These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Polarized weaponry (affectionately known as glass cannons)

First post First post First post
Author
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#201 - 2014-10-23 11:55:26 UTC
Kadesh Priestess wrote:
War Kitten wrote:
I've no idea if the pastebin info is legit or not

It is. These guns are just marked as unpublished, thus do not show up on any searches. You can view their info on sisi if you do following:

Put this to file named blight.html
Put blight.html to root of drive C:
On sisi, open file:///C:/blight.html and click names you see (links won't appear as normal ingame links, but they are still clickable)

You will open info window for corresponding module (torp launcher)


Appreciate the info thanks.

So a whole 14.5% ROF bonus on blighted torp launchers over T2. Wheeee.

Yeah, these are structure grind weapons, or specialized ganking weapons at best. The underwhelming damage bonus isn't worth losing 60-70% of your EHP in any kind of regular fleet pvp action, large or small.


CCP - if you want to make it interesting, make the weapon's bonus proportional to the resistances or EHP given up.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

CCP Paradox
#202 - 2014-10-23 12:07:10 UTC
Just to reassure you we're still here.

The naming convention is being looked at, when we have a good candidate we will update the thread with that info.

And the stats are being looked into also, to balance the risk and make them a bit more interesting. Again when the next stats come up, I will get CCP SoniClover to drop a post.

I am also seeding them as they currently are on Singularity now. Please give them a try, and keep in mind some more changes are coming.

Thanks for the feedback, it's all good. Hope to get something updated to you shortly.

CCP Paradox | EVE QA | Team Phenomenon

Space Magician

Moloney
The Bilderberg Group
#203 - 2014-10-23 12:44:40 UTC
Are you taking the ****??

What exactly do you intend people to haul in after this??

Last I checked putting 3bil in mods on a proteus to get 400k hp still nets you just a 300m3 cargo hold.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#204 - 2014-10-23 13:02:32 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Moloney wrote:
Are you taking the ****??

What exactly do you intend people to haul in after this??

Last I checked putting 3bil in mods on a proteus to get 400k hp still nets you just a 300m3 cargo hold.


Well they could always guarantee instant concord response when these weapons are fitted if they wanted to eliminate ganking with them altogether, but there seems to always need to be a workaround to remove secondary unintended use.
Apart from the fact that a portion of the playerbase are now, purple with rage at that comment and that it could ever be thought of, it does seem that it is intended for structure grinding, would it not make sense to have a weapon that reduces resistances for both the attacking ship and the resistances of the attacked structure? Either that or the additional damage and resistance loss, takes time to "warm up" to it's full levels, much more interesting, and much less exploitable.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Indahmawar Fazmarai
#205 - 2014-10-23 13:28:07 UTC
Can't see where do these weapons fit... they're mostly useless for PvE, and for PvP... well, if a fleet needs that extra DPS, why not just bring another ship? It will be cheaper and the fleet still haves all their tank if the target fires back.

Frankly, it looks like a "wouldn't it be cool" idea that went too far. Or maybe CCP knows and we don't. What?


PS: call them Mephisto weapons. The name is cool enough even if some people won't get it. P
Horoth blod
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#206 - 2014-10-23 13:49:43 UTC
well so these guns are some what usefull, but they need some better stats.. right now the only real use for them is on the stealth bomber..,

i can see a usage for them but upgrade em a little eh :)
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#207 - 2014-10-23 13:52:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Considering in eve combat nowadays your EHP is SEVERAL TIMES more important htan your DPS (except if you are a kite boat).. I see those being used ONLY on structure bashing.

Losing all your resistance makes you die 2 to 3 times faster. SHile you get a moderate damage bonus that does not surpass much overheating the guns.

Instead of adding these absurdities.. why not reduce even more the strucutres EHP sicne those are the ONLY targets for these?

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#208 - 2014-10-23 14:02:18 UTC
CCP Paradox wrote:
Just to reassure you we're still here.

The naming convention is being looked at, when we have a good candidate we will update the thread with that info.

And the stats are being looked into also, to balance the risk and make them a bit more interesting. Again when the next stats come up, I will get CCP SoniClover to drop a post.

I am also seeding them as they currently are on Singularity now. Please give them a try, and keep in mind some more changes are coming.

Thanks for the feedback, it's all good. Hope to get something updated to you shortly.

I really hope you consider the stats again!

This is a good idea, but the gain from the DPS just doesn't justify the costs of fitting them!


If you *REALLY* want to go down this route, split them into 2 different groups.

Do both short and long rang variants!

Examples...

Short range weapons should get the range hits, but keep the resists!

Long range variants should keep the range, and they get the resists hit!

Both get the DPS bonus's...

...

Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#209 - 2014-10-23 14:03:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
Kossaw wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
I'm asking this only because I'm interested in words generally, and am likewise interested in the strong reaction to "blighted".

(Disclaimer: I have no skin in this name game, am not participating in the discussion that Paradox describes, I have no influence one way or the other over how items are named, and I don't feel strongly one way or the other about "blighted".)

Blight is a word used IRL mostly to describe plant disease, and secondarily as a general description for something that has been spoiled or damaged. What about it gives you such a strong "fantasy RPG" feeling? Is it the Undead Warcraft 3 sprawl thing?



As you say "Blight" refers to a "disease" - so hence it is a verb applied to anything "living". Applying this to anything non-living (like a gun or a sword) is out of context. And the most common out of context use is in sword and sorcery type fantasy. So you've inadvertently chosen a word that already has a strong connotation of anything BUT sci-fi.



Verbs do not apply to any thing except to describe action taken by something to something. A word that applies to a thing would be an adjective. Hence, "blighted" is an adjective, and "Blight" is a noun.

"Blighted" is generally used to describe a state of disease, sickness, or rotting of an organism; both plant or animal. So it doesn't really work with a manufactured device.

Also, the benefits of using these are not exactly worth the penalties. They will need to hit a lot harder or anything that can reach the ship will simply instapop them.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Ama Scelesta
#210 - 2014-10-23 14:03:21 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Can't see where do these weapons fit... they're mostly useless for PvE, and for PvP... well, if a fleet needs that extra DPS, why not just bring another ship? It will be cheaper and the fleet still haves all their tank if the target fires back.

Frankly, it looks like a "wouldn't it be cool" idea that went too far. Or maybe CCP knows and we don't. What?


PS: call them Mephisto weapons. The name is cool enough even if some people won't get it. P

I think CCP said it's part of their series of new features, where they can't predict how the players end up using them. They're throwing something totally new and different in the sandbox and seeing where it goes from there. Basically it seems like a weapon you use when you're confident you can prevent the target from shooting back or when it doesn't matter. So some structure grinds and maybe niche small gang gank squads.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#211 - 2014-10-23 14:10:25 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
For an exercise in patterns have you looked at all the changes announced in Vegas as a whole?

Tug class of ship, probably used to move bling incursion runners
T3 destroyers that can be fit for offense on the fly
Berserker Class weapons to maximize alpha

hmmm

m

This.

I tend to agree that the DPS increases seen hardly justify the loss of resists, but let's wait and see what else CCP is releasing with them. I'm especially curious to see what kind of interplay there is between the Blighted Weapons and the new T3 Destroyers. Who knows...maybe these T3 hulls will be able to fit cruiser-sized or battleship-sized Blighted Weapons.

Imagine the DPS of an overheated Talos...on a destroyer hull. Now wouldn't that be interesting....

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

Michael Pawlicki
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry.
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#212 - 2014-10-23 14:12:04 UTC
Everyone is shouting these suck. This current version of Blighteds suck. This is the V.1 Alpha test of em. This isnt final.
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
#213 - 2014-10-23 14:13:31 UTC
These pretty much suck. The trade-off between the extra gank (oh wow my Talos now does 1489 DPS instead of 1325) isn't worth the massive loss of tank. Why not have a true "cannon" be a single weapon that has a long activation time. While it is active your resists are zero and you have a weapons timer so you can't dock or jump through gates? We can say cheesy things like "all power to the main cannon!" on comms. Think about how sci-fi awesome that would be!
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
#214 - 2014-10-23 14:16:43 UTC
CCP Paradox wrote:
We want you to try them out on Singularity as this is for feedback from the test server. If we were to write the numbers down, it would turn into just a number-crunching feedback post instead of people actually trying them out in game.

Was that because you knew the stats were craptastic at best?

How would this thread not turn into a facts/figures thread the instant the stats hit SiSi....you are really underestimating your player base CCP...

ATM, almost half the range with 0 resists...just to get ~10% more dps....for faction prices....

Yeah, i'll just go with a couple 5% implants and get the same end result...without the drawbacks.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#215 - 2014-10-23 14:17:43 UTC
The more I think about it, the more I think that Blighted Weapons aren't meant primarily for existing ships. Sure, existing ships can use them but with a massive penalty.

I think the ticket is going to be T3 Destroyers and Blighted Weapons. I'd wager that the former will have some sort of role bonus in at least one of it's configurations disabling the heavy penalty of the latter.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#216 - 2014-10-23 15:01:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Krell Kroenen
Bronson Hughes wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I think that Blighted Weapons aren't meant primarily for existing ships. Sure, existing ships can use them but with a massive penalty.

I think the ticket is going to be T3 Destroyers and Blighted Weapons. I'd wager that the former will have some sort of role bonus in at least one of it's configurations disabling the heavy penalty of the latter.


Interesting concept but that is a lot of faith to have in CCP for having a logical reason for these weapons. I fear a lot of mine was used up when I saw how giddy they were on the o7 show about naming a module "ample".
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#217 - 2014-10-23 15:09:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Michael Pawlicki wrote:
Everyone is shouting these suck. This current version of Blighteds suck. This is the V.1 Alpha test of em. This isnt final.



The whole CONCEPT sucks. Why Because foregoing ALL your defense for more dps is relevant on only 2 scenarios.

Suicide ganking (great.. as if the catalysis was not OP enough on that role) or shoting structures.

In other words a boost to 2 of the least liked mechanics ...

that is why people say it sux...



Think plainly... if a SHIP A using such guns would lose agaisnt same ships with normal guns and fittings.... before EVEN SCRATCH the paint of the normal ship. Then it is a COMPLETE FAILURE for real combat.

To be reasonable, the damage boost shoudl be enough that you will lose on 1:1 combat, but you will push the enemy ship to near structure before that.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#218 - 2014-10-23 15:20:45 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
The whole CONCEPT sucks. Why Because foregoing ALL your defense for more dps is relevant on only 2 scenarios.

^^ Truth.

If a full rack only halved resists, they could be balanced. If they damaged you while they damaged your target, they could be balanced. But getting rid of resistances entirely means they are inherently unbalanced.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#219 - 2014-10-23 15:26:24 UTC
An even more clearn example why this idea is HORRIBLE.

You get Pulse laser of this variant. It stilld oes LESS.. and a LOT LESS damage than a NORMAL blaster.

So WHY IN HELL woudl you do that? Why not just use a normal blaster and KEEP your resists?


Not only this proposal is an extreme niche target.. it also has an extremely niche envelope..


ONLY BLASTERS on structures. NOthing else....

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#220 - 2014-10-23 15:29:47 UTC
Michael Pawlicki wrote:
Everyone is shouting these suck. This current version of Blighteds suck. This is the V.1 Alpha test of em. This isnt final.


Yeah, that sums up the thread so far. Way to summarize.

Or were you berating people for giving feedback that was asked for by CCP on the only version of these guns that currently exists?

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.