open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Gallente MkII
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author Topic

Soden Rah
Gallente
EVE University
Ivy League
Posted - 2009.12.14 01:39:00 - [61]
 

I would like to add support for mooving in this direction, with a coupla caviats. If your going to take away the hyperions repair bonus (and I wouldn't) you need some slot/grid changes otherwise it will totaly suck at missions, Like the AB bonuses though, especially for missioning, as missioning in blasters atm is a pain as many rats outpace even an AB fitted BS and the then mandatory rails do crap dmg.
Basicaly this would have to be tested and balanced but I feel us Galente have felt a few too many nerf bats and could do with some loving.
I feel that there should be a real choice between the races in style and abilities wich this would emphasise and promote.

Also .... dampener bonuses very very seconded.

Ugly Eric
Posted - 2009.12.14 03:15:00 - [62]
 

Hi all !

After reading this and carefully considering this, I mostly disagree. As a pretty new player to EvE (one year) The on most exiting things in this game has been the balance. And I do not speak about how a drake newer looses to a hurricane, or how the rifter just kicks ass in the frigate classes, but of the complete full balance. Every race has their own ships that are good. Minmatar have their rifter, jaguar, vagabond and hurricane. Gallente have Ishkur, Ishtar and dominix. Caldari have their own, and so does amarr. But the races as complete are wery good in balance.

I do agree, that the damage of blasters could be a bit sturdier, rails should be even more sturdy (double the RoF, take 25% of volley ?) and rockets just sucks. And the AB bonus to gallente is something I really do not like. If gallente had that, they would be wery overpowered with those ships. Lets take an example.

Your megathron with ab bonus flies towards my tempest with 700m/s. There is no way I can slow it down, but with web, and that means I haveto stay inside 10km. If I want to outrun you, I need to burn cap with my MWD, and still just barely outrun you, except if you have fitted the web. And when the speeds are about the same, you would have a edge in agility against my MWD + you would have a ton of cap to spare compared to me, where my cap burns as hell with MWD.

And I cant help myself to not compare your post and proposed changes to current minmatar. We had some love, but hey, it was about the time to. And even now, we have wery limited possibilities to tank deacently anything, we don't do the most damage but the thing we are good at is outrunning everybody. And you would like to take it away from us? Besides that, we minmatar pilots, haveto train "double skills" to be even close the ship compared to all the rest races due to the both shield and armor ships thinking. It is a good thing to have possibility to fit either armor, or shield, but the skilltraining (specially as a new pilot) sucks bad.

All in all, you had some good points, but if all that you suggested would be done, I wouldn't bother to try to fight a gallente ship without 3to1 ratio of similar ships.

Ugly Eric

ps. sorry for bad english and possible ununderstable sentences :)

Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2009.12.14 05:07:00 - [63]
 

I like the general idea, but a few points stick out for me:

-I'll echo Pattern in that some of the numbers need a little tweaking. 75% extra tracking is a lot.

-Tracking bonuses are much more useful than you seem to think they are for rails. I say blaster tracking could use a little love, but leave the tracking bonuses.

-AB bonus: a big no-no on Mega, Brutix and Astarte/Eos. These ships are effin' slow enough with a MWD, they don't need to be slower. "Le Sneaky-Beaky" should be kept for cruisers and under. The Thorax would be pretty awesome with it, as would the Deimos (and switch out the MWD sig radius bonus to the armour HP bonus). Brutix/Astarte/Eos should get the armour HP bonus. Mega should keep its tracking bonus, or better yet, the Hype could get the tracking bonus and the Mega could get the HP bonus.

-Myrm: I would love to see it become a mini-Domi with a hybrid damage bonus instead of the tank bonus. I know not many agree with this, but meh.

That being said, all in all an excellent effort. I'm especially fond of the boosted overloading bonus on blasters... it just works. Good job.

Cosmoes
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.12.14 07:49:00 - [64]
 

Edited by: Cosmoes on 14/12/2009 08:34:14
Edited by: Cosmoes on 14/12/2009 08:06:13
Originally by: Gabriel Karade

Quote:
"typical of modern Gallente design philosophy it is most effective when working at extreme close range where its blasters and hordes of combat drones tear through even the toughest of enemies." - Thorax




I got no problem with gallente recieving massive damage or tracking bonuses but I would like to highlight "extreme close range".

Just doing a rough calculation but with falloff changes you can get a L blaster to around 20km falloff with t1 ammo and 2 tracking enhancers. That doesn't sound like close range, that's out to disruptor range.

I'd like to see a change for blasters that not only brings them back to the super high damage superiority but back to actually being the short range race.


For example with the recent minmatar changes:

We got some alpha, we lost some rof still a overall boost.
We got increase in EMP damage, we lost damage in carbonized lead.

That's only half the changes and the other half where all win but those where two of the biggest changes. What I havn't heard in gallente boost threads is what the drawback of all these changes will be. Though this thread is better than most in that it does limit speed mods to ab's and the massive damage boost to heat, this is more of a general complaint rather than a complaint on this thread. All I've seen is massive damage boost, massive tracking boost, massive hp boost and speed boost.

One last thing to add. I'm against hybrids being all focused on heat bonus purely because it makes it a harder weapon to use. It's not a bad idea to have blasters be stronger in heat than other weapons but spread the bonus between heat and straight boost so those who can't use heat get some bonus too.

Diabolyc
Amarr
Tea Club
Posted - 2009.12.14 09:31:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Gabriel Karade

2.



(T1) Myrmidon

Worried that their hot-shot pilots would burn brightly in their eagerness to engage the enemy, the Federation Navy created a ship that encourages caution over foolhardiness. A hardier version of its counterpart, the Myrmidon is a ship designed to persist in battle. Its numerous medium and high slots allow it to slowly bulldoze its way through the opposition, while its massive drone space ensures that no enemy is left unscathed.

Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 10% increase to drone hitpoints and damage dealt by drones, and 7.5% increase to armor repair amount per level

- No bonus changes. The Myrmidon of old was OTT, no argument there. It has a fantastic slot layout and given it is a drone boat, can dedicate its low lots to a chunky armour tank. However, given it only does the DPS of the T1 cruiser equivalent, and comparing to the ‘wow’ factor of other Tier 2 BC (hello Hurricane) maybe it is time to buff the drone bandwidth to the middle ground i.e. 100m3.



point, 560 dps, 61k ehp, 200 sustained def is not enough for you?

now i do not have time to read and compare other fittings but myrmi is a super boat and dont need any changes.

Gabriel Karade
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2009.12.14 21:10:00 - [66]
 

It's fascinating to see how widely different opinions are on the AB bonus, from "Totally overpowered" to "Totally underwhelming" I think maybe this means it has hit somewhere in the middle ground ;-)

The reason for splitting the line down the 'AB bonus' and 'armour bonus' routes is to increase diversity and give distinct roles within the overarching 'Gallente doctrine'. This is especially so when it comes to the Megathron vs. Hyperion, which currently step on each others toes competing for the same role.

The bonus as is, provides ships with 75% of the equivalent MWD speed, overloaded, you get to 98% of normal MWD speed. Remember this is using a standard plated fit. Given the great ingenuity displayed by Eve pilots in the face of new changes, I'd fully expect to see the somewhat cookie-cutter 'all plates' setups start to give way to lighter, faster, leaner setups because of the survivability afforded by not inflating your signature 6-fold. Recall, in the missile damage formula the main factor is the function sig/velocity, and AB bonus therefore gives you greatly increased survivability vs. the equivalent class size weapons (i.e. torpedoes if you are in a Megathron).

Secondly this bonus restores something that has been missing since the speed changes; manoeuvrability within web/scrambler range. As it stands, in a blaster boat, you are dead in the water once scrambled as you are absolutely reliant on that MWD to bring you into the very slim optimal operating zone for blasters. With an AB bonus you have the agility to stay in that optimal operating zone once in contact with a target.

Thirdly, the bonus, in conjunction with the general tracking boost, allows blasters to really shine up close, maximising their own damage output, while minimising the damage taken in return.

Fourthly, the bonus has another positive, namely it makes blaster setups useful in deadspace, both for PvP and PvE. Encouraging diversity of setups is I'm sure in most minds, a good thing.



Tracking:

With regards to the tracking boost, this is absolutely contingent on removing tracking bonuses. Again, this must be viewed in the context of drastic changes that have already been implemented; the web changes resulted in a 300% boost in transversal speeds at blaster optimal. Removing the tracking bonus and boosting base tracking by 50-75% actually only results in a 9-27% boost in real terms on the best tracking blaster boats currently in game. The important point here being, the playing field has been levelled for all blaster boats.

With the Roden bonuses, a hybrid optimal is ideal for railguns, allowing higher damage ammo to be utilised, and hitting targets at ranges where the effects of transversal are minimised. Oh and, you don't tend to see Caldari railgun platforms suffering from a lack of a tracking bonus, particularly when discussing fleet combat ;-)


p.s. With regards to the 'overboost', I can appreciate the comment about this possibly excluding some pilots from the full benefits. However, thermodynamics is not a difficult skill to train, and in terms of PvP I would say it is an essential core skill. The pilots less likely to train the skill are those with only an interest in PvE, but they would already see the overall benfit of having an 'AB bonus' line of ships. You never know, once they get the taste for 'up-close' combat you may find more of them enticed into PvP Cool

Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2009.12.15 03:44:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Oh and, you don't tend to see Caldari railgun platforms suffering from a lack of a tracking bonus, particularly when discussing fleet combat ;-)



That's because Caldari railboats have an optimal bonus which allow them to snipe with faction T1 ammo instead of T2 Wink

Halycon Gamma
Caldari
The Flying Tigers
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2009.12.15 06:10:00 - [68]
 

Edited by: Halycon Gamma on 15/12/2009 06:11:04
No, A big HELL NO!! to the AB change.

CCP Speed Module Rule #1: AB is a tanking module that just happens to make you go faster. It is not a make you go faster module that just happens to helps you tank.



With the bonus to speed on AB, plus the damage bonus to tracking, you are skirting very close to a ship which can't be hit by anyone else because of transversal, yet does damage with impunity to its target. AKA: A Nano MkIII Ship.

CCP Speed Module Rule #2: MWD is the speed module that helps you go faster, it should not ever help you tank.



If you have problems closing with a target, fiddle with MWD or the tank of the ship. Your way gives your ship a bonus to speed, tanking, and god knows what else with an all in one bonus. Then to top it all off, you're giving some of these same ships another tanking bonus; without a downside!

So no, just no. Figure out another way.

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.12.15 14:28:00 - [69]
 

Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 15/12/2009 14:28:38
Originally by: Halycon Gamma

Lots of obnoxious big orange text


Considering that the AB bonus for the assault frigates was only called off due to their ability to fit oversized 10mn afterburners, and the fact that interceptors have a MWD sig reduction bonus, it seems that none of your rules have any bearing on EVE or how the developers think.

And when you consider that the whole point of the after burner bonus is to improve the survivability of ships that operate in by default, within tackling, drone, neut, web and scram range, your concerns are less than justified.

Anyway, I don't think there perfect, they would need to be tested however the numbers GK has provided for that specific fix are the most sane of the lot.


Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.12.15 16:35:00 - [70]
 

Recommendations

I've flown along side Gabriel Karade and although I can see his point with blaster tracking - (even on a megathron, a cruiser within 2km with full transversal will barely be hit by neutrons or ion blasters without a dual web) - however, I don't believe that this is a problem - the plucky throx or deimos should be able to mitigate damage from turrets at least, whilst being BBQ'ed by neuts, scrams and heavy drones.

At optimal, your doing almost full damage against targets of your size or larger, with even with full transferral which rarely never happens battleships vs battleships. The damage reduction due to transversal is also why less sensitive than what your making it out to be. See here for a chart. (navy = Neutrons +75% tracking, green = Neutrons on TQ, Red = Ion's)

So on that front i'm out, it's a big change that doesn't really to fix anything deemed broken about blasters. And when you go around removing tracking bonuses, you probably end up breaking alot of stuff that was ok before.

Personally, I believe your on the right track with the overloaded bonuses. 30% (instead of 15%) damage increase with the same overloaded duration seems about right, that gives an overloaded hyperion using neutrons, ogre II's, 3 damage mods, and CN animatter, just over 1600 dps, as opposed to the 1800 dps monster the 50% overloaded bonus would provide.


I'm all for getting rid of the active tanking bonuses in exchange for something none godawful. However in the case of the hyperion vs the mega, a few tweaks would have to be made to your specific proposal...

The Megathron would now swap all the speed, and agility stats with the hyperion, gaining a similar capacitor with a somewhat higher overall peak re-charge amount, allowing mission active tanking fits to be more cap stable, as well as improved sniping performance.

A 5% or 7.5% armour HP bonus would be enough as you'd now get a ship with roughly the same stats as the abaddon (168k ehp vs the abaddons 165k ehp using a 5 slot armour tank, with roughly the same dps) this combined with the new overloaded state of the blasters and improved cap, speed and agility would give the hyperion the edge in that specific instance.

Just as a note, both using 5 slot tanks, the Hyperion has 65% more EHP than a megathron with a 37.5 armour bonus due to the funny way trimarks and plates stack. Although a 25% resistance bonus is still better most of the time.


Abolish the battlecruiser tiers. Make all the battlecruisers tier II in strength. This has the effect of fixing 90% of whats wrong with the brutix. This combined with a 30% grid increase and the Armour HP bonus turns this ship into something more than just Myrmiddon lite.

In summary...

All blasters to have there overloades state changed from 15%, to a 30% damage increase with the heat amount staying the same.

Myrmidon - Power grid reduced by 15%, Turret hardpoints reduced by 2 (4), Drone bandwidth increased to 125mb

All tier I battlecruisers promoted to tier II with similar relative fittings, slots and ehp.

Brutix active tanking bonus now replaced by an armour HP bonus.

Megathron swaps speed and agility stats with the Hyperion, gains a much improved capacitor.

Hyperion has the active tanking bonus replaced with armour HP bonus.

Base speed of all destroyers increased by 20%

Catalyst Base power grid increased from 60 to 70

Eris, Your version with a second 5% hybrid damage bonus instead of 10% (with launcher slots returning) looks good.

50/50 on the optimal range bonuses replacing tracking bonuses,

The Taranis is fine as is.

The Commandships get the 7.5% armour HP bonus, there too slow to make use of an AB bonus IMO.

Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Posted - 2009.12.15 17:51:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Pattern Clarc


...I don't believe that this is a problem - the plucky throx or deimos should be able to mitigate damage from turrets at least, whilst being BBQ'ed by neuts, scrams and heavy drones.



Fully ack. We do not need 1-size-fits-it-all game.
Survival for small ships is hard enough in Eve.


Originally by: Pattern Clarc

...All blasters to have there overloades state changed from 15%, to a 30% damage increase with the heat amount staying the same.


That seems be te right direction for me too.

Originally by: Pattern Clarc

The Taranis is fine as is.


The Ares is also doing fine. It is fast, it can defend itself agains drones and incoming missiles. You even can solo some combat interceptors with it.

Range Bonus --> Raptor this way :-)

London
Imminent Ruin
Dirt Nap Squad.
Posted - 2009.12.16 17:37:00 - [72]
 

bump, gallente need love.
fix blastoooors.


Spugg Galdon
Posted - 2009.12.22 10:36:00 - [73]
 

Bumped


Some of the ideas in this suggestion are outstanding (overload damage bonus) (increased base damage and tracking for blasters/rails)

Some do need a little revision but this needs to be considered.


Trent Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.12.23 00:29:00 - [74]
 

I must have missed this thread amidst the flames and smoke coming from the supercap discussion.

Gallente should be all about the drones and balls-out close range DPS.

Horse Glue
Posted - 2009.12.23 02:17:00 - [75]
 

"... perhaps halting the ever present creep towards harmonising all races/flavours of ships, doctrines and weapons. Which, let’s face it, makes for a rather dull game"

- agree 100%
- 1 quick example;

which one is the sentinel & which is the keres?
a)ewar+(60m3 drone bay, 20m3 bandwidth)
b)ewar+(10m3 drone bay 5m3 bandwidth).

- Hybrids, yes every1 knows how much they are broke. The quick and easy fix is to simply boost opt and falloff of blasters and boost spike dps.

- Adjust mids for a few of the galente ships by removing empty high for additional mid. This could give galente the additional web it needs to hold targets - seeing galente is extermely slow

- drone bays, yes they all need to be larger and a standard drone bay in a galente ship needs to be least 2x the bandwidth ( remember the velator it has 10m3 , a rookie ship has >= drone bay then all other galente frigs )
-myri, bring back the 125 bandwidth, a harbi has more hull and armor and moves faster, it needs the drones to do damage or others keep at range ftl.
- absolutely get rid of missle crap, these ships should be in ur face dps mofo's with drone support since galente ships are damn slow.
- I disagree with changing bonuses on these ships. for example; the taranis/swapping tracking for range. fix the hybrids so u can hit something outside of 2k and we'll all be happier.

Princess Xenia
Caldari
Scion Innovations
Posted - 2009.12.23 03:34:00 - [76]
 

Edited by: Princess Xenia on 23/12/2009 03:50:41

1- 20% AB bonus is crazy overpowered. 15% less heat damage on both AB and MWD or 10% overheating bonus on AB and MWD instead.

2- You are destroying Roden identity... use missile and suck up like a khanid.

3- 10% armor bonus BELONGS to Amarr... use a 5% armor resist AND THEN replace this bonus to 10% armor boost on ALL Amarr ships. LOL 10% armor bonus on a BS...

Personally i believe the repair bonus and armor resist is meant for gallente as a 'lighter' faster option rather than the 'heavy' plated buffer tank (more appropriate for Amarr). Make sense roleplay-wise... especially since Minmatar alpha shots are more potent, Amarr should adapt as a buffer tanker.

Ava Starfire
Minmatar
Teraa Matar
Posted - 2009.12.23 04:35:00 - [77]
 

As a rifter pilot, I must dissaprove, as I would no longer be able to close to 500m and lolyourtrackingsucks kill the incursus.

/sarcasm off.

I like it.

Nauticaa
Gallente
Unknown Soldiers
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2009.12.23 09:03:00 - [78]
 

/signed

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2009.12.23 11:36:00 - [79]
 

Haven't read anything but original post, so if any point has already been raised in comments, tough luck.
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
All Blasters overload bonus increased from 15% to 50%. heat damage adjusted to allow for twice as long overheating.

Must be a typo, or are you really suggesting a huge damage increase for an extended period of time?
Surely overheat duration should be shortened to justify such an increase.
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
On the Incursus

Would be massively overpowered. Same arguments as I made against the "AB buff to AF" discussion .. benefit with no downside is bad for game, we would be drowning in AB rail Incursus'. Also generally a poor choice to "force" any kind of fitting on players.
For it to be viable you would need to reduce fittings, decrease agility or add a whopping cap drain to its AB to prevent the obvious cookie cutters. High speed, low signature at the price of high cap drain and/or worse fittings.
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
On the Tristan

Looks good, will have to tweak fittings to avoid the 400 plate fit option as it would be invincible in its weight-class (50% from bonus + trimarks = huge buffer).
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
on the Arazu

Please for the love of Goddess reduce fittings to avoid the ridiculous twin extender fit that is already omni-present .. with your new blasters it would be nigh impossible to counter by anything but specialised ships/fits.
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
On the Diemost

Awesome solution. Maybe less than 15%/Lvl reduction though to differentiate it from the interceptor bonus, 10% would still be massive in the scenarios where it comes into play.
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
On the Brutix and Megathron hull types

See comment on Incursus. Same applies. Needs a drawback.
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
On the Hyperion

Same as I said about the Tristan. Need to avoid/discourage the immense power of the synergy between armour bonus, plates and rigs.

Other than that it looks good. Would make blasters a viable short range tool regardless of hull and give blaster boats a chance or even a full-blown revival.

Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
Not Found.
Posted - 2009.12.24 05:24:00 - [80]
 

Most of your changes don't have the balance of Gallente along the other races in mind, but to make Gallente overpowered against the others.

Any AB boost is more an Caldari nerf than a close guns damage reduction, and it is not because CCP Nozh love TPs that I can afford a loss of a precious med slot for this (the habitual Caldari problem : EW/Disrupt or Tank, take one). It is already a few problematic to shoot an armored ship who don't have any sig radius penalty to add this too.

It is one of the numerous reasons who explain why AF wasn't AB boosted for the moment.

Skullian
Posted - 2009.12.25 01:34:00 - [81]
 

I totally agree with the Deimos and Bruitx bonus fixes. That armor rep does nothing and the Deimos is a paper target when using the MWD.

Change is necessary!!!

Ogogov
Gallente
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.12.26 16:47:00 - [82]
 

I wholeheartedly agree with the blaster buff.

I also feel rails need a buff as well (as posted here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1236979&page=1#25 )


Perhaps instead of altering the armor rep bonus, which seems like a very work-intensive thing to do for each individual ship, perhaps we could take a look at why a self-armor rep bonus sucks?


1) It eats cap
2) It's slow - shield boosters have an effect immediately whereas armor reps kick in at the end of the cycle, making them very hard to time effectively.
3) Armor doesn't regenerate, shields do - doesn't this constitute an inherent disadvantage to armor tanking?
4) Armor tanking increases a ship's mass. How does this fit with ships that have to move fast and deal damage up close?

5) All of the above, cap hungry armor rep plus cap hungry MWD plus high mass? These ships are apparently designed to meld the worst of all three worlds, it would seem.

6) Armor has generally great resistance- oh, wait. It has a frightening explosive hole and whichever amarr-lover was able to push through the EM resistance changes.... well.... Rolling Eyes generally armor is now good at tanking kinetic and thermal... which are the two damage types it will be least likely to face given that every other faction's damage is selectable. duh.


Just an idea; If Gallente ships need to move fast, how about stripping down their armor amount, mass, and generally "nano" them across the board - make the armor rep bonus faster, less cap hungry and less effective. The ship would still be able to tank the same but it would be more effective in short fights, get into range faster and result in higher-energy combat, which is the kind of experience that blaster boats are supposed to bring to a battlefield.


I disagree with removing the rep bonus for certain ships (Kronos - who the hell uses that in PvP?!) but for an obviously broken ship like the Hyperion it would make sense.

ChalSto
Galactic Shipyards Inc
Huzzah Federation
Posted - 2009.12.29 23:09:00 - [83]
 

Looks well out though. I would agree with most of the parts.

AB-Concept: Well....yes...and no.
Yes, its a cool concept for Gallente. But have to be rebalanced for the missle-weapons.

Megathron: Yes, again a cool concept. But still; The Megathron is still not fast enough to reach the target. The MWD would still be needed. 1k m/s was and still is the magicaly line...

Kyra Felann
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.12.30 01:01:00 - [84]
 

I agree with most of this. Gallente need to really be the extreme close-range facemelting blaster DPS fast-charging armored juggernaut faction. I kind of like how hybrids are kind of split between two factions, but I think Gallente need more bonuses that fit with the blaster role. I'd even support changing the hybrid bonuses to blasters only and then blasters and railguns themselves could be rebalanced.

SupaKudoRio
Posted - 2009.12.30 01:06:00 - [85]
 

I like.

Might be slightly overpowered in spots, but what balance change isn't? (I'm in love with those afterburner bonuses... Embarassed )

Bevil Smyth
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.12.30 03:31:00 - [86]
 

A brilliant post. I really like the suggested armour hit points bonuses, especially on the hyperion which really doesnt know what its supposed to be right now :)

Also very much agreed that the Diemos changes and the blaster refurb.

Also Also in agreement with the Gallente laws, they should be stuck to.

Like someone else said, in general i totally agree with most of the suggestions although some of it may be a bit overpowered.

Props for Le Humour.

Gabriel Karade
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2009.12.30 17:02:00 - [87]
 

Hi guys, been busy, but good to see there is ongoing discussion.

Pattern,
I still stand by the tracking boost in-lieu of tracking bonuses as being required. It doesn’t make sense to have half the Blaster line-up functioning less effectively at the same range as the other half. In terms of longer range combat, Railguns are less affected by poorer tracking than up-close blasters, so while there will be an effect in removing tracking bonuses, it will be marginal. In terms of the actual percentage boost, 37.5% would be the minimum, and for the reasons I’ve already outlined 50% would be desirable (c.f. Megathron: 9% increase over current tracking).


I totally agree some fiddling with the final armour bonus would be required, but on the Tristan-> Hyperion line-up I think this is a sound direction to go in. swapping the Megathron/Hyperion stats could be interesting and may be worth testing. I’ve left the AB bonus on the command ships to encourage consistency down through the T1-> T2 lines, and to not step on the Damnations toes, though when re-considering the whole Gallente ship line-up, the armour bonuses are a possibility.


Princess Xenia,
You say that the AB bonus is ‘crazily overpowered’, but based upon what exactly? I think it is worthwhile testing. I have been thinking about possible drawbacks to add, and I’m tending towards an increase in the mass addition to match the speed boost, i.e. the Gallente ‘AB boats’ become faster in a straight line. As I don’t know exactly how the game calculates turn radii/acceleration I’ll just for now say “X %” per level (updated in OP).

Roden’s identity is somewhat half-baked, much as Khanid originally was. My aim here is to bring Roden back into the fold in order to have a solid doctrine based on the three Gallente ship manufacturers, namely:

Duvolle: Blasters, second damage bonus (RoF) plus falloff where warranted,
Roden: Railguns, optimal range bonus, second damage bonus (straight damage) where warranted,
CreoDron: Drones Drones and more Drones (as per already).

Finally the armour bonus is not exclusively Amarr, infact you could actually say it is a Gallente bonus based upon the Erebus (7.5% gang member armour HP per level)


Hirana,
It wasn’t a typo, I believe some combined Overload damage/duration bonus is required. After some testing I’ve found I can overheat a full rack of Ion II’s for 70 seconds before destruction. While that sounds great for a 1 vs 1, it would not be so for a small fleet battle. An overload bonus of 50% provides overmatch vs. overheated repairers, while a 30% bonus reaches parity. Again, given the risks and difficulties of getting into perfect blaster range I believe the reward should be overmatch vs. current tanks, though as with all of these bonuses, and no disagreement here; a great deal of testing would be required to hit a balanced value.

I believe adding a mass ‘bonus’ (i.e. penalty) as per above would be the correct way to address concerns of ‘benefit with no downside’ and could fit well with the RP side of things (huge afterburner, limited turn radius with the same size manoeuvring thrusters/e.t.c)

With regards to the Arazu, part of the problem there is the poor state of Gallente EW, and upping the dampner bonus would encourage proper EW fits.


Sky Marshal,
This is not the case, the aim is to provide a solid doctrinal basis for the whole Gallente line-up. Please do not focus too much on the specific percentage bonuses, these would undoubtably change through testing. As far as I am aware the assault frigate AB boost was canned due to the combination of small sig radius, T2 resists and ability to fit oversized AB, all without a penalty. I agree, a great deal of care must be taken with AB bonuses but I do think this could be an excellent Gallente Blasterboat ‘thing’.

With regards to missiles, I personally don’t see the need for the ‘sig radius bit’ – if the missile hits ‘full contact’ on any target it should do full damage, target velocity alone should be the factor on damage mitigation - but that is just my opinion.

ChalSto,
Sadly the magic 1km/sec hasn’t been achieveable on sensible fits for sometime, all I would say is an AB bonus adds an awful lot, and to see the effects fully, and the sort of novel fits it may encourage, would require a lot of testing. I don’t believe anyone here can accurately predict the exact outcome. Smile



As I said a few post back up, more discussion required, and exact numerical values for the bonuses would need a lot of testing, but I believe this could be a good solid basis to start from.






Gabriel Karade
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2010.01.01 11:52:00 - [88]
 

Edited OP in light of some of the discussion. Also fixed the link which has been broken from the word go Embarassed

Rhonnen
Aliastra
Posted - 2010.01.01 15:46:00 - [89]
 

Though I agree with the original post I'd like to see what a CCP Rep. thinks. This topic has been going for a while and not a single developer has said anything. If they have issues or they like it and are testing some of the theories I'd like to know.

ChalSto
Galactic Shipyards Inc
Huzzah Federation
Posted - 2010.01.02 17:38:00 - [90]
 

Thky for the reply.

Well.....I will try it to make it simple to understand for everyone:

All the tracking-"boost" and dmg-"boost" will not help the blasterships, becouse they will NOT reach their target (esp. the battleships).

Before all the nerfs, the Megathron did around 1,3k m/s with regular fit. That was fast enough and not OP.
NOW I can hardly even catch an Abaddon


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9

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