| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
741
   |
Posted - 2014.09.08 12:44:00 -
[1] - Quote
Numbers warning.
Warning, this post contain excessive use of numbers. For those with a feint heart, or are currently with child, I advise you read the TL;DR.
TL; DR
The changes to be made to the Small Railgun should be:
* ROF reduced from 120 to 92 (as currently suggested)
* Damage reduced by 10% (not 30%)
Why:
The proposed changes (fix the damage profile, -30% damage and -24% ROF) are too steep for the intended change (to make Small Rails less effective against infantry) and would, in fact, make Small Railguns significantly weaker versus vehicles and rendering them if not impotent then St least relegated to being weight of fire only.
By altering the proposed damage change to -10% instead, while fixing the profile and reducing the ROF, we get a Small Turret that his effective against vehicles (roughly 20% less effective against shields than currently; roughly 10% more effective against armour than currently) and still less effective against infantry, period.
Even with a Particle Cannon (434.2 base damage) most Medium (Assault/Logistics) and all Heavy (Sentinel/Commando) suits require 2+ shots to kill currently. With a 10% damage reduction (390.78), more suits will require more shots and the reduced ROF will factor in more noticeably in that follow up shots will require more skill to land successfully.
DPS Comparison (using Particle Cannon, for simplicity)
Base Damage, current: 434.2
Shield Damage, current (77%): 334.334
Armour Damage, current (68%): 295.256
Base Damage, HF Delta (70% of current): 303.9
Shield Damage, HF Delta (90%): 273.51
Armour Damage HF Delta (110%): 334.29
DPS Values (DPS = Damage x ROF / 60)
Base, current: 868.4
Shields, current: 668.668
Armour, current: 590.512
Base, HF Delta: 466.0413 (-46.3%)
Shields, HF Delta: 419.382 (-37.3%)
Armour, HF Delta: 512.578 (-13.2%)
DPS Values, Gallente ADS 5
Current ROF: 180 (120 x 1.5)
HF Delta ROF: 138 (92 x 1.5)
Base, current: 1302.6
Shields, current: 1003.002
Armour, current: 885.768
Base, HF Delta: 698.97
Shields, HF Delta: 629.073
Armour, HF Delta: 768.867
I hope that format isn't ungodly to read.
Essentially, Small Railguns, with current change numbers, will be getting nerfed in every aspect. I don't know what numbers to suggest, but to me this is not a good fix for Small Railguns being too effective against infantry. Despite the efficaciousness vs armour increasing, the reduction in base damage means it will actually be harder to kill not only shield vehicles (fair enough, it should be an anti-armour weapon like the Hybrid - Rail profile is supposed to be) but also 13.2% less effective against armour.
In layman's terms that means it will take roughly 7 shots in Delta to do the same amount of damage as 6 shots currently does.
This does not sound like much, but shields will also take almost 14 shots to do the same damage as 10 currently. What this means is that Small Rails will lose all power versus vehicles, rendering them, for all intents and purposes, impotent against their primary target whilst doing little (reduced ROF only) to really dissuade use vs infantry.
Currently, armour vehicles are substantially less afraid of Incubi than Shields vehicles and this situation will actually worsen with this change while shield vehicles will also get a break.
I would suggest a change of -10% Damage and ROF down to 92 (ROF as suggested)
These are the numbers of the 10% change:
New Proposal DPS
Base Damage: 390.78
Shield Damage (90%): 351.702
Armour Damage (110%): 429.858
Base DPS: 599.196 (-31%)
Shield DPS: 539.2764 (-19.4%)
Armour DPS: 659.1156 (+11.6)
This change means that Small Railguns are almost 20% less effective against shields than currently, but slightly more than 10% more effective against armour.
For those interested, Incubus Level 5 @ -10% base:
Base DPS: 898.794 (-31%)
Shield DPS: 808.9146 (-19.4%)
Armour DPS: 988.6734 (+11.6%)
TL; DR
The changes to be made to the Small Railgun should be:
* ROF reduced from 120 to 92
* Damage reduced by 10% (not 30%)
Alt of Halla Murr.
|
ARF 1049
Vengeance Unbound
142
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:00:00 -
[2] - Quote
Well I understand what point they are coming from but they did go overboard, and as of right now the only effective anti infantry weapon is the missiles (on an ADS), I can sometimes use the railgun but if would rather them hit the damage over the RoF it's already hard enough to hit a python when his missiles knock you around and your rail turret isn't even registering half the time.
"Gallente tech with Amarr ideals swimming around in my head, I'll burn every shield tanking impurity out there."
|
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
432
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
ARF 1049 wrote:Well I understand what point they are coming from but they did go overboard, and as of right now the only effective anti infantry weapon is the missiles (on an ADS), I can sometimes use the railgun but if would rather them hit the damage over the RoF it's already hard enough to hit a python when his missiles knock you around and your rail turret isn't even registering half the time.
The small blaster is quite useful if you manage to aim it right at something... Can spray down forgers and swarmers... Personally I'd suggest a drop in the splash radius/damage to even things out and also stop infantry complaining about having no chance vs turrets.
As a side turret it's very usable as well... Even without the ads bonus. |
MarasdF Loron
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
1023
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
ARF 1049 wrote:Well I understand what point they are coming from but they did go overboard, and as of right now the only effective anti infantry weapon is the missiles (on an ADS), I can sometimes use the railgun but if would rather them hit the damage over the RoF it's already hard enough to hit a python when his missiles knock you around and your rail turret isn't even registering half the time.
If you are moving then chances are that the missiles will not be able to hit you, they don't go exactly where you'd want or expect them to go to, they don't follow any kind of pattern with the "dispersion". And when rail shots do register you shoot a Python down in one go.
|
ARF 1049
Vengeance Unbound
142
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
Derpty Derp wrote:ARF 1049 wrote:Well I understand what point they are coming from but they did go overboard, and as of right now the only effective anti infantry weapon is the missiles (on an ADS), I can sometimes use the railgun but if would rather them hit the damage over the RoF it's already hard enough to hit a python when his missiles knock you around and your rail turret isn't even registering half the time. The small blaster is quite useful if you manage to aim it right at something... Can spray down forgers and swarmers... Personally I'd suggest a drop in the splash radius/damage to even things out and also stop infantry complaining about having no chance vs turrets. As a side turret it's very usable as well... Even without the ads bonus.
Infantry aren't supposed to have a chance against turrets accept the jeeps and I don't want to be touching them to have an effective blaster turret on my incubus, the way you help the incubus out is to make it a non variable turret (no spread when fired on ADS)
missiles need less damage, and a larger mag, so you have to 3 shot most people, and they should make 1st person ADS turret sight be able to aim up and down without leaning the DS that would significantly improve use of other turrets.
"Gallente tech with Amarr ideals swimming around in my head, I'll burn every shield tanking impurity out there."
|
ARF 1049
Vengeance Unbound
142
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:26:00 -
[6] - Quote
MarasdF Loron wrote:ARF 1049 wrote:Well I understand what point they are coming from but they did go overboard, and as of right now the only effective anti infantry weapon is the missiles (on an ADS), I can sometimes use the railgun but if would rather them hit the damage over the RoF it's already hard enough to hit a python when his missiles knock you around and your rail turret isn't even registering half the time. If you are moving then chances are that the missiles will not be able to hit you, they don't go exactly where you'd want or expect them to go to, they don't follow any kind of pattern with the "dispersion". And when rail shots do register you shoot a Python down in one go.
Missiles just need a little practice and you can intercept a dive bombing after burner juiced ADS with missiles any day, all I know is missiles have a more reliable hit rate than rail turrets in dogfights.
"Gallente tech with Amarr ideals swimming around in my head, I'll burn every shield tanking impurity out there."
|
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
744
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
There was a suggestion by Pvt Numnutz awhile back about potentially dropping small missile damage but increasing the number of shots proportionally, which would basically mean you need to land more hits for the same effect, essentially rewarding accuracy over a longer period.
Anyway, does anyone have anything to say about the Small Railgun changes?
Alt of Halla Murr.
|
MarasdF Loron
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
1023
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
ARF 1049 wrote:MarasdF Loron wrote:ARF 1049 wrote:Well I understand what point they are coming from but they did go overboard, and as of right now the only effective anti infantry weapon is the missiles (on an ADS), I can sometimes use the railgun but if would rather them hit the damage over the RoF it's already hard enough to hit a python when his missiles knock you around and your rail turret isn't even registering half the time. If you are moving then chances are that the missiles will not be able to hit you, they don't go exactly where you'd want or expect them to go to, they don't follow any kind of pattern with the "dispersion". And when rail shots do register you shoot a Python down in one go. Missiles just need a little practice and you can intercept a dive bombing after burner juiced ADS with missiles any day, all I know is missiles have a more reliable hit rate than rail turrets in dogfights.
I've had over a year's worth of practice with them, how much more do I need? I can tell you, even with my terrible hit detection I would choose rails over missiles any day for air combat.
|
MarasdF Loron
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
1023
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:38:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kallas Hallytyr wrote:There was a suggestion by Pvt Numnutz awhile back about potentially dropping small missile damage but increasing the number of shots proportionally, which would basically mean you need to land more hits for the same effect, essentially rewarding accuracy over a longer period.
Anyway, does anyone have anything to say about the Small Railgun changes?
The current one is a load of bollocks. Your suggestion makes much more sense when keeping in mind that they are apparently supposed to be AV... Even though at some point it was said small turrets are AI... now even small turrets are AV... soon the small blaster is AV too. Lol.
|
Vulpes Dolosus
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
2024
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 14:41:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kallas Hallytyr wrote:There was a suggestion by Pvt Numnutz awhile back about potentially dropping small missile damage but increasing the number of shots proportionally, which would basically mean you need to land more hits for the same effect, essentially rewarding accuracy over a longer period.
Anyway, does anyone have anything to say about the Small Railgun changes?
Yes. CCP needs to keep the DPS numbers relatively the same with this change, minus the change in RoF. Ratatti even said that the change in damage profile and base damage shouldn't change the proposed DPS, and if it does, they need to compensate for that. |
|
|
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
752
|
Posted - 2014.09.08 23:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
Anyone else agree with this altered proposal? Or not?
Alt of Halla Murr.
|
manboar thunder fist
Dead Man's Game
125
|
Posted - 2014.09.17 22:36:00 -
[12] - Quote
I propose a simple yet arguably effective solution:
The problem with small rails is their ability to deal high damage at long range with precision when coupled with a stationary LAV.
Seemingly, the best solution here would be to make them less effective against infantry, while simultaneously fixing their OP ability to destroy pythons.
I propose:
Rails get a 50% efficiency to infantry...
ROF stays the same....
Rails get 65% shield, 75% armour against dropships
Rails get 80% shield, 100% armour against LAVS
Rails get 70% shield, 80% armour against tanks
In addition possibly:
Rails get a 10% DMG reduction and a 15% ROF reduction.
NERF SCOUTS, NERF TANKS, NERF AV, NERF ASSAULTS, NERF LOGIS, NERF HEAVIES
nerf life
Delta- bye bye ads, bye bye scr
|
Kallas Hallytyr
Skullbreakers
782
|
Posted - 2014.09.18 22:22:00 -
[13] - Quote
manboar thunder fist wrote:fixing their OP ability to destroy pythons.
Part of that OPness (hur hur...Pness...) is due to the efficaciousness being shield biased. With 10% damage/ROF nerf and fixed efficacy, small rails will be better against armour than shields and will be overall less effective against shields than currently/slightly more effective against armour than currently.
manboar thunder fist wrote:Rails get a 50% efficiency to infantry...
That I could get behind. Explain it however you like: the shots are more likely to impact and ricochet/whatever. It'd make it less infantry killy.
manboar thunder fist wrote:ROF stays the same....
Rails get 65% shield, 75% armour against dropships
Rails get 80% shield, 100% armour against LAVS
Rails get 70% shield, 80% armour against tanks
I strongly disagree with having different efficaciesu, mostly because they are intended to be AV. Not ALAV,not AHAV and not ADS: they're anti vehicle in general. And honestly, Incubi are one of the few natural predators of the Python: with -10% D/ROF, they will not be auto-dead as currently, but they will be a big threat, as they should be.
Alt of Halla Murr.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |