These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP, to Bring Balance, Nerf AC's (or Remove Blasters).
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vmir Gallahasen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2011-11-08 01:37:35 UTC
Alexandria Aesirial wrote:
As long as it's been proven to be plausible your point remains mute. If you didn't know, other factions have uber ships too and none can match the vindi except from the bhaal and it's debatable.
I doubt you even play this game. The vindi deals 50% more dps than a mega???? where did you drop from? homeworld?

Read the damn post. 50% more damage bonus. as in, the mega gets a 25% bonus, the vindi gets a 25% * 1.5 = 37.5% damage bonus
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2011-11-08 01:43:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Hungry Eyes
KLizMaN wrote:
A few nerf posts coming from you; first Tengu now AC's


So your going against your previous post; lasers, ac's, and missiles are balanced

To quote you..
"No matter how you buff these guns, they will always be inferior to pulses, AC's and missiles, which are balanced well."

Why would you want to nerf something that is in balance with two other systems.

AC's don't need to be nerfed. Blasters and blaster ships need to be buffed. I have faith CCP will continue to work on this until they release the winter expansion.


thanks for reading my material, appreciate it. allow me to address your concerns.

- nerf posts: a problem? considering this game has been left to rot for 3 years, there is much balancing to be done; my commentary is relevant given the times.

- the Tengu thread is about bringing other T3's in line with this monster, and possibly about nerfing heavy missile range; i assume you have not seen what the Tengu can do in PVP, and i also assume you have not seen Tengus being the single best answer for all things PVE (at the cruiser/BC level)

- lasers, AC's and missiles are fairly well balanced relative to each other; being the fan that you are, perhaps you can find that thread where i said there are two options for bringing hybrids back into the game: a) buff hybrids to fit current meta (which involves deleting blasters as they simply cannot fit without radical buffs to blaster boats, i.e. teleportation devices, scram immunity, web resistance, heavy armor resists, etc), or b) nerfing other weapon systems while buffing hybrids so they all meet in the middle (a much tougher undertaking); this is a thread dealing with option B. welcome.

- im so happy that you have faith in CCP. i dont personally, given the last 3 years of ignoring FiS. i dont think there's anything wrong with giving suggestions when theyre struggling. ive put my (few) ideas out on the table, and now i wait to see what happens on SiSi.
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2011-11-08 01:54:18 UTC
Alexandria Aesirial wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
there are 3 ways to fix blasters (and, by extension, hybrids as a whole):

A) make them behave like AC's

B) make blasters ships more mobile than matari ships (and a fair bit of damage added to them blasters too)

C) remove the entire hybrid weaponry from game, gallente now only use drones and caldari only use missiles. SP refund from hybrid skills removal.




A is bleh, B would divide the community, C is the easiest, and, as of late, considering how everybody is behaving about this, the best solution.

at the very least it would allow me to sigh and move on instead defending option B.

I know that hybrids can still fit in and I'll wait for the changes to be implemented on TQ before saying anything. CCP tallest said it himself that more buffs could be on the way depending on the feedback he gets from this patch.
It's all annoying when some random dude starts blabbing like nothing is being done




as I said, besides removing them entirely from the game, you either make them overshadow something, or transform them into [insert other weapon's name here] Mk. II.

blasters specifically, you either make them into AC's that spew therm+kin damage and eat cap instead current AC's, or you boost weapons and boats to a level where they surpass AC boats at mobility.

[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
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#44 - 2011-11-08 02:00:13 UTC
To the OP:

Nerfing projectiles would do nothing for the viability of hybrids since they are still dramatically outperformed by lasers. Really, all current complaints about Hybrids that are framed against projectiles are better framed against lasers. I think the right answer is to leave projectiles alone until the hybrid boost is finalized and then re-evaluate the situation. It is entirely possible to boost hybrids in such a way to make them equal to lasers and projectiles (which I feel are fairly reasonably balanced).

Hopefully, the hybrid boost isn't finalized because it seems pretty underwhelming so far. Maybe the ship changes will redeem it, but I really really doubt it. :S

To Grimpak:

Option B) more mobile blaster ships with a fair bit of damage is the right answer for Hybrids. To hell with the dissenters.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2011-11-08 02:07:26 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
To Grimpak:

Option B) more mobile blaster ships with a fair bit of damage is the right answer for Hybrids. To hell with the dissenters.

-Liang


I know that, but do you see it happening in a perfect way, considering CCP's track record?

if any they will boost damage by 50%, make blaster ships 50% more faster and mobile than matari ships and boost optimals and falloffs by 500%.


which would be awesome but totally OP.

[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
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2011-11-08 02:12:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Hungry Eyes
how would you justify the use of blasters in the current meta without giving blaster boats teleportation devices, huge speed increases, web resists, scram immunites, massive armor resists, or etc?

i guess pretty much what grim said. those percentages would have to be huge.
Roosterton
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2011-11-08 02:13:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Roosterton
My video linked in another thread? I'm truly honored! Big smile

Carry on. /reads

Edit:

Just a few points - The fit I was using in the video was heavily armor tanked, so it pretty much sacrificed its signature minmatar kiteyness. Additionally, I was using 650mm AC's, which means less falloff. The TC was loaded with the tracking speed script for most of the time, which, along with dual webs, was *just barely* enough to track the drones and inty, so I imagine tracking bonused blasters on a Talos should have no issues with pulling off similar things post-buff.

The Naga being unable to finish off my 5% armor was less of a case of the Tornado being OP, and more of a case of the Naga being very, very "meh." A Talos would have finished me off with no issues, due to a very good tracking bonus and an armor tank (which allows it to fit webs and whatnot.)

As for the Proteus, had I been using your typical shield tanked Tornado fit, it would have pinned me down with its 18km scram and melted me in moments. I was somewhat lucky to be rolling with that dualweb + short scram fit, as it allowed me to keep at the edge of scram range, away from his blasters. Had he fitted a web or two himself, he would have likely killed me much faster, without needing the help of the Loki.

Additionally, my fit's DPS is really nowhere near comparable to that of a Mach. Looking at EFT, I'm seeing only around ~600 DPS with heat and faction ammo. There is no faction ammo on sisi atm, so the DPS you were seeing in that video was closer to 550. A shield version gets more DPS, but trades all those utility mid slots. A hurricane gets better DPS and vastly superior tank; really, the only reasons one would want to use a Tornado are for the extra volley damage and falloff of large guns, and the extra speed and reduced sig. The paper stats are really terrible. P
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#48 - 2011-11-08 02:19:17 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
To Grimpak:

Option B) more mobile blaster ships with a fair bit of damage is the right answer for Hybrids. To hell with the dissenters.

-Liang


I know that, but do you see it happening in a perfect way, considering CCP's track record?

if any they will boost damage by 50%, make blaster ships 50% more faster and mobile than matari ships and boost optimals and falloffs by 500%.


which would be awesome but totally OP.


Honestly? Have you been reading the dev blogs lately? It seems to me that they've brought back some of the old guns that have lots of experience with Eve. They might actually pull it off in a pretty reasonable way.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#49 - 2011-11-08 02:24:47 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
To Grimpak:

Option B) more mobile blaster ships with a fair bit of damage is the right answer for Hybrids. To hell with the dissenters.

-Liang


I know that, but do you see it happening in a perfect way, considering CCP's track record?

if any they will boost damage by 50%, make blaster ships 50% more faster and mobile than matari ships and boost optimals and falloffs by 500%.


which would be awesome but totally OP.


Honestly? Have you been reading the dev blogs lately? It seems to me that they've brought back some of the old guns that have lots of experience with Eve. They might actually pull it off in a pretty reasonable way.

-Liang


Your Back?!?!
KLizMaN
Stark Innovations
#50 - 2011-11-08 02:30:09 UTC  |  Edited by: KLizMaN
Hungry Eyes wrote:

thanks for reading my material, appreciate it. allow me to address your concerns.


You're welcome?


Hungry Eyes wrote:

- im so happy that you have faith in CCP. i dont personally, given the last 3 years of ignoring FiS. i dont think there's anything wrong with giving suggestions when theyre struggling. ive put my (few) ideas out on the table, and now i wait to see what happens on SiSi.


I do have faith. I also can't imagine the current state of hybrids on sisi is final.

KLizMaN
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2011-11-08 02:54:43 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
To Grimpak:

Option B) more mobile blaster ships with a fair bit of damage is the right answer for Hybrids. To hell with the dissenters.

-Liang


I know that, but do you see it happening in a perfect way, considering CCP's track record?

if any they will boost damage by 50%, make blaster ships 50% more faster and mobile than matari ships and boost optimals and falloffs by 500%.


which would be awesome but totally OP.


Honestly? Have you been reading the dev blogs lately? It seems to me that they've brought back some of the old guns that have lots of experience with Eve. They might actually pull it off in a pretty reasonable way.

-Liang




I know, exaggeration from my part. still, I am concerned that they either don't get the point or boost it too much.

[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
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#52 - 2011-11-08 03:20:26 UTC
JC Anderson wrote:
Your Back?!?!


"Back" is such a strong word. I have resubbed this account as an attempt to recognize CCP's focus on FIS. Since resubbing, I've put in 2 80x jump low sec roams and found exactly nobody to shoot. I'd do more, but I've been putting in 100+ hour work weeks too so that's just not gonna happen right now. Also, Skyrim (which I have preordered) comes out this week ... so... yeah.

I don't know about my previous ban status except that I confirmed with GM Lelouch a couple of days ago (maybe a week?) that I am no longer banned on any account. So much <3 to him (and the rest of CCP).

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#53 - 2011-11-08 03:31:03 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
there are 3 ways to fix blasters (and, by extension, hybrids as a whole):

A) make them behave like AC's

B) make blasters ships more mobile than matari ships (and a fair bit of damage added to them blasters too)

C) remove the entire hybrid weaponry from game, gallente now only use drones and caldari only use missiles. SP refund from hybrid skills removal.



A) By this you mean extend their range? To be honest I find it amusing that the ranges on other races have been extended as they have and yet people turn purple when the subject comes up pertaining to blasters. Take Minmatar:

Before the projectile buff AC had one range for falloff. Afterwards, that falloff range was assigned to the lowest tier gun with a 10% stepup for every tier after that. So the 1600mm plate Ruppie stayed as is with it's dual 180s. The vaga's 220mm got a 10% falloff increase. The Cynabal's 425mm got a 20% falloff increase. Add a TE for a 30% increase that wasn't there before. If you add a second TE you get 25% - 26% increase on that one.... 50% for barrage.

To put it in perspective - the vagabond before the projectile buff had 23km of falloff. Now it gets 41km.

So to turn it around - why not? Increase blaster's optimal so it's a 50-50 mix with falloff. Push cruiser DPS out to 20 -25km so they can at least force a warp out.

B) I support more mobile Gallente as the way to go as well. Shortest weapon system = fastest ships.
A'Brantox Foson
A'Brantox Foson Corporation
#54 - 2011-11-08 03:52:03 UTC
Been reading this whole thread over the past few hrs, on and off while battlefield 3 crashes back and forth in a very neferious loop of stress and joy.

My conclusion has been since the start:
Leave autonannons alone... go and play with yeer hair or something. I'm sure you could have fun doing that, I know girls generally like that sort of thing.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#55 - 2011-11-08 03:59:59 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
there are 3 ways to fix blasters (and, by extension, hybrids as a whole):

A) make them behave like AC's

B) make blasters ships more mobile than matari ships (and a fair bit of damage added to them blasters too)

C) remove the entire hybrid weaponry from game, gallente now only use drones and caldari only use missiles. SP refund from hybrid skills removal.



A) By this you mean extend their range? To be honest I find it amusing that the ranges on other races have been extended as they have and yet people turn purple when the subject comes up pertaining to blasters. Take Minmatar:

Before the projectile buff AC had one range for falloff. Afterwards, that falloff range was assigned to the lowest tier gun with a 10% stepup for every tier after that. So the 1600mm plate Ruppie stayed as is with it's dual 180s. The vaga's 220mm got a 10% falloff increase. The Cynabal's 425mm got a 20% falloff increase. Add a TE for a 30% increase that wasn't there before. If you add a second TE you get 25% - 26% increase on that one.... 50% for barrage.

To put it in perspective - the vagabond before the projectile buff had 23km of falloff. Now it gets 41km.

So to turn it around - why not? Increase blaster's optimal so it's a 50-50 mix with falloff. Push cruiser DPS out to 20 -25km so they can at least force a warp out.

B) I support more mobile Gallente as the way to go as well. Shortest weapon system = fastest ships.



The biggest problem with increasing blaster optimal is that it just makes them ****** projectile/laser copies. Or it obsoletes projectiles or lasers - either way its bad form. Much better to have moar damage.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Cedo Nulli
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2011-11-08 04:36:18 UTC
I support the idea to nerf everything to the ground.

Make everything so terrible to fly that nobody will want to play the game and bam ... no more problems as the last person out shuts down the lights.
A'Brantox Foson
A'Brantox Foson Corporation
#57 - 2011-11-08 05:15:44 UTC
Cedo Nulli wrote:
I support the idea to nerf everything to the ground.

Make everything so terrible to fly that nobody will want to play the game and bam ... no more problems as the last person out shuts down the lights.


This. Otherwise go and play chess. More meaningful to say what with the expansion coming up and said fixees already piercing the light of day/eve.

Optimal is best left to lasers/arty
Falloff left to autocannons
Tracking/dps lleft to blasters
Wildcard range, possibly rails.
Spamming and what goes to missiles.

I think CCP's job here cud be done. (altho just trying out tornado 7xT2 1400mm = "holy ****".. and "WTF" lol.)
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2011-11-08 07:32:17 UTC
Yes decrease ac-s dmg by 20%,pulses too. So blaster would have a real advantage not just +5% paper dps over them.
And projecitles need an alpha reduction too . Those are way too much compared to the other weapons. A +30-40% advantage should be enough.
Robert Lefcourt
BigPoppaMonkeys
E.B.O.L.A.
#59 - 2011-11-08 07:55:22 UTC
Alexandria Aesirial wrote:

I just wanted to state the obvious. Blasters currently have better tracking than projectiles across the board so your point is ******* mute.


Point blank range, transversal speed. Please learn the basics.
Buzzmong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2011-11-08 12:19:36 UTC
Take away the buff Pulse lasers got to tracking to move them more towards short->medium range weapon they always used to be, nerf Scorch as well, as even as an respecced laser user, they're out of wack.

If you did that, not only would it be a big step into reintroducing the grey areas of ranges where none of the weapons work at their peak, it would clearly show up just how versatile AC's are and how they do need to be bent back into their niche.