open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Projectile Weapons - Balancing
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (90)

Author Topic

Lumy
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:04:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Dwindlehop
Presumably Quake and Hail will also get boosted to make them better than RF EMP post-boost?

Probably not. Remember that T2 short range ammo sucks by default. Laughing

Ath Amon
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:05:00 - [92]
 

@Kagura
you did wrong tests if you got that results (expecially with values similar to eve ones), alpha of course gives some results when dps is very close, or can be a real factor vs very low dps ships but in eve 3-4 volleys are enought to lose its initial advantage and no fight is going to end in 3 volleys.

you can see how dmg build up with a cumulative dmg graph rather than a dps one (i think in the past i posted such kind of graph) a boost of this kind with make the "steps" of the "dmg stair" more pronunciated but without huge variation in global performance

the real thing that this kind of improvement can help is the dmg you deal before reload... as proj reload lower the dps quite a bit it is benefical to fire slower as it will indirectly boost the overall dps (expecially if they will look at the clip size too)

for example if in the old system you did 100dps and where forced to reload every 20s wasting 10s in the reload in a minute you will deal 4000dmg or 66 real dps... if instead you will be able to fire for 50s again for 100 dps and 10s reload in a minute you will deal 5k dmg so 83 real dps

still we dont know if their intent to keep same dps is just for the dmg/rof ratio or the real dps factoring reload... but even in the first case i doubt the dps boost will be enought to requalify arty as a viable weapon, maybe it will be close to rail dmg performance (if i remember right the way dmg scale before reload is quite similar) but rail have an huge range and tracking advantage over arty making it still quite inferior to this weapon system (and of course to lasers too that have huge dps advantage)

well i gue we will see when it will hit sisi and with real numbers, still atm i'm quite pessimistic as imo arty need a more "dramatic" ovehaul rather than some indirect dps from reload... hoping to be wrong ofc :P

Volir
Space Bushido
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:13:00 - [93]
 

Edited by: Volir on 23/09/2009 22:16:31
The entire ammo line should be revamped so that no two kinetic / explosive ammos are in the same ~range. Here is an example of what the ammo line should be (from near range to far):
Fusion (-50% range), Emp, Titanium Sabot, Phased Plasma, Nuclear (0% range), Depleted Uranium, Proton, Carb Lead (+60% range)

The current setup, for comparison, is:
Emp (-50%), Phased Plasma, Fusion, titanium Sabot, Depleted Uranium(0%), Proton, Nuclear, Carb lead (+60%)

Note how kinetic / explosive ammos are grouped together in the current setup, but separated under the proposed changes.

The actual damage numbers would have to be adjusted to fit the new ranges, but these changes would provide actual useful choices in ammo for both ACs and artillery. under the proposed ammo setup above, every engagement style would have an ammo useful against shields and against armor.

Kai Lae
Gallente
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:15:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: mazzilliu
what about range? the tempest and maelstrom are the worst ranged fleet snipers compared to all other races.

in fleet fights you hardly ever see minmatar ships. because even with maxed out range they cant touch what the other races can bring.


Which is a function of the fact that 42km of the 1400mm II's range is falloff, which cannot be increased. This means that a fleet tempest or maelstrom cannot reach the ranges that other fleet ships can. In comparison, a megathron with 425 II's has no difficulty being fit as a perfectly acceptable fleet sniping platform.

What maz is saying is something with definite merit though. Currently, standing orders from MM high command is for anyone with minmatar spec to cross train amarr and use an apoc in fleets instead, because you can't get a fleet BS of comparative effectiveness as a minmatar player. There are only 2 real solutions to this problem, either increase the optimal range of the 1400 so it's closer in performance to the 425 II, or make tracking computers modify falloff. The second is honestly the worst idea. This is because if a minmatar ship is having to shoot a fleet target in falloff at 185km, and a apoc is shooting in optimal, even if on paper the minmatar damage will be higher, in practice it will be lower because of the reduction in damage due to shooting in falloff. The result will be that amarr will still be far superior in this area even with the increases. The other reason is that I'm guessing someone will quickly get a 50km falloff vaga if that goes through - CCP should be careful that a change that is supposed to assist in one area does not result in imbalances developing in another.

Also, not only does arty need looking at, but it's a well known fact that large autocannons are simply horrible. The combination of these effects on top of each other makes minmatar BS rather poor even without going into the hull deficiencies of the ships (typhoon as an exception, mostly because it frequently isn't even armed with projectiles). Unless you address these issues as well you'll only be doing part of the job.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:19:00 - [95]
 

Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 23/09/2009 22:22:06
Originally by: Ath Amon
@Kagura
you did wrong tests if you got that results (expecially with values similar to eve ones), alpha of course gives some results when dps is very close, or can be a real factor vs very low dps ships but in eve 3-4 volleys are enought to lose its initial advantage and no fight is going to end in 3 volleys.

you can see how dmg build up with a cumulative dmg graph rather than a dps one (i think in the past i posted such kind of graph) a boost of this kind with make the "steps" of the "dmg stair" more pronunciated but without huge variation in global performance

the real thing that this kind of improvement can help is the dmg you deal before reload... as proj reload lower the dps quite a bit it is benefical to fire slower as it will indirectly boost the overall dps (expecially if they will look at the clip size too)

for example if in the old system you did 100dps and where forced to reload every 20s wasting 10s in the reload in a minute you will deal 4000dmg or 66 real dps... if instead you will be able to fire for 50s again for 100 dps and 10s reload in a minute you will deal 5k dmg so 83 real dps

still we dont know if their intent to keep same dps is just for the dmg/rof ratio or the real dps factoring reload... but even in the first case i doubt the dps boost will be enought to requalify arty as a viable weapon, maybe it will be close to rail dmg performance (if i remember right the way dmg scale before reload is quite similar) but rail have an huge range and tracking advantage over arty making it still quite inferior to this weapon system (and of course to lasers too that have huge dps advantage)

well i gue we will see when it will hit sisi and with real numbers, still atm i'm quite pessimistic as imo arty need a more "dramatic" ovehaul rather than some indirect dps from reload... hoping to be wrong ofc :P


The alpha increase is a good thing. It makes the critical mass of ships necessary to one volley another ship of the same class smaller, and increases the time windown advantage. I would have preferred a 100% increase, but 50% is a good beginning.

The ammo clip increase they proposed, in addition to the decreased rate at which ammo will be used will also help a lot.

It is true that in large engagement dps will still be more important, but maelstroms and tempests will be undoubtly better if the changes go through.

If they also change weapon tiers, as they hinted and increase the dps of 1400/720/280 as well as their optimal ranges a bit to make them worth their higher fitting requirements I dare say they will fix artillery for good.

Originally by: Kai Lae
The other reason is that I'm guessing someone will quickly get a 50km falloff vaga if that goes through


And so? A 50km falloff Vaga, which won't happen because of stack nerfing, still does less damage at any range than a zealot.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:19:00 - [96]
 

The artillery changes are good, as is the fact that you're looking at damage types and range.

Everyone knows a geddon with scorch does 850 dps at 45km while having a pretty beefy armor buffer tank. 10% more damage on phased plasma and 9% on EMP doesn't mean anything against that ship. Give me something that either nerfs that or gives minmatar to do something that can counter this, and I'll jump on board whole-heartedly.

We need a general rebalancing of all turrets, not just projectile weapons. These changes you propose, while good, will not come remotely close to giving minmatar the loving it really needs to be viable.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:26:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 23/09/2009 22:37:12
Originally by: isdisco3
The artillery changes are good, as is the fact that you're looking at damage types and range.

Everyone knows a geddon with scorch does 850 dps at 45km while having a pretty beefy armor buffer tank. 10% more damage on phased plasma and 9% on EMP doesn't mean anything against that ship. Give me something that either nerfs that or gives minmatar to do something that can counter this, and I'll jump on board whole-heartedly.

We need a general rebalancing of all turrets, not just projectile weapons. These changes you propose, while good, will not come remotely close to giving minmatar the loving it really needs to be viable.


If they increase falloff and damage in high-tier ACs, increase the Trajectory analysis bonus to 10%, increase the T1 low range ammo damage and give TE/TC/TLs a falloff bonus, then minmatar ships will be able to, at least at close range, best Amarr ships.

I don't know if it will happen, but one can dream...

Egorik O
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:41:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Egorik O
Wow!

-Liang


I kill NPC frig or destr in one shot. Any damage increase - overkill. Actually, not big deal for me. I fly Panther and can kill those lil guys with sentry drones.

BTW, Panther with short range ammo and sentries will have huge alfa( more than 10k). Enough to kill T1 cruiser of new player in one wolley, especially if it has its DC off after jump.
Plenty room for no-risk PVP: decloack - volley - warp out - cloack.
No-risk PVP - subject to nerf. So pretty soon we will see a "legion if loyal" whiners again.
No big alfa for short range ammo, please.

<<But Eve is a PVP game>>

That already was written in EULA or it's still ur fantasies.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:47:00 - [99]
 

Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 23/09/2009 22:48:58
Originally by: Egorik O
I kill NPC frig or destr in one shot. Any damage increase - overkill. Actually, not big deal for me. I fly Panther and can kill those lil guys with sentry drones.



Split your weapons...

Quote:

No-risk PVP - subject to nerf. So pretty soon we will see a "legion if loyal" whiners again.
No big alfa for short range ammo, please.

<<But Eve is a PVP game>>

That already was written in EULA or it's still ur fantasies



There is no such a thing as no-risk PVP. And in this case the risk is not even LOW. You want to use a 800M ISK ship with pitiful damage to TRY to pop cruisers in low sec. Very good luck to you. It WILL be tackled and die horribly and VERY soon.

Ath Amon
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:48:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 23/09/2009 22:22:06
Originally by: Ath Amon
@Kagura
you did wrong tests if you got that results (expecially with values similar to eve ones), alpha of course gives some results when dps is very close, or can be a real factor vs very low dps ships but in eve 3-4 volleys are enought to lose its initial advantage and no fight is going to end in 3 volleys.

you can see how dmg build up with a cumulative dmg graph rather than a dps one (i think in the past i posted such kind of graph) a boost of this kind with make the "steps" of the "dmg stair" more pronunciated but without huge variation in global performance

the real thing that this kind of improvement can help is the dmg you deal before reload... as proj reload lower the dps quite a bit it is benefical to fire slower as it will indirectly boost the overall dps (expecially if they will look at the clip size too)

for example if in the old system you did 100dps and where forced to reload every 20s wasting 10s in the reload in a minute you will deal 4000dmg or 66 real dps... if instead you will be able to fire for 50s again for 100 dps and 10s reload in a minute you will deal 5k dmg so 83 real dps

still we dont know if their intent to keep same dps is just for the dmg/rof ratio or the real dps factoring reload... but even in the first case i doubt the dps boost will be enought to requalify arty as a viable weapon, maybe it will be close to rail dmg performance (if i remember right the way dmg scale before reload is quite similar) but rail have an huge range and tracking advantage over arty making it still quite inferior to this weapon system (and of course to lasers too that have huge dps advantage)

well i gue we will see when it will hit sisi and with real numbers, still atm i'm quite pessimistic as imo arty need a more "dramatic" ovehaul rather than some indirect dps from reload... hoping to be wrong ofc :P


The alpha increase is a good thing. It makes the critical mass of ships necessary to one volley another ship of the same class smaller, and increases the time windown advantage. I would have preferred a 100% increase, but 50% is a good beginning.

The ammo clip increase they proposed, in addition to the decreased rate at which ammo will be used will also help a lot.

It is true that in large engagement dps will still be more important, but maelstroms and tempests will be undoubtly better if the changes go through.

If they also change weapon tiers, as they hinted and increase the dps of 1400/720/280 as well as their optimal ranges a bit to make them worth their higher fitting requirements I dare say they will fix artillery for good.



for AC i think that a "revision" of weapon tiers can help to fix them whitout big changes... for example there are not many reasons to fit 800mm over 650mm as they dont provide similar range gain of other turrets (main range for ac come from faloff that does not change in reguard of turret used) and have a minimal dps gain for way worse tracking and fitting req

but for arty ia not that 1400 is useless and 1200 is ok... both are bad, the gain from 1400 is actually more evident as the range gain is good, dps gain is meh, but is kinda the same for other turrets too.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:57:00 - [101]
 

Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 23/09/2009 22:59:09
Originally by: Ath Amon

for AC i think that a "revision" of weapon tiers can help to fix them whitout big changes... for example there are not many reasons to fit 800mm over 650mm as they dont provide similar range gain of other turrets (main range for ac come from faloff that does not change in reguard of turret used) and have a minimal dps gain for way worse tracking and fitting req

but for arty ia not that 1400 is useless and 1200 is ok... both are bad, the gain from 1400 is actually more evident as the range gain is good, dps gain is meh, but is kinda the same for other turrets too.


There is a 9.5% increase in damage from Mega Beams to Tachyons, against a 7.2% increase from 1200 to 1400 (less if you factor the ammo clip sizes).

Regarding range there is a 10% increase in range from Mega Beams to Tachyons and a 25% increase in falloff, against a 25% increase in range from 1200 (1200 range REALLY REALLY sucks, though) to 1400 and NO INCREASE IN FALLOFF.

Vitrael
Reaper Industries
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:07:00 - [102]
 

On the autocannon tiers:

Right now the tier two autocannons (150mm, 220mm, and Dual 650mm) have a 10% tracking advantage over their tier three counterparts (200mm, 425mm, and 800m). The tier three autocannons offer only a marginal increase in DPS (3% from memory). Additionally, the tier two autocannons are much, much easier to fit in all circumstances. Even where grid is not an issue, I typically go for the tier twos every time just for the poor returns for the large size. Personally I think for the cost of grid, tracking, and clip size the larger autocannons should have a significant DPS boost.

On projectile ammo:

I think your ideas on changing the damage profiles of the various ranges is awesome. Pleeeease do it! Very Happy

As for which ammunition "should" be the lowest-range, highest-damage choice, I see no reason to fix it cause it's not broken. I guess the argument could be made that fusion is the "most Minmatar" because it has the highest proportion of explosive damage, but I will always love EMP best. Just a personal preference.

On artillery:

Holy outrage batman. Please increase the ammo magazine of 280s, 720s and 1400s so they can hold more than 10 rounds of EMP or tremor. Otherwise, leveling out the actual charge sizes a bit might be nice. A rifter with 2 gyros and 280mm artillery firing EMP needs to reload once per minute, so in an extended fight it spends 1/7th of its time reloading. o.0 It's not much better for medium artillery.

<333 the Minmatar loving. I hope for a day when I can fly some kind of artillery Sleipnir pain-train of doom... make it so sir!

Egorik O
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:13:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 23/09/2009 22:48:58
Originally by: Egorik O
I kill NPC frig or destr in one shot. Any damage increase - overkill. Actually, not big deal for me. I fly Panther and can kill those lil guys with sentry drones.



Split your weapons...

Quote:

No-risk PVP - subject to nerf. So pretty soon we will see a "legion if loyal" whiners again.
No big alfa for short range ammo, please.

<<But Eve is a PVP game>>

That already was written in EULA or it's still ur fantasies



There is no such a thing as no-risk PVP. And in this case the risk is not even LOW. You want to use a 800M ISK ship with pitiful damage to TRY to pop cruisers in low sec. Very good luck to you. It WILL be tackled and die horribly and VERY soon.



It's alredy splited. I'm talking about one shot, not about one volley.

OrlY? You should really suck to be caught with such tactic.

Forge Lag
Jita Lag Preservation Fund
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:16:00 - [104]
 

Edited by: Forge Lag on 23/09/2009 23:31:54
Projectiles (and hybrids) need some defining feature. Some of the proposed changes just further homogenizes weapons.

Tracking to mid-range ammo while making it viable for ACs, contradicts current design of making kiting with artillery platforms inefficient, contradics currents design of larger ships having issues hitting smaller ones, invades beams territory, and also cements prevalence of mid-range combat. The idea is cool but not suitable for projectiles.

We already have three AC ammo types: Fusion, EMP, Phased Plasma. You can then make some more AC ammo with your tracking bonus but have to put range penalty there effectively prohibiting its use in arty (outside of NPCing).

You are then making too many ammo types considering you need to differentiate the damage mix in the first place. You should probably go the route of 4x AC 4x arty ammo, deliberately violating the range/dmg bands, with either one of each damage type or Exp, EM, Kin+The, 3way. That is original enough.

Still, consider some new definig feature of projectiles.

The no-cap pick damage idea does no qualify as while original in turret world is implemented better by missiles and drones already. Also T2 ammo does not share one or both of those supposed advantages. You need something different.

Say better overheating would support hit and run paradigm and could be made into cool new skill; it also makes sense that no cap wepons take overheating better. Some other crazier ideas are damaging enemy modules, damage bleeding, ignoring flat % of enemy resists, tweaking falloff curve.

Alpha is dangerous on small ships and borderline useless on large ones, same goes as fleet size scales up (past critical margin where your pirate camp just barely OH KOs loners). People want better aplha but I bet if you make artillery fire much faster and reload even slower (exact opposite), leading to by far best DPS amongs long range guns prior to reload while improving sustained DPS only slightly (arty does need that), they would be happy as the subjective damage would be high either way.

Edit: You can make high tier ACs fire much slower. Alpha is less prone to abuse on ACs than artillery. That way high tier ACs have some merit and the aplha preachers have their high alpha high magazine weapon, even one relevant in ganking.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:24:00 - [105]
 

This also in news:

Jesus Christ returns! Cubs win world series! And I'm happy. Wink

What they're doing seems very interesting. Doubling the ammo capacity is going to a LONG way toward fixing artillery DPS. And though yes, they will still hit for crap at 200KM, it seems like Alpha may actually mean something at mid-long ranges. (Tossing a falloff script into the mix could be interesting, however.)

Also, tracking ammo bonus = moar flavor™. I'd also second a Fusion, PP, EMP (with more EM and less explosive damage) lineup.

In my opinion this could be a great fix that doesn't make Projectiles FoTM. Thank you CCP, from the bottom of my rusting heart.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:24:00 - [106]
 

I see this as a big step forward for Minmatar, and one that nicely gives us a role without stepping onto the domains of the Gallente, Caldari, or Amarr realms. The alpha strike, while not direct DPS, definately allows us to act as a hammer for fleets. If coupled with ammo that gives a tracking bonus, we can use speed to our advantage once again.. and this too opens up options in a fleet as either hit-and-run teams, or as perimeter guards, or as the support mop-up crew.. as well as lending real damage to the target.. and all we would need to do is just change the ammo.

Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:32:00 - [107]
 

Finally some Minmatar love Very Happy Thanks Nozh!
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: CCP Nozh
After ship hitpoint adjustments, the alpha strike of artilleries isn't nearly as impressive as it was a while back. In our first iteration of these changes we've increased the damage modifier by 50%, along with the rate of fire.

I sincerely hope you are not planning on changing small artillery in this fashion. The Thrasher can already one volley 85+% of of all small targets (its primary victims), a 50% increase would allows 3-4 thrashers using just 1-2 volleys to down cruisers.

This is a good point. Also think about the Muninn.
Maybe a small increase, but 50% seems like an awful lot and might have bad side-effects.

That's why I proposed a different approach a while ago:

Fixing Alpha Strike
Alpha strike on artillery is pretty much ok, but it is insignificant at the moment, because ships have huge hp buffers.
If buffer tanks were a bit weaker, alpha strike would be a lot more effective. Possible changes to rigs (e.g. only one of each type) and maybe plates/shield extenders could go a long way in the right direction.
Note: ship base hp are not the problem. That's why alpha strike works in the frigate class. As soon as oversized plates and hp-increasing rigs come into play, it doesn't work.

Artillery
I'd say that due to the damage-decreasing effect of falloff the sum of optimal+falloff should be a bit higher on falloff-heavy weapon systems than on optimal-heavy weapon systems.
When you look at autocannons and blasters, it is that way.
However comparing 1400mm howitzers (108+44km) with 425mm rails (130+30km) shows, that the sum on 1400mm is lower.
I think it should be somewhere around 114+48km instead.
Doesn't look like much, but I think it would work well.

Tracking Computers
It's great to hear they're being looked at. Will you also look into the computer/enhancer balance?
I think having a passive module (tracking enhancer) that is more effective than the respective active module (tracking computer) kind of goes against the general design principle where almost all active modules are more effective than the passive versions.
The current 'balance' could be maintained by splitting the range bonus up into an optimal and a falloff bonus on both modules.
Like 7,5% optimal/7,5% falloff for Tracking Enhancers and 5% optimal/5% falloff for Tracking Computers.
Withoug script, enhancers would still be better than computers (range-wise), but with script, the tracking computer would give 10% optimal/10% falloff, while losing the tracking bonus.

Not sure about the tracking bonus for mid-range projectile ammo. Size reduction kinda seemed alright.
Cap usage is a disadvantage for lasers and hybrids. That disadvantage gets alleviated when using mid-range ammo.
Clip size is a disadvantage for projectile weapons. Reduced size alleviates that almost the same.
Reduced cap usage isn't a big incentive. As far as I know it's only an argument for missions.
Reduced ammo size isn't a big incentive, either. Only in missions.
So overall, it seems ok for me.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:58:00 - [108]
 

Minmatar are getting double bonused on the weapon clips currently:

- Smaller-sized ammo means more can fit in your cargo AND in the current clip (from what CCP Nozh seemed to say was that there was going to be additional bonus to their size on top of moving projectile ammo to be uniform with charges and crystals, but I could be wrong and it could be they might change the size bonus to a much more preferred tracking bonus).

- We are getting a 100% increase in clip size as well.


Harotak
Malicious Destruction
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:00:00 - [109]
 

Edited by: Harotak on 24/09/2009 00:05:50

It all sounds good to me Nozh.


While you are playing with ammo changes though, I would also like to see all T2 short-range ammo have its tracking penalty removed. The T2 stuff still has cap use or recharge penalties, so its still a reasonable tradeoff for the slightly better damage compared to faction ammo.

Also, Hail has both a 50% falloff and 50% optimal penalty while Conflag only has a 50% optimal reduction and Void has 50% less falloff and 25% less optimal. I would prefer to see Hail get only -50% to falloff and keep full optimal, while Void gets -25% to both optimal and falloff. To keep Amarr pilots from feeling left out you could also change Conflag to be 66-75% Thermal damage to give them a bit more versatility.

If you fix Hail, then there won't be a need to reorder projectile ammo to make Fusion the high-damage type since Hail will fill the EXP role.


Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Tracking Computers
It's great to hear they're being looked at. Will you also look into the computer/enhancer balance?
I think having a passive module (tracking enhancer) that is more effective than the respective active module (tracking computer) kind of goes against the general design principle where almost all active modules are more effective than the passive versions.




I think the idea would be to give the "optimal range" scripts both an optimal and falloff bonus, just like "optimal range disruption" disrupts both falloff and optimal. If thats not the plan then tracking disruptors need to be changed to not hit both optimal and falloff at the same time.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:03:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh
This interests me. We took a look at the over all damage type distribution, and it could do with some tweaking. How do people feel about the damage types the ammo is dishing out now?


I would like to see EMP be given more weight (~60%) to EM damage as the highest damage ammo, and keep PP/Fusion the way they are. Change Hail (and all other short range t2 ammo) to have it's tracking penalty reduced to 25% or gotten rid of entirely. This will give minmatar autocannons the flexibility to shoot all damage types as well as keep their exp/kin bias on T2 ammo.

I would also like to see minmatar ammo have falloff modifiers as well as optimal range modifiers. Pulse and Beam lasers both get range bonuses from using longer range ammo, but autocannons get jack all from longer range ammo.

P.S. Just reviewed the projectile ammo descriptions and this is fairly hilarious: "Titanium Sabot. This is among the most feared ammunition around." That's p. funneh.

Cadde
Gallente
221st Century Warfare
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:15:00 - [111]
 

Edited by: Cadde on 24/09/2009 00:21:32
Originally by: Gripen
*Stuff* ...
You can make ammo to select damage type only and range vs damage selection to be done via script on separate high slot module (all minmatar ships have "utility" high slots). Call it a "Range Controller" or something. Looks like a much better alternative to me.


THIS is why I'm crawling out from whatever corner i was hiding in.

It made me think of artillery as more of a "FLAK" cannon where you load your projectile (EM, THERM, EXP, KIN) and then you adjust the range (timer) on your shot. Making it a insta missile so to speak. This falls perfectly in line with Gallente/Amarr using the regular guns. And Caldari/Minmatar using missiles and flak/bursts respectively. (Apart from the fact some caldari use hybrids too but minnie use missiles too so no issue there)
Of course, if your hit is accurate enough then you will get a direct hit, if you pass your target close enough you get a proximity burst and if you miss completely you get your timed burst, which can be EXTREMELY effective to fend off targets you normally can't hit but you can get them with the space bursts!
One might wonder how optimal and falloff is handled in a situation like this... Well, easily enough, it remains just the same! Except instead of adjusting your max range you are adjusting where your round will burst, if you set it to max range then it would work just like normal apart from the moment where it bursts at optimal+falloff.
But won't this make projectiles overpowered given the damage they deal? Not if balanced correctly i would say but that is for YOU guys to discuss if you feel my 10 minute old idea is a good one, i simply haven't had time to think too much about the balance part here. But for the sake of starting it, what if the burst part of the shot was handled by missile skills, making it so they are handled the same way missiles are handled as they explode. The bonus to using projectiles is that you get a insta remote smartbomb. The downside would be their effectiveness since they don't carry the same payload that a missile does.
This change also makes it possible to set up a firewall to defend against oncoming tacklers or missile barrages but their effectiveness is only limited as the burst radius is rather small compared to smartbombs and missiles/torps.

---

So what about autocannons then you might ask?
The first thing that hits the top of my head is more like a shotgun. Instead of loading one shell you load several "pellets" that all burst at your desired range. This also opens up the possibility of using a multidamage shot where it would deal all kinds of damage at a reduced effect. Much like a multispectral ECM does against all racial sensor strengths.


Like i said, this is just a new idea that spawned out of the blue. In my eyes the projectiles would remain the same with the added bonus of the burst functionality at the cost of a broadened skillset (missiles, which minnie uses heavily anyways alongside their projectiles) and at a reduced damage output unless you make perfect or near perfect hits every time.
I can see it in front of me right now, the entire grid lighting up in an awesome display of firepower from all these space bursts happening around your enemies ships popping drones (yours too if you are not careful) and causing major havok.

Finally, would this work as a friend or foe weapon by chance? Giving minnie the equivalent of the FoF missiles. Would they even need 50/50 missile launchers and projectiles or would it be better with 5 projectiles and 1 missile slot where there where 3 projectile and 3 missile slots before?

I feel there is not much more to say without taking this into the next millennium so i will just cut it short here.
Thank you for reading!

EDIT: I called it fire and forget but i though about it and this is the true definition of friend or foe... Unlike the missiles that only kills "foes"

Gavin Darklighter
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:21:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: Harotak
While you are playing with ammo changes though, I would also like to see all T2 short-range ammo have its tracking penalty removed. The T2 stuff still has cap use or recharge penalties, so its still a reasonable tradeoff for the slightly better damage compared to faction ammo.

Also, Hail has both a 50% falloff and 50% optimal penalty while Conflag only has a 50% optimal reduction and Void has 50% less falloff and 25% less optimal. I would prefer to see Hail get only -50% to falloff and keep full optimal, while Void gets -25% to both optimal and falloff. To keep Amarr pilots from feeling left out you could also change Conflag to be 66-75% Thermal damage to give them a bit more versatility.

If you fix Hail, then there won't be a need to reorder projectile ammo to make Fusion the high-damage type since Hail will fill the EXP role.




This is badly needed TBH. T2 short-range ammo has become useless after the addition of a tracking penalty, the introduction of faction ammunition, and the nerfing of webs. I think Harotak's idea would be welcomed by pilots of all races. The only people that lose out are the noob-corp high-sec mission farmers that see a drop in faction ammo demand

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:28:00 - [113]
 

My thoughts -

I notice a lot of dps is lost due to constantly reloading.

Example

Rails - generally have bout 40 units of ammo per round
Artillary - 12-14 units of ammo.
Lasers - dont need to reload.

(not exact numbers but just giving an example)

Part of the solution shoudl come from being able to load more ammo into artillery, because as anyone who has ever played a fps knows, reloading kills.

Psyflame
North Eastern Swat
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:30:00 - [114]
 

Edited by: Psyflame on 24/09/2009 02:05:22
Awesome! Very glad this is being looked into. Four points I would like to touch on:

Range:
In fleet fights, artillery simply lack the required range.
Matar ships are often compared to 8x tachyon apocalypse to show the lack of balance.
Tachyons are NOT a valid comparison because of their massive fitting requirements over other weapon systems. To solve the range issue, what is the chance of introducing something like 1800mm artillery, with MASSIVE (in-line with Tachyons) fitting requirements?

More flavor - projectile ammo tiers:
There have been repeated statements of the intent to make the weapon systems different; to give them flavor. A long time ago there was a devblog mentioning ammo tiers for projectiles. Tier one would be Fusion, PP, EMP. Equal range and damage, but different damage TYPES. Tiers two and three would offer more range in exchange for damage reduction, but would still offer more flavor in damage types. This would definitely make projectiles unique.
Think we could run with this?

Boost to what size weapons?
I don't think there is any real issue with small projectiles. Small autocannons are so good that ships with a rocket bonus usually forgo their bonused weapons in favor of the higher-dps autos. Thrasher is generally considered the best destroyer for virtually any pvp situation and is hilariously good at what it does. Perhaps rebalance a few ships instead of the entire small proj platform?
Medium projectiles are iffy. Rupture is undeniably one of (if not the) best t1 cruisers. A significant boost to medium autocannons would make rupture quite overpowered. On the other hand, the hurricane can be a bit slim on their gank/tank ratio. Need to be very careful with medium projectile changes imo.
The only huge need for a boost has been to large projectiles. These have been substandard for quite some time. Over-boosting the small and medium classes may cause some serious balance issues.

Barrage L:
I realize you are changing the t1 ammo and am very happy about this, but Barrage L could use a SLIGHT damage buff to bring it in line. If you improve autocannon tracking (see: flavor) and give Barrage L a slight damage increase it should balance out the lower overall damage output.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2009.09.24 00:56:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Psyflame
Awesome! Very glad this is being looked into. Four points I would like to touch on:

Range:
In fleet fights, artillery simply lack the required range.
Matar ships are often compared to 8x tachyon apocalypse to show the lack of balance.
Tachyons are NOT a valid comparison because of their massive fitting requirements over other weapon systems. To solve the range issue, what is the chance of introducing something like 1800mm artillery, with MASSIVE (in-line with Tachyons) fitting requirements?



That works.

Although, with TCs/TEs boosting falloff, that is somewhat of a range boost - *maybe* it's enough to fire at range, depending on the falloff bonus numbers. Depends - if you get double the falloff with the typical amount of TEs/TCs for a sniper, it's extra ~40km to fire at with effect (taking that optimal+1/2 falloff is where you do reasonable damage) could be enough.

TEs/TCs boosting falloff helps arties significantly in general, since their range after range mods applied was always a good part of the issue with them.

The whole change as proposed doesn't really upset medium ACs/small ACs; they don't have to rely on Hail usage so much now to have competitive DPS, which is sort of good. While DPS/EHP numbers seem generally balanced around T2 ammo, other races got a penality-free card in faction ammo, while Minmatar pay a fairly steep price for using it at the moment.

Any DPS boosts together with this would have to apply on large guns only.

I'm a bit uncertain about the 50% more alpha for small/med arties, too.


Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:06:00 - [116]
 

Edited by: Roland Thorne on 24/09/2009 01:11:35
Originally by: Forge Lag
Edited by: Forge Lag on 23/09/2009 23:31:54
Edit: You can make high tier ACs fire much slower. Alpha is less prone to abuse on ACs than artillery. That way high tier ACs have some merit and the aplha preachers have their high alpha high magazine weapon, even one relevant in ganking.



I'm not really clear why you think this is true. I've heard before that projectiles have always been popular as a cap-less weapon to put on other racial ships - is this what you mean by abuse? If so, then I don't see any reason why autos could not be abused any more then arties could.

Also, could higher minmatar ship bonuses to counter-act perhaps a purposeful nerf (and no, I don't mean any more then they are now lol) to projectiles fix this from happening? I don't know for sure since I cannot read minds, but this seems to be an issue with ccp, and I might be wrong, but logic says it might be part of the reason we have not seen a boost to projectiles before now.

So here it is broken down: rebalance ammo like it should be and increase tracking across the board, BUT, instead of giving the percentage dps boost to the ammo, give it to the ship bonuses instead so minmatar only can enjoy the capless weapons at full strength. This will keep the weapon systems from being abused.

Edit: adding alpha to 200mm autos, 425mm, and 800mms would not be an unwelcome addition to me, just as long as its not too severe in regards to ROF.

Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Emptiness.
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:11:00 - [117]
 

Edited by: Kagura Nikon on 24/09/2009 01:13:45
Originally by: Ath Amon
@Kagura
you did wrong tests if you got that results (expecially with values similar to eve ones), alpha of course gives some results when dps is very close, or can be a real factor vs very low dps ships but in eve 3-4 volleys are enought to lose its initial advantage and no fight is going to end in 3 volleys.

you can see how dmg build up with a cumulative dmg graph rather than a dps one (i think in the past i posted such kind of graph) a boost of this kind with make the "steps" of the "dmg stair" more pronunciated but without huge variation in global performance

the real thing that this kind of improvement can help is the dmg you deal before reload... as proj reload lower the dps quite a bit it is benefical to fire slower as it will indirectly boost the overall dps (expecially if they will look at the clip size too)

for example if in the old system you did 100dps and where forced to reload every 20s wasting 10s in the reload in a minute you will deal 4000dmg or 66 real dps... if instead you will be able to fire for 50s again for 100 dps and 10s reload in a minute you will deal 5k dmg so 83 real dps

still we dont know if their intent to keep same dps is just for the dmg/rof ratio or the real dps factoring reload... but even in the first case i doubt the dps boost will be enought to requalify arty as a viable weapon, maybe it will be close to rail dmg performance (if i remember right the way dmg scale before reload is quite similar) but rail have an huge range and tracking advantage over arty making it still quite inferior to this weapon system (and of course to lasers too that have huge dps advantage)

well i gue we will see when it will hit sisi and with real numbers, still atm i'm quite pessimistic as imo arty need a more "dramatic" ovehaul rather than some indirect dps from reload... hoping to be wrong ofc :P



Nope i did no wrong tests. Several simmulations with open code for other people to analyse and find bugs. Arti alpha strike advantage for example from a maelstrom is only surpassed by a megatron after the 12th shot! (yes that does include the reload, although considers static targets (so no tracking involved) and at 150 km.

The alpha strike advantage is all the cummmulative damage from the first shot, that all guns deliver at same time regardless of their ROF. Yes eventually rails will outperform arties. But that is the price! Its flavor! Specially with these new changes the arti boats will be the MOST DAMAGING SNIPERS up to the 3rd minute of a fleet fight! And that is only 1 very simple situation...


Another level of bennefit is when the fleet size is small enough relative to HP of target that a set of rail boats and apocs cannot instantly pop them. That NOT GONNA happen at a 100 BS fight sure. But eve is not ONLY about those fights. Get a 20 man RR gang of battleships and engage them with 20 tempest with the new arties or 20 megatrons. The tempests will CHEW trough them MUCH more effectively! Because their combined volley can trespass damage into hull EVEN if the combined RR power of the enemy gang is LARGER than the dps of your fleet! If there are too many enemies repairing then their cycles wil spread enough that I would need an EVEN LARGER alpha strike to kill the ship. That is simple undeniable discrete simulation of system where a feeder may overflow a consumer EVEN when a consumer has a maximum troughput superior to the feeder troughput. Its a classical problem of Queues theories and a very well studied field of simulations.

To summarize a the sum of 2 continuous functions f(x) and g(x) is DIFFERENT from the sum of 2 discrete functions, even if their limits at x -> n is EQUAL! The equality only arises when the step s of the discrete functions tends to zero.

THAT is the main power of alpha strike! How many times I killed a drake even with my DPS being LOWER than his peak recharge.. simply because a large alpha strike ALLOWS for that!

Mona X
Caldari
Missions Mining and Mayhem
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:20:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Gripen
Homogenization once again. It doesn't look like this ammo rebalance will change much (if you want to boost damage - increase the damage modifier) but it will take away one small flavour of projectiles.

Alpha strike increase is a very bad for gameplay. No one enjoys being insta-killed. There are other, better ways to boost projectiles and make them different from other turret-type weapons.

I like what Abrazzar suggests:

You can make ammo to select damage type only and range vs damage selection to be done via script on separate high slot module (all minmatar ships have "utility" high slots). Call it a "Range Controller" or something. Looks like a much better alternative to me.


Looks like short/long range in one package insta-damaging missiles to me.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:34:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Arti alpha strike advantage for example from a maelstrom is only surpassed by a megatron after the 12th shot! (yes that does include the reload, although considers static targets (so no tracking involved) and at 150 km.


You are right on your conclusions about the benefits of high alpha, but this statement I quote is false. That is how it works:

- Artillery starts ahead because of high alpha in the first volley
- Rails catch on on its second volley, because artillery is still in cooldown
- Artillery catches on on its second volley
- Rails catch on on the third volley

until the 12th rail volley, when artillery cannot catch on anymore.

Basically as it is now artillery has diminishing windows of higher damage between volleys and is left behind at the 12th.

Increasing the alpha strike won't change the end result after a lot of volleys, but it will widen these windows though, making it easier to benefit from them.

Spaztick
Terminal Impact
Kairakau
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:42:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Rayokashi
- trajectory analysis bonus upto 7,5% per skill level
I rather like this idea. It's a good way to increase total damage slightly on ACs and give more range to artillery, while justifying the insultingly long training time for it.


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (90)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only