Features & Ideas Discussion

 
^ Back to top

Topic is locked indefinitely.

28 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Medium Rail, Beam and Artillery rebalance

Jump to first DEV post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 Posted: 2013.07.18 10:49  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Good morning space adventurers!

IF YOU WANT TO CRITICIZE THIS PROPOSAL PLEASE READ THE EXPLANATION BELOW FIRST <3

Okay so I'm going to give you the numbers first, then do some text walling below to try and explain why we arrived where we did.

Medium Rails (all sizes and metas):
+15% Rate of Fire
+15% Damage Multiplier
-15% Tracking Speed

Medium Beams:
+25% Damage Multiplier
-10% Tracking Speed

Medium Artillery:
+10% Rate of Fire
-5% Tracking

So the basic idea is that we're increasing damage by quite a lot for all medium long range turrets, while also lowering their tracking a little bit.

From a high level, the goal here is to make long range weapons valuable enough that people are able to use them for both PVP and PVE without being laughed at. This is hard to accomplish without stepping heavily on the toes of either large weapons or short-range medium weapons. We felt that a large damage increase was absolutely necessary for there to be any chance of seeing increased use, but the higher damage goes the more pressure gets put on other weapon systems. By making tracking speed a bit worse we preserve a lot of the advantage that medium short-range guns bring, while also making medium long-range guns a great choice verse large guns in many situations.

To understand why that last part is true, its VERY important that you understand how tracking works in EVE. I want to use an example here to help illustrate:

The tracking speed on a standard Neutron Blaster Talos with Null loaded is .0794
The tracking speed on a new 250mm Railgun Deimos with Antimatter loaded will be .0304

It looks like the Talos tracks 3x as well as the Deimos. In reality, because of the role Signature Resolution plays, the Deimos will actually track moving targets about 19% better than the Null Talos.

A real tracking number that combines tracking speed and resolution would look like this:

Real tracking on standard Neutron Blaster Talos with Null loaded is .0001985
Real tracking on a new 250mm Railgun Deimos with Antimatter loaded is .0002432

If you want to make this kind of comparison for other ships and situations, divide tracking speed by the signature resolution of the gun and compare the resulting numbers. If you want to see an awesome in-depth explanation for tracking, I recommend reading THIS BLOG by Azual Skoll.

One of the discussions we had with the CSM on this topic (there were a lot) revolved around a situation where you get to choose which ship to bring to a fight where you will be shooting at Talwars. Do you want a new medium long-range gun ship, or an Attack BC with large short-range guns. So I made a DPS graph here showing three fits: a 200mm Rail Thorax, a 250mm Rail Deimos, and a Neutron Talos, all of which have 2 tracking enhancers fit. The situation shown would be if the Talwar has MWD on and is moving at full speed at an angle of 60 degrees (hopefully fairly average, though it will vary a lot). You can see what that looks like here: DAMAGE GRAPH

There are of course a lot of other reasons to bring medium long-range ships over large like price, speed, resilience, and the option to shoot to much longer ranges. Overall we are still a tad worried about power creep here, but hopefully this will put medium guns in a healthy place in relation to their competition.

Be sure to check out the HEAVY ASSAULT CRUISER REBALANCE as well as many of those ships are affected by this change and vice versa

As always, looking forward to feedback.
CCP Rise
@ccp_rise
Fraternity.
#2 Posted: 2013.07.18 10:50
first

we are waiting it so long
Drunk 'n' Disorderly
#3 Posted: 2013.07.18 10:55  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
brb refitting ferox

also. Are you going to de-crap heavy missiles now? Before the reason you nerfed them was because you thought buffing all the long range turrets was too much "power creep". Fozzie? Any say on this?
Amarr Empire
#4 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:01
As an Amarr specialized player, these changes look good to me.
#5 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:04
CCP Rise wrote:

The tracking speed on a standard Neutron Blaster Talos with Null loaded is .0794
The tracking speed on a new 250mm Railgun Deimos with Antimatter loaded will be .0304

It looks like the Talos tracks 3x as well as the Deimos. In reality, because of the role Signature Resolution plays, the Deimos will actually track moving targets about 19% better than the Null Talos.

As always, looking forward to feedback.
CCP Rise


I don't thing there is such a thing as a "standard" ship fit, that would imply you are balancing around a specific fit and then using anything but that means you can't compete.

I also believe comparing 2 different charge types is a bad idea, null charges have a 25% tracking penalty.
  - 
Gentlemen's Agreement
#6 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:05
I was looking out for this since your post on Twitter ... finally I can fit the Gallente ships for longrange without thinking, that i should have used minmatarr instead.
#7 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:14
mmkay so why are all the comparisons ignoring T2 ammo? ..... who uses antimatter on rails? .. anyone?

T2 ammo needs a buff on long range guns .. -75% range makes it unusable...
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Drunk 'n' Disorderly
#8 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:18
Harvey James wrote:
mmkay so why are all the comparisons ignoring T2 ammo? ..... who uses antimatter on rails? .. anyone?

T2 ammo needs a buff on long range guns .. -75% range makes it unusable...


Antimatter has great range. Javelin could use a bit more range, but i think other than that its quite balanced. Antimatter should be better in some circumstances so how it is now is decent. Javelin does cripple your range just a little too much IMO. Spike is great and should stay as is. With the damage boost it will get it will be super useful.
Shadow Cartel
#9 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:28  |  Edited by: TrouserDeagle
It's funny how short range guns are basically entirely about their T2 long range ammo. I thought T2 was supposed to be niche, specialist ammo, not what you use all the time. Can you imagine trying to use a blaster ship without carrying a large pile of null and having it loaded all the time by default, because it's plain better in 99% of situations? Anyway, you should probably be nerfing the obviously overpowered things (ABCs, scorch, null and barrage). It's insanity that you're balancing stuff around a shield null talos of all things, one of the most broken things around. I'd probably go with a -75% tracking penalty on null scorch barrage, instead of 25%, and/or just reducing the range.

It'd be nice if you could look at low-tier long range guns, because they're much worse than low-tier short range guns. It'd also be nice if you could do something with range bonuses. Amarr optimal bonuses are great, minmatar falloff bonuses for ACs are great, but artilleries and hybrid guns are all half optimal half falloff, meaning they only get half the benefit of a range bonus that lasers or ACs do.

If you want to move the game away from being entirely about t2 ammo (no diversity, bad for new players, etc.), you could slow the damage reduction on t1 ammos as you go up the ranges, and make it so projectile and hybrid ammos have bonuses/penalties to both optimal and falloff (some number jiggling would be required), so you could load longer range t1/faction ammos into falloff/s weapons

Edit: You should probably stop testing gallente ships with shield tanks on them. It's supposed to be possible to armour tank gallente, it's supposed to be what they do best. If I load up EFT and find that it's impossible to rail fit anything unless you load LSEs instead of 800mm plates, I'll be quite disappointed.
#10 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:29
Bringing back the midrange AHAC Zealot?
AAAAAAWWWW YIIIIISSSSS!!!


PS: nice to see Azual getting some credit, that article of his is golden.
Now should he write some more of those damn articles, that'd be even better.
Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
The Afterlife.
#11 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:34  |  Edited by: Schmell
OP AS HELL

Would abuse
#12 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:38
It's a general consensus that Medium Rails need a buff, but giving them a 15% bonus to both RoF and damage seems a bit drastic to me - they don't suck that bad (and Rail Proteus or Astarte still works very well in killing rats that are weak to Kin/Thermal). But, since both Rails and Beams need capacitor to fire and are limited in terms of what damage they can inflict, they need to have at least 10% more DPS than Artillery turrets (possibly also better range) to make up for their lack of flexibility.

On the other hand, Artillery turrets of all sizes are terribly hard to fit (as most of us know that, even with perfect skills, you can't fit a full rack of 1400mm's on a Nado without ACR rig). I would therefore reduce the powergrid needs of all Artillery turrets (expect XL) by 10% but also lower their alpha by similar amount.
Highsec is for casuals.
A Band Apart.
#13 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:38  |  Edited by: Zappity
Happy.

Edit: played around with - 15% tracking stats and, um, unhappy now. It doesn't work well. Also, armor?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#14 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:44  |  Edited by: Katrina Oniseki
Any word on if Heavy Missiles will be updated again?

Nevermind, HMLs are about on par. Would like TC/TD/TE to affect missiles though.
Chūjō Katrina Oniseki
~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer
~ [I-RED] Director of Public Relations
HYDRA RELOADED
#15 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:50  |  Edited by: Morel Nova
Swap the arty RoF buff to a 20% damage bonus instead. Artillery is for alpha strikes, this risks making all weapon systems a bit too similar which is boring.
Limitless Inc.
#16 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:53
CCP RISE.

OHHHH yes. Thankyou. Thankyou thankyou thankyou.

Ohh you are made of WIN and everywhere you go it WINS.
C C P Alliance
#17 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:54
Morel Nova wrote:
Swap the arty RoF buff to a 20% damage bonus instead. Artillery is for alpha strikes, this risks making all weapon systems a bit too similar which is boring.


Its very intentional that it gets ROF and not damage. Alpha on Arty is already plenty high, making arty Hurricanes and Muninns both viable before the changes. We wanted to make sure the dps kept up with rails and beams somewhat without overbuffing alpha which is working fine currently.
@ccp_rise
Pandemic Legion
#18 Posted: 2013.07.18 11:56  |  Edited by: Adwokat Diabla
at first I was super excited about this and was gonna buy some eagles. but then i saw the tracking nerf to rails and now...

I know you think that it tracking better then a talos with null is cool, but in reality its kinda ****** vs frigs unless they're ******** and coming at you in a staight line. m. rails already track the 2nd worst of medium guns, and only just slightly better then arties, so why even bother when you can just use the other, better tracking guns. Please, just remove the tracking nerf on medium rals, and give them the buff that they so desperately need. Literally nobody uses medium rails right now and if it turns out that its over-powered then you can always nerf it, but I really do not think that this tracking nerf is going to help.
#19 Posted: 2013.07.18 12:00
CCP Rise wrote:
Morel Nova wrote:
Swap the arty RoF buff to a 20% damage bonus instead. Artillery is for alpha strikes, this risks making all weapon systems a bit too similar which is boring.


Its very intentional that it gets ROF and not damage. Alpha on Arty is already plenty high, making arty Hurricanes and Muninns both viable before the changes. We wanted to make sure the dps kept up with rails and beams somewhat without overbuffing alpha which is working fine currently.


Good i thought that was intentional as Arty does have excessive alpha right now
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
#20 Posted: 2013.07.18 12:01
CCP Rise is there any intention to do a ammo review ?
-50% and -75% penalties are too high for long range guns
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
28 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump