open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Summit Topic: Ship Balance
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 (13)

Author Topic

Awesome Possum
Original Sin.
Posted - 2011.04.20 16:37:00 - [61]

Originally by: Vile rat
Originally by: Marconus Orion
I detest that the following statement is true in this game:

"Why fly a,b,c when x,y,z exists?"

That applies to so many ships right now. So many that are simply inferior to other ships so they see no use at all. Granted you could name any ship and there will be some die hard out there who had some mild success with it once out of a hundred times and swears by it but lets be realistic here.

You know I love this post. I agree. I hate that whole classes of ships end up obsoleted because some other class does it better. Dreadnoughts I'm looking at you!

Keep the ideas coming guys. Don't worry about interpreting the thread too much, just post all your hair brained ideas on how to fix things and things you got a gripe with.

There will ALWAYS be a ship class that does X better than any other classes.

The only solution to this is to pull a Blizzard and nerf the **** out of a,b,c classes once every few months so that x,y,z classes are the new top dog.

Its a ******ed way to run a game and I won't support it.

KillJoy Tseng
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc
Posted - 2011.04.20 18:25:00 - [62]

Originally by: Awesome Possum

There will ALWAYS be a ship class that does X better than any other classes.

The only solution to this is to pull a Blizzard and nerf the **** out of a,b,c classes once every few months so that x,y,z classes are the new top dog.

Its a ******ed way to run a game and I won't support it.

Sure there'll always be a ship class that does X better than any other class, and that's good and proper. The problem is the classes, or ships within a class, that either don't do ANY role better than other classes (or ships within their class) or do EVERY role better. Not going to bother with indepth examples as, well, see the last few pages... but I don't really want to play Drakes vs. Abaddons (with occasional SC drops) online.

Sarina Rhoda
Posted - 2011.04.20 18:32:00 - [63]

strong emphasis needs to be placed on the issue of power creep. IMO nerfing > buffing however both are needed to create balance.

Ships that need to be nerfed imo :-

Dramiel - has rendered alot of frigates obsolete. It excels in too many roles. ONE of the following needs to be picked get rid of drone bay/ reduce speed / reduce pg to get rid of ability to dual prop + MSE.

Supercariers - not entirely sure what needs to be fixed but in their current form they make regular caps obsolete.

tier 2 bcs - IMO although they are very balenced against themselves they are op in comparision to tier 1 bs, all t1 cruisers and tier 1 bcs. They need either a dps nerf or a ehp reduction.

Mechanics that need changing :-

IMO the whole ecm jamming mechanic needs changing. It is not OP at all its just very simply unfun, its a mechanic that really makes pvp not worth while.

Ships that need buffing:-

Black ops - I think they are actually quite ok as they are. The main issue with them is the fuel bay as they don't even have a big enough fuel bay to jump a proper recon fleet to their max jump range. I would recommend either increasing fuel bay by a factor of 5 or massively reducing the amount of fuel required to jump and bridge.

t1 destroyers - with the introduction with the noctis they serve no purpose. Need reduction to signature and speed increase to give them more survivability against cruiser sized hulls and greater.

Merrik Talorra
Northstar Cabal
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.04.20 18:53:00 - [64]

Originally by: Sarina Rhoda
Ships that need buffing:-

Black ops - I think they are actually quite ok as they are. The main issue with them is the fuel bay as they don't even have a big enough fuel bay to jump a proper recon fleet to their max jump range. I would recommend either increasing fuel bay by a factor of 5 or massively reducing the amount of fuel required to jump and bridge.

The other black ops suggestions + this one are a good place to start on rebalancing their lineup.

If they're going to be just a mobile jump bridge/logistics boat like so many enjoy pointing out, then make them at least decent at it. A larger fuel bay, smaller fuel requirements for bridging and jumps, longer jump range and perhaps the ability to refit their covert ops gang in the field? Maybe a larger cargo bay to carry ammunition for bombers and recons?

And T2 resists. The cost and training requirements for these things are immense - please bring the performance of the ship in line with what it takes to get in one.

The Konvergent League
Shades of Gray
Posted - 2011.04.20 20:18:00 - [65]

There was a post a while ago about changing the skill bonus on freighters from a maximum velocity bonus to an agility bonus that I thought was a good idea and seemed to have a lot of support. Please see:

Posted - 2011.04.21 03:29:00 - [66]

Originally by: Mr DurkaDur
Edited by: Mr DurkaDur on 19/04/2011 00:42:17
For me the first thing I can think of as far as ships, is the dreads, I remember when I joined EVE and was like "Whoa, dreads are fawesome!" then I found out that they are basically big fat battleships that move 3x slower, have horrible damage against other capitals, can pretty much only shot stationary structures (rly?), only have 3 XL turrets, and not to mention the 10 minutes it takes to make your guns look all fancy.

They need some serious buffing, my personal, uneducated, and ignorant idea that will no doubt get trolol'd. Is to simply give the dreads more turrets. When I say this, I am thinking of the Star Wars, Star Destroyers, like 30 large, 20 medium and 10 small (and proper missile upgrades to the Caldari) all active at once.

Just my opinion, or whatever.

Capitol ships should have things like this. Battleships even. But the game is not ballanvced though and is too big to even get into something like that. I like your idea though/

Posted - 2011.04.21 03:53:00 - [67]

Originally by: Kyang Tia
Edited by: Kyang Tia on 19/04/2011 12:01:25
Edited by: Kyang Tia on 19/04/2011 11:58:56

4) Angel cartel ships, while expensive and difficult to fly, are a bit too strong. When you fight one, you either die or the enemy can run away, unless he makes a crucial mistake.

5) Destroyers and intedictors. Generally the minmatar ships are the only good ones in this class. The others need to be put in line.

6) The Arazu and Lachesis need some kind of improvement to their EW bonuses, so as to make sensor dampeners viable to use. //edit: Forgot about the Keres, Maulus and Celestis. Same applies for those.

So, basically, just what Marconus Orion said. Every ship should be resonable to use in some situation. There sould be no such thing as a useless ship.


I agree

Posted - 2011.04.21 04:52:00 - [68]

Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Vile rat
Originally by: Marconus Orion
I detest that the following statement is true in this game:

"Why fly a,b,c when x,y,z exists?"

That applies to so many ships right now. So many that are simply inferior to other ships so they see no use at all. Granted you could name any ship and there will be some die hard out there who had some mild success with it once out of a hundred times and swears by it but lets be realistic here.

You know I love this post. I agree. I hate that whole classes of ships end up obsoleted because some other class does it better. Dreadnoughts I'm looking at you!

Keep the ideas coming guys. Don't worry about interpreting the thread too much, just post all your hair brained ideas on how to fix things and things you got a gripe with.

There will ALWAYS be a ship class that does X better than any other classes.

The only solution to this is to pull a Blizzard and nerf the **** out of a,b,c classes once every few months so that x,y,z classes are the new top dog.

Its a ******ed way to run a game and I won't support it.

I agree

Deep Core Mining Inc.

Posted - 2011.04.21 06:57:00 - [69]

Originally by: Jame Jarl Retief


...Myrmidon battlecruiser. It has 75 bandwidth, exactly the same as a Vexor cruiser. Far too low, needs to be upgraded to 100 at least. Capacity might have to be increased too. And, of course, drone modules could use T2 variants, etc., etc. You know the drill. As a racial weapon system (which the tutorial claims is drones for Gallente), drones are badly neglected.

But I believe fixing Hybrids will go a very long way towards making Caldari ships function better.

EWAR could use a review as well. dampening

Myrmidon is dead, everyone flies drakes. Make myrmidon alive, give it some potent boni for its role, i.e. damage for piracy and ganking. Drake's role is survivability and all range engagement in fleets.

Myrmidon deserves 125 MB bandwidth, full rack of blasters and it can be strong again. An option to substitute drake superiority.

Monster Dude
Posted - 2011.04.21 09:56:00 - [70]

I want to speak of Gallente.
But not in a way "give more, etc..."
I wanna show you some examples how gallente got cheated.
When you gallente everything suggest you that your weapon is drones - learn drones well.
But then suddenly:
- no BC can use 5 heavy drones / sentries. Not even a command ships :D
- Kronos (elite BS made mostly for NPC killing) can not use 5 heavy/sentries and got miserable dronebay! Even thought that it's prototype - Megathrone can Shocked. This is unbelievable!!! BTW tanking abilities of Kronos are also **** as it has: poor resists & shortage low slots (where u also want to put some damage mods) & problems with capa.
- t3 ship can not use 5 heavy/sentries even if u configure it as drone boat Shocked. Well basically all Proteus version are pretty useless, but may be it really ment to be so....
- Hyperion (high end of gallente BS's) useless ship as it bonuses are nonsense. (well may be for mission running it is ok though, but that is it.)

Not going to cry about blasters... It is just require to be pro to use them solo or in fleet (then it is pro fleet). Why Gallente Navy didn't invent rig that would significantly increase blasters (only) optimal? :)
Some how drones control & mechanics/logic screwed, alway been.
You can't broadcast your drone using drones window (for reps e.g.)
You can't lock it using ctrl+click from drone window (only right click menu)
Shortcuts are only for all drones. You can not give command to specific (selected) drone unless you do right click and select an action from many options which takes too long.
You can not teach your drones what to do when last order done. Why wouldn't be possible to create few players scripts and assign those scripts to drones in drone settings? Nothing too intelligent but e.g. after current order complete engage similar class target / higher class target / smaller class target / stay passive (as we have now in settings) / return and orbit / return to drone bay.
Or when hit broadcast for shield / armor / structure / all.
Why on earth drones returns to shot old target when I told them to shot new one and they seem to accept new order (new target is in range and everything is right)!!! Shocked

Cypress Cavalero
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.21 10:30:00 - [71]

1. Boost Hacs.

Tier 2 BC occupy the same niches as the rebalanced hacs (im looking at YOU quantum rise) and do it much better for a fraction of the price. Hurricaine is borderline silly atm with its dual neuts, ECM drones Speed and DPS, it prety much counters any hac u throw at it with 2x less cost and 2-3x less skillpoint requirment.

Look back towards nano hacs, make them less stupid but more like that, i do not want to fly tier 2 BC i want an alternative that doesnt require every inch of pilot skill i can muster to beat a 3 year younger toon in a damn drake/hurri.

The drake-
One ship one setup, Superb Range, DPS , tank, Speed without doing anything other than pressing F1 and mwding.

Missles in general-
Add a hard counter (lol defenders), or re-do the missle formula to pre quantum rise.

FIghter bombers-
Reduce the ehp on these a lot so bombing runs are actually effective on them.

Dont know what u were thinking with dominon patch at all, you go to great lengths to balance "i win ships" then introduce the dread/titan/ctrl q under primary mobile that is the nyx. Loose the immunity to e-war bonus on SC loose SC in general or loose subscribers.

A working Portal generation skill would be a great start. Add another 2 LY to the range ( 4-5 jumps to cross one region is dumb as hell). Keep bridging costs the same but reduce the amount of fuel it takes to jump the ship itself drastically so we dont have to anchor fuel cans at each interval jump in hostile space where we are trying to [u]avoid[/u] the ompletely broken JOKE that is non delayed local and 15 region wide intel channels.

./rant over

Posted - 2011.04.21 12:30:00 - [72]

1. fix gallente
2. fix ewar frigates
3. fix dessies / t2 dessies
4. balance hacs
5. balance T3s
6. balance BCs

I would be a happy camper.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2011.04.21 21:29:00 - [73]

In about four weeks the Megathron will be the final Gallente hull to drop from's Top 20. It's currently at 16 with about 1/10th of the kills as the Abaddon (No. 1 right now).

Why are Gallente hulls not used? They don't dominate their intended range (close range) and in return can get kited really easily due to speed, range, fitting, and tanking issues. We've heard them all before.

So how can Gallente dominate their intended range? Here's some suggestions:
1. Better tracking from blasters.
2. Tracking bonuses to drones on all Gallente hulls. 5 small drones from a Gallente hull should count for more than 5 small drones from another race's hull since drones are the Gallente's preferred anti-frig defence.
3. Bonuses to webifiers in some form (rigs perhaps?)
4. Easier fitting requirements for Gallente weapons so they can use what they were going to use for a fitting mod for tracking enhancements and/or webifiers instead.

5. Boosting baseline speed so that if the Gallente hull wanted to "nano" it up a bit, they would be able to go as fast as their Minmatar counterpart if they were to, say, fit the same number of overdrive injectors (+12.5% speed) as the minmatar ship fits nanofiber internal structures (9.4% speed increase) (I'm looking at you, Myrmidon and Brutix!).

6. Hull rigs (to catch up with trimarks and CDFEs) to increase EHP so that damage/tracking mods and webifiers could be fit on the ship instead of tanking mods. This is very similar to 4) above.

Time Funnel
Posted - 2011.04.22 04:06:00 - [74]

Edited by: Time Funnel on 22/04/2011 04:21:18
Stating my accumulated observations of EVE ships.

Ship and color options that appeal to females. Females being different than gay men.

Covert Cloaks for Covert BS. They then might actually be what they are supposed to be.

Carriers that carry/bridge squads. Supercarriers that carry/bridge wings. Dreads that knock the crap out of things, big and small. Then they might actually be what they are supposed to be.

A sensor damp Gallente BS platform.

Rethink the EOS. Right now they are basically scorpion buffs which seems to be a bit cross-purpose with other gallente ships... Not sure but they need some love as a command ship and the boosts it provides.

Buff the EW frigs. Range and lock boosts might be in order.

Find good fleet options for Caldari and Gallente ships. A rail buff might solve this issue.

Generally going through each ship and each race and finding a good balance from one race to another. Obviously there are some roles which are hard to compare but finding a good useful balance between at least all the different races of ships. If one ship is not really a dangler and not used or exceptional in an area then it should be be buffed or altered to give it a role comparible in usefulness to the other races of ships. Every balance cycle should the least used ships in the game, statistically.

Edit: Oh and T3 frigates. Someone forgot them.

Grath Telkin
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.04.22 05:01:00 - [75]

Sup Vile, how's life treating you?

Anyway, simple:

The Retribution and Coercer each have but a single mid slot.

Yea, no I'm totally serious.

No, really, I have no idea what they thought we'd do.

Yea, I agree, totally gay.

Anyway, tell them this for me: Its dumb, stop being dumb, every combat ship in EVE without a jump drive needs a MINIMUM TWO FREAKING MIDSLOTS to be viable in a fight, one for propulsion, one for tackle.

Theres always been this little gaggle of people who are like "no its cool they fill a role nicely".

No, they don't, there is no role that ship can fill that every other ship in the game including the rifter can't fill better.

Also gallente suck, do something about it instead of nodding along with us.

Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.22 06:07:00 - [76]

about dread... on top of regular cannons, a dread should get siege cannon/module, which works in unique manner for every type of dreadnaught.

First, dreads become anti-blob tool, second dreads become anti-tanking solution.

Amarr dreadnaughts get beam cannon effect, laser damage from dreads is focused to form one beam, which cumulates the damage, 1 weapon 1x dmg, 2 weapons - 2x dmg, 3 - 4x dmg, 4 - 8x dmg. This approach allows focus fire on heavily tanked targets, greatly multiplying the damage output on heavily armored, high hit point objects. Smaller targets get significant tanking bonuses, due to signature and movement, example a POS is a perfect traget, carrier gets 90% vulnerability, battleship gets 30% vulnerability, frigate gets 0,1% vulnerability.

Gallente dreadnaughts get shock wave generator - Area of effect weapons, which limit blobbing and spider tanking, and encourage targets to scatter and attack from different positions, instead of linear shootout. Shockwave have 98% EMP damage, 2% Heat damage, which mainly weakens the shields, but damages armor only at a slow rate. Shockwave cannons, have 30 km blast radius and slow, but potent shock wave bursts, which allows still leaves enemy a chance.

Caldari get extra potent long range rail guns, with very high alpha damage, very slow reload time. For breaking tank.

Minmatar get mid range potent explosive cannons, with mild AOE effect, shrapnel damage which renders small craft very vulnerable and can get rid of support fleet in reasonable time, unless enemy employs hit and run tactics. AOE effect is minor and does not damage heavy armor, but unlike anti-armor weapons, has no damage reduction vs size of an object, only its speed and range. Micro explosive pieces break down very fast and discourage blobbing of low - medium armor targets. Drones die after 2-3 volleys, interceptors get a chance to escape as their 1500 EHP can be sufficient to initiate evasive maneuvers, a fast moving interceptor never gets hit very hard as it is able to outrun the explosion cloud.

Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
Posted - 2011.04.22 18:21:00 - [77]

I thought it was the position of the CSM that the minutiae of game balancing wasn't their concern?

That said CCP probably has no idea what makes certain ships unpopular and in trying to buff them will manage to **** it up completely so I guess CSM input is needed.

The problem with the gallente ships themselves is that, while they're supposed to be very close range, they don't have the speed or acceleration to get there in comparison to minmatar ships, which have a more flexible engagement range. A competently-piloted 'cane, for example, can kite at point range with barrage or crash into someone and shove 700 dps down their throat with fusion or EMP. That said it's always impressive when someone with a Deimos manages to gank an idiot in a Vaga that let himself get into scram range, but "ganking idiots who don't know how the game works" isn't really a viable niche for an entire race of ships.

We talked about this on kugu and more or less agreed the best buff to gallente would involve:

- An across-the-board reduction of inertial modifier. Having gallente ships accelerate extremely fast but not have a very high top speed would augment their supposed role of close-range DPS very well. They'd have the acceleration to clear, say, 10-15km from a standstill very quickly, but not the speed to dictate range in any sort of extended fight, as a minmatar ship would.

- Increase in blaster tracking. The DPS advantage of blasters is more-or-less negated by the reality that, without a 90% web, they have some trouble tracking within their ideal range.

- Increase in the grid cost of top-tier autocannons. Gallente, being primarily small gang or solo oriented-ships (unless drone/blaster boats have some fleet role I haven't heard of), find most of their competition in minmatar, and at the moment autocannon fitting is pretty broken. Blasters do more DPS on paper, yeah, but you're almost never able to fit a tank and neutrons at the same time. A thorax, for example, after fitting an 800 plate and an MWD, can't even fit a full rack of Ions without downgrading one to an electron. A rupture can do the same with 425s and two utility highs. Virtually all cruiser and battlecruiser hulls can fit top-tier autocannons with no issue due to their disproportionately low fitting cost. Even a vagabond, which makes special mention of its low grid, can fit 2 T2 LSEs, a Y-T, and 425s with no fitting mods save a PG-4. I've literally never seen someone fit dual 425s to a minmatar battleship, since the only reason to do so would be for the extra tracking.

Other balance issues:

- Nearly half of the navy faction cruisers are awful and unused. The Navy Exequror, Osprey and Scythe are terrible. It really shouldn't take long to figure out why if you just compare them to T1 cruisers.

- Black Ops need more jump range, as was mentioned, but moreover I think their role in combat needs to be overhauled completely. Specifically, they should be the battleship-sized counterpart to force recons. The Sin should have a point range bonus, the Panther should have a web range bonus, etc. Along with an overhaul of their offensive systems and a general increase in speed and maneuverability to complement their role, because right now they are absolute pigs. An increase in range would be nice but they'd still be boring to fly if they're basically inferior versions of T1 BS.

- The Cerb and the Eagle are awful. Cerb needs a role (sniping missile boat is hilariously bad for obvious reasons) and the Eagle needs a general buff to DPS to make it competitive with the Zealot and the Muninn.

Scatim Helicon
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.22 19:11:00 - [78]

Originally by: Viribus
I thought it was the position of the CSM that the minutiae of game balancing wasn't their concern?

Its not.

However, things like this thread are useful ammunition for going to CCP and saying hey dudes look at this MASSIVE list of horribly broken ships, you guys really should assign a dev/team to work on ship balance full time, which is the underlying objective behind this thread.

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.04.22 20:28:00 - [79]

Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 07/05/2011 08:30:58
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 23/04/2011 11:38:24
The tier system.
By getting rid of this, it would produce a huge increase in the number of viable hulls.
That and there are a fair few t1 ships that could just use a buff, so I'll lump them in as well.
I obviously haven't covered every problem ship here, but the ones that stand out the most to me as fixes that'd be fairly straightforward:

Ferox - Extra mid.

Omen - More grid. Seriously. Being unable to fit focused medium pulses and an 800mm plate/MWD at max skills is utterly ridiculous.

Caracal - More grid. Should be able to mount HAMs or at least HMLs and an LSE with reasonable skills. A third low is debatable, but would bring it up to par with the Moa in slot amount and help compensate for the tiny drone bay and relatively low dps this ship has.

Maller - 25m3 drone bay would be an excellent start. I'm cautious about suggesting a damage bonus in place of cap use because it'd be easy to unbalance this.
A lot of people have suggested HAMs for this ship as well, but I'm trying to keep the suggestions fairly simple/easy to implement.

Thorax - more grid. Having to mount the lowest tier guns just to squeeze on a measely 800mm plate without fitting mods is ridiculous, and ACR rigs cost as much as the hull.

Stabber - Another mid, up its natural speed, and change the speed bonus to a falloff bonus. Right now the Rupture does basically everything better.

All tier 1 frigates - up their HP, give all of them at least 2 lows with a varying number of mids, and up their fitting stats a bit. Let them be the lightest, fastest tacklers of the t1 frigate lineup rather than just newbie rubbish you ditch after the first few tutorial missions.

Kestrel, Incursus, Inquisitor - distribute an extra slot to each, low to Gallente and Amarr and mid to Caldari.

Breacher - this deserves a special mention, for having the downright hilarious 4/2/2 slot layout. Give it an extra low and mid.

Caldari Navy Hookbill - Dear CCP. During the dev meeting in which you decided a 5 mid missile frigate should have 206 CPU max skilled, how drunk were you?
Give the Hookbill at least another 30-40 CPU, so it doesn't have to resort to laughable meta levels across the entire ship just to fit.

Ok, so it's a lot of requests, but my view is just that half the ships in the game being made pretty much obsolete is not fun for anyone. Variety ftw?
(And for anyone preparing to point out how much I missed - just because I didn't mention something doesn't mean I think it's fine, just that I have no easily implemented suggestions.)

Edit: More!
Eagle - Needs more grid. It requires 2 fitting mods where the other sniper HACs need 1 or less. This might go some of the way to fixing this joke of a ship but until rails are sorted I doubt we'll see many more of them.

Cerberus - Needs a bit more CPU and about 15% more power grid. A HAC should not have fitting issues this bad.

Cruise missiles - Significantly increase flight speed at the cost of flight time. No weapon should be relegated to PVE simply for being so broken in PVP.

Posted - 2011.04.23 01:15:00 - [80]

first off, 1 request i have is that every ship greater than a rookie or t1 frig have atleast 2 mediums (this includes mining barges and destroyers) in particular a mining barge with just a scanner and no civilian shield systems is an easy kill to pirates and a destroyer with no boost drive or no shield will not be able to hunt fast flying pirates either... pirates all fly the same ship (you know the one) and having just 1 medium slot further strengthens its problem with high dps and super high attack/interception speeds

as for all other t1 ships i think you should use sandbox theorycrafting to construct them based on stats (type, size and faction origin)

ship class determines amount of highs
frigate - 1-4 highs
fleet t2 frigate 5 highs
cruiser - 6 highs (personally i think cruisers need more highs to make them atleast capable of taking on frigates, as they are now they are both vulnerable to their larger battlecruiser and smaller frig brothers)
fleet t2 cruiser - 7 highs
destroyer, battlecruiser battleship - 8 highs

ship size determines amount of lows
fast attack ship - 1-2 lows
medium frigate - 2-3 lows
destroyer - 3-4 lows
cruiser - 4-5 lows
bc - 5-6 lows
bs - 6-7 lows
capital - 8 lows

ship faction technology determines amount of meds
amarrian/minmatar 2-3 meds (low science)
gallente/fleet or navy 3-4 meds (military research)
caldari/pirate 4-5 meds (high interest in science)
sleeper/strategic 5-7 med (stolen technologies)
jovian 7-8 meds (highest technologies)

as for drake - evasive manuerving/high speed manuevering skill should give each pilot 5-25% chance to completely evade a missile completely allowing for fast flying ships like interceptors to quickly shake off drake missiles

however ships aren't the only thing that needs changing, weapons and equipment are basically what makes the ship do what it does so perhaps weapons need more balancing or new additions as well...

twin blasters - twin weapons would be attached to frigates as a twin shot or group shot weapon that only takes up one space, this will allow frigatiers to strafe heavier ships while still having highs left over to equip missiles, smart bombs or other tech to aid in their attack (twins are not duals which actually have a faster rate of fire..twins fire 2 shots at once)

quad flak or AA blaster cannons - quad shot flak or AA defensive weapons could be equipped to destroyers and cruisers to allow for them to take down small fast flying frigates while still concentrating their artillery on the larger vessels

other ideas i've posted - artillery weapons create a splash dmg which dmgs nearby ships, railguns have a chance to penetrate hulls and pass through ships into other ships in a single line of sight, lasers can cause burning or engine overheating, autocannon bullet spray can slow down or damage manuevering of ships by tearing apart their "fins/wings/hulls"

addition of more weapons could also help balance combat between different classes of ship - 350 cannons/dual medium lasers for destroyers vs cruisers, 450 cannons/dual heavy laser or blasters for cruisers vs frigates/destroyers

specialized weapons could turn the tide for players of certain factions -

caldari missile scrambler - emits a beam which would scramble incoming missiles and send them away from the original target
gallente drone scrambler - emits a beam which would scramble drones and force them to either become disabled or attack random targets
amarrian tactial laser strikes - could allow amarrian pilots to attack cruicial parts of the ship disabling weapons, shields or mobility
minmatarian nukes - minmatarians could launch heavy powerful nukes as a last ditch effort to destroy their attackers

Posted - 2011.04.23 04:01:00 - [81]

Edited by: MeBiatch on 23/04/2011 04:04:06
Edited by: MeBiatch on 23/04/2011 04:02:10
ok my list is:

Tech II Tier 3 bs's called flag ships (there is a thread on them in features and ideas)

AF 4th bonus

Hybrid fix:

idea for blasters would be close range arties... (basically keep dps the same but increase alpha decrease rof to ofset, plus increase base tracking)

Railguns: make them long range autocannons (increase base damage and rof, reduce cap activity amount)

hybrid ammo:
make it a true mix between energy and projectile... (give a base tracking bonus added to the cap reduction bonus)
plus make (antimater 50/50 therm/kin damage uranium 80/20 therm/kin plutonium 20/80 therm/kin) = -50% to optimal range thorium 70/30 therm/kin -20% optimal range 1.15% increase to tracking -25% to activation cost...
lead 30/70 therm/kin 0% change to optimal range 1.075% increase to tracking -35% to activation cost...
iridium 50/50 therm/kin 20% change to optimal range 1.035% increase to tracking -40% to activation cost...
thungsten 80/20 therm/kin 40% change to optimal range 1.0175% increase to tracking -45% to activation cost...
iron 20/80 therm/kin 60% change to optimal range 0% change to tracking -50% to activation cost...

make there options for gallente ships to get close
1st is speed option
so give gallente ships all reduced mass plus make a mass reduction bonus to some ships (like deimos, mega all ships that currently get falloff bonus now get mass reduction bonus)
2nd is increase armor:
replace active tank bonus to 10% per lev to armor bonus (this would be brutix, astarte, hyperion) kronos remains unchanged

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.04.23 08:51:00 - [82]

Originally by: MeBiatch
Edited by: MeBiatch on 23/04/2011 04:04:06

(Hybrid gun stuff)

I actually really like those ideas O_o
For the guns at least.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.04.23 09:08:00 - [83]

Originally by: MeBiatch

Hybrids should be buffed in the same manner that created the god-like projectiles .. through ammo revamp and minor tweaks to guns.
That much I can agree with, not sure the high thermal options are kosher though as it targets Amarr resists rather than Caldari.

But reducing mass to get intercept speed? Mass affects acceleration, top-speed and agility .. you have to adjust speed a little and inertia a lot to compensate or Gallente will be used as kiting boats with very few exceptions (especially if they get better tracking options Smile)

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2011.04.23 10:08:00 - [84]

not sure the high thermal options are kosher though as it targets Amarr resists rather than Caldari.

... Umm, what?
This is a problem for game balance how?

Rexthor Hammerfists
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.04.23 11:11:00 - [85]

1. Take a look at what ships are hardly ever used

2. Improve those ships, especially in their roles, and put them for 2-3months on the testserver until the general consensus is that theyre fine.

Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor
The Seventh Day
Posted - 2011.04.23 11:37:00 - [86]

Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/04/2011 14:13:13
Dear CSM Vile rat,

I caution you to take the comments in this thread with a grain of salt. After glancing over these three pages, half of these suggestions are so ludicrous I shudder to see them added to the game.

I have spent the better part of my EVE career studying the game mechanics and the ships of EVE so I can run the various PVP training schools that I have founded over the years. It should be noted that some commonly held opinions regarding ships and weapon types are nothing more than uneducated nonsense. Point in fact "Sensor Dampeners Suck" WTF are these people talking about? They they land jams 95% of the time inside of deep falloff, exceeding 120KM Rolling Eyes They are the perfect countermeasure for ECM and logistics ships at range and are practically over powered as the are.

People just do not understand that it has a more specific role then ECM and not everything in eve can (or should be able) to do "everything"

The biggest issue facing EVE right now in terms of ship balance is so blatantly obvious... It is the balancing of Carriers vs Dreds vs Supercarriers. Once upon a time Dreds were win and massive Revelation/Archon fleets dominated EVE. What should have happened was a buff to all other racial Dreds and Carriers that would have resulted in a far more balanced playing field... but instead we got the Nyx and Aeon. Shocked

Now there is hardly room for anything else

CCP did not expect that Titans would be so prevalent in game.
Well, the same freakin thing is happening with Supercarriers to...
Now do to their double oversight, we have Supercarriers and Titans online ugh

Dreds and carriers of ALL RACES should be the bread and butter of any fleet in 0.0. Suppercarriers should be far less numerous then they are now and Titans should not be able to one shot a perfectly skilled Archon in Triage Are you kidding me?

All other issues in game are a distant second to the current epic fail disbalancing of capital warfare. Period. Who gives a **** about blasters right now? Fix nullsec warfare.


All CCP had to do in order to fix the damn doomsdays was give it an "explosion velocity" like what we have on bombs. This way only other capital ships would absorb damage and any battleship that was not sitting there completely stationary would absorb next to no damage.

See how simple that was?
But no... some moron came up with the death ray instead.

Unleashed' Fury
Posted - 2011.04.23 12:08:00 - [87]

Has someone already mentioned Gallente sub cap line active armor fitting requirement/bonus/speed/cap regen/cpu issues etc

Also hybrids dps/tracking/fitting requirements?

My 2cts contribution hopping Sanchas will annihilate the Gallente federation so we can finally get our sp back and train lasers.

Hashi Lebwohl
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.23 12:21:00 - [88]

The fact is that CCP, except when the game first launched, have not cared too much about balance. Admittedly at first there were some really broken features such as hardeners and damage modules stacking without penalty.

They have had all the information available to them in real time but apparently chose not to use it. Every time a player buys a ship or module in Eve they are voting about the relative merits of that object. So for instance the Eagle is demonstrative awful because its selling at less than it costs to produce, the Dramiel is over-powered because its price indicates that is the case.

My recommendation is that the developers acquaint themselves with the bell curve. A class of ships should be valued on the market within a range of prices, or perhaps, better profit over build cost. If a ship type moved more than a standard deviation of the mean it should be flagged for review. That flagging perhaps should be published on the forums and suggestions invited for its nerfing or boosting.

If a ship class moves two standard deviations from the mean the expectation should be that the next patch will address the issue of that ship.

The same process should be conducted for modules and there should be a look for patterns within the market data. For example, I am sure you can use something more sophisticated than venn diagram, but the poorly performing Eagles and Ferox are also members of the “use rails” set. And the rail set is notable because a lot of its tech II types are trading a low to negative profits. So perhaps a solution would be to give a small boost to rails and see what happens.

The key is that these adjustments are continual at each patch – not done and forgotten. A complete revision would be signalled by the failure over a number of patches to move the target group back into the central part of the bell curve.

The advantage of this system is that the developers need not themselves be “leet pvpers”, even though some maybe, because they are using the market and therefore utilising the collective knowledgebase of the players.

Posted - 2011.04.23 13:43:00 - [89]

Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Long Winded request to boost dreads

I second that... remember what happened to the moros? instead of ccp making other dreads better the made them all stink...

but my idea to make dreads better might not jive with you...

i want tech II dreads! dreads were the first capital ship and they should have a tech II variant by now...

Basically thier Tech II bonus would be 1. increase to damage
2. increase to HP
3. roll bonus would be to half the time and cost for siege mode...
I would put the cost for each one of these babies around 4.5 billion...

ok back to hybrids:
the reason why i suggest the changes to therm/kin layout is that gal are kinda gimped when it comes to pve using turrets... basically kin/therm is usually a secondary damage type for most rats... so that means when you use lets say blasters to rat with half your damage ends up being tertiary...
so having ammo types that gives you more of one type of damage type will allow you to rat more effectivly with gallente...

as for the speed bost via mass reduction... yeah it would be great finally gallente doing the kiting and not getting kitedCool

Gabriel Karade
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2011.04.23 14:08:00 - [90]

Re-work the whole Gallente blaster 'core doctrine' without morphing blasters into a poor man's pulse laser or autocannon. Keep the drone boats as they are, bin the Roden "lol, missiles" brain-fart.

Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (13)

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only