Restructure Weapon Bonuses

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

The idea is simple, but the implementation would be wicked complex.

Short version: Make weapons more like ships insofar as the each weapon gets different bonuses instead of the weapon skill simply providing a straight damage/RoF bonus. This could allow for some interesting design choices and potentially make lower-tier turrets more viable.

Long version: I’m going to use small railguns as an example (and only an example) but the principles would apply to all weapons. Currently, small railguns all get +5% damage per skill level of Small Hybrid Turret and +2% damage per skill level of Small Railgun specialization (if they’re T2). As is the case with most turret families, the higher tier entries have higher damage and longer range at the expense of lower tracking and higher fitting. While they all benefit from damage bonuses, a damage bonus doesn’t necessarily play into their relative strengths. What I’m proposing would be to remove the damage bonuses from the skills, and add something like the following bonuses to the weapons themselves:

75mm Railgun I
Small Hybrid Turret bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to tracking

75mm Railgun II
Small Hybrid Turret bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to tracking
Small Railgun Specialization bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonuses to damage

125mm Railgun I
Small Hybrid Turret bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to optimal range

125mm Railgun II
Small Hybrid Turret bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to optimal range
Small Railgun Specialization bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonuses to damage

150mm Railgun I
Small Hybrid Turret bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to damage

150mm Railgun II
Small Hybrid Turret bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to damage
Small Railgun Specialization bonuses (per skill level):
2.5% bonuses to rate of fire

Again, these would be instead of the existing weapon skill bonuses, not in addition to (i.e. small hybrid turret would provide no bonus itself, just like the Caldari Destroyer skill doesn’t*) and none of the associated support skills would change either. I tried to pick numbers that make sense, but they’re for illustration so please don’t comment on the specific values. Notice how each entry has specific strengths, and those strengths grow as the pilot becomes more skilled. Maybe to the point where someone chooses to fit an undersized railgun not just because of fitting, but because it’s the better choice for the job. And also, the specialization skill bonuses aren’t necessarily forced to all be tiny; they can end up being just as impactful (no pun intended) as the base skill bonuses.

Arties would be another great example here: give the smaller ones damage bonuses and the larger ones RoF bonuses (along with application bonuses mixed in like with the railgun example) in order to help better deal with the long-standing “RoF vs. Alpha” debate.

Now, obviously, all of this would take a lot to balance and get right. But if it worked, I think it would provide a much more diverse ship fitting ecosystem and potentially open up some new gameplay avenues.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Am I totally off base here?

*Can you tell that I’m a Cormorant lover at heart? :heart_eyes:

2

Not really opposed except for the amount of work and time i think it would take for CCP to implement.
Otherwise +1

2 Likes
3

Seems like a fun idea, but i think instead of straight up buffing weapons it should be more like -2.5% damage per level but + 5% optimal range or smth

4

I’m confused by this part. Do you mean there’s no damage bonus provided, as the caldari destroyer gets optimal range and tracking speed bonuses from the skill?

I like the idea of this too, but would be concerned it steps on the toes of the ammunition bonuses, not sure if that’s a good thing or not.

Regards,
Cypr3ss.

1 Like
5

The server can’t support this just so you know weapon grouping was just one development to reduce load

6

That just not true, I can’t even come up with a witty or smart assed comment for it.

7

The biggest question is, will the new bonuses keep the weapons a they currently are or would it be a bit of power creep?

8

Not opposed to the concept and it does provide more flexibility for balance, but yeah this is hella-complex and a lot of work to do.

1 Like
9

The CORMORANT gets the bonus for having the skill. But the skill itself does nothing.

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=33092

As oppose to the current version of small hybrids which describes the bonus it provides.

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=3301

2 Likes
10

Ahh… well that makes sense, in my head Caldar Destroyer = Cormorant, there is nothing else. :slight_smile: Thanks!

Regards,
Cypr3ss.

11

Yes, exactly that. Thanks, I wasn’t super consistent with explaining that.

I’m not sure that server load would be an issue here. You can only group weapons of the same type, and each weapon/group would have the same number of skill bonus calculations, it would just pull those bonuses from different places than it does now.

Thanks for the feedback everybody!

12

This is old idea from when T2 weapon skills were announced.

T2 skill only effect the ammo.

The concept was by training T2 spec skills players gained knowledge to effectively utilize ammo. Basically gaining more damage out of turret ammo, and better explosion radius and explosion velocity with missiles.

The T2 skills still unlock the T2 turrets, launchers and ammo. But had no other effect on turrets or launchers.

The idea was if you had a turret or launcher (no matter meta), training T2 was worthwhile to gain better ammo bonuses. As the T2 weapon had default better features than non-T2 version, but with a high fit requirement.

I think this was a great idea that CCP should ran with back in the day. There’s no reason it could be still done. It would make a huge difference to how players would fit and make all combat more interesting with the possible weapon and ammo combos.

13

I agree, +25% would be a big deal in small ship PvP, I think it would negatively impact the kiting fight style.

Ugh itsa necro

14

What you’re talking about doesn’t to anything to differentiate the individual weapons from from their counterparts. I think you totally missed the point of my post.

Given our past interactions, this doesn’t surprise me.

(Not an attack, just an observation that our brains seem to be wired differently.)

15

All good.

Though your idea is good, its how can it be done and what about all the other turrets and weapons?

The skills were blanket cover skills, one bonus to all of the same type and size. And CCP decided on damage bonus to the turrets, and ROF for launchers.

To do what you suggest it might be easier to change individual turret specs, T1 and T2 stay the same, but all between have changes, like how Factional turrets have better fitting requirements and range/tracking.

As it is T2 ammo effects the turrets more than factional and T1 ammo, but reducing tracking, increase cap, etc, etc.

So personally I’d leave the turret skills as is, change skill spec to T2 ammo damage bonus, and make specific turrets have your suggested bonuses, but not lvl improved, after all that’s why CCP added tracking enhances,computers and damage enhancement modules.

But that’s just my 2cents worth on the idea.

16

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.