Yogi already addressed this a day ago and you can find the posting on Spectrum. I will quote him down below. "What actually happened is that all vehicle weapons had to be moved to a simplified heat model on a relatively short notice last week until the full resource network hooks become online for them. The data of the simplified heat model has different meanings to the numbers so it is not surprising that certain tuning values can slide a bit as we often need to go through the bulk of data relatively fast. I can't judge how your tool (I assume that's Erkul) fetches the values but also please don't rely on just a number readout. We sometimes rejig how these values are calculated internally, so if you spot a weapon seemingly changed for no reason, please try to time the overheat during gameplay yourself. We do not want to change weapon performance between 3.24.3 and 4.0. So if you spot a weapon being out of balance just report this." Yogi also admits that something else isn't adding up with current "time to kill" and that they will investigate it. "The overheating will have it's effect on the TTK but you're right, something doesn't add up there. That said, the 3.24.2 and 3.24.3 data doesn't look necessarily correct for the Inferno data. We still want some overheat on the Inferno albeit not nearly as long as it is now. The last reliable state I can currently think of was likely in 3.24.1 ... 3.24.2 and .3 states (where you could fire for minutes) were not correct either. We'll do some digging on Monday."
@ShookOne1980 At least the devs talk to us. Not many are willing to stick their neck out like that. I strongly doubt Yogi is the problem. It's disingenuous to say that, and you know it. It's more complex than "yada yada yada yogi's fault". CIG has over 1100 employee's.
I already did a video on his answers and they are not true. He says that the DPS calculator is wrong, not showing the correct value. I timed time to shoot and time to kill and time to cool down. And the DPS calculator is correct. Alpha damage is the same, but now you can fire less, so yeah nerf to all ballistics, unless they change it. We will see. o7
You know it's funny they talk about wanting things to be as close to realism as possible but yet they nerf the gatling guns to shoot about 200 rounds per minute when in real life they shoot between 700 - 7000 rounds per minute
Good to know, I currently have a Sentinel in my pledge fleet (currently the ‘best’ Vanguard) and run it with the stock S5 Attrition and 4 laser repeaters in the nose (they have the same projectile speed as the Attrition). Solarwinds paint is nice. And I run it with a stealthy build. We’ll see if I melt the Sentinel, Redeemer or Scorpius when the MISC Guardian is released. Probably the Redeemer, but we’ll see. For Pyro ballistics are not ideal imho. unless you only run defense instead of offense. For a stealth smuggler it’s probably the best, but be prepared to run instead of fight. Cheers o7
@@USS_Daedalus Looking at that video now. Oh gawd... If CIG continues on that path it takes a lot of the game away for me. As I like to create custom builds... On the other hand, it will make gameplay interesting if we will be able to loot those components. And it will be the same for all of us players. We'll see if this just is a temporary thing.
Having to depend on ammo is a huge downside to ballistics. If anything they should have higher DPS than their energy counterparts! I would give ballistics a giant burst DPS vs energy. (Let's say a 'burst' is 5 seconds just for the sake of argument.) But then balance that with a lengthy cool down. Or make energy and ballistic symbiotic, so you would switch to ballistic during capacitor recharge & make capacitor recharge longer so it would be beneficial to carry a ballistic weapon to switch to.
I can't tell if this is a purposeful nerf or just because someone went through and screwed around with heating/cooldowns without actually doing the math of how it affected the guns. Hell for all we know two different people went in there and changed two different things unaware of what the other guy was doing. 😆
i really hate that part, that they really try to make us really hard. yeah things was easy side. but they do it way too much and way too harsh. i really hope they have idea what they do bc people are really unsatisfied. i just try to make best of it. but i do get why people are disappointed.this all is too much....
I wish CIG would just post on Spectrum asking player feedback for ballistic weapons. (Because obviously they don't have any of their own good ideas for them) Sure there will be a lot of crap to sift through, but there will probably be some very good ideas.
so tired of ship nerfs and watching Ballistics just get worse and worse and worse......... This ship is powerful while shooting at an AFK starter npc starter ship come on man.. Vanguards suck I melted mine after coping with it for years. THEY SUCK. they are 10x slower now, Ballistics cant be spammed like before... Plus the size 5 weapon velocities are so slow good luck pvping. only good thing is the torps or if your enemy is afk in front of you. I hate that I love this stupid awful ship never owning it again until it's good. Let's be honest here.
![What Weapons & Components That Are NOT Available For Purchase In Alpha 4.0 | Preparing For 4.0 [4k]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1pMSIexjwy0/mqdefault.jpg)
![What Weapons & Components That Are NOT Available For Purchase In Alpha 4.0 | Preparing For 4.0 [4k]](/img/tr.png)
Yogi already addressed this a day ago and you can find the posting on Spectrum. I will quote him down below.
"What actually happened is that all vehicle weapons had to be moved to a simplified heat model on a relatively short notice last week until the full resource network hooks become online for them. The data of the simplified heat model has different meanings to the numbers so it is not surprising that certain tuning values can slide a bit as we often need to go through the bulk of data relatively fast. I can't judge how your tool (I assume that's Erkul) fetches the values but also please don't rely on just a number readout. We sometimes rejig how these values are calculated internally, so if you spot a weapon seemingly changed for no reason, please try to time the overheat during gameplay yourself. We do not want to change weapon performance between 3.24.3 and 4.0. So if you spot a weapon being out of balance just report this."
Yogi also admits that something else isn't adding up with current "time to kill" and that they will investigate it.
"The overheating will have it's effect on the TTK but you're right, something doesn't add up there. That said, the 3.24.2 and 3.24.3 data doesn't look necessarily correct for the Inferno data. We still want some overheat on the Inferno albeit not nearly as long as it is now. The last reliable state I can currently think of was likely in 3.24.1 ... 3.24.2 and .3 states (where you could fire for minutes) were not correct either. We'll do some digging on Monday."
@ShookOne1980 At least the devs talk to us. Not many are willing to stick their neck out like that. I strongly doubt Yogi is the problem. It's disingenuous to say that, and you know it. It's more complex than "yada yada yada yogi's fault". CIG has over 1100 employee's.
I came to say this.
@@ShookOne1980 Right? Making changes on the test server of an alpha game to test them out is just wild....
Damage control after people found the nerf. Sandy likely squezed his nuts and told him to say something , anything before guardian goes on sale.
I already did a video on his answers and they are not true. He says that the DPS calculator is wrong, not showing the correct value. I timed time to shoot and time to kill and time to cool down. And the DPS calculator is correct. Alpha damage is the same, but now you can fire less, so yeah nerf to all ballistics, unless they change it. We will see. o7
You know it's funny they talk about wanting things to be as close to realism as possible but yet they nerf the gatling guns to shoot about 200 rounds per minute when in real life they shoot between 700 - 7000 rounds per minute
Its unfortunate that their downside was supposed to be a finite ammo number but now its that plus literally being worse in general
Good to know, I currently have a Sentinel in my pledge fleet (currently the ‘best’ Vanguard) and run it with the stock S5 Attrition and 4 laser repeaters in the nose (they have the same projectile speed as the Attrition). Solarwinds paint is nice. And I run it with a stealthy build. We’ll see if I melt the Sentinel, Redeemer or Scorpius when the MISC Guardian is released. Probably the Redeemer, but we’ll see. For Pyro ballistics are not ideal imho. unless you only run defense instead of offense. For a stealth smuggler it’s probably the best, but be prepared to run instead of fight. Cheers o7
Nice fleet, yeah I would melt Redeemer too. Looking forward to Guardian. o7
Foxy Shows that almost all Components can't be purchased in 4.0. 😅😅😅
The Time of diversity Build will be gone if they really do it.
@@USS_Daedalus Looking at that video now. Oh gawd... If CIG continues on that path it takes a lot of the game away for me. As I like to create custom builds... On the other hand, it will make gameplay interesting if we will be able to loot those components. And it will be the same for all of us players. We'll see if this just is a temporary thing.
Having to depend on ammo is a huge downside to ballistics. If anything they should have higher DPS than their energy counterparts!
I would give ballistics a giant burst DPS vs energy. (Let's say a 'burst' is 5 seconds just for the sake of argument.) But then balance that with a lengthy cool down. Or make energy and ballistic symbiotic, so you would switch to ballistic during capacitor recharge & make capacitor recharge longer so it would be beneficial to carry a ballistic weapon to switch to.
the Polaris nose turret got nerfed too
The ballistic changes were a change necessary for resource management so it's temporary
I can't tell if this is a purposeful nerf or just because someone went through and screwed around with heating/cooldowns without actually doing the math of how it affected the guns.
Hell for all we know two different people went in there and changed two different things unaware of what the other guy was doing. 😆
Iirc Yogi said it's due to the resource network not being fully implemented.
Not true, he is twisting the truth. They nerfed the ballistic and now they try to fix it
We will see what happens.
I think the Harbinger was killing things faster than an Inferno. Granted you're shooting Pisces and Auroras. 😆
no point in having a balistic loadout anymore the new meta is laser repeaters just happens we got 4 of them from this event...
this makes me want energy repeaters in the nose now more then ever s6 attritions
i really hate that part, that they really try to make us really hard. yeah things was easy side. but they do it way too much and way too harsh. i really hope they have idea what they do bc people are really unsatisfied. i just try to make best of it. but i do get why people are disappointed.this all is too much....
I wish CIG would just post on Spectrum asking player feedback for ballistic weapons. (Because obviously they don't have any of their own good ideas for them) Sure there will be a lot of crap to sift through, but there will probably be some very good ideas.
Eyo
so tired of ship nerfs and watching Ballistics just get worse and worse and worse......... This ship is powerful while shooting at an AFK starter npc starter ship come on man.. Vanguards suck I melted mine after coping with it for years. THEY SUCK. they are 10x slower now, Ballistics cant be spammed like before... Plus the size 5 weapon velocities are so slow good luck pvping. only good thing is the torps or if your enemy is afk in front of you. I hate that I love this stupid awful ship never owning it again until it's good. Let's be honest here.
😄💥