open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [ISSUE] - Balance T2 & Faction Ammos
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

Author Topic

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2009.03.25 17:13:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: Random Womble
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Null/Barrage give range bonuses to weapons with no range

Of the six range ammos, four are good, and Barrage is salvageable, likely by upping the falloff bonus. Null is problematic, but really, a +200% optimal bonus or something isn't totally unreasonable for blasters, and that'd sort of put it in the same category as the others.


Here on barrage you are hugely wrong any decent minnie pilo will tell you barrage is god, if anything it is possibly the best T2 ammo around admittedly on frigates the diffrence is less noticable but on even a muninn or ru[ture wiht good skills barrage will get you a faloff of 14-15km rather than 9-10km and that gives you a huge advantage in certain circumstances. Not to mention the vagabond where you can get well over 20km falloff (over 30kms if you faloff rig it which now post QR is not unreasonable) and on larger ships (i like cheap rigged tempests) you can get 45km faloff. While you dont do max damage when fighting in faloff (obviously) any minmatar will tell an EFT warrior that thats where they fight so the EFT figures presented are not real (not that they every are) anyway my point is thats where we minmatar pilots fight and while it is not perfect and i would love an extra 200% falloff that would just be silly (vagas with up to 60km faloff or tempests with 90km). Remember at optimal + faloff you do 1/2 damage not 0 thats at optimal + 2x faloff.

As for null yes its kind of broken but again +200% would just be silly it would also change the way each races close range guns are balanced (amarr longest but low tracking high damage, minmatar short but able to go longer but for loss of DPS good tracking lowish base damage (many minmatar ships have 2 damage bonus while amarr/gallente have just one to make up for this), gallente short good tracking, which some might not believe but check stats, and high damage) i would be more in favour of a 30-35% increase in both optimal and falloff rather than the +25% atm. However one problem null faces is not so much that its really that bad but more the idea that blasters must be used at point blank range.


I'm not a minnie pilot, and I don't know any minnie pilots who use Barrage, but I acknowledge that it likely has some utility sometimes. Thing is, look at what ship would generally use it. When I think of a ship that wants long falloff on its ACs, I think of a Vagabond or something similar, that likes fighting in the 15-20 km range, to put a point on the enemy and stay out of web/scram range. Those ships are naturally speed-fit, to be able to hold the range against slower enemies. How well does a fast-orbiting ship do when you nerf its tracking? People who fight in falloff tend to need their tracking quite a lot.

Originally by: Vardemis
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
[...] It gives a "massive" 1.45% damage increase over faction antimatter, but makes your guns miss every shot![...]


There are situations when you want the 1.45% extra damage and where you will not miss any shot. So it has a role, a fairly limited one, but it still offers an advantage, one almost as good as training the specialization skill a level and when you have that at 5 already you look for more opportunities to increase your damage.


Actually, it was Strill who said the line you quoted, and me who made about the same points you just did. Thing is, I acknowledge that a handful of slight advantages do not offset the stonking big disadvantages Void has except in some incredibly niche situations. It's not good as a whole, even if some aspects of it are. And since you can't fire half a shot, that means that Void is bad. Sure, if you know exactly how the combat is going to play out, maybe it's better, but the thing about combat is that you don't - battle plans go out the window at first contact with the enemy, and all that.

Also, who trains weapon spec skills to 5? That's just crazy.

Efrim Black
Gallente
Thanatos Industries
Posted - 2009.03.25 18:08:00 - [122]
 

Supported, dispite the arguing.

Blih Nox
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.03.25 18:23:00 - [123]
 

Remove all T2 BPO's from game

AndzX11
Caldari
Reign of Anarchy

Posted - 2009.03.27 15:50:00 - [124]
 

Edited by: AndzX11 on 27/03/2009 15:50:08
Instead of -cap/second T2 long range ammo should give a bonus to cap/recharge. Its not a lot to ask since most fleet BS lack exactly that - cap. And also because there is already the low-damage of long range ammo's and gimped tracking. So that kind of small bonus would make it more usable.

Perhaps the tracking of short range lazer/blaster/missile(expl velocity here) should be looked into as well.

Or some sort of other bonus or something would certainly be a nice addition to T2 ammo.

Kilostream
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2009.03.27 17:27:00 - [125]
 

Can't support this topic as it's unclear what is being asked for....

I would definitely support a buff for *shortrange* t2 ammo - the reason it's so cheap is not because it's easy to produce - it's bacause there is no demand due to the fact that it has crippling drawbacks for no noticable benefit - as it stands if you're using Void / Hail etc, you're doing something wrong!

I would not support nerf of faction ammo however - and since that is a concievable inference of the thread title I can't support it.

Max Essen
Gallente
Bison Industrial Inc

Posted - 2009.06.01 23:18:00 - [126]
 

Just curious ... did this ever get reviewed or supported by CSM/CCP?

My support for this is on either reducing or removing the huge drawbacks on the hybrids ... makes the T2 ammo a pretty thing to sit on the showcase but never really use it.

Minkert
Caldari
Firebird Squadron
Terra-Incognita
Posted - 2009.06.02 00:54:00 - [127]
 

/signed

Lucas Avidius
Deep Core Mining Inc.

Posted - 2009.06.02 04:25:00 - [128]
 

Edited by: Lucas Avidius on 02/06/2009 04:24:56
Signing this.

Currently on a blaster ship, I keep some Faction Antimatter and Null in the cargohold. On rail ships I keep Faction Antimatter and Spike. Javelin and Void both have such horrid drawbacks that I would literally never consider using them over CN/FN Antimatter.

Also, why not make it so that Caldari hybrid ammos get a bonus to range instead of damage, since that's the Caldari thing on all their hybrid boats?

Chequer Bones
Posted - 2009.06.02 04:49:00 - [129]
 


Just fearless
Caldari
Phantom Squad
Atlas.
Posted - 2009.06.02 08:32:00 - [130]
 


Mister Xerox
Posted - 2009.06.02 11:46:00 - [131]
 

Good lord I thought I'd never see this thread resurrected from the ashes of the previous pointless CSM runs.

Of course, I'm still all for making T2 ammo viable against faction, but it seems CCP is more interested in making it easier to create your Caldari Navy Ammo... 23 nice shiny new agents.

Mos7Wan7ed
Gallente
Dirt-Nap Ship Yards
Posted - 2009.06.02 12:41:00 - [132]
 

i trained t2 torps for a reason, and it wasn't for cheaper ammo.

Ulstan
Posted - 2009.06.02 19:01:00 - [133]
 

Edited by: Ulstan on 02/06/2009 19:03:17
The original sounds like an ignorant and angry industrialist who expected a T2 ammo BPO to be free money and is upset it isn't. T2 ammo is a definite concern, but trying half of the thrust of the original poster seems to be to nerf faction ammo, which I don't support at all.

Originally by: Mister Xerox

So, in the amount of time to crank out 5k Wrath Cruise (for example), you can convert them to CN Wrath and slap them on the market for 1900 ISK/U, which is 100% pure profit.


No it's not. You fail at understanding the economics of EVE.

Originally by: Mister Xerox

Thus, T2 ammo is relegated to back shelf because the introduction of faction ammo completely skewed the balance.


T2 ammo is relegated to the back shelf because it sucks ass, with it's horrendously large *stacking* penalties.

T1 ammo is fine. Cheap and basic.
Faction ammo is fine: super expensive and pretty good.
T2 ammo sucks - it needs to be in between the T1 and the faction ammo in terms of cost and power.
Right now the price is in the right place, but the power isn't there, many of the types are utterly pointless given the huge penalties.

Originally by: Mister Xerox

Profit margin isn't that great??? WTF are you smoking?

Faction is FREE to produce!


You are completely wrong. Don't even bother trying to make any sort of economic argument in this thread, it just weakens your case.

GENERAL EMILIO
Posted - 2009.06.03 01:06:00 - [134]
 


Mister Xerox
Posted - 2009.07.13 08:26:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
Edited by: Ulstan on 02/06/2009 19:03:17
The original sounds like an ignorant and angry industrialist who expected a T2 ammo BPO to be free money and is upset it isn't. T2 ammo is a definite concern, but trying half of the thrust of the original poster seems to be to nerf faction ammo, which I don't support at all.

Originally by: Mister Xerox

So, in the amount of time to crank out 5k Wrath Cruise (for example), you can convert them to CN Wrath and slap them on the market for 1900 ISK/U, which is 100% pure profit.


No it's not. You fail at understanding the economics of EVE.


And you fail to see the point.

It is about balance, not economic issues. I know how the economy functions very well, it is what I do.

Originally by: Ulstan
Originally by: Mister Xerox

Thus, T2 ammo is relegated to back shelf because the introduction of faction ammo completely skewed the balance.


T2 ammo is relegated to the back shelf because it sucks ass, with it's horrendously large *stacking* penalties.


As I have pointed out many times already.

Originally by: Ulstan
T1 ammo is fine. Cheap and basic.
Faction ammo is fine: super expensive and pretty good.
T2 ammo sucks - it needs to be in between the T1 and the faction ammo in terms of cost and power.
Right now the price is in the right place, but the power isn't there, many of the types are utterly pointless given the huge penalties.


For the complexities involved in manufacturing the stuff T2 should far surpass faction which can be made simply by running one (yes TWO) level 4 mission and supplying a handful of T1 ammo.

And this can be done in the amount of time it takes to blitz one level 4 mission. The production of the ammo is INSTANTANEOUS.

Economically I'm withdrawing from the argument there; T2 ammo is economically viable and indeed more profitable than faction depending on how you value your LP. I am only concerned with the stacking nerfs that make most T2 ammo utterly unusable.




Yeah, resurrecting a thread that the CSMs still refuse to take a look at.





Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us

Posted - 2009.08.26 23:09:00 - [136]
 

Oh yes I did! I bumped AND supported it.

Irongut
Sex Money Guns
Posted - 2009.08.27 01:17:00 - [137]
 

T2 ammo needs love.

Nidhiesk
Posted - 2009.08.27 13:41:00 - [138]
 

I didn't read all posts here but I can definitely tell you t2 ammo needs a rework in there design when manufacturing them. it takes way to much time and the profit margin is ridiculously low.

I would rather spend my time and ISK getting the LP for faction ammo than building t2 ammo.

I don't know if its considered charges or something cause I know nothing about mining but making omber crystal and the likes takes more time for the copy and inventions ???? ridiculus. I can't say numbers cause I dont have them in front of me...but I was angry when I saw those especially when I saw the profit margin at the end..alsmost the same as the ones I do regularly (no dont ask, I wont tell what I invent LOLYARRRR!!)

El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar
Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik

Posted - 2009.08.27 13:48:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Does anyone actually use damage T2 ammo? Range, sure - but damage?


I use Hail L to shoot structures in missions....

Fully supporting this issue, the drawbacks of T2 damage ammo need looking at.

HybridMiner
Rudis Vox

Posted - 2009.08.27 15:25:00 - [140]
 


Lord Cath
Amarr
Gung-Ho
Posted - 2009.08.27 15:44:00 - [141]
 

Edited by: Lord Cath on 27/08/2009 15:45:54
Originally by: MirrorGod
Originally by: MirrorGod
Signing, but only with hope that faction should not be nerfed, and ffs, whatever you do, don't change scorch crystals, they're fine.



scorch and aurora are good, conflag and that other thing noone is stupid enuff to use are crap...

edit : support "love for T2", do not support "Nerf faction ammo"

Minkert
Caldari
Firebird Squadron
Terra-Incognita
Posted - 2009.11.05 19:40:00 - [142]
 


IronThimble
Brotherhood of Heart and Steel
Libertas Fidelitas
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:41:00 - [143]
 

Bump back to page 1. Supported.

Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
POD-SQUAD
Posted - 2009.11.11 08:10:00 - [144]
 

Edited by: Maxsim Goratiev on 11/11/2009 08:09:51
agreed, void is absolutely useless ATM, so is the high-damage railgun charge (forgot the name)
They half your tracking, with void also severly cutting your falloff, need inssane amount of skills to use, and offer nearly no additional damage over navy antimatter. The range and tracking cut would be acceptable if there damage would be significantly larger, then they could be used to give small ship edge over larger ships, say frigate over a BS, or used by Hacs and BS against capitals.
They either need much lower penalties, or increase in efficiency.

Arcane Azmadi
Caldari
First Flying Wing Inc
Primary.
Posted - 2009.12.02 22:05:00 - [145]
 

Good grief, why are we being forced to bump a topic which alreqdy has this much support AGAIN?


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

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