open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Fixing Railguns: Hybrid Ammo Overhaul
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp
Posted - 2011.05.30 07:13:00 - [1]
 

There have been countless threads about how railguns are utterly broken in comparison to their lasers and artillery counterparts as weapon platforms. After spending some time understanding how railguns work, I came to realize that it's not the weapons that need to be buffed/tweaked, its the ammo that needs to be completely overhauled.

Comparing Ammo Types

Let me first start by saying, my approach to wanting to fix railguns is that no 2 weapon platforms should act or perform in the same way. Ammo for each weapon system dictates how the weapon performs and I wanted to point out each of the weapon systemsí distinct traits (excluding missiles) based on their ammo.

Lasers
  • use frequency crystals and capacitor for their ammo

  • deal EM and Thermic damage types

  • and can switch between ammo types without a reload penalty


Projectile Turrets
  • have no reliance on capacitor and only fire projectile shells at their targets

  • have 3 ranges (-50% , 0% , 60%) unlike the other weapon platforms' 8 ranges ( -50% , -37.5% , -25%, -12.5% , 0% , 20%, 40% , 60%) but make up for this disadvantage by being able to deal any damage type

  • and boast a generous unstacked tracking bonus for each range ( +0% , +20%, +5%)


Hybrid Turrets

Hybrids are supposed to share the characteristics of both lasers and projectile turrets. Unfortunately, there aren't any real stand-out characteristics for hybrid ammo besides
  • they fire shells

  • they do thermic and kinetic damage

  • each ammo has various cap need bonuses that don't particularly make sense, from antimatter to iron, the 8 different capacitor needs are (0%,-5%, -8%, -40%, -50%, -24%, -27%, -30%)


which really doesn't aid hybrids in having any distinct trait or advantage over the other two weapon platforms.

How Railguns Should function

Let me start by disagreeing with how hybrid ammo is currently dictating damage and cap need for railguns. It is contradictive to how a railgun works. Basically, a railgun is an electric gun with two conductive rails and a conductive shell in-between them to complete the circuit. The destructive force of a railgun doesn't come from its payload, but rather its kinetic force. The magnitude of this kinetic force is always a function of two things: the length of the physical rails and the amount of current (capacitor) delivered to the rails.


Knowing this, there is a problem with the current ammo we have for railguns. Looking at the facts, the current description for hybrid charges states that they all have a titanium shell, which means the conductivity of each shell type (antimatter, plutonium, iridium, etc) is the same. Right now, hybrids use the most cap at their closest ammo ranges and the least at the mid-long range types. So how do their ranges and cap needs make any sense together? It's like the attributes used in hybrid charges are just there because CCP is following the same convention that frequency crystals preceded with. For a railgun on earth, less energy means less velocity for the shell it projects, and Iím not sure how fluidic space friction factors into the ranges dictated in eve but I would argue at the very least that rails would require more energy to fire at longer ranges.

So here's what I'm going to propose for hybrid ammo:

  1. Have lowest cap need at close ranges and highest cap need at longest range

  2. Have kinetic damage increase as range increases

  3. Have tracking increases as range decreases



Hybrid weapons would adopt a completely new tactical philosophy by being most lethal at long ranges, while most accurate at close ranges.

Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp
Posted - 2011.05.30 07:15:00 - [2]
 

Here's what that could look like:

Antimatter: 4 thermal, 1 kinetic, -50% optimal range/capacitor, +100% tracking
Plutonium: 4 thermal, 2 kinetic, -37.5% optimal range/capacitor, +75% tracking
Uranium: 4 thermal, 3 kinetic, -25% optimal range/capacitor, +50% tracking
Thorium: 4 thermal, 4 kinetic, -12.5% optimal range/capacitor, +25% tracking
Lead: 4 thermal, 5 kinetic, +0% optimal range/capacitor, +0% tracking
Iridium: 4 thermal, 6 kinetic, +20% optimal range/capacitor, -20% tracking
Tungsten: 4 thermal, 7 kinetic, +40% optimal range/capacitor, -35% tracking
Iron: 4 thermal, 8 kinetic, +60% optimal range/capacitor, -45% tracking

Astroka
Posted - 2011.05.30 07:41:00 - [3]
 

This honestly sounds like a really cool idea, but would it make railguns too versatile? That seems a bit overpowered.

What about blasters? They're hybrids, too, with emphasis on closer range.

Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp
Posted - 2011.05.30 09:20:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Infinion on 30/05/2011 09:23:18

Originally by: Astroka
This honestly sounds like a really cool idea, but would it make railguns too versatile? That seems a bit overpowered.

What about blasters? They're hybrids, too, with emphasis on closer range.


keep in mind that they would be fairly ineffective at short range. They may be able to hit smaller and more agile ships with the improved tracking of short range ammo, but they wouldn't be able to deal considerable dps unless they switch to use long range ammo, which would only be effective against either really slow or really big targets. This long-range-only aspect would clash with blasters' short-range-only aspect, and make hybrid platforms especially potent at either long or short range, but not so much in-between.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.05.30 09:51:00 - [5]
 

Something like this already proposed:

http://www.eve-search.com/thread/1473465

Cyberus
Caldari
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.05.30 21:25:00 - [6]
 

+ 1. My spec hybrid lvl5 skills are at the lowest priorety only because of the matter how bad they are atm, but still i'm training those in case they will good some day.

Mithfindel
Zenko Incorporated
Posted - 2011.05.31 08:56:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Mithfindel on 31/05/2011 08:58:38
Remember that blasters (particle accelerators) do also use the same ammunition as railguns. As such, sweeping changes like this are not looking very likely. Also, from lore standpoint, higher range = higher kinetic energy. It's a military application, you don't want to dial down the weapon when you hit someone who's close.

Now, having a look at the different weapons:
Guided missiles pros: Long range, usually high alpha, select damage type, tracking doesn't matter
Guided missile cons: Can be shot down or outrun.
FoF missile pros: Long range, usually high alpha, select damage type, no target lock necessary, tracking doesn't matter
FOF missile cons: Can be shot down, outrun, cannot select target
Short range missiles pros: Higher DPS than above, select damage type, tracking doesn't matter
Short range missile cons: Difficulties hitting fast targets, can be shot down, can be outrun, low range
Blaster pros: High DPS
Blaster cons: Effective only at point blank
Railgun pros: Extreme range
Railgun cons: Low DPS, low tracking
Autocannon pros: High DPS, select damage type, no cap
Autocannon cons: Low range, usually fight in falloff (reduced damage)
Artillery pros: High alpha, select damage type, no cap
Artillery cons: Extreme range requires fighting in falloff, low tracking
Pulse laser pros: High DPS, relatively high optimal range, fast reload (select optimal range), T1 ammunition is not spent by firing
Pulse laser cons: High cap usage
Beam laser pros: Fast reload (select optimal range), T1 ammunition is not spent by firing
Beam laser cons: High cap usage

For a railgun fix, I'd personally look at the strengths. Or the strength, which is supposed to be "extreme range". Gallente are supposed to use blasters and Caldari railguns, so perhaps increase the range bonuses for the Caldari gunboats, allowing to use higher-damage ammunition at higher ranges. Since the blaster optimals are laughable and railgun optimals fairly decent, a small increase in bonus would be significant at the ranges the railguns are "effective", but would not effect the blasters very much. This would mean that railguns would become the best long range sniping equipment (face it - long range means max lock range or over 200 km) and more competitive at the fleet ranges (due to ability to use higher-damage ammunition) as well as kiting (with tackle support) targets with short-range weapons at "medium range".

Alternatively, introduce a skill which boosts only railguns but not blasters (compare to Guided Missile Precision). Blasters or blaster ships may need their own boost, though, but it is highly dependent on other things, such as MWD/Warp Scrambler mechanics.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.05.31 10:06:00 - [8]
 

I'm not convinced by #2, but I think #1 would be quite a boost for blasters by releasing cap for MWD/AB and Gallente active tanks.

Perhaps have 1 damage amount across all ranges? maybe with variation on the kin/therm ratio?
e.g. all small ammo does 10hp damage.

This wouldn't be the silver bullet for hybrids & their platforms, but I believe something on this theme would be a good step towards giving them a role.


Kitty Baugh
Posted - 2011.05.31 16:03:00 - [9]
 

I disagree with OP's explanation of a railgun.
A railgun is two electro magnets that pull a projectile forward and then switch off before it can "pull" The projectile back, You need a bigger projectile for more damage, Because of magnetic saturation (Why its pointless using massive amounts of energy with a small projectile)
The majority of its power is derived from kinetic energy, But putting a payload on the projectile would most likely do more damage than kinetic energy on its own against Futuristic armour types.

Ogogov
Gallente
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.05.31 18:11:00 - [10]
 

Get rid of all railgun ammo, replace with one ammo type, then give the rail module itself energy level settings that increase cap usage (with reasonable limits) and range/damage at the expense of tracking.

THAT would be more like how a railgun should work.

Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
Posted - 2011.05.31 19:47:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Infinion
Valid Rail gun ammo fixes



I would add that rails are primarily an Alpha weapon and as such, would have a longer Rate of Fire to help against the arguement of it being OP'd. It would further define it's role/niche. Otherwise, this is all very good suggestions to the rails fix. Well done!

Now, what about Blasters? It should be almost the complete opposite, save for tracking as they would be designed for In your face fighting.

Ambaseter Doggy
Posted - 2011.05.31 22:27:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Kitty Baugh
I disagree with OP's explanation of a railgun.
A railgun is two electro magnets that pull a projectile forward and then switch off before it can "pull" The projectile back, You need a bigger projectile for more damage, Because of magnetic saturation (Why its pointless using massive amounts of energy with a small projectile)
The majority of its power is derived from kinetic energy, But putting a payload on the projectile would most likely do more damage than kinetic energy on its own against Futuristic armour types.


The rails are a Completed circuit with the completion being the slug. they form 1 magnet not 2. Anyway This is a good idea

Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp

Posted - 2011.06.02 09:02:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Something like this already proposed:

http://www.eve-search.com/thread/1473465


Then we are on the same page :)
I can't, however, agree with removing range penalties on all ammo types, especially for railguns. If you aren't compensating damage/tracking for something else, it simply makes the characteristic unbalanced; Railguns have far too large of an optimal range for this to work within the limitations of the other weapon platforms. Changing between different ranges of ammo types is one of the few tactical advantages you have in combat that require perception, and they're also integral to many of eve's pvp mechanics. Ranged ammo dictates how close you need to be from target, if you can kite them safely, or if you need to get within neut / point / web range to gank them fastest. AB's and MWD's would also be used less for maintaining particular distances and more for nano-sniper gangs that kite in a huge window of optimal effectiveness.


ShadowGod56
Posted - 2011.06.06 21:56:00 - [14]
 

i support the above changes, great ideas for hybrid ammo overhaul, what about t2 ammo tho?

Lakuma
Posted - 2011.06.07 01:46:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Lakuma on 07/06/2011 01:46:24
Remember that Blasters inherently have a short optimal...so if the 'longest range' ammo deals the most damage, that only makes a Blaster hit out a few km farther but with little/no tracking bonus. Considering Blasters have a higher dmg multiplier as well as high tracking speed, this shouldn't be a problem.

+1 The idea is sound for Railguns - but you are now making Gallente pilots primarily snipers for PvE, but maintaining their 'up close and personal' role in PvP. I like it. Caldari hybrid boats would do fine with this as well.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.08 09:39:00 - [16]
 

I don't see why the guns need to be balanced wrt each other nor why hybrids need a distinct advantage over lasers or projectiles.

If they did, it would buff gallente and caldari at the expense of the other races, if we consider the big picture and secondary weapon systems of missles and drones, and the buffs that these races have for them.



Takseen
Posted - 2011.06.08 12:09:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
I don't see why the guns need to be balanced wrt each other nor why hybrids need a distinct advantage over lasers or projectiles.
If they did, it would buff gallente and caldari at the expense of the other races, if we consider the big picture and secondary weapon systems of missles and drones, and the buffs that these races have for them.


If the only commonly used Gallente ships are their droneboats, and those droneboats prefer to fit projectiles or lasers even when given a small bonus to hybrids, then there's probably something wrong.

I like the gist of the OP's proposal. Right now the big bar to using hybrids in Pve is their lack of versatility. Blasters are unable to hit anything outside of point blank range, railguns poor tracking make them weak against small or close targets. And the cap drain puts a big strain on the active armor tank most Gallente ships are designed to use.
I'll leave it to the pvpers to discuss whether this might make hybrid weapon platforms overpowered.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.08 17:12:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
I don't see why the guns need to be balanced wrt each other nor why hybrids need a distinct advantage over lasers or projectiles.
If they did, it would buff gallente and caldari at the expense of the other races, if we consider the big picture and secondary weapon systems of missles and drones, and the buffs that these races have for them.


If the only commonly used Gallente ships are their droneboats, and those droneboats prefer to fit projectiles or lasers even when given a small bonus to hybrids, then there's probably something wrong.

I like the gist of the OP's proposal. Right now the big bar to using hybrids in Pve is their lack of versatility. Blasters are unable to hit anything outside of point blank range, railguns poor tracking make them weak against small or close targets. And the cap drain puts a big strain on the active armor tank most Gallente ships are designed to use.
I'll leave it to the pvpers to discuss whether this might make hybrid weapon platforms overpowered.


Hm. Okay then.
I am not against tweaking them if it makes them used more, but I am against buffing them without gimping them somewhere else, so as not to imbalance the total race weapon set.
So 'sure why not' to making them 'unique', so long as they don't become stronger or weaker net net than they currently are.
How.... is the hard part. I leave that for pvpers.




Saerinea Kael
Posted - 2011.06.08 17:57:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
I don't see why the guns need to be balanced wrt each other nor why hybrids need a distinct advantage over lasers or projectiles.
If they did, it would buff gallente and caldari at the expense of the other races, if we consider the big picture and secondary weapon systems of missles and drones, and the buffs that these races have for them.


If the only commonly used Gallente ships are their droneboats, and those droneboats prefer to fit projectiles or lasers even when given a small bonus to hybrids, then there's probably something wrong.

I like the gist of the OP's proposal. Right now the big bar to using hybrids in Pve is their lack of versatility. Blasters are unable to hit anything outside of point blank range, railguns poor tracking make them weak against small or close targets. And the cap drain puts a big strain on the active armor tank most Gallente ships are designed to use.
I'll leave it to the pvpers to discuss whether this might make hybrid weapon platforms overpowered.


Hm. Okay then.
I am not against tweaking them if it makes them used more, but I am against buffing them without gimping them somewhere else, so as not to imbalance the total race weapon set.
So 'sure why not' to making them 'unique', so long as they don't become stronger or weaker net net than they currently are.
How.... is the hard part. I leave that for pvpers.






The thing is that once upon a time lasers were so worthless that no one used them and fit projectile turrets to the ships that used lasers (due to cap issues), and CCP effectively stated that this was bad and lasers received a series of indirect buffs that made them the weapon to use. So much so in fact that people started using lasers in place of projectiles because lasers could hit just as far as projectiles while doing more damage because of falloff mechanics. Once again, CCP stepped in and said that this was bad and gave projectiles some buffs to compensate for falloff, which have more or less balanced lasers with projectiles.

The problem with hybrids isn't so much a problem with hybrids as it is the simple fact that hybrids were balanced against lasers that could only fire for a few cycles and couldn't scratch armor and projectiles that missed half the time. The other weapon systems got buffs that they needed, but hybrids have been left behind.

At least that's how I understand it.

Kaelie Onren
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.09 07:40:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 09/06/2011 07:41:44
okay, that sounds reasonable.

But can anyone point to some hard (as in QEN) numbers on the percentage of gallente ships fitting projectiles instead of rails?)

As I said, I am all for it, so long as play balance is not disturbed. It is very dangerous to think that you can buff 1 weapon system without affecting many other things. Buff it too much, and maybe Minmatars will start using hybrids instead of projectiles.

Which is why I'm all for making them have a unique *capability*, not a buff. A unique feature that should complement drones.
Purely as as example; if you give them excellent tracking at long range (like lasers) then maybe make them do less damage, but also take less cap than lasers but faster cycletime.

Remember, tactical balance is such a volatile thing. All it takes is the ability for say, a common ship like the Megathron to be able to field 1 more hybrid due to tweaked cap use or increase their DPS a bit due to increased DPS for everyone to stop complaining that the hybrid system in its entirety is gimped. (I'm citing completely hypothetical situations, I have never flown a Gallente ship)
I defer to the experts.

Ogogov
Gallente
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.06.09 13:29:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Ogogov on 09/06/2011 13:41:05
Originally by: Kaelie Onren
Edited by: Kaelie Onren on 09/06/2011 07:41:44
okay, that sounds reasonable.

But can anyone point to some hard (as in QEN) numbers on the percentage of gallente ships fitting projectiles instead of rails?)

As I said, I am all for it, so long as play balance is not disturbed. It is very dangerous to think that you can buff 1 weapon system without affecting many other things. Buff it too much, and maybe Minmatars will start using hybrids instead of projectiles.

Which is why I'm all for making them have a unique *capability*, not a buff. A unique feature that should complement drones.
Purely as as example; if you give them excellent tracking at long range (like lasers) then maybe make them do less damage, but also take less cap than lasers but faster cycletime.

Remember, tactical balance is such a volatile thing. All it takes is the ability for say, a common ship like the Megathron to be able to field 1 more hybrid due to tweaked cap use or increase their DPS a bit due to increased DPS for everyone to stop complaining that the hybrid system in its entirety is gimped. (I'm citing completely hypothetical situations, I have never flown a Gallente ship)
I defer to the experts.


As the good Doctor pointed out in his devblog, I don't think they have that kind of granularity. What they do see is tens of thousands of railgun modules being produced... but that isn't because anyone is using them. It's because they're being used for mineral compression to move resources mined in hisec out to null. Perhaps everyone was just looking at manufacturing and industry stats and thinking everything was fine?

Other than highlighting how broken mining and industry in nullsec must be in order to make exporting common ores preferential to actually mining them in situ, it also seriously skews many other figures.

What is interesting, is that there is no Gallente vessel in the top10 this quarter, a trend that will be continuing until they are re-designed from the ground up. In fact the ONLY Gallente vessel that outstrips other races by a significant margin appears to be the Nyx, mostly for aesthetic reasons - certainly not functional ones since almost every alliance will tell you to fly an Aeon instead.

Devron Taal
Posted - 2011.06.16 12:35:00 - [22]
 

I don't know what you guys are talking about. I scan through a random selection of youtube vids on nullsec alliance wars, and the second most numerous battleship that I see is the Megathron (right after the Apocalypse), and the most popular carrier is the thanatos and Nyx. Surely just because gallente ships don't make the top 10 most popular in some economic report isn't adequate proof that hybrid guns are gimpy. It doesn't follow.

Naomi Knight
Amarr
Posted - 2011.06.16 15:05:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Devron Taal
I don't know what you guys are talking about. I scan through a random selection of youtube vids on nullsec alliance wars, and the second most numerous battleship that I see is the Megathron (right after the Apocalypse), and the most popular carrier is the thanatos and Nyx. Surely just because gallente ships don't make the top 10 most popular in some economic report isn't adequate proof that hybrid guns are gimpy. It doesn't follow.


get some clue noob

Devron Taal
Posted - 2011.06.19 08:38:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Devron Taal on 19/06/2011 08:49:38
Originally by: Naomi Knight
Originally by: Devron Taal
I don't know what you guys are talking about. I scan through a random selection of youtube vids on nullsec alliance wars, and the second most numerous battleship that I see is the Megathron (right after the Apocalypse), and the most popular carrier is the thanatos and Nyx. Surely just because gallente ships don't make the top 10 most popular in some economic report isn't adequate proof that hybrid guns are gimpy. It doesn't follow.


get some clue noob

Suck my willy you bloody eyed emo Twilight watching vapire loving, the-world just doesn't understand me post pubescent teener.
Apparently you can't google YouTube yourself to prove me wrong wench. Go back to watching gossip girl. If you are going to drag this convo down into the bowels of blind name calling, I will no longer dignify your presence with any response.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.06.19 09:11:00 - [25]
 

Revamp similar to projectile ditto, keeping it as simple as possible. Since there are only two damage types in play we can cut number of ammo types to an even six.

Short Range (0.5 range modifier - 14 damage (+1)):
  • Antimatter - 8 Thermal / 6 Kinetic.

  • Plutonium - 6 Thermal / 8 Kinetic.

Medium Range (1.0 range modifier - 10 damage - 20% tracking and falloff bonus):
  • Iridium - 6 Thermal / 4 Kinetic.

  • Thorium - 4 Thermal / 6 Kinetic.

Long Range (1.4 optimal modifier, 1.2 falloff modifier, 6 damage, 10% tracking bonus):
  • Lead - 4 Thermal / 2 Kinetic.

  • Tungsten - 2 Thermal / 4 Kinetic.


Rails get a 15%? dps increase evenly spread on damage mod and RoF.
Blaster ships get a 20%-25% speed increase with a corresponding inertia penalty. We want them fast in straight line but have poor maneuverability.
Armour repair bonuses reduced to 5%/level but apply to external repairs as well.
Base armour on blaster boats increased 15%-20%? to compensate.

Gives blasters a better choice of damage type with better thermal being one of them.
Allows blaster pilots to sacrifice some damage for above auto tracking by loading medium range.

Naomi Knight
Amarr
Posted - 2011.06.19 18:16:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Revamp similar to projectile ditto, keeping it as simple as possible. Since there are only two damage types in play we can cut number of ammo types to an even six.

Short Range (0.5 range modifier - 14 damage (+1)):
  • Antimatter - 8 Thermal / 6 Kinetic.

  • Plutonium - 6 Thermal / 8 Kinetic.

Medium Range (1.0 range modifier - 10 damage - 20% tracking and falloff bonus):
  • Iridium - 6 Thermal / 4 Kinetic.

  • Thorium - 4 Thermal / 6 Kinetic.

Long Range (1.4 optimal modifier, 1.2 falloff modifier, 6 damage, 10% tracking bonus):
  • Lead - 4 Thermal / 2 Kinetic.

  • Tungsten - 2 Thermal / 4 Kinetic.


Rails get a 15%? dps increase evenly spread on damage mod and RoF.
Blaster ships get a 20%-25% speed increase with a corresponding inertia penalty. We want them fast in straight line but have poor maneuverability.
Armour repair bonuses reduced to 5%/level but apply to external repairs as well.
Base armour on blaster boats increased 15%-20%? to compensate.

Gives blasters a better choice of damage type with better thermal being one of them.
Allows blaster pilots to sacrifice some damage for above auto tracking by loading medium range.

thx but no
if there will be a hybrid change it shouldnt be a copy of projectiles ,make them different

Sir Drake
Caldari
Posted - 2011.06.19 18:20:00 - [27]
 

Apart from ammo size changes i would rather prefer a nerf of proj ammo to kin/expl dmg only in order to level the playfield.
Anything else should rather be changed on the guns and most of all the ships to bring them back in line.

Goose99
Posted - 2011.06.19 19:46:00 - [28]
 


Estimated Prophet
Ye Olde Curiosity Shoppe and Trading Company
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2011.06.20 09:41:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Devron Taal
I don't know what you guys are talking about. I scan through a random selection of youtube vids on nullsec alliance wars, and the second most numerous battleship that I see is the Megathron (right after the Apocalypse), and the most popular carrier is the thanatos and Nyx. Surely just because gallente ships don't make the top 10 most popular in some economic report isn't adequate proof that hybrid guns are gimpy. It doesn't follow.


Try finding some that were made in the last 1-2 years, post web-nerf/warp scram boost.

Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp
Posted - 2011.07.17 22:26:00 - [30]
 

bump


Pages: [1] 2

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