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

Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Emptiness.
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:46:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: Etho Demerzel
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.



In fact will widen a bit because we will have to reload with less frequency. But except from that it sliek you say. Widening the window increases the envelope of engagements where arties can excel. BTW the 12th is the number I remember by memory.. might be maelstrom not tempest. NEed to check tomorrow at work.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2009.09.24 02:16:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: Spaztick
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.


An increase of 12.5% for the level 5 skill is good but still insufficient. This skill should be 10% per level at the very least, considering its high rank and low effectiveness compared to Sharpshooting.

bloodlust priest
Posted - 2009.09.24 03:12:00 - [123]
 

give ac's an optimal between blasters and pulses, 17km base optimal for l ac's would be good, keep falloff the same and make tracking enhancers not just computers help falloff

jamaican herbs
Posted - 2009.09.24 03:35:00 - [124]
 

How about implementing clips for projectiles? Clips would have to be pre-reloaded in station/pos but you could fill your clip with any proj ammo type and giving it ability to change ammo type faster, in the middle of battle.

Of course you could use the ammo without clips but it would be like now, only one ammo type at a time. There could be bonuses/reductions for using clips.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:04:00 - [125]
 

Edited by: isdisco3 on 24/09/2009 04:17:44
There was a good 10-15 page thread on how to rebalance weapons systems a while back, right before nozh stopped posting because everything he posted was trolled and ridiculed because the ideas were almost completely terrible. The thread seems to have been ignored, but there were many many fantastic ideas in it.

Basic consensus of the thread was to create a new balancing system in which damage decreased with range. Blasters would pwn all at less than 5-7 km, ac's would pwn all between 7-20km, and pulses would pwn all beyond that. Torps would be somewhere in the middle.

The thing that we must remember when we look at projectiles is RANGE VS DAMAGE. That is the critical component. If a geddon can do 850 dps at 45 km with scorch, that should be our guideline. We either nerf that or we make other systems be better than the geddon at specific swaths of range.

Here's how it is, using short-range weapons and long-range ammo:
(race, damage # out of 4 races. 1 is highest damage, 4 is lowest damage. 1 is highest range, 4 is worst range)
gallente 1 4
amarr 2 1
minmatar 3 3
caldari 4 2

Here's how it should be:
gallente 1 4
amarr 2 3
minmtar 3 2
caldari 4 1

We need a rebalancing of all weapons systems to meet this. Dabbling at projectile turrets does nothing.

Don Pellegrino
Pod Liberation Authority
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:09:00 - [126]
 

Good idea on the projectiles, Nozh, it's great to see you're rebalancing the weapons intelligently :)

However, I am really disappointed to hear about projectile fixes before blaster fixes.
Blasters don't do much more damage than pulse lasers, have 5 to 8 times less range and worse tracking.
The tracking has been bugging me since I started playing this game.
Why does a VERY close ranged weapon have worse tracking than a medium ranged one?
It makes no sense and blasters just end up doing less damage than pulse lasers because of poor tracking (don't forget about the 3k effective range with medium blasters).

Nozh, all the Gallente pilots are holding their breath.
They have been waiting since the speed nerf that broke their blasters.

If (I can't find any reason why, but...) you're not going to change blasters, it would be great to know why you consider them to be fine compared to other guns.

Thanks alot!

Slayton Ford
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:15:00 - [127]
 

Whats about the missing Duel 720 artillary? Both Beams and Rails have a low end duel turret yet Arty does not.

isdisco3
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:21:00 - [128]
 

Found the link:

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1080158&page=1

Read that thread from start to finish Nozh. You'll have all the feedback you want and a lot of answers from the community too.

Captain Narmio
Blue Republic
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:25:00 - [129]
 

That CCP is addressing Minmatar's gradual slide into obscurity over the last few years is excellent news. Hooray for not being the race of "The Vagabond, Rifter, Hurricane, Sleipnir, Typhoon and a bunch of terrible stuff we don't talk about."

A few thoughts:

* Trajectory Analysis increase to 7.5% or 10% would be an excellent idea and also benefit blaster pilots a little.
* TCs/TEs could definitely improve falloff - but on TCs it would have to be added to the +optimal script rather than a separate +falloff script, or it would be useless for artillery. This would give Maelstrom/Tempest fleet fits that extra +10-20km effective range they *sorely* need.
* Perhaps the alpha increase could be 25% for small arties, 50% for medium arties and 75% for large? I don't think anyone disagrees that the place Minmatar most need love is in the Battleships arena. And people have mentioned the already vicious alpha on the Thrasher.
* The tracking of large artillery is absurdly bad. 1200mms have 80% of the tracking of Tachyon Beams at much shorter ranges and lower damages. And in fleet fights 1400mms with Tremor lose significant DPS due to their battleship targets at 150km+ just being aligned. This shouldn't be changed across the board, or the Thrasher and Muninn will dominate vs frigs, but a small tweak to large artillery should be looked at.
* On the subject of ammo, there was a dev blog a very long time ago about completely reworking projectile ammo types into three range brackets with three different damage types in each. Perhaps that could be revisited?

AbudSeab
Posted - 2009.09.24 05:32:00 - [130]
 

Why do we need all those range options?

having options so close like 0.5 and 0.625 just makes no influence on mental computations. So options will go to extremes for pvp or will be most based on damage type for pve.

Could be a short 0.5 medium 0.9 and long range 1.6 with 3 damage combination for each for example. Don't need to be exactly this way, maybe 4 damage combination for medium range and less for long and short would be nice to.

Three tier ammo sound an nice idea someone said in this thread. This way pvpers have more options for short range and pvers have better options balanced options against factions.

Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.09.24 05:54:00 - [131]
 

Plz dont say that you gonna make tracking penalty/bonus distribution just like cap use penalty/bonus for crystals/hybrids. (multifreq->standart->radio == most cap use->least->sligtly less than multi)

That kind of distribution will literally kill close range ships and muninn

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:06:00 - [132]
 

Edited by: Typhado3 on 24/09/2009 06:21:00
Very nice start but needs more than this. Glad to see you are trying for racial balance rather than nerfing everything to be the same.

1. Arty Tracking: we have lowest range, fastest ships and our primary targets are small ships... all of this suggest we should have high tracking but instead we get the worst tracking of all long range weapons.

2. 1600mm arty: whatever u call it we need a 3rd tier artillery, with this plus the tracking computers and falloff fix minmatar will be acceptable in fleets again.

3. You still need to look at our ships. The Maelstrom doesn't feel like a minmatar ship, it's got no speed, doesn't focus on alpha, zero flexibility/utility.... feels like a amarr ship with projectiles and shield. WE NEED A WAY TO FOCUS ALPHA. There isn't a ship that really feels like a true alpha beast in our race (aside from thrasher) nor is there a way for us to focus alpha over dps, Something like letting gyro's be scripted for rof or dmg would make us able to actually focus on our specialities (I know this wouldn't work because of stacking formula).


Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:07:00 - [133]
 

Please don't take away our EMP. Reloading takes 10 seconds which is forever in PVP, we need that ammo good for many situations.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:28:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: Dibsi Dei
Please don't take away our EMP. Reloading takes 10 seconds which is forever in PVP, we need that ammo good for many situations.


Mmm... using EMP in PVP means that half your damage is hitting each layers highest resists, and half on its lowest resists. While this sounds good on paper, people only tank one layer at a time and ignore the other.

Which means you're better off using Fusion or, if they change it, a more EM focused version of EMP. As it is now, EMP is pretty bad in practical terms and doesn't stand up to the idea of damage selection.

Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:48:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Seriously Bored
Originally by: Dibsi Dei
Please don't take away our EMP. Reloading takes 10 seconds which is forever in PVP, we need that ammo good for many situations.


Mmm... using EMP in PVP means that half your damage is hitting each layers highest resists, and half on its lowest resists. While this sounds good on paper, people only tank one layer at a time and ignore the other.

Which means you're better off using Fusion or, if they change it, a more EM focused version of EMP. As it is now, EMP is pretty bad in practical terms and doesn't stand up to the idea of damage selection.

EMP is good against all not-armor-tanking-bs, t2 caldari and t2 gallente. PP for t2 amarr. Barrage and fusion for the rest. I like minmatar ammo.

Blazde
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:22:00 - [136]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh
Oh, and also Tracking Computers. We're looking at some falloff love.

This is a good idea.


I'm sceptical how much of a big deal high alpha strike is in most common situations (while certainly useful in specialised circumstances ie. any short long-range engagement). If you look at big fleet battles you tend to find Matari BS pilots aren't ranked any lower (damage wise) on individual killmails but they tend to appear on fewer killmails, because their slow rof prevents them firing on some of the primaries. The high alpha srike is almost masking their low dps. (I wish I had harder figures on this - maybe I'll try to churn some stats out of our kb database at some point).

The reason they have low dps is not directly due to the projectiles but battleship fitting. To match the range and tank of other race's battleships you sacrafice damage mods. The reason for that is low range of projectiles but also that none of the Minmatar battleships really suit fleet fits. The Tempest is hard to get tank on compared to bships that are more clearly armour or shield. The Maelstrom lacks the double-damage bonus that all the best Matari ships need to make up for the low inherent dps of proj and instead gets the shield booster bonus that has no use in fleet battles. Infact the Maelstrom and a 1400mm fitted Abaddon perform very similarly for common styles of fleet fitting. If you want more tank the Abaddon is better, if you want more damage the Maelstrom. They're both wastng one bonus.

The Maelstrom shield boost bonus is quite fun for small-scale combat but maybe it should be exchanged for a decent fall-off bonus which would still leave it useful in autocannon mode. Kinda similar to when the Apoc got it's optimal bonus and became awesome for fleet work.

In other ship classes the Muninn, Hurricane, hell even the Naglfar now, the Trasher ^^ etc.. have no problems competing when projectile fitted.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:27:00 - [137]
 

Edited by: Seriously Bored on 24/09/2009 07:43:10
Originally by: Dibsi Dei

EMP is good against all not-armor-tanking-bs, t2 caldari and t2 gallente. PP for t2 amarr. Barrage and fusion for the rest. I like minmatar ammo.


Non-armor tanking BS...so, the Raven, Rokh, and Maelstrom? If EMP drops to current Phased Plasma damage levels, but has a much higher % of EM damage, it would be more effective against shield tanked targets.

You have a good point about Caldari and Gallente, but their base resists are 0%/50% EM and 50%/10% Explosive. Provided Fusion becomes the highest damage type, and matches the other highest damage ammo, it would still be better than EMP currently is against them.

Anyway, even if the damage type order stays the same I'll be happy! Can't wait to see the changes on Sisi. (Provided macs get access again. That working yet?)

EDIT!:

Originally by: Blazde
The reason they have low dps is not directly due to the projectiles but battleship fitting


This is only partly correct. Even if all ships fit the same number of damage mods, Artillery never peaks above the damage curves of other weapon types, even without figuring in reload times, which were the major crippling factor in Artillery DPS. Compound that with the fact that it's harder to make projectiles shoot far, and you end up with even more underwhelming results.

Quote:
The Maelstrom shield boost bonus is quite fun for small-scale combat but maybe it should be exchanged for a decent fall-off bonus which would still leave it useful in autocannon mode. Kinda similar to when the Apoc got it's optimal bonus and became awesome for fleet work.


As interesting as this would be, I think it sort of defeats the purpose of the Maelstrom as a tier 3 ship. It's supposed to tank like all the others, and does it quite well outside of a fleet.

In any case, I feel like now that we're getting a bit of attention, we're using this thread as a sort of Minmatar wishlist and we shouldn't. Let's stick with fixing ammo, which is the point of this thread. I can't wait to see what the final results will be. Very Happy

Edmund Khan
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:54:00 - [138]
 

\o/

Much sympathy for these changes!
But while you're at it, take a look at Quake ammo. Since the release of faction ammo it's kind of useless. Specially with those 4 penalties that you get when using it. That's a bit to much.

While writing this, I realise all T2 high dmg ammo could use some love.

Arkady Sadik
Minmatar
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:57:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: Arkady Sadik
Fusion (12 total, 9 ex, 3 th)
EMP (11 total, 8 em, 3 ki)
Phased Plasma (10 total, 8 th, 2 ex)
Titanium Sabot (9 total, 7 ki, 2 em)
Depleted Uranium (8 total, 6 ex, 2 th)
Proton (7 total, 5 em, 2 ki)
Nuclear (6 total, 5 th, 1 ex)
Carbonized Lead (5 total, 4 ki, 1 em)


I found the time to look at some numbers here.

One of the more interesting numbers regarding projectiles is "rounds till death" - how many rounds of a given projectile ammo do I have to apply to someone before he dies? This is relevant especially as preferred damage types vary between shields (EM>TH>KI>EX), armor (EX>KI>TH>EM), and structure (raw damage > all).

Armageddon
Fairly standard pulse fit, 2x plate, 2x ANP II, DCU II, trimarks.

6836 shield, 12.5/30/47.5/56.3 shield resists
28594 armor, 71.4/62.8/57.1/54.2 armor resists
7764 structure, 60% structure resists

Old:
- EMP needs 9657.85 rounds to kill this
- Fusion 9768.05 rounds
- Then PP, then ****

I.e. the higher base damage of EMP, the added exp damage type, combined with EMP being much better against shields and no damage type advantage on structure make EMP a better ammo type to use against the Geddon than Fusion. (This changes somewhat when others are firing on the same ship)

With the new numbers I gave:

- Fusion needs 8209.56 rounds (-19% vs. old fusion, -18% vs. old EMP - nice boost)
- EMP needs 10560 rounds (+9%, expected with EM damage)
- PP needs 10343.78 (-1%)

So vs. a very typical armor tanker, the new damage types say "use Fusion" - good!

Raven

For a shield tanker, a typical torp raven setup (LSE II, 2x invul II,PDU II, DCU II, 3x cdfe).

20211 shield, 56.7/63.8/72.8/77.4 shield resists
8301 armor, 57.5/53.2/36.3/23.5 armor resists
8301 structure, 60% structure resists

Old:
- EMP needs 8765.74 rounds; again, EM damage + high base damage wins out here
- PP needs 9604.79 rounds
- Fusion needs 11791.03 rounds

This is actually expected: EM damage type wins out against a shield tanker.

The new numbers I gave give:

- EMP needs 9171.77 rounds
- Fusion needs 9208.71 rounds
- PP needs 9685.94 rounds

EMP uses 7% less rounds, again a small boost. Fusion is much more viable than before due to the higher base damage.

Absolution
Passive fit, 800mm plate, DCU II, EANM II, thermic hardener II, 2x trimark.

4204 shield, 12.5/30/67.2/83.6 shield resists
11415 armor, 76.1/85.4/77.6/85.7 armor resists
5405 structure, 60% structure resists

Old:
- EMP needs 7121.14 rounds. Despite doing half exp, it's still the best ammo type here.
- PP needs 9086.98 rounds
- Titanium Sabot needs 9648.57 rounds

With my new numbers above:
- EMP needs 6172.53 rounds, 15% less due to more EM damage.
- PP needs 9911.18 rounds, 8% more
- Titanium Sabot needs 8119.62, 19% less, but still more than EMP

Baaltazar
Beach Boys
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 08:11:00 - [140]
 

Edited by: Baaltazar on 24/09/2009 08:12:19
I fly both laser and projectiles boats and yes laser have bigger dps but for a love of god dose anyone remember here and in CCP. power grid and cap issues. I don't know about blaster but laser/projectiles today is OK. artis/AC have slightly lesser dps but don't use any cap and take much less PG So it's OK. And game itself show that this is good balance: when we go for a small roam we take vaga when we go for snip HAC gang we take zelot (and munnin is not relay worse, got less DPS but bigger alpha). So why any change? TBH blaster could use some buff.

Ath Amon
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:05:00 - [141]
 

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

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.


ehm this is kinda a flawed test because you are comparing a ship with 8 guns + 1 dmg bonus vs a ship with 7 guns + 1 dmg bonus

you are getting the performance of these 2 ships not of arty vs rails, compare vs an hype for example and you will get a more realistic figure of arty alpha effectiveness.

and for the RR example... is quite unlikelly that such gangs will ever meet... i dont see many RR arty/rail gangs... but still imo the megas will win, their volley dmg will still be enought to pop the pests maybe not in 1 volley but 2 will be mostly enought, not to say that with the crappy range of arty they are probably going to use more damaging ammos

not to say that a pest will have tons of troubles be able to fit 1400mm and large remote reppers also, after the initial few volleys, you will start to have ships firing at different timers lowering their alpha (or their overall dps if you tel them to stop firing awaiting the others to recharge) and if they will fight in faloff they will also miss, lowering their alpha

truth is that various coalitions ask their pest pilots to train amarr or gall and in most small fleet situations you dont see arty on the field

an alpha boost, not supported by improvements in some of the main areas (dps/tracking/range) will be useless, you will get higher numbers but the general performance will be mostly the same...

is useless to have big alpha if then 20% of your guns miss because you fight in faloff or due to bad tracking, is useless if you the dmg you build with few volleys is not enought to overcome the buffer tank of your opponent.

alpha was good when you where able to fit 6 gyros on a pest and hit whitout tracking problems but that days are long gone

Dominik Flandry
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:10:00 - [142]
 

Sheesh!
Guys, don't you think you're trying to cure a healthy leg? Don't fix things that is not broken!

You better do finally adjust missile/torpedo flight time, say, 5x times faster (<irony>fit an MWD to charges?</irony>), to make it at least USEFULL in long range PvP.

Or add a flight time for projectiles, so they doesn't cross 250 kilometers range in 0.01 second. For your notice: 250 KM is a range from London to Manchester, or Washington DC to New-York. To say "this is unreal" is to say nothing in this matter. Even radio-waves takes more time to reach that!!

Dibsi Dei
Salamyhkaisten kilta
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:11:00 - [143]
 

CCP don't fusion in front of EMP. There is already barrage and hail if we want to do explosive. Cool

If you have to put fusion to do top damage we need a great reduce in reloading times.

Actually the latter would be great, 10 second reload is just too much when lasers can switch range instantly.

Hrodgar Ortal
Minmatar
Ma'adim Logistics
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:12:00 - [144]
 

Edited by: Hrodgar Ortal on 24/09/2009 09:12:55
Originally by: Arkady Sadik


Stuff (sorry for cutting but just too much to have in a quote)



Did you take into account the different damagetypes efficiency against shields and armour?
For example EM damage had a coefficient of 1 against shields but only 0.4 against armour while EXP has 0.4 against shields and 0.9 against armour.
So the more armour you pile on a ship the better EXP should become.

Andreya
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.09.24 10:14:00 - [145]
 

Re: artillery
when you think 'artillery', you think of huge cannons with poor aim, long range, HUGE damage, slow rate of fire.

what im proposing (play with the numbers as you see fit)
increase artillery range by X% (X being what you guys figure is acceptable im hinting around 20%)
REDUCE artillery tracking by X% (X being the same as above, therefore balancing it)
increase damage by 50% or 100%
increase ROF by 50% or 100% (same DPS, but moar alpha!!!)

this would make minmatar arty platforms shoot farther, with more difficulty hitting targets, with a increase to alpha with the overall damage being the same.

(I wouldnt mind a 5% buff to overall dps, but i wouldnt wanna ask for too much ;)
cheers!

Abrazzar
Posted - 2009.09.24 10:27:00 - [146]
 

Edited by: Abrazzar on 24/09/2009 10:29:35
About the reloading issue: Give the Controlled Burst skill a bonus to projectile weapon ammo capacity or maybe even a reduction in reloading time if possible. Currently Projectile Weapons do not benefit from this skill and adding a bonus like that would address two things in one go.


Edit: And I am in favor of boosting 1400mm artillery to be on par with tachyons and add a smaller artillery for more medium ranges and better tracking. Something like a Quad 720mm Siege Artillery Battery would be nice. Very Happy

Andreya
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.09.24 10:32:00 - [147]
 

o yea, and im quite happy with autocannons, however a small buff would be appreciated, as they are a little behind the times :)
and thank you ccp for listening to our whines :)




(p.s. can we speed up interdictors a bit :D they used to be the most fun ship in eve :P yet i havent flown one since the 25% speed nerf BEFORE the speed nerf :P)

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2009.09.24 10:33:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Andreya
Re: artillery
when you think 'artillery', you think of huge cannons with poor aim, long range, HUGE damage, slow rate of fire.

what im proposing (play with the numbers as you see fit)
increase artillery range by X% (X being what you guys figure is acceptable im hinting around 20%)
REDUCE artillery tracking by X% (X being the same as above, therefore balancing it)
increase damage by 50% or 100%
increase ROF by 50% or 100% (same DPS, but moar alpha!!!)

this would make minmatar arty platforms shoot farther, with more difficulty hitting targets, with a increase to alpha with the overall damage being the same.

(I wouldnt mind a 5% buff to overall dps, but i wouldnt wanna ask for too much ;)
cheers!



When I think of "1400mm fusion warhead" I think of instakill, but that's not game balance.

Artillery already has very craptastic tracking (the worst, in fact). If you consider that it's a also comparatively a shorter range weapon system, it already scores more poorly then anything at tracking at range considerations. I more often find myself lacking tracking then range when using smaller then large artillery.

They're already boosting alpha by 50% (which gives artilleries something it does better then other guns) and they're making TCs/TEs add falloff (which extends its useful range when fitting range mods to be somewhat more competitive).

Imo, together with faction ammo boost, it makes artillery rather fine.

The proposed changes are nice - but not excessive - from both a AC and arty standpoint.

xOmGx
Gallente
A-Priori
Red Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 11:00:00 - [149]
 

Edited by: xOmGx on 24/09/2009 11:01:06
Please DON't Chnage anything

Minmatar are overpowered now don't make them uber

You should give minmatar Projectile weapon some Capacitor usage to make thing's fair - No cap - no shooting

ArmyOfMe
Hysera.
Posted - 2009.09.24 11:05:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: Baaltazar
I don't know about blaster but laser/projectiles today is OK. artis/AC have slightly lesser dps but don't use any cap and take much less PG So it's OK.

slightly???????
what game are you actually playing? or did you just look at the dps at the ac's optimal range? cause if so then yes, ac wouldnt look so bad.
but how many ac ships do you see that stays in optimal?
if you want to compare projectiles and lasers then do compare their dps at ranges, check and compare dps at 5, 10 and 20km, hell even compare them at 40km and you will start to see a pattern emerging


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