Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Please forgive me if I missed something... does this mean the Navy Vexor has more sentry dps than Ishtar?

They aren't bad and neither sentries are op when you fit the weapons on the appropriate hulls. The only thing that gets bizarrely out of line are RLML, which outrange and damage most other weapon systems.

Unfitted weapon stats aren't really relevant in balance discussions.

Just make it so Ishtar sentries stop firing if you exceed a certain speed.

Being able to fly a HAC to any semblance of efficiency then you are more than able to PvP - you just dont.

Also the ishtar will project the DPS much better and tank much better - it's not all about the paper numbers.

Yes it does, although the Ishtar has better tracking, better range, better drone control range, higher resists, better sensor strength, better capacitor stats, MWD signature radius mitigation bonus, higher warp speed, better targeting range...

The Navy Omen+Omen has drones and the Zealot doesn't, doesn't mean the Zealot is bad.
Navy Exequror outdamages a Deimos if all you're doing is comparing raw blaster DPS...
Caracal Navy Issue outdamages the Cerberus when not using kinetic missiles due to drones+application bonus

there are plenty of cases like this.

That's fair enough :)

Domis are excellent though, the MJD is a godsend for missions.

However, if you're serious about mission efficiency - a HAC is a poor choice for the most part - battleships/marauders are where it is at.

I was in sentry drone fleets long before the HAC rebalance. The changes that brought on mass sentry use just amped up an already powerful fleet design. The issue is, and will remain, the ability to put out battleship firepower and range from a mobile and resilient platform.

The HAC will remain resilient and mobile, what it needs to lose is the area control provided by mass sentry. Simply nerfing the fire power is a brutish rebalance, what should be introduced is a hard counter. Maybe a battleship or capital class module which jams drones or reduces the control range of drones within an area. Create a way to force the HACs to defend the area by risking their ships. The counter to sentries should come with some weakness so the RPS chain is maintained -- preferably a chain that climbs the ship-class ladder.

Reducing the power of a ship is never a fun solution. Players want to feel like their ship or fleet is amazing. Creating a solid Rock, Paper, Scissors chain allows people to fly powerful ships, have absolutely lopsided victories, but never give the impression of total imbalance because if the proper counter was used the fight would have gone dramaticalky different.

Another day.

Another day nanoggafing in an Ishtar.

Thank you, CCP.

***

My only hope, as they keep ignoring the Ishtar problem, is that some new developments/dynamics of the coming sovereignty system will force a completely new meta. Otherwise, hello Ishtars Online forevermore.

You sunk my battleship.

Holy crap. Did you seriously just post that? Unfitted weapon stats absolutely relevant. If the weapons within a group are not comparable (comparable means having some variation within a general performance range, not identical in performance), then exactly how do you balance them? Put widely disparate bonuses or even penalties on every ship in the game to compensate?

The unfit weapon stats are exactly where CCP should start with balancing. Then they can correct any obvious and glaringly bad bonuses on the hulls that have them. Charts like the above indicate disparities in performance (poor balance) between systems in the same category; this case medium weapons + Rapid Lights.

Sentry drones have better applied dps to a medium target under worst conditions than every other weapon system by a large margin from 28km all the way out to as far as you can get them to engage.

I've suggested multiple ways to fix this. Here is another way; nerf the damage on Gardes, Curators, and Bouncers so that they apply the same dps as Wardens to the same target at their engagement ranges. They'll be comparable to the short-range weapons at long range, better than the long-range weapons at long range, and worse than short range weapons at short range.

tbh, even that might not be enough.

edit: The only thing you said that I agree with is that Rapid Lights (ie light missiles) have too much range. The front-loaded dps is ok.

I think it would be more relevant to compare them to large weapons....with the rest of this post taken into account.




Actually it's perhaps more true than you may first realise. The problem is comparing them to (unbonused or not) other weapons and that is that they cap out at FIVE possible "turrets" per ship before bonuses. Most other DPS boats have more than this.

This is why when hulls are compared they use the terms "effective" launchers/turrets and allows more meaningful comparison at a high level.

This is really not obvious from the chart and is being overlooked when it shouldnt be. The chart is an oversimplification (and was originally done to show why rails were being nerfed)

They are still outliers, but that chart is a bit of a misrepresentation because if you alter sentries to fit there, you nuke them as a battleship platform (where they belong, imo).