These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#101 - 2011-11-10 02:48:14 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
Its ok, you and Lang and the 'countless other that have been saying this for YEARS' can keep putting out the fires just like the caldari fanboys did 5 years ago when it was very clearly broken then too (and I would like to say that it has not been years - the problem is quite recent - relatively speaking)
Quite recent? The problem is a direct result of the nano nerf combined with amarr getting buffed, simultaneously buffing amarr both directly AND indirectly, by shifting the meta game to favour damage projection while downplaying tracking.
Back then though the argument was to either nerf lasers, or buff everything else.

Ruah Piskonit wrote:
Especially since I suspect you spend most of your time in a mini ships and your only amarr experience is for very specific things (then tell me - who has 7/8 years experience in Amarr, minmatar and Caldari ships - all 04 characters specialized to one race). But you can prove me wrong.
Actually my most flown ship since I started playing again is the guardian. Though I would be lying if I said I didn't dislike amarr ships as a rule (the exception being their recons)

Ruah Piskonit wrote:

You can easily get under an Amarr ships guns, you can burn away and warp out, they often don't have a MWD or tackle. . . I mean, I think for that range, Amarr ships actually are just one big f1 key.
No MWD? WTF kind of amarr ships are you flying? That aside, I think amarr and minmatar are fairly well balanced with each other. Minnies can track up close but don't hit well at range, and logic dictates that the guys who can operate at long range have more drawbacks, because the difference between pulses and all other weapon systems at range is staggering. The problem is that gallente don't really fit in there, because they have only a very, VERY slight increase in DPS over amarr at the cost of having no range.
Ruah Piskonit wrote:

I am compairing the racial roles, figure it out. Gallente, with their blasters should do the most damage at close range by far.
A geddon ODs a megathron at 8km. That's close range, well within web range, comparing the weapons made for long range to those made for short range, and the pulses still win out.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#102 - 2011-11-10 03:02:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Cambarus
Ruah Piskonit wrote:

Ok, EFT again. Tank is more then just EHP. its sig, its speed, its range, its even neuts (for everyone but ACs ofc). Gank is also not just a DPS number - its range, cap use, damage type, clip size, tracking. Real gank and tank plays out very differently in the game then it does on the test server or on EFT or some similar simulator. I see minmatar ships doing damage to someones weakest resist hole, at 45km even at falloff, while zipping around with cap and options and neuts and whatever, with a nice EM resist buffer (for T2), while I am sitting there shooting away with my theoretically amazing lazors hitting for very little damage while getting riddled down - then I scratch my head and ask - where is this supposedly amazing dps I have at amazing ranges. a poor example, but equally valid then any you give.n Falloff vs optimal is only important when you consider how much you actually apply.
I'm sorry m8, minmatar used to be considered dominat cruiser and below. Now its a clear BC and below (cry about the drake all you want, the cane is 99% of the time better), and with alpha the way it is, it has a firm place in BB warfare. Excuse me, thats most of the ships in the game. zelot and apoc maybe. Ever use a curse in any duo or more situation? Tell me how you fared - cuz 1v1 maybe, ganking maybe, but in any target rich environment, its a cap drainer at most, the drones are an afterthought. And when you start talking about logistics ships, well, QED.


I suppose that is what is so upsetting about this whole discussion. What I am saying is that there needs to be a reasonable rollback of some of the buffs that ACs got. The 9% damage buff, the TE buff, these are all reasonable things to consider taking down. But no, in your world, Amarr are somehow uber, Caldari are not a factor, Gallente just need to find a new niche that ACs occupy and will always, no matter how much you buff blasters, will occupy (because ACs are what blasters dream of being) and Mini are somehow still the underdogs. Let me be the first to tell you, Amarr are just competing because they started with their inherent and purposefully designed 'best gun system at high cost', Caldari are the missile race, and Gallente are left sucking ash. You like this because you like Minmatar. I want to go up against a Mini ship and have a chance, right now, that is simply not a real option - and its not skills.
An AC ship shooting at 45km is using exactly one type of ammo, so stop talking out your ass. What's more is that you're looking at it from a 1v1 scenario, which is HEAVILY biased towards minmatar, who are supposed to be the skirmishers. While you've got this matar ship on your ass, your buddy 20km away has exactly 0 problems tracking him (this goes for cruisers as well, a zealot tracks a vaga perfectly at 20km, and even after resists the difference in buffer between the 2 is so huge that a handful of vagas would lose to a handful of zealots)

You see hellcats and apocs being used all the time, so they must be viable.
Ditto for zealots at the cruiser level.
While that not might SOUND like much, you have to consider how many matari ships are actually good; you have maels, canes, vagas, and what else exactly? (Yes they do have an advantage in the t1 department, but then that's like the brutix being the best tier 1 BC in that it really doesn't matter)

Most of the other ships are no more or less viable than their amarr counterparts. The race that really gets shafter is gallente (and caldari since they share a weapon system)

And no, I'm not saying that amarr are uber and need to be nerfed, but they most certainly ARE viable.

Maybe my view of eve is just somehow flawed, but the way I envision the rough range layout is like this:
Close range:
Amarr: Bad
Minmatar: Decent
Gallente: Great

Long range:
Amarr: Great
Minmatar: Decent
Gallente: Bad

As it stands what we have is this:
Close range:
Amarr: Good
Minmatar: Good
Gallente: Good

Long range:
Amarr: Great
Minmatar: Decent
Gallente: Bad

And yes there is a difference between amarr and minmatar at close range, but it is TINY compared to the differences between the races at 20-40+km (for example: tracking kicks the baddon in the nuts when shooting a pest at about 4km, closer than that and the pest ODs the abaddon due to tracking issues, by comparison, a mega only holds a DPS advantage over a geddon until 8km)

If you're going to nerf minmatar, then a scorch nerf is also needed, because with the current state of the game a nerf to ACs would leave everyone flying amarr ships (or do you not remember what it was like before the minmatar buffs?) IMO it's much more viable to buff blasters, so that they outperform other weapons at close range the same way other weapons outperform them at long range.

EDIT: http://eve-search.com/thread/1136336-0/page/1#18

Also dat BBCode crap, why are these forums so bad?
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#103 - 2011-11-10 03:07:46 UTC
I'm going to ramble a bit. Has anyone had a chance to visit Sissi? Or keep up with the hybrid buffs? In addition to the dev blog Blasters will get a 5% damage boost. Rail guns will get a 5% tracking boost. Hybrids will reload in five seconds. And the ammo will be smaller. You'll still only fit the same amount into the guns - but you'll have more room for cap charges, loot, etc.

Blaster frigates are going to be sick. 20% better tracking + 5% more damage. They are a chainsaw to drones.

The problem lies in the damage projection or lack thereof for medium and large blaster ships.

There are a few solutions:
Make Gallente faster then Minmatar

OR

Redo Hybrid ammo the same way projectile ammage was redone. Short-Medium-Long. Give short a DPS buff and the long the range to actually be useful.

As I said earlier, Vagabonds used to have 23km of falloff with their 220mm and Barrage. That was increased to 25km through adding tiers. If you put on one tracking enhancer you push that to 32km. Add two and you're at 41km! At 23km you have to get close to a blaster ship's envelope. Mistakes can happen. You can die. At 41km? Not so much. Everything should be relative. A blaster cruiser used to have almost half the range that a vaga had. Not it's a quarter. Either increase the blaster cruiser's range so it again has half or pull the vaga's range in so back in line. Or a combination of the two. I see no reason why all options can't be placed on the table and discussed in a reasonable manner.

If the falloff bonus for TE was reduced to match the optimal at 15% - one TE for the vaga would give it falloff of 28km. A second would give it 32km.

Oh- and the Tornado? 800mm with Barrage gets 54km. Add a TE - 70km. Two?- 89km. A TE nerf would make that 62km for one and 70km for two.
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#104 - 2011-11-10 03:50:39 UTC
Cambarus wrote:

Close range:
Gallente: Great


Shocked

btw, scorch is may (and should) get nerfed. theyre thinking about it.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#105 - 2011-11-10 03:52:52 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:
Cambarus wrote:

Close range:
Gallente: Great


Shocked

btw, scorch is may (and should) get nerfed. theyre thinking about it.


Scorch is mostly fine as long as we boost Hybrids instead of nerf every other weapons system.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#106 - 2011-11-10 03:54:54 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
I'm going to ramble a bit. Has anyone had a chance to visit Sissi? Or keep up with the hybrid buffs? In addition to the dev blog Blasters will get a 5% damage boost. Rail guns will get a 5% tracking boost. Hybrids will reload in five seconds. And the ammo will be smaller. You'll still only fit the same amount into the guns - but you'll have more room for cap charges, loot, etc.


Hmm, no. I've been dropping a hundred hours a week into work so I haven't been on Sisi. A 10% blaster damage boost along with all the changes would probably make me fairly confident they're sufficient. 5% leaves me iffy, which is probably a good thing.

Quote:
Oh- and the Tornado?


Please stop complaining about the Tornado like it shows how projectiles are imbalanced. What it shows is how the TORNADO is imbalanced. I kinda hope it doesn't hit live like this.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
#107 - 2011-11-10 04:12:24 UTC
This is the conversation we're having:

A: We need to nerf proj and lasers, hybrids are still far behind on sisi.

B: No, we just need to buff hybrids up to lasers and projectiles.

A: How should we do that?

B: Not my problem.
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#108 - 2011-11-10 04:14:44 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Quote:
Oh- and the Tornado?


Please stop complaining about the Tornado like it shows how projectiles are imbalanced. What it shows is how the TORNADO is imbalanced. I kinda hope it doesn't hit live like this.

-Liang


this really. tbh all the pain and rage brought about projectiles would've been avoided if CCP nerfed the falloff bonus on the ships with said bonus (which are the main culprits here) from 10 to 5% when they boosted TE's.


but, that's something for another thread. here we talk about blasters.

[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
#109 - 2011-11-10 05:44:49 UTC
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
This is the conversation we're having:

A: We need to nerf proj and lasers, hybrids are still far behind on sisi.

B: No, we just need to buff hybrids up to lasers and projectiles.

A: How should we do that?

B: Not my problem.


Funny, I thought we'd been pretty consistent when we said DPS. But, reading comprehension and all that.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
#110 - 2011-11-10 05:58:06 UTC
Of course, it's so simple!
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#111 - 2011-11-10 06:07:42 UTC
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
Of course, it's so simple!


It really is. I've never been a fan of the +30% damage suggestions, and frankly I'm beginning to be pretty mollified by what I'm hearing about on sisi. 10% rail damage is pretty sexy, but I'm not sure that 5% blaster damage is quite enough. The ship changes might just make it ok without going overboard though - which would be a welcome change. Another 5% damage (+10% total) and I'm probably good to go (personally).

Then again, I've never subscribed to the "more range", "more tracking", or "+30% damage or bust" theories.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#112 - 2011-11-10 10:06:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Kara Books
Hungry Eyes wrote:
I'll give one example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yuf_JzAkq7E

In its current iteration, the Tornado is making a mockery of most other ships in the game, especially the other tier 3 BC's. It's kind of hilarious to me that large AC's can perfectly track and hit Vespa drones Shocked and inties Shocked. Sure, he had two webs, but still. Why would you introduce a cheap, faster and more agile Machariel into the game? But the problem is not necessarily the ship. AC's are simply off the wall.

Please reduce the fall-off and tracking of medium and large AC's. You don't have to nerf them into the ground, but make them not stupid. Having extreme fall off, extreme speed, extreme tracking, and higher than average DPS is not conducive to balance. It's really not that different from they days when people released a bunch of drones, and zipped around at 4km/s in their HACs.

Thanks, I'll know you'll do the right thing.



It apears that you have forgotten the Rokh with 224KM range and just over 350DPS, say goodby to all those exploration paying customers.

and for your information, with enough tracking computers and fittings you can THAT with any type of weapon.

Im also going from the Monocle hint, perhaps you have allot invested in gallante t2's? perhaps raise the price on them mods a bit?
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#113 - 2011-11-10 11:57:03 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
Of course, it's so simple!


It really is. I've never been a fan of the +30% damage suggestions, and frankly I'm beginning to be pretty mollified by what I'm hearing about on sisi. 10% rail damage is pretty sexy, but I'm not sure that 5% blaster damage is quite enough. The ship changes might just make it ok without going overboard though - which would be a welcome change. Another 5% damage (+10% total) and I'm probably good to go (personally).

Then again, I've never subscribed to the "more range", "more tracking", or "+30% damage or bust" theories.

-Liang


It's CCP. Expect a complete and total collapse of backbone. You remember them trying to pull back on the fighter bombers at the last second? Subsequent caving? Or the eventual total capitulation during the projectile nerf? Expect 3.5km/s deimos with a 30% increase in damage. We'll all sit around wondering why CCP did that when they should have just pulled back on Minmatar range a little bit. Roll
A Lunchbox
Elysian Technologies Enclave
Fraternity.
#114 - 2011-11-10 12:23:04 UTC
Why does noone seem to understand how autocannon falloff works for Minmatar? Jeebus. Ok, it goes like this.

Optimal - Good, but almost no minnie ships should be that close. Some exceptions.
Medium range - Decent.
Long range - LOL you might as well be using just light drones.

The last third of falloff is useless. Yes, it hits (barely). No, it's not going to do anything significant, especially if you're using barrage like in some examples. The vagabond example, for instance... Ok, you can make it hit 45 with barrage. It's going to do something close to 80ish dps less than normal even at close range, and at anything past 20-25 it's going to drop even further into the realm of lawl. Machs are indeed cheating though, as they have large guns, can fit te's easy, a falloff bonus that leaves your effective medium range around 30-50 depending, and can go wtfbbq fast with said large guns, something no ships can really manage until they release those tier 3 bcs.

I think what you really want is a mach nerf, but you'll be able to make those poo themselves with lolalpha t3 bc fleets soon anyway.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#115 - 2011-11-10 13:38:32 UTC
A Lunchbox wrote:
Why does noone seem to understand how autocannon falloff works for Minmatar? Jeebus. Ok, it goes like this.

Optimal - Good, but almost no minnie ships should be that close. Some exceptions.
Medium range - Decent.
Long range - LOL you might as well be using just light drones.

The last third of falloff is useless. Yes, it hits (barely). No, it's not going to do anything significant, especially if you're using barrage like in some examples. The vagabond example, for instance... Ok, you can make it hit 45 with barrage. It's going to do something close to 80ish dps less than normal even at close range, and at anything past 20-25 it's going to drop even further into the realm of lawl. Machs are indeed cheating though, as they have large guns, can fit te's easy, a falloff bonus that leaves your effective medium range around 30-50 depending, and can go wtfbbq fast with said large guns, something no ships can really manage until they release those tier 3 bcs.

I think what you really want is a mach nerf, but you'll be able to make those poo themselves with lolalpha t3 bc fleets soon anyway.


You get 40% of your DPS at falloff x 1. For a Tornado with one TE that means cruiser level DPS at 70km with sufficient tracking to hit a variety of targets.
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#116 - 2011-11-10 15:25:36 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
Of course, it's so simple!


It really is. I've never been a fan of the +30% damage suggestions, and frankly I'm beginning to be pretty mollified by what I'm hearing about on sisi. 10% rail damage is pretty sexy, but I'm not sure that 5% blaster damage is quite enough. The ship changes might just make it ok without going overboard though - which would be a welcome change. Another 5% damage (+10% total) and I'm probably good to go (personally).

Then again, I've never subscribed to the "more range", "more tracking", or "+30% damage or bust" theories.

-Liang


It's CCP. Expect a complete and total collapse of backbone. You remember them trying to pull back on the fighter bombers at the last second? Subsequent caving? Or the eventual total capitulation during the projectile nerf? Expect 3.5km/s deimos with a 30% increase in damage. We'll all sit around wondering why CCP did that when they should have just pulled back on Minmatar range a little bit. Roll



they really gotta grow some balls and make some larger fundamental changes. they'll have to sooner or later. theyve been too quiet. either theyre lost, or theyve got something big in the works.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#117 - 2011-11-10 15:40:51 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:

they really gotta grow some balls and make some larger fundamental changes. they'll have to sooner or later. theyve been too quiet. either theyre lost, or theyve got something big in the works.


Hope the later, I still find the idea to change ammos completly , so longer range ammos still do acceptable dps. This could fix the rails + they should track as fast as beams, the extra range should be an option(advantage) they shouldnt be forced to fight from that far, just to hit targets.
And for blaster well , hybrid ships needs to be boosted.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#118 - 2011-11-10 15:55:13 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
Of course, it's so simple!


It really is. I've never been a fan of the +30% damage suggestions, and frankly I'm beginning to be pretty mollified by what I'm hearing about on sisi. 10% rail damage is pretty sexy, but I'm not sure that 5% blaster damage is quite enough. The ship changes might just make it ok without going overboard though - which would be a welcome change. Another 5% damage (+10% total) and I'm probably good to go (personally).

Then again, I've never subscribed to the "more range", "more tracking", or "+30% damage or bust" theories.

-Liang

I'm in pretty much the exact same position myself. I havent checked to see if this 5% damage boost actually hit sisi, but assuming it has, combined with the other changes hybrids have received (as well as their ships) I won't go as far as to say it's balanced, but I am willing to wait and see how the stats affect performance on tq before arguing for more.

That said, there is one thing that I disagree with liang on: 30% damage boost would be awesome, provided it was accompanied by a falloff nerf to balance it out (won't speculate on exact numbers mind you)
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#119 - 2011-11-10 16:04:43 UTC
rails are still bottom of the barrel at medium/long ranges, and blasters are still next to useless due to poor compatibility with the actual ships.
Roosterton
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#120 - 2011-11-10 16:19:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Roosterton
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
A Lunchbox wrote:
Why does noone seem to understand how autocannon falloff works for Minmatar? Jeebus. Ok, it goes like this.

Optimal - Good, but almost no minnie ships should be that close. Some exceptions.
Medium range - Decent.
Long range - LOL you might as well be using just light drones.

The last third of falloff is useless. Yes, it hits (barely). No, it's not going to do anything significant, especially if you're using barrage like in some examples. The vagabond example, for instance... Ok, you can make it hit 45 with barrage. It's going to do something close to 80ish dps less than normal even at close range, and at anything past 20-25 it's going to drop even further into the realm of lawl. Machs are indeed cheating though, as they have large guns, can fit te's easy, a falloff bonus that leaves your effective medium range around 30-50 depending, and can go wtfbbq fast with said large guns, something no ships can really manage until they release those tier 3 bcs.

I think what you really want is a mach nerf, but you'll be able to make those poo themselves with lolalpha t3 bc fleets soon anyway.


You get 40% of your DPS at falloff x 1. For a Tornado with one TE that means cruiser level DPS at 70km with sufficient tracking to hit a variety of targets.


Yes, and? An Oracle can get battlecruiser level (~650) DPS at 60km with megapulses and scorch. And switches crystals instantly if something gets too close, to put that DPS up to battleship levels.

Of course, this is irrelevant anyway, since an OP tornado =/= an OP Minmatar.