damage. Most of these comparisons ignore the drone bays of ships. And also forget that any damage increase is a range increase due to the nature of fall off.


After some time in caldari rail boats I can only suggest a few things.
The 10% per level optimal range bonus should become 20% per level - if so, having them as slow as they are with as little tank as they have would be acceptable.
In addition, the Moa and Eagle need an additional Turret, a lot more grid.

Vulture needs a shield HP bonus in addition to the resists bonus (losing it's second optimal range bonus)

I think the frigates are more or less fine.

Naga.... Should be a cruise missile and torp ship. Needs a 25% damage bonus to kinetic missiles.

I still strongly recommend these ship changes
Myrmidon = -2 turrets, +50mb drone bandwidth
Eos = +50mb drone bandwidth

Hyperion = Maybe loses it's damage(or)tanking bonus and drones for a sensor damping bonus and an extra mid?



And yeah, 4 big things your going to need to do during, or before summer...

1) Increase the difference in speed between the classes:
Frigates and Interceptors: +1.7km/s to microwarpdrive speed
Destroyers and Interdictors: +1km/s to microwarpdrive speed (with thrasher and Sabre getting much less of a speed increase)
Cruisers, HAC's and tier 3 BC's: +500m/s to microwarpdrive speed (with cynabel and vagabonds getting much less of a speed increase)

2) Unfuck the commandships:
Disable off grid gang boosting.
Give all fleet commandships HP bonuses
Give field commandships higher command bonuses or bonuses that improve there ability in someway (eg lower cap, the ability to use whilst in warp etc etc)

3) Disable the ability to fit oversized speed mods...

4) Tanking balance, Active vs Passive (fix or replace active tanking bonuses), Shield vs Armour (deadspace shield hardeners please)

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