Gallente

[Pattern]

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=103220&#post103220

The Game Has Changed.
Disruptive changes such as the Nos, Damp, Myrmiddon and Eos and even webs and scrams have had a massive impact on Gallente effectiveness in general whilst the predominance of HP vs Active, Medium vs Short have forced Gallente ships out of all but the most specialised of fleet compositions. We see them less, we use them less - partily because they no longer do what they did good enough to be worth it and partily because they don't do what we now do good enough, to be flown over something else, and for Gallente to be restored, both issues need to be addressed.



To become better at what we did.
Hybrids need to be upgraded.
Range needs to become viable again
Active tanking needs to evolve to meet the demands of modern warfare.

To become better at what we do.
Drone carriers need to be renovated.
Tier 1 Battlecruisers and Commandships need an overhaul.
And Gallente Blasterboat hulls need to be modernised.




Combat: Blasters
Blasterships receive a full overhaul with ship changes that increase the speed and agility by the equivalent of around 1 nanofiber. In addition to the above, utility in the form of additional 25m3 of drone bay has been included to cruisers and above, improving the options available to a pilot "in sticky situations".

Blasters and turret changes have also been included that increase blaster performance within the engagement envelope.

Blasters:
- Ion Siege Blaster Cannon Capacitor usage reduced by 30%, Tracking increased by 30%
- Neutron Blaster Turret DPS increased by 7%, Tracking increased by ~40%, optimal range and fall off increased by 10%
- Ion Blaster Turret DPS increased by 10%, Tracking increased by ~50%
- Electron Blaster Turret DPS increased by 10%,Tracking increased ~60%

Ship changes: (These apply to: Brutix, Hyperion, Megathron (+all variants), Astarte, Thorax (+all variants), Tristan, Incursus, Kronos)
- Base Speed increased by ~10%
- Inertia Modifier reduced by ~15%
- Mass reduced by ~5%

(These apply to: Brutix, Hyperion, Megathron (+all variants), Astarte, Thorax (+all variants) only)
- Power grid increased by between 10% to 20%
- Drone bay increased by 25m^3




Combat: Rails
Here, ranged warfare is boosted by various changes to targeting, probing and warp mechanics restoring a niche Railguns once dominated.

Global:
- Maximum Targeting distance increases from 250km to 300km
- Minimum Warp to distance increases from 150km to 200km
- As the number of ships on grid increase, the accuracy of scan probe warp to results reduces, resulting in ever greater warp to variances of up to 200km.

Railguns:
- Optimal range increased by 33%.



Combat: Drones
Drone carriers that were once the pride of the gallente fleet (falling from the most common, to the least common used in their class), have their drone bandwidth restored. This enables them to once again focus on being specialised drone carrier, instead of blasterboats with surplus drones and split weapon syndrome.

Sentry Drones:
- Top speed now increased to 200m/s

Myrmidon:
- Loses 2 turret hardpoints
- Powergrid is reduced by 15%
- Gains 50mb in drone bandwidth

Eos:
- Becomes Field Commandship
- Gains 50mb in drone bandwidth
- Info warfare bonus becomes turret falloff bonus




Active Tanking MK II
Active tanking now evolves to keep pace with modern warfare. Active tanking performance vs resistance bonuses ship increases from 2% to about 14%.
In the largest change, the overloaded state of active tanking modules receive a significant boost, allowing active tanking ships to momentarily deal with bursts of high damage within small gang warfare much better than before. Finally, as top speed is vital to acceleration in Eve, armour rig penalties were modified.
- Racial (Gallente and Minmatar) Active tanking bonus changed from 7.5% per level to 10%.
- The overloaded bonus on both Shield Boosters and Armour Repairers changes to include a (stacking penalised with active tanking mods) 5%, 10% and 15% bonus to small, medium and large Shield or Armour resistances (respectively)

Rigs:
- Armour Rig penalties changed from -10% speed to -7.5% agility

Capacitor Batteries:
- Now provide a reserve of capacitor that cannot be affected by energy warfare, equal to half the size of the capacitor capacity increase.




Assault Warfare
Assault Warfare links replace Information Warfare links as Gallente racial Command Links to provide better synergy with Gallente philosophy. Information Warfare links remain intact whilst new Assault Warfare modules, skillbooks and Mindlinks are introduced that better suit gallente philosophy. Meanwhile, wider changes see that Fleet commandships become better suited to modern fleet warfare and more competitive with Command T3's with new HP tanking bonuses.

Fleet Commandships:
- The Astarte and Claymore have there tanking bonuses changed to 10% per level bonuses
- The Vultures first 10% optimal range bonus becomes an 10% shield hp per level bonus

Astarte:
- Becomes Fleet Commandship
- Field Commandship Damage bonus becomes Assault warfare link role bonus
- See "Combat: Blasters" for additional ship changes

Assault Warfare Link:
- Assault Warfare Link - Overload Efficiency: reduces the heat damage sustained by overloaded modules
- Assault Warfare Link - Trajectory Control: Increases the tracking speed or turrets, explosion velocity of missiles
- Assault Warfare Link - Capacitor Superiority: Increases ships capacitor size.



Battlecriuser Tiericide
Tier 1 Battlecruisers are amongst some of the least used ships in the game. Thoroughly outclassed by their tier 2 counterparts, although the costing significantly less, in Eve roles and performance are the deciding factors determining ship usage.
- Battlecriusers effectively become tier 2 in performance - requiring the level 1 skill to be trained with Hitpoints, Sensor strength, slot numbers, cost and in some cases fittings normalised.


And Finally…

Roden
Because split weapons are bad...
- Missile Hardpoints increased on Eris by 2, Lachesis increased by 1
- Eris loses a highslot in exchange for a mid (Ares style), receives more cpu
- See "Combat: Blasters" for changes to the Phobos.


There's a strong sense of synergy with each of the changes, from assault warfare links, to the rig changes, each of the suggestions tries to complement Gallente piloting play style. This list of change is also one that tries not to shy away from any of the existentialist issues affecting the game. I make no apologies for it as I doubt most would be satisfied until those changes were in place.




~~~New Updates based on Eve-O feedback.~~~


Caldari Lovin:
Caldari base speed increases significantly. Caldari hybrid ships, especially the cruisers are just to slow to be viable and often whilst existential issues really effect the performance of the 14 inch penis and it's variants.
~30% increase to base speed, for:
- Moa, Harpy, 14 inch penis, Vulture, Rokh, Egale, Cormorant (Whilst the Tengu's Hybrid Weapons subsystem should increase speed by a similar amount).
- Moa and Eagle powergrid increased by 30%
- Moa and Eagle hull re-designed to look less shit.
- See Tiericide for additional changes to the 14 inch penis
- See Fleet Commandships for additional changes to the Vulture
- Combat Blasters for additional changes to Hybrids.
New Updates:


Combat: Rails
Here, ranged warfare is boosted by various changes to targeting and probing whilst changes to ammo mean damage attenuates far less at range (far out damaging competitors at ultra long ranges).
At medium range, the optimal range increase means the envelope antimatter can be used in is greater whilst Javelin now provides improved tracking in return for much increased capacitor usage and slightly reduced dps.


Railguns:
- Optimal range increased by 33%.
- See below for Ammo changes



Global:
- As the number of ships on grid increase, the accuracy of scan probe warp to results reduces, resulting in ever greater warp to variances of up to 200km.
- Probing accuracy is now inversely proportional to the amount of time the target has been in one location (grid)" (After 0 seconds, within 200km accuracy, after 30 seconds, 50km accuracy, after one minute, probing accuracy improves to 12km and so on)
- Max Targeting Range is now 350km


Ammo:
Tech 2 Ammo now receives short range variants that alter the behaviour of the turrets (beyond additional dps, or range) either compensating for short falls or improving strengths of the turrets in very different ways.
- Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off.
- Gleam - Increases damage - 15% more damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking and 50% less optimal range.
- Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 50% increased capacitor usage.

Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts:
Antimatter remains unchanged

Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage

Thorium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Lead - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iridium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Tungsten - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iron - Same as current Iridium except with the optimal range of before.

Spike - Damage increased to current Thorium with optimal range, tracking penalties and cap use same as current

[whispous]

Does this even matter? I'm serious. What good does this do, or do you just keep doing this for your own entertainment? Because if so, hey, carry on mate vOv nothing is going to come of it.

[Pattern]

Does this even matter? I'm serious. What good does this do, or do you just keep doing this for your own entertainment? Because if so, hey, carry on mate vOv nothing is going to come of it.
The reality is that these things have more of an effect than you would think. It's scary just how many of the eve-o minmatar proposal where implemented.

[whispous]

http://hijinksensue.com/assets/store/images/shirts/godspeed-you-fancy-bastard-hijinks-ensue-shirt.jpg

[prometheus]

I've got nothing to say other than that it *might* be a little overpowered.
I don't think damps need a boost, as much as I think ecm needs a nerf.

Damps can be the warfare of choice for small gangs and ecm for fleets.

[Resi]

I think I still cared about EVE back in the 1st draft Gallente thread.

optimismlol

[Shiroi Okami]

I agree with most of the changes, aside from the ship changes, which are waaaaayy overpowered for frigs and battleships. +30% grid, + 25% speed enyo which can do 2400ms with a 400m plate and neutrons? Wat? Not to mention a hyperion with 125m3 dronebay which could fit dual large reps and neutrons. I think the active tanking changes are a step in the right direction, the damps i could care less about, ECM needs to be first in line for a nerf bat before other ewar is looked at, and the ship changes seem like a step in the right direction, if a bit overpowered

[Sponk]

Tiericide: good (orthogonal to gallente tho)
Active tanking changes: good
Cap resistance module: maybe. Seems less useful than cap boosters, except on capital class ships.
Rigs: Definitely (assuming the numbers aren't retarded)

Blaster changes: Can't say much without number crunching but yeah, blasters should have huge tracking buffs (less broken than huge damage buffs)

Ship changes: no comment because :numbers:
Rails: seems ok, might be uphill battle though. I would be OK with rails having poor damage if they had awesome tracking, btw.

Drones: drone damage mod: sure (I bet it gets nerfed to midslot though)

Myrm: I doubt 5 heavies would pass balance check. I reckon they'd be ok with -1 turret, +25 bandwidth tho
Command ships: aside from 125 bandwidth, *shrug*

Roden: ok.

Assault warfare:
Overload efficiency: sounds awesome
Tracking processor: dump the missile bonus. You know that won't pass muster.
Capacitor control: seems good. ofc amarr and gallente are always fighting over who gets +cap vs who gets +armour (see: titan bonuses) so why not.

E-warfare: damps probably need a slight boost on the recons, that's it.

[Pattern]

I agree with most of the changes, aside from the ship changes, which are waaaaayy overpowered for frigs and battleships. +30% grid, + 25% speed enyo which can do 2400ms with a 400m plate and neutrons? Wat? Not to mention a hyperion with 125m3 dronebay which could fit dual large reps and neutrons. I think the active tanking changes are a step in the right direction, the damps i could care less about, ECM needs to be first in line for a nerf bat before other ewar is looked at, and the ship changes seem like a step in the right direction, if a bit overpowered

The enyo (and other frigs) shouldn't have received a PG increase. Fixed.

Re: PG changes for battleships, why can an Abaddon fit mega pulses, a dual rep tank, +heat sink and a cap injector without running out of grid whilst a Hyperion is short by almost 5000pg if it tried to do the same?

Neut resist module - Would this work? If a capital, say in siege/triage is under serious neutraliser stress, they could fit in a few of those modules whilst massively gimping there ability to (dread) shoot, (carrier) remote rep. In a battleship or smaller, one or two of those modules +cap booster would make you pretty neut resistant, at the expense of (shields) tank or (armour) tackle, which in my mind balances reasonably well with crystals.

I guess testing all of the effects together is what's needed, although I've intentionally left out the specific numbers for the Assault Warfare link - assume around +20-30% all maxed out for most of them.

Should the Tracking Processor be turrets only?

[prometheus]

An interesting idea I just thought of would perhaps involve differentiating Caldari & Gallente Navy ammunition.
For example; Caldari ammo could give an added bonus to optimal range, and Gallente ammo could give an added bonus of falloff

Caldari & Gallente are the only ones who explicitly share a weapon system (Hybrids)
Rockets, HAMs & HMLs don't really count since Caldari is the only one that makes ammo for them.

It wouldn't be a huge stretch when you think about it. Minmatar already have T1 ammo that gives a bonus to tracking.

[Shiroi Okami]

The enyo (and other frigs) shouldn't have received a PG increase. Fixed.

Re: PG changes for battleships, why can an Abaddon fit mega pulses, a dual rep tank, +heat sink and a cap injector without running out of grid whilst a Hyperion is short by almost 5000pg if it tried to do the same?

Neut resist module - Would this work? If a capital, say in siege/triage is under serious neutraliser stress, they could fit in a few of those modules whilst massively gimping there ability to (dread) shoot, (carrier) remote rep. In a battleship or smaller, one or two of those modules +cap booster would make you pretty neut resistant, at the expense of (shields) tank or (armour) tackle, which in my mind balances reasonably well with crystals.

I guess testing all of the effects together is what's needed, although I've intentionally left out the specific numbers for the Assault Warfare link - assume around +20-30% all maxed out for most of them.

Should the Tracking Processor be turrets only?

The abaddon can fit that because it doesn't have 125m3 (or 100m3) dronebay, an MWD, and a capacitor which is so bad it caps itself out just running it's guns for a couple of minutes (Checked this it's actually 4 min 50 for an abaddon with mega pulses and MF, vs cap stable for a hype with neutrons and AM, both with just guns active). I agree that the hype needs more grid, but an additional 6000 grid is way too much. 2300 (13%) extra grid would allow you to fit a full rack of ions, dual LARs, dual heavy cap injectors and an MWD without any fitting mods, which is fine imo.

As far as the cap idea goes, I wonder if ti would not be too powerful on triage carriers? Considering their only weakness is really neuts, as each one can locally tank over 20k dps, while it puts out about the same in reps. Fitting one of these to a triage carrier or two would make gangs like the ones RnK run with bs, t3s, a dozen guardians and a triage carrier completely invincible against non capital fleets. I think a capital cap injector would be a better choice, as it would be less prone to abuse when combined with cap recharge mods.

[Pattern]

The penalties niegh on double the amount of cap your remote reps use for each module fitted, so it would only really be a module you'd switch into under certain situation. In addition your also reducing your cap stability or tank so.

I guess it would really need to be tested.

[Marlona Sky]

Have you thought about long range vs. short range affecting agility or any other aspect of a ship when fitted?

Example:

Megathron with a full rack of Neutron blasters being more agile than a Megthron with a full rack of 425mm railguns? Also you could even break it down even more where blasters give the best agility bonus vs. pulse, auto cannons or torpedoes launchers.

This would allow close range damage ships to gain an edge for closing the distance initially in a fight opposed to those who try to keep distance. In the end their top speed would be the same, when comparing the exact same ship and exact fit with the exception of the weapon system.

As far as the personal repair bonus, it could go up to 1000% and it still would not be able to hold a candle to medium to large scale engagement and their remote repair logistics chains. Once a fleet primaries you, they only have to put down a certain amount to break it. You will only be able to get a balance of EHP and best repair amount, and once that established number is surpassed in damage, the ship will fall. Remote repair chains will have the edge due to it being able to scale up or down depending on what is called for.

I do think that it is complete bullshit that the Typhoon (a tier 1) has as much drone space as the Megathron (a tier 2) for battleships. Minmitar is more agile, more flexible, faster and their weapon system uses no capacitor. When comparing any race ship to another race in the same tier category, Gallente by default should always have more drone bay space. That is unless your comparing say the Arbitrator to the Exequror, Arbitrator clearly a drone boat.

Anyways, keep the dream alive I guess.

[Shiroi Okami]

I do think that it is complete bullshit that the Typhoon (a tier 1) has as much drone space as the Megathron (a tier 2) for battleships. Minmitar is more agile, more flexible, faster and their weapon system uses no capacitor. When comparing any race ship to another race in the same tier category, Gallente by default should always have more drone bay space. That is unless your comparing say the Arbitrator to the Exequror, Arbitrator clearly a drone boat.

Anyways, keep the dream alive I guess.

Except the typhoon has completely shitty grid. So bad in fact it can't fit 5 guns and 3 torps + MWD without an ACR (5 torp 3 gun fits with like 100 grid left over). The typhoon is supposed to be a jack of all trades though, so it trades shitty grid, shitty cpu and shitty applicable dps (torps), for an awesome dronebay and excellent speed.

[Alain Colcer]

First, +rep for keeping the ideas and continue forward to do some brainstorming on this, as a pilot who only fly gallente i appreciate it. Now onto each different topic:


Battlecriuser Tiericide

Sounds good, dont exactly understand what will be "normalised", but just level 1 skill and small adjustments are a reasonable way to make them readily available.


Active Tanking MK II

I love the changes to basic active tank bonus, overloading bonus and rigs. Not quite sure on the capacitor barrier.

I know active tank in itself is very susceptible to neutering, but would prefer to see a "repair injector module" instead. Something that sacrifices slots in order to gain better performance cap wise.


Combat Blasters

Excellent suggestions for the turrets, maybe the DPS adjustment could go with a RoF/DPS exchange, i liked the idea that was discussed in other threads to make blasters slow loading but deadly shotguns. A sort of alpha king at point blank.

I am a little concerned that you applied flat out increases in base speed, inertia and agility to a very different range of ships (from frigs up to battleships), i think each case needs to be reviewed carefully on their respective category. The same could be said on the powergrid increase. I don't quite see the Phobos needing more PG, its still the best DPS HIC there is.

Drone bay increase (for utility) is perfect. Versatility with drones should be the primary advantage of gallente really.


Rails

The changes you propose for max targeting range and minimum warp distance not only affect gallente or caldari, but every other ship. Not sure it would be for the best.

The rest of the changes regarding cap, javelin attributes and optimal need some calc, as it would be probably give caldari the ability to fire AM at very far ranges with rails. Unsure of this part on the proposal as i cannot really foresee how it would be benefitial (besides the obvious) or cause unbalance.


Drones

Im not in favor of creating modules that increase drone damage, to me we just need to add hardwiring implants that provide the equivalent.

Myrm with 5 heavies, no way, 4 i agree, but a full flight with dominix-like damage is not balanced. Even if you reduce turret count.

On the last part, i'm a bit confused on the switch of roles between the Astarte and Eos....cant really provide any arguments to support it or not....we just need fleet/field ships regardless of which hull is it.



Roden

I believe CCP has been slowly tweaking this line of ships to move them away from the split weapons concept. Eris sadly suffers from being a bastard child in the interdictor lineup, supposedly blaster/missile, does nothing at all.

In theory we still need launcher hardpoints to fire the warp disruption charges, but i would prefer to see the Eris a more gun-centric ship like the sabre. Perhaps a 6-gun + 1 launcher layout (which can be used as utility in pure comabt fits) could work, moving 1 high to a mid just as you suggest.


Assault Ganglink

-Overload ganglink, OMG yes please

-Capacitor ganglink, sure why not, but wouldn't capacitor recharge be a more appropiate bonus? why did you choose size in particular?, i like the idea nonetheless

-Tracking ganglink, not so sure

However, the idea of changing gallente racial "information" links to "assault" ones is a very good suggestion, ideally gallente ships will be in the thick of the battle at close range, therefore it is natural for their links to boost attributes that would favor such an approach. I wonder if keeping the "electronic superiority" link as it is today
would be a better choice (ie: enhanced EWar). On the other hand, if you want to avoid making EWar annoying, then i conccur that turret tracking and missile precision are obvious alternatives without making them overpowered DPS links.



Dampeners

This is a big issue. Not only to dampeners itself, but to EWar in general. If you ask me the easiest and simplest change would be decrease the module's effect, but massively increase the ship bonus on Maulus/Celestis/Arazu/Lachesis.

The problem with RSD+ECM compared to the other 2 choices is they totally disrupt targeting, not just cripple, and sadly targeting is the basic mechanic to actually being able to do anything to anyone.

I've mentioned in other threads that one of the options to make EWar in general more balanced is to never absolutely cripple targeting itself, instead focusing on a "weaken-the-enemy" philosophy. On this concept i envision that all EWar modules have 1 "sureshot" effect and 1 "random and non-often" effect

ECM -> diminishes the quantity of locked targets (down to an absolut minimum of 1). Very slight chance of lock break for 15secs, instantly breaking the module cycle on the targeted ship.

RSD -> diminishes sensor resolution (bonuses can only be stacked to a maximum percentage, 65%?). Very slight chance to shorten target range down to 1km for 15secs, instantly breaking the module cycle on the targeted ship.

TD -> dimishes turret tracking (bonuses can only be stacked to a maximum percentage, 75%?). Very slight chance to shorten turret range (down to 1km) for 15secs, instantly breaking the module cycle on the targeted ship.

TP -> increases ship signature radius (bonuses can only be stacked to a maximum percentage, 85%?). Very slight chance of electronic disruption, deactivating all active modules for 15secs, instantly breaking the module cycle on the targeted ship.

EWar centric ships would have their bonuses changed so they improve capacitor usage and range at which the "sureshot" effect can be projected, but nothing in the game would increase the "random" one. Being at a very reasonable value of 15% (maybe 20%).


Good work on the proposal, i hope people still keep discussing it albeit all the bittervet-ness

[Mona]

I've mentioned in other threads that one of the options to make EWar in general more balanced is to never absolutely cripple targeting itself, instead focusing on a "weaken-the-enemy" philosophy.

Gallente philosophy: imma melting ur face!!!!111
ECM: Not anymore. Umad?

Caldari philosophy: Chillin' & (slowly) killin' from 200+km.
RSD: <cuts targeting range to 10km> Problem?

Both ewars are perfectly suited to weaken enemy philosophy.

[Marlona Sky]

Both ewars are perfectly suited to weaken enemy philosophy.

I'll take jamming someone over damping them any day of the weak and twice on Sundays. Why do you think everyone picks ecm drones over damp drones every time? Matter in fact. There is easily 1000 ecm drones sold for every non-ecm drone sold. Speaking of ew only drones of course.

[Sponk]

Why do you think everyone picks ecm drones over damp drones every time?Because ecm drones aren't stacking nerfed, unlike all other ewar drones?

[Pattern]

Can someone actually formulate a cogent argument as to why a 5 turret, 4 heavy drone myrmidon is good, but a 4 turret, 5 heavy drone myrmidon is bad? As far as I understand, the Art department was the only reason why it wasn't done the other way.

[Shiroi Okami]

Can someone actually formulate a cogent argument as to why a 5 turret, 4 heavy drone myrmidon is good, but a 4 turret, 5 heavy drone myrmidon is bad? As far as I understand, the Art department was the only reason why it wasn't done the other way.

It's not the turret count, it's just people don't want to enroach on dominix territory apparently. I don't think it would be that much of a problem though cause the myrm doesn't have the massive dronebay of the domi and thus has to use almost all of it's space to fit a flight of heavies, leaving room for only 1 flight of light drones.

[Sponk]

sentryfleet? Imagine 1000 sentries assisting the FC. :)

[Pattern]

sentryfleet? Imagine 1000 sentries assisting the FC. :)
As opposed to a nano drake blob? Would be quite tame actually.

[Tyrus Tenebros]

I'm sort of confused about the final stats for the eos and astarte.

If the bonuses and turret slots, etc., are exchanged the way I think you mean, the eos will end up being a deathwielding rapemachine.

[Pattern]

I'm sort of confused about the final stats for the eos and astarte.

If the bonuses and turret slots, etc., are exchanged the way I think you mean, the eos will end up being a deathwielding rapemachine.
Eos is pretty much the same except that it gets a tracking bonus (in-place of the info warfare link bonus) and can use 5 heavy drones instead of 3.

Similar DPS without damage mods to the old astarte (+650ish).

The new astarte now does the dps of a brutix as it loses the second damage bonus, although may/should be nerfed harder, to be more in line with the other fleet commandships...

[prometheus]

Nobody has any thoughts on my ammo suggestion? :(

[Sponk]

Nobody has any thoughts on my ammo suggestion? :(It's ok, but seems like low EV compared to, say, +tracking t2 rail ammo.

[Marlona Sky]

Nobody has any thoughts on my ammo suggestion? :(

Which ever one gives the best distance and maximum damage will be the ammo of choice. In all honesty, with blasters, your still going to be in scram/web/neut range. Is it like some +500% to optimal or falloff? If not then it wont matter. Your still perma-committed to the fight. If it is all about falloff then might as well roll Minmitar.

[prometheus]

Well it would benefit the appropriate ships.
ie: An Eagle and Harpy both have optimal bonuses, whereas Deimos and Astarte have falloff bonuses

[Shiroi Okami]

Eos is pretty much the same except that it gets a tracking bonus (in-place of the info warfare link bonus) and can use 5 heavy drones instead of 3.

Similar DPS without damage mods to the old astarte (+650ish).

The new astarte now does the dps of a brutix as it loses the second damage bonus, although may/should be nerfed harder, to be more in line with the other fleet commandships...

Not every fleet command ship is as bad as the damnation in pvp you realise. The claymore is boss tier and the vuture can hold it's own as a t2 ferox

[Tsubutai]

Not every fleet command ship is as bad as the damnation in pvp you realise. The claymore is boss tier and the vuture can hold it's own as a t2 14 inch penis
You really should qualify that statement since the damnation does what it's designed to do in pvp extremely well. The fact that you can't really solo in it doesn't make it bad, especially since no one would ever believe you weren't bait even if it was a good solo brawler.

Also, prom's ammo changes would turn the Harpy from a slow but brutal brawler into a slow omnicidal rape machine.

[Shiroi Okami]

You really should qualify that statement since the damnation does what it's designed to do in pvp extremely well. The fact that you can't really solo in it doesn't make it bad, especially since no one would ever believe you weren't bait even if it was a good solo brawler.

Also, prom's ammo changes would turn the Harpy from a slow but brutal brawler into a slow omnicidal rape machine.

I was more talking about single combat capability, which is what pattern was referring to when he said he wanted to nerf the astarte

[Alain Colcer]

Gallente philosophy: imma melting ur face!!!!111
ECM: Not anymore. Umad?

Caldari philosophy: Chillin' & (slowly) killin' from 200+km.
RSD: <cuts targeting range to 10km> Problem?

Both ewars are perfectly suited to weaken enemy philosophy.

You forgot to take into account that ECM only needed 1 module to disrupt the attacker, while RSD needed 2 to bring it down to that range.

My issue with ECM is the fact its a much more efficient force multiplier than any other EWar. Maybe my suggestions on that topic are absurd but then why is ECM first choice when going into combat instead of the others?

[Tony O]

You forgot to take into account that ECM only needed 1 module to disrupt the attacker, while RSD needed 2 to bring it down to that range.

My issue with ECM is the fact its a much more efficient force multiplier than any other EWar. Maybe my suggestions on that topic are absurd but then why is ECM first choice when going into combat instead of the others?

Captain Obvious here...

ECM, RSD, and Neuts are all capable of crippling the bejesus out of a ship. ECM does it with one shot from one module/drone, RSDs and Neuts generally will not. Even a shitty little light ECM drone will does max damage (as it were) if it hits, and there is no penalty for sending a cloud of shitty little light drones at your target. Also, there is little you can do tactically to counter ECM (as compared to, say, getting a warp-in right on top of a fleet relying on RSDs for defensive EWar), basicly you can gimp your ships by fitting ECCM and pray for luck or blob the fuck out of your enemy (both strategic choices.)

Given the game mechanics, why would you choose anything other than ECM?

Shitty game mechanics is shitty game design. ECM is to EVE what stun/mez is to PvP with elves and fairies: Shit, shittier, & shittiest all rolled up into one shitty ball of shit. Looks like shit, smells like shit, tastes like shit, must be shit, & etc.

ymmv

[Alain Colcer]

TonyO, i Dont want to derail the thread, but i agree 100% with you, ECM is not balanced as it is now.....

Was just trying to add new light to Mona's comment that each racial EWar was balanced against the type of engagement envelope of their racial enemies.


Going back to the Gallente suggestions and taking into account Pattern's comments on hybrid ammunition.....i would love to see a more interesting spread ofattributes, Caldari racial ammo could indeed have slight less penalties or better bonuses in range, while sacrificing the thermal component in their damage, while the contrary happens with Gallente racial ammo.

Or even more harsh remake, Caldari Navy ammo dissapears, as they already produce missiles...and racial hybrid ammo is the realm of the Gallente.

[Tony O]

OK, no more off-topic ranting from me... (in this thread, anyway)


I like the idea of substantial improvement to Blaster tracking. In the abstract, it seems absurd to me to have a point-blank-range weapon system that's ineffective at point-blank range. In the specific case of EVE's game mechanics evolution, it's been years now and Blasters remain in dire need of a proper adjustment for the web nerf. This is special in a "needs the help of three nurses and two dogs to board the shortbus" kind of way, aka :ccp/awesome:

Don't recall who was pushing the idea of boosting Gallente agility rather than max velocity, but I think that deserves a good look. For that reason, I dislike Patterns suggested rig penalty change. Actually, I'd like to see them ditch the current implementation where all rigs of a particular classification (armor, shield, astronautic, & etc.) receive exactly the same penalty and tune penalties to specific rigs, but that verges on going off-topic, so...

I like Prom's notion of differentiating between Caldari and Gallente faction ammo, although I'm not sold on optimal vs. falloff as the difference. I'd lean more towards optimal vs. tracking, possibly tuned by a (slight) difference in raw damage.

[Marlona Sky]

Don't recall who was pushing the idea of boosting Gallente agility rather than max velocity, but I think that deserves a good look.

It has been brought up a few times, but too many Minmitar fans cry foul play screaming that it steps on their toes if Gallente has better agility than them.

[prometheus]

It has been brought up a few times, but too many Minmitar fans cry foul play screaming that it steps on their toes if Gallente has better agility than them.
Caldari has better agility than Gallente..
Figure that one out.

[Tony O]

It has been brought up a few times, but too many Minmitar fans cry foul play screaming that it steps on their toes if Gallente has better agility than them.

Speaking as a Minmatar fan, who gives a flying fuck? Actually, a bit of screaming over balance changes would be good for the game.

What really bugs me about the whole Gallente/Blasters mess is that our :awesome: overlords at CCP have committed the ultimate sin in PvP balance. They've left things essentially unchanged for so long that tactics are going stagnant. The goal should never be perfect balance (as if there could be such a thing), but rather to shake things up fairly often. The problem with the Dramiel isn't that it's retardedly OP, the problem is that it's been retardedly OP for years.

Why let the perfect be the enemy of the good? Especially when imperfect is better!

So go with Pattern's suggestions, OR do something simpler, or whatever...


Give the Myrm/Eos their 5 heavies/sentries back, gimp turrets and fitting to compensate.
Give Blasters a 50% tracking boost across the board.
Give ships intended as blasterboats agility slightly superior to equivalent Minmatar hulls, while looking at each hull individually and maybe downgrading a few bits here and there if/as necessary. Make kiting a blasterboat with an AC boat less of a gimme.
Take up Prom's idea of differentiating Caldari and Gallente faction ammo.
Don't be afraid to have a couple Gallente hulls work out to be best in class for a while.

Oh yeah, and nerf the Dramiel while you're at it.

Then, six months later, tweak anything that's too OP, nerf the Dramiel again, and move on to the next race/weaponsystem/whatever.

[Alain Colcer]

I can cope with the idea of small incremental balances every year, but there comes a point that you need to set "ground rules" for each racial ship catalog and not divert too far.

As a game that has newcomers, old timers, and returning customers, change is good, but total overhaul is not. People associate minmatar with speed and guerrilla fights....amarr with armor and capacitor, caldari with missiles and shields......gallente with drones and not sure what else.

Reviewing balance and making changes must be aligned with the concept of usefulness of each item and purpose and maintaining that overall racial "strenght". Its no use to have ships or items that server no purpose at all, or that are completely superceeded by others (as it will always be better to use the other one instead). EvE currently has a small quantity of such cases. That should be the goal of the game designers, to continually work the edges and smooth things out, of course it may lead to stagnation in certain areas, but the idea is to make small incremental changes.

Improvements could be made with rigs, or hardwirings, that would later lead to adjustments in drones, or armor tank modules and so on.

[Pattern]

Not sure I want to touch faction ammo. Not that I don't think it's a good idea, it's just it can't be done just for hybrids, should be done via more of a more focused ammo rebalance.

As for speed and agility...

As far as I'm concerned, there is really two(ish) templates of how blasters can work. The Aridestia (sp?) and the proteus. One is a vagabond with blasters (1000dps at 2,7kms LOLs), the other is a damnation with blasters (900 dps with 250 EHP wat?).

My preference is for the later (because it works and it's probably less situational) but I think I'm in the minority.

[Resi]

Replace every ship with Megathrons.

There, every problem that EVE is facing is fixed with one simple change.

[prometheus]

Replace every ship with Deimos.

There, every problem that EVE is facing is fixed with one simple change.

FIXED

[Kyle Semones]

tl;dr past page 1, but i support this public service announcement and plan to donate 3,000,000 to your campaign! VIVA LA FEDERATION!

[Pattern]

Ok, publishing something similar to this soonish. Closest I've come to some sort of consensus/acceptance in a while...

Basically, you have a few days to say "STOOOOOPPPP!" Or, "what about this." and basically if you threadnought it till summer something similar to the proposal will get done.

[Sponk]

Blasters have their role well-defined, but I don't think rails do.

To recap:
pulse lasers: niche: best (mid-range) DPS
Autos: niche: range flexibility
Blasters: niche: (should be) best short-range DPS (implicitly: best tracking)

beam lasers: short-mid ranged, ok tracking, big optimal. Niche: best dps
artillery: mid-long range damage, poor tracking, big falloff. Niche: best alpha
Rails: long range damage, poor tracking, mixed optimal/falloff. Niche: wat?

I think the rail niche should be 'best tracking'. Caldari + rails would then be 'range + tracking constant dps' and gallente + rails would be 'hit anything for decent damage'. Dicking around with ammo types is not enough - the base stats should be fixed (also: lower the freaking powergrid use)

[Marlona Sky]

Blasters:
+25% damage
+12.5% tracking

Railguns:
+25% tracking
+12.5% damage

Start from there...

[Sponk]

Eve fng has some good blog posts recently comparing guns. Has only done small, close ranged guns so far I.e. exactly the area that blasters are ok in.

Not linking because :phonelol:

[The Djego]

Combat: Blasters
Blasterships receive a full overhaul with ship changes that increase the speed and agility roughly matching Minmatar counterparts whilst powergrid has been significantly increased, correctly taking into account the fittings cost of active tanking, neutron blasters and MWD's.
Blasters and turret changes have also been included that increase blaster performance within the engagement envelope. In addition to the above, utility in the form of additional 25m3 of drone bay has been included to cruisers and above, improving the options available to a pilot "in sticky situations".

Blasters:
- Ion Siege Blaster Cannon Capacitor usage reduced by 30%, Tracking increased by 30%
- Neutron Blaster Turret DPS increased by 7%, Tracking increased by ~40%, optimal range and fall off increased by 10%
- Ion Blaster Turret DPS increased by 10%, Tracking increased by ~50%
- Electron Blaster Turret power grid usage reduced by 10%, Tracking increased ~60%

Ship changes: (These apply to: Enyo, Brutix, Hyperion, Megathron (+all variants), Astarte, Thorax (+all variants), Deimos (+all variants), Tristan, Incursus, Kronos)
- Base Speed increased by ~10%
- Inertia Modifier reduced by ~15%
- Mass reduced by ~5%

(These apply to: Brutix, Hyperion, Megathron (+all variants), Astarte, Thorax (+all variants), Deimos (+all variants) only)
- Power grid increased by between 10% to 20%
- Drone bay increased by 25m^3

Note: plates still massively increase mass, minmatar ships are still faster, especially when shield fitted


The tracking buff is larger than expected, still not really sufficient with the current web/scram mechanic. The fitting reduction to electrons is pointless since you will get a "neutrons on everything" with a pg buff, the added range on neutrons even makes it even more the only realistic choice of a turret(while atm the problem is just that anything without neutrons doesn't posses a DPS advantage). I don't think the drone changes are needed if CCP actually addresses the true point blank problem(you lose them under sentrys or in 1oX very quick anyway).

The damage buffs are to low as expected.

I think the speed changes are more or less in line with what I posted in the last thread(minus the adjustments to the Astarte to give it a useful role).

Btw the Diemost is a thorax variant.



Combat: Rails
Here, ranged warfare is boosted by various changes to targeting, probing and warp mechanics restoring a niche Railguns once dominated. In addition, the behaviour of Railguns has now changed with the introduction of new Javlin ammo, that gives up range for tracking speed.

Global:
- Maximum Targeting distance increases from 250km to 300km
- Minimum Warp to distance increases from 150km to 200km
- As the number of ships on grid increase, the accuracy of scan probe warp to results reduces, resulting in ever greater warp to variances of up to 200km.

Railguns:
- Optimal range increased by 33%.
- Javlin becomes Medium range (Thorium +capacitor usage), high tracking ammo providing an increase of 40% to turret tracking speed.
- 50% reduction to capacitor usage.


It still misses a thing that makes the useful outside "hey lets sit at 180km". The main problem of fixing rails is that they need to be good at something that is actually useful between highest DPS and highest alpha. Also the range buff actually makes the rokh pointless since a mega will out damage it all the way at any range that is within 200km.



Eos
- Becomes Field Commandship
- Gains 50mb in drone bandwidth
- Info warfare bonus becomes turret tracking bonus

Astarte
- Becomes Fleet Commandship, bonuses exchanged with Eos.
- See "Combat: Blasters" for additional ship changes
- Field Commandship Damage bonus becomes Assault warfare link bonus

The problem with this is that the Astarte as a fleet command ship is extreme useless, dealing less DPS than a rax and being a paper tiger with the active tanking bonus. I think the Eos is the far more flexible platform for a fleet command ship(given that 50% of his DPS is in drones the tracking bonus isn't this useful and since it isn't affected by the speed changes it would be to slow anyway). There isn't a good reason why the Eos can't be a useful combat ship w/o links since the nos nerf(outside the obvious "damnation isn't one so fu").

[Pattern]

The tracking buff is larger than expected, still not really sufficient with the current web/scram mechanic. The fitting reduction to electrons is pointless since you will get a "neutrons on everything" with a pg buff, the added range on neutrons even makes it even more the only realistic choice of a turret(while atm the problem is just that anything without neutrons doesn't posses a DPS advantage). I don't think the drone changes are needed if CCP actually addresses the true point blank problem(you lose them under sentrys or in 1oX very quick anyway).
Drone changes are for the drone boats... As are the electron blaster pg reduction changes
Neutrons on everything, unless you still want a dual tank +cap injector and MWD.






It still misses a thing that makes the useful outside "hey lets sit at 180km". The main problem of fixing rails is that they need to be good at something that is actually useful between highest DPS and highest alpha. Also the range buff actually makes the rokh pointless since a mega will out damage it all the way at any range that is within 200km.
The Rokh has been pointless ever since the DD nerf. The only difference now is that instead of hitting with antimatter out to 75km+58km (91+58km w/ strong frentix) it'll hit out to 100km+58km (120km+58km).




The problem with this is that the Astarte as a fleet command ship is extreme useless, dealing less DPS than a rax and being a paper tiger with the active tanking bonus. I think the Eos is the far more flexible platform for a fleet command ship(given that 50% of his DPS is in drones the tracking bonus isn't this useful and since it isn't affected by the speed changes it would be to slow anyway). There isn't a good reason why the Eos can't be a useful combat ship w/o links since the nos nerf(outside the obvious "damnation isn't one so fu").
I disagree. You complain about the Astarte "dealing less dps than a rax" whilst you have the Eos doing almost exactly the same thing as it stands in the same role. Not that the Astarte can ever be mobile enough to compete in a blaster boat role (fly the proteus, seriously) without the EHP of a wet fish. No, instead it can take it's place as the highest damaging CS, yes - the active tanking bonus still sucks (even though active tanking in general is a little better...) and I'm considering giving all fleet commandships the 10% HP PL bonus.

[Marlona Sky]

All these changes, still will make Gallente inferior to all the other races when it comes to medium to large scale combat. The only thing it will do is fill that 'niche' spot better, which means it will only see action once for every hundred times any of the other races will.

Basically, none of it is enough. Unless you start including some real nerfs to the other races at the same time to effectively put Gallente back on the map as being a competitive platform, the ship lineup will be shit. Don't be discouraged, just saying you need to include several nerfs to the other races with these ideas.

[Pattern]

All these changes, still will make Gallente inferior to all the other races when it comes to medium to large scale combat. The only thing it will do is fill that 'niche' spot better, which means it will only see action once for every hundred times any of the other races will.

Basically, none of it is enough. Unless you start including some real nerfs to the other races at the same time to effectively put Gallente back on the map as being a competitive platform, the ship lineup will be shit. Don't be discouraged, just saying you need to include several nerfs to the other races with these ideas.


So which is it?

Make Gallente better at being gallente? Or give it the roles and bonuses that actually work? People want different things. ITT drone boats become more usable for everything else, whilst the blaster boats appeal better to the fetishists.

[Liptonez]

Ship changes: (These apply to: Enyo, Brutix, Hyperion, Megathron (+all variants), Astarte, Thorax (+all variants), Deimos (+all variants), Tristan, Incursus, Kronos)
- Base Speed increased by ~10%
- Inertia Modifier reduced by ~15%
- Mass reduced by ~5%

This has probably been talked about (skimmed the thread though) but: Gone the days of Nanocanes will have gone, Hyperions be the new Machariels?

[Pattern]

This has probably been talked about (skimmed the thread though) but: Gone the days of Nanocanes will have gone, Hyperions be the new Machariels?
No, those changes are roughly the equivalent of adding a single nanofiber on to a ship.

[Pattern]

Some major changes since the last iteration, but done. (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=14433)

[Shiroi Okami]

All these changes, still will make Gallente inferior to all the other races when it comes to medium to large scale combat. The only thing it will do is fill that 'niche' spot better, which means it will only see action once for every hundred times any of the other races will.

Basically, none of it is enough. Unless you start including some real nerfs to the other races at the same time to effectively put Gallente back on the map as being a competitive platform, the ship lineup will be shit. Don't be discouraged, just saying you need to include several nerfs to the other races with these ideas.

Stop being retarded. Blasters were never even intended to be good in mid to large scale combat. And the uselessness of rails has nothing to do with the other races, it has to do with instant probewarping and the fact that rails have no advantage over lasers or arty. The are supposed to fit somewhere between as longest range, and best tracking, but range is useless in the current eve when close range brawlers can just instantly warp their entire fleet on top of you with 100% accuracy

[Sponk]

wait, why can't rails be best tracking?

[Marlona Sky]

Stop being retarded. Blasters were never even intended to be good in mid to large scale combat. And the uselessness of rails has nothing to do with the other races, it has to do with instant probewarping and the fact that rails have no advantage over lasers or arty. The are supposed to fit somewhere between as longest range, and best tracking, but range is useless in the current eve when close range brawlers can just instantly warp their entire fleet on top of you with 100% accuracy

So a probing nerf is needed, along with a railgun buff.

[Pattern]

Derp.
Did you not read the fucking OP?

[Shiroi Okami]

Did you not read the fucking OP?

Of course he didn't, it's Marlona we are talking about :D

[Pattern]

The OP here has been updated to reflect the final changes. - Eve-O link is above.

[Marlona Sky]

Did you not read the fucking OP?

I thought this was your other Gallente thread and was confused. So yes, I see the:

"- As the number of ships on grid increase, the accuracy of scan probe warp to results reduces, resulting in ever greater warp to variances of up to 200km."

Maybe you should just combine the two into one idea? Would be far better don't you think?

[RoemySchneider]

wait, why can't rails be best tracking?[partially,] because of the (optimal) ranges that can be achieved (on a few ships)

a zealot sniper fleet (two enhancers, ~105km optimal) comes with 0.0122 rad/s
an eagle fleet (one tracking script, ~145km optimal) can achieve 0.0093 rad/s

however!
since the hit calc values range and tracking equally/proportionately, the eagles will hit ceptors 'better' at 140km than the zealots at 100km
[if it weren't for the shitty dps]
[nerf zealot -.-]

- OR -
the eagle fleet can use long range T1 ammo
then it can mix with the zealot fleet, switch the tracking script for an optimal script, load iridium and shoot across ~110km - with 0.0287rad/s (!)
same [shitty] dps as spike, too

[The Djego]

Drone changes are for the drone boats... As are the electron blaster pg reduction changes
Neutrons on everything, unless you still want a dual tank +cap injector and MWD.

I mean the +25m³ dronebay on the blaster hulls. If you allow the drone ships to mount a full rack of blasters they do actually better than blaster ships in the blaster role most of the time, so yes it is kind of pointless.

I think neutrons on everything is actually a bad idea, since I think a challenging, but rewarding fitting system is the better choice on gallente ships(like it was over the years). The problem isn't that you can't easily throw neutrons on every hull, but that every hull without neutrons lacking behind in dps to her counterparts. A neutron fitting should be hard, fitting wise, but a fair trade in dps and range over the tank and utility it costs you. Electron and Ion fits however should be still suitable and already provide a DPS advantage against other hulls fitted with the biggest guns(assuming a similar number of damagemods).




The Rokh has been pointless ever since the DD nerf.

That is a point actually worth addressing since it includes the other caldari hulls as well, given they would be still shit after this hybrid fix. Optimal bonuses are awesome for puls and beams, because you improve one of the key points of them. However rails already have more than enough range for most applications and it is pretty useless for blasters. This is the reason why I suggested a twice as high bonus and making rails more similar to beams in range, tracking and dps to actually have a useful effect on both blasters and rails with this bonus.



I disagree. You complain about the Astarte "dealing less dps than a rax" whilst you have the Eos doing almost exactly the same thing as it stands in the same role. Not that the Astarte can ever be mobile enough to compete in a blaster boat role (fly the proteus, seriously) without the EHP of a wet fish. No, instead it can take it's place as the highest damaging CS, yes - the active tanking bonus still sucks (even though active tanking in general is a little better...) and I'm considering giving all fleet commandships the 10% HP PL bonus.

Fitted with 3 gang links it only got 4 turrets and one damage bonus. This is worse than the rax, also since it would be stupid to park your gang boosting CS at point blank it would do even worse dps with rails. The Eos is a lot more suitable here since it can keep some range and use sentrys/heavys for DPS in a small gang, similar to what the claymore can do. As explained in the other thread I could see a lot potential in a light tanked, fast, high DPS astarte.

[Liptonez]

No, those changes are roughly the equivalent of adding a single nanofiber on to a ship.
More like 2 nanos.

For reference, with 2 nanos and the one extra you mentioned a Hyperion will go 1780m/s. 1900m/s would be more realistic I think. And that is without any Zor's or whatever implants. So yeah it'd become a little mach for just 150 mil.

[Pattern]

More like 2 nanos.

For reference, with 2 nanos and the one extra you mentioned a Hyperion will go 1780m/s. 1900m/s would be more realistic I think. And that is without any Zor's or whatever implants. So yeah it'd become a little mach for just 150 mil.
Yes, a machariel with 4 effective low slots, a third the effective turret range, a top speed of 1400-1500m/s ish (no, the changes don't equate to a MWD speed increase of 60% :psyduck:), 30% less ehp, 30% less agility etc.

If you have an issue with the exact numbers I've mentioned, feel free to provide modifications with some reasoning. Posting "WAAAA THE HYPERION IS THE NEW MACH" is a little retarded tbh.

[Liptonez]

Yes, a machariel with 4 effective low slots, a third the effective turret range, a top speed of 1400-1500m/s ish (no, the changes don't equate to a MWD speed increase of 60% :psyduck:), 30% less ehp, 30% less agility etc.

If you have an issue with the exact numbers I've mentioned, feel free to provide modifications with some reasoning. Posting "WAAAA THE HYPERION IS THE NEW MACH" is a little retarded tbh.
Well, there's no way around it but nerfing the slot layout. But I think that wouldn't be too good.

Oh and you can overheat MWDs (even people in Machariels like to do that).

35km optimal+falloff while fielding 800 DPS and a heavy neut is not terribly bad imo. Such a thing would probably easily trash a Tempest, which is often considered a shitty mach.

Just because you don't like that someone will misuse your armor ship as a nano ship doesn't mean that no one will fit and fly it like that.

[Pattern]

Well, there's no way around it but nerfing the slot layout. But I think that wouldn't be too good.

Oh and you can overheat MWDs (even people in Machariels like to do that).

35km optimal+falloff while fielding 800 DPS and a heavy neut is not terribly bad imo. Such a thing would probably easily trash a Tempest, which is often considered a shitty mach.

Just because you don't like that someone will misuse your armor ship as a nano ship doesn't mean that no one will fit and fly it like that.
No, it's because your making it out to be something that appears insanely overpowered or out of the ordinary and not unlike a Typhoon flying at 1953ms or a Macherial going 2734ms overheated with 2 nanos.

[Sponk]

wait, why can't rails be best tracking?[partially,] because of the (optimal) ranges that can be achieved (on a few ships)

a zealot sniper fleet (two enhancers, ~105km optimal) comes with 0.0122 rad/s
an eagle fleet (one tracking script, ~145km optimal) can achieve 0.0093 rad/s

however!
since the hit calc values range and tracking equally/proportionately, the eagles will hit ceptors 'better' at 140km than the zealots at 100km

[nerf zealot -.-]

Right, so you're complaining that when we add tracking to rails, the tracking is better than zealots, but the damage is worse? That sounds like [i]working as intended.


- OR -
the eagle fleet can use long range T1 ammo
then it can mix with the zealot fleet, switch the tracking script for an optimal script, load iridium and shoot across ~110km - with 0.0287rad/s (!)
same [shitty] dps as spike, too

Sounds good, too.

Beams: best dps, ok range
Arties: best alpha, long range
Caldari rails: best tracking, long range, poor dps, poor alpha
Gallente rails: best tracking, ok range, ok dps

[Marlona Sky]

Look at these people afraid of Gallente being a decent ship to fly. I'm beginning to think some people want them to stay shit so they have an easy target if they come across one.

[Silenos Lakedaimon]

sounds good all in all i think, i like it

but about drones, why not give them microjumpdrives? (only on combat t2 drones?)
so if the target is far away (40km+?) the drone jumps closeby, (15ish km)

[Shiroi Okami]

sounds good all in all i think, i like it

but about drones, why not give them microjumpdrives? (only on combat t2 drones?)
so if the target is far away (40km+?) the drone jumps closeby, (15ish km)

inb4 teleporting sentry/heavy drones volleying errything all across the battlefield

[Tyrus Tenebros]

(Regarding the rokh)
That is a point actually worth addressing since it includes the other caldari hulls as well, given they would be still shit after this hybrid fix. Optimal bonuses are awesome for puls and beams, because you improve one of the key points of them. However rails already have more than enough range for most applications and it is pretty useless for blasters. This is the reason why I suggested a twice as high bonus and making rails more similar to beams in range, tracking and dps to actually have a useful effect on both blasters and rails with this bonus. If blasters themselves are buffed AND the optimal bonus gets doubled, the blaster rokh would be on par with the baddon.

Currently, the baddon has essentially no drawbacks except for minor tracking penalties and very mildly decreased dps at (the rokhs) optimal vs. a blaster rokh:

22 vs. 45 km optimal (20km falloff on rokh brings half-damage range to baddon full damage optimal) (1 TE + 1 optimal script TC on rokh, normal range for baddon w/ scorch)
681 (rokh) vs 649 (baddon) dps (3 Mag stab vs. 2 HS on the Baddon) (this is GUNS ONLY loading T2 longrange)
165k EHP (baddon) vs. 104k (Rokh), assuming the rokh fits a tackle module (somewhat better without one, but still not 165!!)

Rokh is slightly faster but still only BARELY more agile than a 2-plate baddon (20.6 on the rokh, 21.7 on the baddon) which is retarded

also the baddon has room for a heavy cap booster. While this isn't AS important for the rokh, it's still a valid point.

in other words the rokh is completely and utterly outclassed by the ostensibly same-tier abaddon, which can also INSTANTLY flip damage range, AND has a larger drone bay.


I know, not a "caldari" thread, but this fits in to the blaster category.

Fits, for reference:

[Rokh, PassiveRokh]
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II

Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets
Medium Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
Invulnerability Field II
Invulnerability Field II
Warp Disruptor II
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range

Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L

Large Core Defence Field Extender I
Large Core Defence Field Extender I
Large Core Defence Field Extender I


Hammerhead II x5



[Abaddon, StandardBaddonBooster]
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II

Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets
J5 Prototype Warp Disruptor I
Sensor Booster II, Scan Resolution
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800

Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L

Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I


Hornet EC-300 x5
Hammerhead II x5

[Pattern]

When you say "optimal bonus gets doubled" do you mean the bonus goes from 25% to 50%, or 100%?

And wouldn't you think that would have a massive effect on how rails performed? EG, Antimatter out to 150km on 425mm's.

[The Djego]

When you say "optimal bonus gets doubled" do you mean the bonus goes from 25% to 50%, or 100%?

Optimal bonuses are 10% per level on caldari hulls so a boost to 20% per level(100% at 5).


And wouldn't you think that would have a massive effect on how rails performed? EG, Antimatter out to 150km on 425mm's.

That was the reason I suggested a range nerf combined with a tracking and dps buff for rails. The new optimal with rails on a caldari hull would be the same than the optimal would be today and a lot shorter on gallente hulls.

For the 425mm this would be:

Optimal: 57600m x 1.5 x 1.25 x 0.5(antimatter) = 54000m
New Optimal(75%): 43200 x 2.0 x 1.25 x 0.5(antimatter) = 54000m

[Pattern]

With the proposed tracking boost, how would the performance of say, rails with antimatter vs pulses with scorch on either the zealot or apoc compare?

[The Djego]

Rail diemost vs puls zealot would do nearly the same DPS at medium ranges. 447 @ 17.8+37.8(4x 250mm with 2 TEs, if you keep the falloff bonus) plus the drones against the 650 ish @ 15+8(conflag) or the 456 you get to 45-50km(depending on the TE count) with Scorch. Scorch however will have a 50% tracking advantage. I'm still not sure if it I would stick to the falloff bonus on the diemost or turn it into a tracking bonus, since it would give the diemost a fairly big med rage niche compared to the astarte.

Rokh would have 636 @ 54+30 against the Apoc with 584 @ 62 + 10(3 damage mods, both without drones) however the apoc would have a much better tracking and the option to deal considerable more DPS at closer range. The Mega(6 gun variant with the 50% damage bonus) on the other hand would have only 27+30, however it would field 716 DPS with rails only(hitting 1016 with Drones and close to 1.1k after imps). Generally speaking with the added mobility on gallente hulls a falloff nerf to rails would be also needed, probably somewhere between 25-37.5%.

Edit: The rail DPS numbers where a bit of, by slightly wrong number in the storage in my calculator, fixed it.

[Pattern]

6 gun megathron? *blinks*

[The Djego]

6 gun megathron? *blinks*

- 1 high(and turret slot) +1 med like posted before, the changed damage bonus(10% per level instead of 5%) also boost it from 8.75 to 9 effective turrets, actually improving DPS instead reducing it.

[Tyrus Tenebros]

Rail diemost vs puls zealot would do nearly the same DPS at medium ranges. 486 @ 17.8+37.8(4x 250mm with 2 TEs, if you keep the falloff bonus) plus the drones against the 650 ish @ 15+8(conflag) or the 456 you get to 45-50km(depending on the TE count) with Scorch. Scorch however will have a 50% tracking advantage. I'm still not sure if it I would stick to the falloff bonus on the diemost or turn it into a tracking bonus, since it would give the diemost a fairly big med rage niche compared to the astarte.

Rokh would have 691 @ 54+30 against the Apoc with 584 @ 62 + 10(3 damage mods, both without drones) however the apoc would have a much better tracking and the option to deal considerable more DPS at closer range. The Mega(6 gun variant with the 50% damage bonus) on the other hand would have only 27+30, however it would field 778 DPS with rails only(hitting 1078 with Drones, breaking 1.1k after imps). Generally speaking with the added mobility on gallente hulls a falloff nerf to rails would be also needed, probably somewhere between 25-37.5%.So how would the numbers come out on the Brokh?

[The Djego]

The rokh would have 1049 @ 13.5+4,7km with Void, 941 @ 9+9.4 with CN antimatter and 749 @ 25+12km(32+19 after 2 TEs) with Null(3 mfs, no drones). This includes the -25% falloff on blasters and the 37.5% optimal bonus on Null(it got 25% atm).

The concept is that the caldari hull with blasters sports a bit more DPS(highly improved by the way the higher optimal bonus works with Void) as a puls ship with the same range ability's(having void also at 15km optimal after 1 TC and with around 30% more tracking compared to MF) in close range fights. At medium ranges it sports more tracking(around 75% more) and DPS with Null than a amarr hull could with scorch, at expense of a much lower optimal range compared to scorch.

[Shiroi Okami]

From the winter expansion devblog:



Hybrid Balancing


REJOICE BROTHERS

[Sponk]

Not rejoicing until I see the devblog.

[Shiroi Okami]

Not rejoicing until I see the devblog.
At least they finally admitted hybrids need fixing. That's what I'm happy about. But what I can see happening is blanket buffs that apply to frigs as well, which will restore the taranis and enyo to their rightful places as GODS AMONGST MEN. Especially if the 4th enyo bonus is a dps bonus. 500 dps enyo says hi bitches

[Tyrus Tenebros]

The rokh would have 1049 @ 13.5+4,7km with Void, 941 @ 9+9.4 with CN antimatter and 749 @ 25+12km(32+19 after 2 TEs) with Null(3 mfs, no drones). This includes the -25% falloff on blasters and the 37.5% optimal bonus on Null(it got 25% atm).

The concept is that the caldari hull with blasters sports a bit more DPS(highly improved by the way the higher optimal bonus works with Void) as a puls ship with the same range ability's(having void also at 15km optimal after 1 TC and with around 30% more tracking compared to MF) in close range fights. At medium ranges it sports more tracking(around 75% more) and DPS with Null than a amarr hull could with scorch, at expense of a much lower optimal range compared to scorch.Significantly better DPS and tracking make it worthwhile. Currently these advantages are nearly nonexistent.

[The Djego]

Not rejoicing until I see the devblog.

This. Might be even reactivate my account for sissi testing if the change is not to terrible.


Significantly better DPS and tracking make it worthwhile. Currently these advantages are nearly nonexistent.

Agreed. I always liked the idea switching a considerable big amount of falloff into optimal on caldari hulls, basically filling the huge hole between 3km and 45km optimal in close range pvp with a useful middle ground ship type.

[Alain Colcer]

At least they finally admitted hybrids need fixing. That's what I'm happy about.

Wrong, they finally caved in to the mass cry of the players about hybrids need rework. I am happy they realized the players see hybrids as subpar weapons and therefore need balance....but they didnt "admit" they were in need of fixing.

[noobcake]

I still dont think LOLACTIVETANKBONUS (no matter how large) helps gallente...at all

[RoemySchneider]

can't wait to actually deal more dps with light neutrons than with d180s.
should reduce the sperging a bit from the ppl only looking at the eft numbers when putting them onto a stabberFI ^^

[Sponk]

tbh small blasters are pretty (http://evefng.blogspot.com/2011/09/everything-you-never-asked-to-know.html) ok (http://evefng.blogspot.com/2011/09/turret-talk-two.html).

[Marlona Sky]

I still dont think LOLACTIVETANKBONUS (no matter how large) helps gallente...at all

My sentiments exactly!

[noobcake]

My sentiments exactly!

and neither does hull tanking ;)

[Marlona Sky]

If only CCP would let us, the players, toy with the actual ships and module stats themselves on SiSi. Imagine all of these ideas from various parts of the sandbox being able to be tested and see how they do.

Is something like that even remotely possible?

[Sponk]

Is something like that even remotely possible?

Is there a way to modify the data eft uses?

[noobcake]

If only CCP would let us, the players, toy with the actual ships and module stats themselves on SiSi. Imagine all of these ideas from various parts of the sandbox being able to be tested and see how they do.

Is something like that even remotely possible?

you have no idea the level of chaos that would generate. People wouldnt use that ability to :test: anything. Theyd take it as an opprotunity to give their ships 8/8/8/3 and max CPU/Grid...it's not practical. CCP has game developers and a balance team to do this kind of stuff.

[RoemySchneider]

Is there a way to modify the data eft uses?i remember some ppl editing eft when pirate & faction ships were fiddled with. a hexeditor should do it ^^

edit after trying : gl figuring out which value means what though -.-

[Marlona Sky]

EFT can only go so far. SiSi is the closest you can get to testing shit out. Just wish we could build our own ships and mods in the station and test them out. I am sure some people would go retarded on it, but still. Would be nice.

[Pattern]

~~~New Updates based on Eve-O feedback.~~~


Caldari Lovin:
Caldari base speed increases significantly. Caldari hybrid ships, especially the cruisers are just to slow to be viable and often whilst existential issues really effect the performance of the Ferox and it's variants.
~30% increase to base speed, for:
- Moa, Harpy, Ferox, Vulture, Rokh, Egale, Cormorant (Whilst the Tengu's Hybrid Weapons subsystem should increase speed by a similar amount).
- Moa and Eagle powergrid increased by 30%
- Moa and Eagle hull re-designed to look less shit.
- See Tiericide for additional changes to the Ferox
- See Fleet Commandships for additional changes to the Vulture
- Combat Blasters for additional changes to Hybrids.


Global:
- As the number of ships on grid increase, the accuracy of scan probe warp to results reduces, resulting in ever greater warp to variances of up to 200km.
- Probing accuracy is now inversely proportional to the amount of time the target has been in one location (grid)" (After 0 seconds, within 200km accuracy, after 30 seconds, 50km accuracy, after one minute, probing accuracy improves to 12km and so on)


Ammo:
- Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off.
- Gleam - Decreases capacitor usage by 50% - 5% Less damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking
- Javlin - Increases tracking by 33% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 25% increased capacitor usage

Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts:
Antimatter remains unchanged

Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage

Thorium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Lead - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Irdium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Tungsten - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iron - Same as current Iridium except with the optimal range of before.

[Marlona Sky]

What is to keep people from having a stop watch to chime at a certain mark to make sure they can never be probed?

[The Djego]

Caldari Lovin:...

What role(s) you think they could be useful for with this changes?


Ammo:
- Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off.
- Gleam - Decreases capacitor usage by 50% - 5% Less damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking
- Javlin - Increases tracking by 33% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 25% increased capacitor usage


Quake, I don't think we need more alpha in alpha fleets.
Gleam, building a T2 ammo only around only one hull isn't a good idea, given that this hull would be the Abaddon with Tachs, makes this idea even worse.
Javelin, I could live with this, even if I think that more damage with less tracking would be more suitable, by the way caldari hulls scale against other fleet concepts(med range puls/alpha).


Ammo:
Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts:
Antimatter remains unchanged

Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage

Thorium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Lead - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Irdium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Tungsten - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iron - Same as current Iridium except with the optimal range of before.

Beside the general ramble of copying projectile solutions to hybrid, the differences between kinetic and thermal resist are not really this pronounced on T1 hulls and generally the first hole to plug on any T2 ship. The ideas to add 40% more damage at max range with faction ammo has some merits, however spike will be probably become complete useless(it might even be the case with the optimal boost for rails that you did suggest alone) since you more or less trade 20% optimal for 300% more tracking and 30% less cap use. Also you once again building the hole rail concept around the extreme long range snipping role, what I don't think will help a lot. It is still a to small niche, even if sniping becomes more useful with your changes to probing.

For blasters I don't see any real improvement by doing this.

[Marlona Sky]

I'm just not a fan of making the solution based around increasing the optimal and falloff. For ammo I want to see much higher dps and tracking. For the ship I want to see a bit better tank and much better agility and speed.

[Pattern]

What role(s) you think they could be useful for with this changes?
With increased speed, ships will gain some of that damage mitigation ability and GTFO mobility sniper hacs or *ahacs* have. They will also gain more of the mobility needed to use blasters better. In general, instead of a racial speed, it becomes based around weapons systems. Ships become faster with the speed chart looking like Minmatar () > Gallente (hybrid) Caldari (Hybrid) Amarr () Caldari (missiles) > Gallente (drones).




Quake, I don't think we need more alpha in alpha fleets.
Gleam, building a T2 ammo only around only one hull isn't a good idea, given that this hull would be the Abaddon with Tachs, makes this idea even worse.
Javelin, I could live with this, even if I think that more damage with less tracking would be more suitable, by the way caldari hulls scale against other fleet concepts(med range puls/alpha).
I'm open to ideas along the same vain (ie, t2 short range ammo that offers a noticeable behavioural change in the weapons systems beyond more dps or range) -




Beside the general ramble of copying projectile solutions to hybrid, the differences between kinetic and thermal resist are not really this pronounced on T1 hulls and generally the first hole to plug on any T2 ship. The ideas to add 40% more damage at max range with faction ammo has some merits, however spike will be probably become complete useless(it might even be the case with the optimal boost for rails that you did suggest alone) since you more or less trade 20% optimal for 300% more tracking and 30% less cap use. Also you once again building the hole rail concept around the extreme long range snipping role, what I don't think will help a lot. It is still a to small niche, even if sniping becomes more useful with your changes to probing.

For blasters I don't see any real improvement by doing this.
Yes, there will be ultra long range and it may be niche, but I don't know why you insist on ignoring what happens to Rails at Antimatter ranges, especially on caldari ships. You now have a huge envelope where, for instance, an Eagle would be hitting with antimatter out to 85km (with the new full rack of 250mm's + 3 tracking mods fitted.). This combined with speed increases (caldari hybrid boats where fucking slow.) should improve things.

At ultra long range, it becomes an option for some to sit beyond the reach of relatively immobile hellcat or sMaestrom fleets in the 250-300km zone. I'm considering increasing spike damage and/or range to emphasis this, but to be sure i'd probably have to break out spreadsheets again :wrists:

With blasters, you now have a choice between tracking, fall off and damage type giving none t2 pilots a little taster of null, whilst providing everyone else a way to get *even more* tracking for a small dps reduction over antimatter.

[Pattern]

New Updates:

Combat: Rails
Here, ranged warfare is boosted by various changes to targeting and probing whilst changes to ammo mean damage attenuates far less at range (far out damaging competitors at ultra long ranges).
At medium range, the optimal range increase means the envelope antimatter can be used in is greater whilst Javelin now provides improved tracking in return for much increased capacitor usage and slightly reduced dps.

Railguns:
- Optimal range increased by 33%.
- See below for Ammo changes



Global:
- As the number of ships on grid increase, the accuracy of scan probe warp to results reduces, resulting in ever greater warp to variances of up to 200km.
- Probing accuracy is now inversely proportional to the amount of time the target has been in one location (grid)" (After 0 seconds, within 200km accuracy, after 30 seconds, 50km accuracy, after one minute, probing accuracy improves to 12km and so on)
- Max Targeting Range is now 350km


Ammo:
Tech 2 Ammo now receives short range variants that alter the behaviour of the turrets (beyond additional dps, or range) either compensating for short falls or improving strengths of the turrets in very different ways.
- Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off.
- Gleam - Decreases capacitor usage by 50% - 5% Less damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking
- Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 100% increased capacitor usage

Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts:
Antimatter remains unchanged

Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage

Thorium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Lead - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iridium - (Damage Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Tungsten - (Damage, cap use Same as current thorium) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iron - Same as current Iridium except with the optimal range of before.

Spike - Damage increased to current Dread Guristas Iridium with optimal range, tracking penalties and cap use same as current

[The Djego]

With increased speed, ships will acrew some of that damage mitigation ability and GTFO mobility sniper hacs or *ahacs* have. They will also gain more of the mobility needed to use blasters well. In general, instead of a racial speed using ships become faster with the speed chart looking like Minmatar () > Gallente (hybrid) Caldari (Hybrid) Amarr () Caldari (missiles) > Gallente (drones).

The a big part of the ahacs concept relays on the small sig, something you will hardly archive on caldari hulls. Even if you would, the damage with rails would just be to limited compared to other options, same as the range with blasters. The higher speed would be most useful for medium range rail uses, however I doubt this works without higher damage capability's. This was also one of my ideas behind sticking with the current range and just add a bit DPS so you get a 50km antimatter rail eagle with a solid punch(after a set of small drones) and tank but the option to increase range by simply switching ammo. At sniper hac ranges the higher speed is cool, but not really this awesome and you hardly see a dps improvement going down to closer ranges.

For brawling they would still lack DPS, even if they got speed. That was something I couldn't really change without over buffing gallente, so this was the reason why I buffed up the range from a bit more to med range blaster pvp and extra advantages from void and null. I would take the extra dps over the extra range for most small gang scenarios when the weapons force you down to web range anyway and this is the main problem where caldari and gallente hybrid hulls collide in roles.

Technically most amarr hulls will be slower than caldari missile spammers after plating/rigging.


I'm open to ideas along the same vain (ie, t2 short range ammo that offers a noticeable behavioural change in the weapons systems beyond more dps or range) -

Well I would like to see Javelin similar to Void, with the 10% more damage, with the optimal of AM at the cost of 30% tracking and probably -75% falloff instead just 25%. Key reason would be to even out the dps difference between caldari hulls w/o damage bonuses to other common hulls when it comes to fight at closer range. However with the 30% higher optimal with rails this would work to well on gallente ships.

Well I really would love a conflag like gleam, but this might be not so good for fleet fights. A 25% tracking bonus, same damage as T1 ammo and a shift to 20% EM/80% Thermal damage distribution would be nice for better armor tank penetration and some PVE applications.

No real opinion about artis, maybe T1 damage, a 25% bigger optimal with 25% more tracking at expense of 50% falloff to make it useful for arti kitting fits.



Yes, there will be ultra long range, but I don't know why you insist on ignoring what happens to Rails at Antimatter ranges, especially on caldari ships. You now have a huge envelope where, for instance, an Eagle would be hitting with antimatter out to 85km (with the new full rack of 250mm's + 3 tracking mods fitted.). This combined with speed increases (caldari hybrid boats where fucking slow.) should improve things.

At ultra long range, it becomes an option for some to sit beyond the reach of relatively immobile hellcat or sMaestrom fleets in the 250-300km zone. I'm considering increasing spike damage and/or range to emphasis this, but to be sure i'd probably have to break out spreadsheets again :wrists:

I don't ignore it, I am just try to be realistic here and try to make caldari hulls ok w/o relaying on extreme ranges since this requires a caldari only gang and is hard caped between super fail(get probed, bubbled and shredded by the guys that warp in) or total success(stay out of the range of any aggressor and apply DPS).

As posted above I would take the lower range with a higher damage, while archiving nearly the same as you suggest at common ranges any day of the week, since it makes caldari turret ships overall more useful, fielded in common roles, where they should offer a alternative to other hulls. At common sniper ranges(given 150km+ sniping gets useful again) they also become the top dog for the job with the damage buff to rails while improving more and more the closer you go to 249km.

I just think, being ok at medium range, very good at long range is overall more useful than being subpar at medium range, ok at long range and becoming super awesome at ultra long range, by the way eve works. Ultra long range has some merits but is far to niche and impractical in my option to be relevant to the game play. Even if it would become relevant you would see the screams for a nerf, since you can't compete against it with other races or hulls.

As for your spike change in your new post, this would only give 2.5% more damage, I doubt this would be worth the trade off in tracking.



With blasters, you now have a choice between tracking, fall off and damage type giving t2 pilots a little taster of null, whilst providing everyone else a way to get *even more* tracking for a small dps reduction over antimatter.

I'm not impressed with *even more* tracking, I tested it quite a bit with projectiles and came to the conclusion that it is not worth the cargo space to take the ammo with me in standard ac fits for small gang/solo pvp scenarios. For rails ok, but for blasters it would still mean null, antimatter or void. As you could see in my previous posts I had no intention to change this, actually I simply build the changes around this circumstances, trying to archive the maximum effect/diversity with the given ammo choices.

[Mike deVoid]

I'm on Sisi in a fleet with a dev (and other players) having a chat about eve. He's in team BFF. I am informed that CCP Tallest is keeping an eye on your thread in EVE-O, Pattern. And the replies too.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=103220

Was also able to infer positive things about the Tornado, this winter and "Watch This Space" too ;).

[Marlona Sky]

What if what range weapon system you fit had an affect on a couple aspects of your ship?

- Fitting railguns/beam/cruise/artillery also decreased your signature radius making it more difficult to be probed thus opening the door a bit for snipping again.

- Fitting blasters/pulse/siege/auto-cannon increased your agility so you can get on top of targets faster.

Food for thought.

[Marlona Sky]

I am informed that CCP Tallest is keeping an eye on your thread in EVE-O, Pattern

Do you know if he reads FHC or more specifically the Game Design & Balance Discussions sub forum at all?

[Pattern]

Should the Eagle get a 6th turret slot, and what did people think of alpha blasters?

[The Djego]

Should the Eagle get a 6th turret slot, and what did people think of alpha blasters?

If you don't buff base rail DPS and/or add some drones a 6. turret would be fine. Alpha for blasters is kind of pointless beyond saving cap by lower rofs.

[Pattern]

*Paging Marn for an updated spreadsheet.*

[Mike deVoid]

Do you know if he reads FHC or more specifically the Game Design & Balance Discussions sub forum at all?
No idea, didn't come up. I might ask someone on Twitter later. CCP Punkturis is on BFF and seems to answer most tweets.


Should the Eagle get a 6th turret slot, and what did people think of alpha blasters?

Alpha blasters seem like a bad idea given the tracking problems they run into more often than other turrets. A few unlucky low qual hits, or misses and your actual dps will drop even faster. Higher ROF evens out the 'dice roll' that tracking issues can present.

[Tsubutai]

I'm not sure where the persistent myth of blasters (or short-range turrets in general) having bad-tracking comes from. Are there really that many players who consider manual control of transversal, ctrl-space-ing, and sensible use of the keep at range button to be mystical black arts whose mere contemplation could bring about the end times?

[Marlona Sky]

I'm not sure where the persistent myth of blasters (or short-range turrets in general) having bad-tracking comes from. Are there really that many players who consider manual control of transversal, ctrl-space-ing, and sensible use of the keep at range button to be mystical black arts whose mere contemplation could bring about the end times?

Sure. Just nerf the other weapon systems so they have to do that extra stuff to attempt to be competitive too.

[The Djego]

I'm not sure where the persistent myth of blasters (or short-range turrets in general) having bad-tracking comes from. Are there really that many players who consider manual control of transversal, ctrl-space-ing, and sensible use of the keep at range button to be mystical black arts whose mere contemplation could bring about the end times?

It comes from ex blaster pilots that can realistically compare damage on the target both with a blaster ship or a med range setup. It doesn't make a real difference in quick ganks(beside slowing them down), makes skilled 1o1 basically pointless and gives you like a miles long drawback in 1oX that increases even further if you fight non retards(like bumping a vaga out of my range in a 1o5 vOv). It isn't even so much the tracking but the lack of control over a close range situation in a ship type that is dedicated to close range fights(read web strength to keep your target in place).

[Alain Colcer]

small ones, dont suffer from tracking mid ones and large ones do

an afterburning megathron orbiting a moros will have problem hitting.

[Mike deVoid]

Tbh they should adjust the tracking/transversal calculations so that a pair of ships do not always have matching transversal.

http://www.hostile.dk/files/eve/eve-tracking101.swf

I.E. Webbing someone slows them down and so your guns can track them easier. But if they haven't webbed you then their guns will struggle. The justification is that the ship turns too and the guns don't have to do all the tracking themselves! (I don't think I'm explaining myself very well, but hopefully you understand what I'm getting at).

[Pattern]

Does anyone know where I can get the raw data stuff like EFT uses?

[Pattern]

Ok,

I've been looking at Railguns in depth lately. I've got a clearer idea of were they need to be.

The 33% increase to optimal range has now been scrapped.

Railguns now do more damage, and much more damage at longer ranges. True to the RP nature of what most of us consider railguns to be like. Due to high muzzle velocity, damage attenuates much less, with *match grade* ammo (spike) providing railguns with much less of a damage drop at long to ultra long range.

This picture should help explain the changes:

http://theskyunion.com/railguns.jpg

Railgun base damage increased by 10%
Spike base damage increased by 25%
Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 100% increased capacitor usage
Iron base damage increased by 20%
Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium except: ), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium except: ), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage

Thorium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Lead - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage

Iridium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal
Tungsten - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage


Beams should and will always out damage and out track at short to medium range, all other turrets. Artillery will always have the most alpha. They have high fitting requirements, and in most cases high enough capacitor usage that continuous fire is not an option without logistics. However, Rails did pointless damage at long range, and had too poor tracking at medium ranges for most damage bonuses to have a meaningful impact.

These modifications solve this. Javelin, Lead and Thorium both help tracking at medium ranges. Overall, the changes to ammo and railgun damage mods increase DPS at range by 30 to 35%.

[Shin_getter]

Tbh they should adjust the tracking/transversal calculations so that a pair of ships do not always have matching transversal.

+1. Make it a modifier that can be adjusted for different weapons and ewar and there should be enough independent variables for more weapon types.

I'm going to repeat my pitch for Blasters to use the missile damage formula, since it is the only existing one that works at close range without erratic performance.

[Sponk]

Tbh they should adjust the tracking/transversal calculations so that a pair of ships do not always have matching transversal.

They don't. Or rather, it's a ratio between the defender's sig and the attacker's guns. A frigate orbiting a battleship will have >10x the tracking because small guns hit large sigs really well.

[The Djego]

graphs

Well as you can see this would make the mega basically the most useful sniper in a sniping gang nearly up to the current lock ranges(basically in any mixed gang) and the rokh only useful at extreme long range(meaning rokh only gangs), then again actually op since no other weapon system or ship could compete at this range. I think this is bad, since it makes the rokh to much niche(it always was in my opinion) and something I tried to avoid with the lower base range on rails, reducing the impact of the mega on the long range while giving it nearly the same bite as a beam setup at medium range, combined with the option to reasonable shield tank the more mobile hulls.

Spike really looks cool with the 25% higher damage compared the iron option, for javelin I still think a higher damage would be more useful to soften the drawbacks on caldari hulls if you end up at closer ranges with your gang and extending the gallente concept of high dps at expense of range to rail ranges.

Btw, there is a small error at range extended tach setup label in the graph, since it would be +37.5% optimal instead of +25% given the current 7.5% per level optimal bonus on the apoc.

[Tsubutai]

I'm not sure where the persistent myth of blasters (or short-range turrets in general) having bad-tracking comes from. Are there really that many players who consider manual control of transversal, ctrl-space-ing, and sensible use of the keep at range button to be mystical black arts whose mere contemplation could bring about the end times?

Sure. Just nerf the other weapon systems so they have to do that extra stuff to attempt to be competitive too.
Uh, they do. Or are you the kind of retard who flies kiting/nano/mid-range ships by setting your orbit range to 20 km, switching on mwd and guns, and waiting for the mail (and then being surprised and dismayed to find that you engaged someone who knows what they're doing and just got scrammed by a 14 inch penis or something)?

@ Djego - 90% of pvp fits on cruiser+ hulls don't even have scrams these days, so how you can claim to have inadequate range control within scram range on a point-blank gankship is beyond me. Not quite sure what you're getting at with the vaga thing either (you scrammed some guy's vaga in a brawler and his buddies bumped him out of scram range to freedom? if so, props to them, but what kind of point-blank gankship were you flying that couldn't facerape a scrammed vaga in seconds?), but I'm not sure why you expect to be able to defeat competent people when outnumbered 5 to 1 in the first place. Protip: the only thing that allows nice-looking 1vN battle reports to exist is that N guys will often act like complete retards. If they know what they should be doing and execute well, of course you should expect to lose or be forced to disengage post-haste.

[The Djego]

90% of pvp fits on cruiser+ hulls don't even fit scrams these days, so how you can claim to have inadequate range control within scram range on a point-blank gankship is beyond me. Not quite sure what you're getting at with the vaga thing either (you scrammed some guy's vaga in a brawler and his buddies bumped out of scram range to freedom? if so, props to them, but what kind of point-blank gankship were you flying that couldn't facerape a scrammed vaga in seconds?), but I'm not sure why you expect to be able to defeat competent people when outnumbered 5 to 1 in the first place. Protip: the only thing that allows nice-looking 1vN battle reports to exist is that N guys will often act like complete retards. If they know what they should be doing and execute well, of course you should expect to lose or be forced to disengage post-haste.

Also 90% of the pvp isn't 1o1. It was a armor tanked brutix and you don't even have to bump a ship out of scram range, you will archive a very handy damage reduction already beyond 5km forcing you to lose another 10s to switch to null or switch targets. Even if you can use the mwd, the multiple speedups/slowdowns while adjusting range within web range wreck your effective dps and cost you time you more often than not simply don't have outside of 1o1s. That you can hardly solo 5 non total retards in a shitty brutix under sentry agro is brutally obvious. However that doesn't make the mechanics any less shit, that cost you the kill even if you manage to force a target into a position where you actually have a advantage and the hulls overall so much less effective and desirable for one of the few things they actually where useful pre QR.

[Marlona Sky]

Uh, they do.

No where near as much as a blaster ship has to. My point is if weapon system A takes 7-10 extra things to make it a competitive platform, then make sure the other weapon systems B,C,D also have to do 7-10 extra things to be competitive. I guess what I am saying is they should be balanced in that area as well.

[Pattern]

graphs

Well as you can see this would make the mega basically the most useful sniper in a sniping gang nearly up to the current lock ranges(basically in any mixed gang)
In an EVE without artillery and Megathrons that had 8 turrets, or Hyperions that didn't need an additional sensor booster to snipe... Maybe.


the rokh only useful at extreme long range(meaning rokh only gangs), then again actually op since no other weapon system or ship could compete at this range. I think this is bad, since it makes the rokh to much niche(it always was in my opinion) and something I tried to avoid with the lower base range on rails, reducing the impact of the mega on the long range while giving it nearly the same bite as a beam setup at medium range, combined with the option to reasonable shield tank the more mobile hulls.
I want, and I think most people value increased divergence in the behaviour of weapon systems. Turning rails into Beams, and forcing them to be compared on the 1-2 difference is a poor move. On paper artillery look like a shitty weapons system, poor tracking, fall off based range, but it shines partly due to the fact nothing else comes close to doing what it does. And that hasn't stopped people training for them, it hasn't stopped specialised fleet comps and it didn't need artillery to compete line for line with tachyons in that seasons FOTM.

Although I'm not sure it'll be a roaring success, either thing will be a net improvement that not only provides increased differentiation between weapons systems, but creates incentives for pilots to try new things.


Spike really looks cool with the 25% higher damage compared the iron option, for javelin I still think a higher damage would be more useful to soften the drawbacks on caldari hulls if you end up at closer ranges with your gang and extending the gallente concept of high dps at expense of range to rail ranges.
To be honest, for the short range ammo I'm thinking of completely different things like ammo that generated heat damage on your targets mods over time, or had a chance of briefly reducing a targets agility for a short time. Moving away from the "more of the same, but better" paradigm for t2 should be the goal really.


Btw, there is a small error at range extended tach setup label in the graph, since it would be +37.5% optimal instead of +25% given the current 7.5% per level optimal bonus on the apoc.
Fixed.

[Pattern]

Minor changes:

Gleam Ammo changed from reduced capacitor usage, to increased damage.


- Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off.
- Gleam - Increases damage - 15% more damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking and 50% less optimal range.
- Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 50% increased capacitor usage.

[Mike deVoid]

Pattern, if you had all these changes on Sisi for testing: what testing would you like see done?

[Pattern]

Pattern, if you had all these changes on Sisi for testing: what testing would you like see done?
I'd really like to know how it felt, both in hit quality and damage mitigation, what life was like in orbit within web range, or at short range with both rails and blasters. Also, I would want to know whether the speed changes had any tangible effect in everyday life. If they didn't, beyond inventing some new mechanic, it might be time to look at increasing blaster optimal somewhat or making offending ships more drone/missile orientated.

So i'd be relying on feedback from pilots doing 1v1s, ffa's and any organised small gangs. I'd also be looking out for any emergent stuff. Like new fits to see if those produced larger changes to the dynamic than expected.

[The Djego]

In an EVE without artillery and Megathrons that had 8 turrets, or Hyperions that didn't need an additional sensor booster to snipe... Maybe.

The only thing that can outgank it is a gedon/navy gedon with tachs, meaning a rather bad tank by fitting limitations. On the other hand, with the fitting boost on the mega you will have no restrictions in this area. If nothing else it at least cuts to much into the role of the rokh.



I want, and I think most people value increased divergence in the behaviour of weapon systems. Turning rails into Beams, and forcing them to be compared on the 1-2 difference is a poor move. On paper artillery look like a shitty weapons system, poor tracking, fall off based range, but it shines partly due to the fact nothing else comes close to doing what it does. And that hasn't stopped people training for them, it hasn't stopped specialised fleet comps and it didn't need artillery to compete line for line with tachyons in that seasons FOTM.

Although I'm not sure it'll be a roaring success, either thing will be a net improvement that not only provides increased differentiation between weapons systems, but creates incentives for pilots to try new things.

Trust me I do, however I asked myself the questions "Was the rokh really useful in this style?" and "Did it really helped all the medium hulls focusing on this concept to make them useful in general gameplay?".
With this changes the role of the rokh would becomes even more niche to a point of being good at doing what a rokh does and not much else. A projectile ship is good because you have the flexibility and speed for solo and small scale pvp, and the massive alpha in big gangs. A laser hull is good because it can field a good tank, very high range and damage in small gang and still offer good range and the best tank for bigger fights. A caldari hull would be only good if you have caldari only hulls and doing extreme long range sniping. I think that is to limed if they wouldn't be attractive for other uses to.

I don't think that making rails more similar to beams would be this bad, since the hulls would still offer different advantages(assuming we cut rail range a bit under beam range), having gallente relative fast and gank heavy with rather weak tanks(Rail fits with shield tanks) and caldari with better range as a trade off for lower dps and with the superior shield tank while being the best snipers at current lock range(plus being a lot more useful in blaster fits). On amarr you would still have the best buffer tank with a overall high damage and good range in expense of mobility.


To be honest, for the short range ammo I'm thinking of completely different things like ammo that generated heat damage on your targets mods over time, or had a chance of briefly reducing a targets agility for a short time. Moving away from the "more of the same, but better" paradigm for t2 should be the goal really.

I still think it is better to simply address some issues and fine tune concepts with it. CCP could always come up with something fancy like T3 ammo for this purpose, if they really want to see this in her game.

[Marlona Sky]

Pattern,

It has been said before, you will have to include some nerfs on the other weapons systems. Without the nerfs then there will be several overlapping ships/weapons that fill the same role too closely and you will have people rabble-rabbling left and right about, "But now your stepping on x,y,z ship/weapon's role!" I am not talking major nerfs, but some tweaks here and there. There is only so much of the pie and if 5% is what is left for Gallente that your trying to amplify a niche then, Gallente will still be passed up for every other race ship and weapon system in the game. I tried to invent something new for Gallente with the hull tanking idea, unfortunately that did not take off very well so you are left with the roles that are currently in the game.

If no one wants the sandbox to get any bigger, then some sand is going to have to be handed over from the other kids in there for Gallente to play with.

[Pattern]

The only thing that can outgank it is a gedon/navy gedon with tachs, meaning a rather bad tank by fitting limitations. On the other hand, with the fitting boost on the mega you will have no restrictions in this area. If nothing else it at least cuts to much into the role of the rokh.
An Abaddon would outdamage the Hyperion. Anything with beams would outdamage anything else with the new Gleam (-capacitor exchanged with +damage -tracking). (NOTE: Megathron would have 12.5% less damage than the relative Turret performances shown on that chart)






Trust me I do, however I asked myself the questions "Was the rokh really useful in this style?" and "Did it really helped all the medium hulls focusing on this concept to make them useful in general gameplay?".
With this changes the role of the rokh would becomes even more niche to a point of being good at doing what a rokh does and not much else. A projectile ship is good because you have the flexibility and speed for solo and small scale pvp, and the massive alpha in big gangs. A laser hull is good because it can field a good tank, very high range and damage in small gang and still offer good range and the best tank for bigger fights. A caldari hull would be only good if you have caldari only hulls and doing extreme long range sniping. I think that is to limed if they wouldn't be attractive for other uses to.
Your argument is "only one race can do this so it's bad." Which just doesn't hold up with reality. Only one race can do high alpha, whilst now, only one race did any damage at long range (tachs). Your trying to balance stuff by needing to make sure things do and work in the same paradigms as we behave in now. What? Do you really think 1-2% more or less DPS than the apoc at Xkm really matters these days? And if it did, how long would it be before Beam users would be asking for a boost?



I don't think that making rails more similar to beams would be this bad Does anyone else agree?

[Pattern]

Pattern,

It has been said before, you will have to include some nerfs on the other weapons systems. Without the nerfs then there will be several overlapping ships/weapons that fill the same role too closely and you will have people rabble-rabbling left and right about, "But now your stepping on x,y,z ship/weapon's role!" I am not talking major nerfs, but some tweaks here and there. There is only so much of the pie and if 5% is what is left for Gallente that your trying to amplify a niche then, Gallente will still be passed up for every other race ship and weapon system in the game. I tried to invent something new for Gallente with the hull tanking idea, unfortunately that did not take off very well so you are left with the roles that are currently in the game.

If no one wants the sandbox to get any bigger, then some sand is going to have to be handed over from the other kids in there for Gallente to play with.
Nerfs have a disproportional on player behaviour, I mean, you would have thought you'd learnt something by now... (Nos, nano, webs, myrmidon, eos, armour resists, damps etc etc)

[Marlona Sky]

Pattern,

It has been said before, you will have to include some nerfs on the other weapons systems. Without the nerfs then there will be several overlapping ships/weapons that fill the same role too closely and you will have people rabble-rabbling left and right about, "But now your stepping on x,y,z ship/weapon's role!" I am not talking major nerfs, but some tweaks here and there. There is only so much of the pie and if 5% is what is left for Gallente that your trying to amplify a niche then, Gallente will still be passed up for every other race ship and weapon system in the game. I tried to invent something new for Gallente with the hull tanking idea, unfortunately that did not take off very well so you are left with the roles that are currently in the game.

If no one wants the sandbox to get any bigger, then some sand is going to have to be handed over from the other kids in there for Gallente to play with.
Nerfs have a disproportional on player behaviour, I mean, you would have thought you'd learnt something by now... (Nos, nano, webs, myrmidon, eos, armour resists, damps etc etc)

and so the power creep continues... *sigh*

[Marlona Sky]

[QUOTE=Marlona Sky;244975]Pattern,

It has been said before, you will have to include some nerfs on the other weapons systems. Without the nerfs then there will be several overlapping ships/weapons that fill the same role too closely and you will have people rabble-rabbling left and right about, "But now your stepping on x,y,z ship/weapon's role!" I am not talking major nerfs, but some tweaks here and there. There is only so much of the pie and if 5% is what is left for Gallente that your trying to amplify a niche then, Gallente will still be passed up for every other race ship and weapon system in the game. I tried to invent something new for Gallente with the hull tanking idea, unfortunately that did not take off very well so you are left with the roles that are currently in the game.

If no one wants the sandbox to get any bigger, then some sand is going to have to be handed over from the other kids in there for Gallente to play with.
Nerfs have a disproportional on player behaviour, I mean, you would have thought you'd learnt something by now... (Nos, nano, webs, myrmidon, eos, armour resists, damps etc etc)

and so the power creep continues... *sigh*

Unless a LoS mechanic is introduced some how; the game will ALWAYS revolve around EHP brick tanks, alpha strikes and logistics with RR. The ships that are best at those, will always dominate the battlefield.

[Sponk]

Jester reinvents the wheel (http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2011/10/wish-list.html) c/d

[Shin_getter]

and so the power creep continues... *sigh*

Unless a LoS mechanic is introduced some how; the game will ALWAYS revolve around EHP brick tanks, alpha strikes and logistics with RR. The ships that are best at those, will always dominate the battlefield.
LI3z!11!1!11!!!

The game has revolved around very slow missiles with splash damage, blobs of heavy drones with super damps, ships that go really fast, ships that shoot really far, ships that give other ships annoying timer of do nothingness, ships with really a few thousands of drones in bay, ships that kill all the small ships in one shot by using a small ship to open a cyno, and everything else in between.
------
The only reason for the above is people love their RR since it is more "skill", and logically EHP and alpha becomes important. It is trivial to make something else more important, but the big problem is: Is it really any better?

[Pattern]

I don't think that making rails more similar to beams would be this bad Does anyone else agree?

[Sponk]

Does anyone else agree?

Artillery has alpha
Beams have high DPS at any range due to crystals
Rails should be a mix of the two, but with much increased tracking to compensate for their other deficiencies (cap, ammo, damage type)

[Marlona Sky]

Said it before. Railguns should be hands down, the best tracking long range weapon system out there. Make frigates and destroyer class ships drop a load in their pants when an Eagle comes out of warp at range.

[Sponk]

Said it before. Railguns should be hands down, the best tracking long range weapon system out there.

[Shin_getter]

Said it before. Railguns should be hands down, the best tracking long range weapon system out there. Make frigates and destroyer class ships drop a load in their pants when an Eagle comes out of warp at range.
Frigates die fast enough already. Do we need better ways to kill them? A tweak too much and it might vanish from the field completely, while not enough makes rails still useless. The railgun design is never design to suit the anti-frigate role anyways, without instant swap ammo that helps shooting fast moving targets.

It would be okay it railguns did more damage at long range then lasers (which should do more dps at shorter ranges, aka nerf auroa) and artillery. This would give them a role if sniping ever comes back.

Or just make railguns do a ton of damage while lasers remain the high tracking, ammo swapping of the class, useful for shooting smaller things.

[Marlona Sky]

Frigates die fast enough already. Do we need better ways to kill them?

But you just said in the T3 thread...


If we are just trying to add a ship and some new role into it, it is good to be conservative and not break what already works.

So make up your mind please. Or are you just trolling every post I make no matter what?

[The Djego]

An Abaddon would outdamage the Hyperion. Anything with beams would outdamage anything else with the new Gleam (-capacitor exchanged with +damage -tracking). (NOTE: Megathron would have 12.5% less damage than the relative Turret performances shown on that chart)

I was thinking about sniping gangs at 150-250km ranges. I actually think that the Gleam and Quake changes only enforce more use of beam and arti setups at closer ranges, what is kind of bad since it increases her performance at what they are best(alpha or dps&tracking) and make them even more preferable compared to rails.


Your argument is "only one race can do this so it's bad." Which just doesn't hold up with reality. Only one race can do high alpha, whilst now, only one race did any damage at long range (tachs). Your trying to balance stuff by needing to make sure things do and work in the same paradigms as we behave in now. What? Do you really think 1-2% more or less DPS than the apoc at Xkm really matters these days? And if it did, how long would it be before Beam users would be asking for a boost?

No it is not. My argument is that "It is a niche with caldari, where no advantage comes in mind in a mixed gang and that even if it works it would be highly ineffective against rr, given that rr might change and people do this with lots of ship it would get the nerfhammer because no other hull that can compete in this scenarios." What you most likely archive is something that is to much niche and not useful for overall pvp, even expecting the best it would require reconsidering again, given that it already is niche and how ccp nerfs it would be compleetly useless again. Keep in mind gallente hulls would sit in the same boat here, even if they cover a larger area of 150km+ damage and can work in mixed gangs, since they would also lack the damage or alpha to compete within 100km.

I didn't propose a split up in range and damage behavior for gallente/caldari hulls with rails because I did think it would be awesome, but to avoid this specific problem where at least one of the races ends up with to much of a niche hulls that are not preferable over the alternatives in current pvp scenarios.

[Mike deVoid]

Said it before. Railguns should be hands down, the best tracking long range weapon system out there.

I would like to see a triad of roles for each of the short-range and long-range gun types within the minimum warp range; something that may well be more easily accomplished with an increase of this minimum. You should be able to see from a damage output graph where each weapon type has it's benefits/niche. As game doctrine evolves due to adjustment of game mechanics, etc, we should see further balancing of all of these.

As for hybrids, it does seem that their tracking should be the best. Blasters/blasterboats could really do with an optimal range increase, probably matched with a falloff nerf (Could be applied to all blasters via ammo effects.) Both blaster ammo types penalising tracking seems a little off to me, especially at the large proportion that is removed.

Someone someplace mentioned that primary damage type of gallente hybrids should be thermal rather than kinetic; I think I'd like to see that swap. But Patterns ammo damage choices seemed kinda good too.

Oh, could we please make the optimal/falloff of electrons, ions and neutrons match? Just amend the damage modifier and ammo capacity for them. Possibly also reload time bonuses for lower tiered weapons?

I agree with allowing gallente better acceleration.

[Shin_getter]

Given a bit of time thinking about it, wouldn't it be better to just swap the tracking of lasers and rails, as opposed to buffing rails to be better then lasers and further favor larger ship types.

[Gypsio]

Yeah, if you want to make rails the best tracking long-range weapon, but you're concerned that small stuff already dies too quickly, then the only logical conclusion is that the tracking of the other weapon systems will have to come down.

[Marlona Sky]

Yeah, if you want to make rails the best tracking long-range weapon, but you're concerned that small stuff already dies too quickly, then the only logical conclusion is that the tracking of the other weapon systems will have to come down.

That would work too. Perhaps even play with signature radius as well on smaller ships.

Pattern, what exactly is railguns supposed to be the best at, in your eyes? How do they shine compared to other long range weapon systems? If it is supposed to be tracking, then instead of doing all the work and number crunching, you could just state that railguns are supposed to be the king of tracking for long range weapon systems and leave all the balancing and tweaking up to CCP and players testing it out on SiSi to get the feel right. That way you can devote more time on polishing the other aspects of your proposal.

[Pattern]

Yeah, if you want to make rails the best tracking long-range weapon, but you're concerned that small stuff already dies too quickly, then the only logical conclusion is that the tracking of the other weapon systems will have to come down.

That would work too. Perhaps even play with signature radius as well on smaller ships.

Pattern, what exactly is railguns supposed to be the best at, in your eyes? How do they shine compared to other long range weapon systems? If it is supposed to be tracking, then instead of doing all the work and number crunching, you could just state that railguns are supposed to be the king of tracking for long range weapon systems and leave all the balancing and tweaking up to CCP and players testing it out on SiSi to get the feel right. That way you can devote more time on polishing the other aspects of your proposal.
Huh?

The current iteration of Rails use t2 ammo to have the best damage at long range, and the best tracking at short range. I think that's pretty much what all apart from The Djego (who really wants beams mk2) want?

Amarr remain best damage at short to medium ranges whilst Minmatar have high alpha.

[Shiroi Okami]

Yeah, if you want to make rails the best tracking long-range weapon, but you're concerned that small stuff already dies too quickly, then the only logical conclusion is that the tracking of the other weapon systems will have to come down.

That would work too. Perhaps even play with signature radius as well on smaller ships.



More than likely messing with sig radius of small ships, especially inties, would break frigate combat. inties with tracking bonuses already have a difficult time tracking each other in a tight orbit as it is, if you made them smaller it'd be damn near impossible to hit anything

[Sponk]

Besides, if you increase the tracking by 1/10 it's exactly the same as if you've dropped the sig res of the turret by 1/11 so it's literally the same thing.

[CastleBravo]

Maybe the effect of sig radius vs sig res should be greater? A circle with half the radius of another circle has one fourth the area afterall, maybe the tracking formula should reflect that.

[Sponk]

Maybe the effect of sig radius vs sig res should be greater? A circle with half the radius of another circle has one fourth the area afterall, maybe the tracking formula should reflect that.

It's already like that (http://serpentinelogic.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/turret_old.gif) (ratio is squared)

ofc if you wanted more substantial changes to the tracking formula, that would be another discussion.

[Kai Lae]

Would be nice to know if CCP are reading this thread, or only the eveo thread. Eveo forum is horrible, having them read here and poast only here would be far superior. I will try to update my year old gallente megapoast and put it here after I get back home from work.

[Pattern]

Would be nice to know if CCP are reading this thread, or only the eveo thread. Eveo forum is horrible, having them read here and poast only here would be far superior. I will try to update my year old gallente megapoast and put it here after I get back home from work.
Someone mentioned that the dev's read the eve-o thread. They don't respond specifically to many things in the features and idea's forums for some reasonable reasons. They read FHC, but purely for entertainment.