These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Updated][Winter] Missile Rebalance 2.0 + Hurricane tweak

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gizan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1081 - 2012-09-19 07:58:11 UTC
DIE IN A FIRE!
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1082 - 2012-09-19 07:59:44 UTC
Personaly I think the Heavy missiles nerf is way to steep, and pretty hard to controle when Nerving it at 3 points at teh same time.

Still think a TD for missiles should be a different module than the TD or Guns.

Range nerf, good.
Damage Nerf, and TD vunrable due to scripts will probably kill heavy missiles instead of nerving them, both for PvP and PvE
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#1083 - 2012-09-19 08:09:35 UTC
I also have concerns about HAMs being nerfed by TD's. It makes no sense, and they are already a subpar weapon system versus anything which can kite. Or has a sig radius less than a small moon. Or both.

Crucifier vs HAM Drake? Crucifier will just fly away unless his gang turns up, or TD the missiles down below 20km (including Javs!) and sit with utter, utter impunity.

At least you don't need to sensor damp missile boats, right? Just TD the shitter out of their missiles.

The only upside is that fitting TE's will buff missiles as well as guns. This will have an effective flow-on to reducing DPS because HML and HAM Drakes will start fitting TE's to buff range/explosion velocity, instead of BCU's to just buff DPS. So, I am equivocal abut whether you need to spread TD to missiles AND nerf HML DPS.

Secondly, tracking links will become effective as remote-EWAR buffs. HAM drakes fluffed by Scimis? Game on.

TE's will become king for Cyclones, Stabbers and Tempests (if anyone ever fits launchers to them) because the TE will spead a benefit across both weapon systems now, buffing your HAM or HML range/velocity as well as turret optimal/tracking.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Kmelx
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1084 - 2012-09-19 08:18:14 UTC
The proposed heavy missile changes go way too far, on top of what may be further nerfs to Tengus in the future the HML nerf would make the Tengu useless for both PVP and PVE, you'd get what 300-350dps on a PVP fit T3 or less? Yeah that's a great plan!

Tracking disruptor change is an awful idea, it would become by far the most overpowered module in the game and a must fit module to any and all PVP ships, currently the module is already powerful, but it is balanced by the fact that it does not work against missiles, keep it as it is.

-1 from me.
Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#1085 - 2012-09-19 08:28:05 UTC
Really CCP, is EVE's code so broken that you cant get defenders working? Fix defenders, end of problem!
You leave things broken for YEARS, nothing new, but don't start nerfing away to cover for your poor coding skills, seriously!

—Ω—
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1086 - 2012-09-19 08:29:31 UTC
Rita May wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Do not forget that missile boats are able to specifically pick the damage type they do. As in 100% of a damage type. Outside of drones, no other weapon system has that luxury.


and you see, fun fact:
Those missile boats most talked about here don't have that luxury if you look at those numbers being thrown around up till now:
They are all for the ONE bonused dmg type.

Shot with anything else and look at the numbers again.
That would be 25% less base damage, 5% LESS as the proposed "patch" for HMs will bring - but wait, those 20% will hit the unbonused damage types too...

cu

If the ship gets a +5% damage for kinetic missiles and you use a different damage type; it is in fact 20% less. Not 25% less.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#1087 - 2012-09-19 08:33:09 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
Crucifier vs HAM Drake? Crucifier will just fly away unless his gang turns up, or TD the missiles down below 20km (including Javs!) and sit with utter, utter impunity.


Whereas a turret BC would just happily shoot away despite being TDed... oh.

You're right to say that TDs will be lolOP though, even before the inevitable ubiquitous link T3s push the TD effect up to 90%.
Calisto Thellere
#1088 - 2012-09-19 08:34:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Calisto Thellere
"CCP; fixing things by ruining other things since 2003."

You guys sure know how to overkill will the nerf bat, seriously.

Hows about fixing the broken things instead of nerfing the working as intended parts just because its easier and less work to do?
Deacon Ix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1089 - 2012-09-19 08:37:30 UTC
Not read all 50+ pages so this might have been mentioned.

If TDs will affect missiles will TEs and TCs?

IMO a module which increases the range and exp velocity of missiles has been long over due (there are the rigs but for balance modules are needed too)
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
#1090 - 2012-09-19 08:44:22 UTC
Swap the grid requirements for fitting HML and HAMs.

Makes HAMs much more viable and addresses another of the OP aspects of current HML fits.

Fear God and Thread Nought
Ashera Yune
Doomheim
#1091 - 2012-09-19 08:44:28 UTC
Deacon Ix wrote:
Not read all 50+ pages so this might have been mentioned.

If TDs will affect missiles will TEs and TCs?

IMO a module which increases the range and exp velocity of missiles has been long over due (there are the rigs but for balance modules are needed too)


You obvious did not read the OP.

Yes TE and TC will affect missiles now.

"Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth."

 Kahlil Gibran
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#1092 - 2012-09-19 08:46:01 UTC
Isaiah Harms wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We're going to be changing the hurricane at the same time


Oh yeah you're changing it. What you didn't tell everyone is the Hurricane with a typical 1600mm plate can only fit 5 180mm
autocannons. P.S. That's with a 5% powergrid implant.

Kind of pathetic. Oh... and very sneaky of you CCP. What's the deal? Don't like the Whelp Cane? Have to save your precious supercapital friends at the demise of every other player in-game?

Can we just eliminate Minmatar and Caldari from the game. I'd like those skillpoints back.

TY.


Whoa whoa, hold your horses there. Have you ever tried training Engineering or Advanced Weapon Upgrades? I can fit 1600mm, MWD and a full rack of 220s along with one medium neutralizer with Engineering V and AWU III, which is not that far-fetched. If you're going to spout bullshit, at least take it a less less into the extremes because people might just start calling you on it.
tgl3
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1093 - 2012-09-19 08:48:37 UTC
Deacon Ix wrote:
Not read all 50+ pages so this might have been mentioned.

If TDs will affect missiles will TEs and TCs?

IMO a module which increases the range and exp velocity of missiles has been long over due (there are the rigs but for balance modules are needed too)

CCP Fozzie wrote:

-Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect:
Max flight time (with optimal range script)
Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1094 - 2012-09-19 08:50:08 UTC
Webvan wrote:
*wonders how many subs CCP is going to loose over this"

Personally, if this were my game, I'd make everyone happ... less irritated by balancing ships up rather than nerfing them down. But hey, it's your game, your subs, your risk. I just hope I get an SP refund, because I'm not going to retrain my account on the clock over some lazy nerf.


5 or 6. All of them posting in this topic over how its horrible their Op ships are finally getting a nerf. Also, buffing everything else up will result in exactly the same result only it will take far far longer to do.
SubStandard Rin
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1095 - 2012-09-19 08:51:59 UTC
[
CCP Frozie wrote:
The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm.



I can see that you want the lowrange missiles to deal more dammage then the longrange missiles HAM over HML
but a ArtyCane calculating on it using a PG implant or a ACR is just plain wrong. if the ships is intended to fly with a certain fit then the PG/CPU of the ships should reflect this!

the PG need since a 720mm Art II takes 275 PG each now and with a 10% reduction its - 27.5 PG or -25.0 PG on a TecI version so with 7 of thoes
the PG goes down -192.5 -175 (Tec1)

with your reduction of 225 your removing 32,5PG (Tec2) or 50PG (Tec1) .... from the ship fully equipted.

-2.89% PG with Tec2 720mm
or
-4,44y% PG with Tec1 720mm

With thoes numbers i can't recomend any new player to use a Hurricane as a Arty base as with so mutch less PG its a problem and for a Tec2 version to be balanced around using a Implant is just plain wrong.
my sugestions is instead drop the PG need for Arty with 11% and you should see it work.

i my self prefere the AC cane but thats just me.


on the HML Nerf well im not very extatic as it seems ALOT and im just scrying now but i think that some of the changes will be reverted. atleast the Range nerf that just wrong

HML could be lower dammage but they are long distance missiles.

also hitting HML is hitting alot more hulls then just the Horrific Drake or Tengu
your hitting Caracal (Cruiser) and alot of auxillary weapons on Mimatar Cruisers/BC have you realy crunched your numbers?
for if your trying to fiddle with alot of ships
Seramis
57th - The Wildcards
#1096 - 2012-09-19 08:52:59 UTC
You can defend against everything.
For Guns you have:
- Tracking Disruptor
- high Transversal Speed
- being out of range

For Missiles you have:
- high Speed (the direction doesn't matter)
- Smartbombs
- Defender Missiles
- being or flying out of range
- at range you have a lot of time to warp of because of travelling time of the missiles

So currently you already can defend against missiles much easier than against turrets, why do we need another module to defend against missiles?

Drake and Tengu are the only missile boats worth flying in PvP at the moment. After the nerf there is no reason to use any missile boat in PvP anymore. Why does CCP not simply remove missiles from the game if they are so overpowered? They get nerfed to death anyway. Can I have the 13Mio SP in Missiles back and put them into other categories please? This nerfing is just stupid
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1097 - 2012-09-19 08:53:12 UTC
Calisto Thellere wrote:
"CCP; fixing things by ruining other things since 2003."

You guys sure know how to overkill will the nerf bat, seriously.

Hows about fixing the broken things instead of nerfing the working as intended parts just because its easier and less work to do?



These things were bronken, and after the nerf they will be in line with everything else.
Signal11th
#1098 - 2012-09-19 08:53:58 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Webvan wrote:
*wonders how many subs CCP is going to loose over this"

Personally, if this were my game, I'd make everyone happ... less irritated by balancing ships up rather than nerfing them down. But hey, it's your game, your subs, your risk. I just hope I get an SP refund, because I'm not going to retrain my account on the clock over some lazy nerf.


5 or 6. All of them posting in this topic over how its horrible their Op ships are finally getting a nerf. Also, buffing everything else up will result in exactly the same result only it will take far far longer to do.



Probably even less but their only seems to be 3 or 4 of the usual people supporting this and everyone else hating it.

What happens when the "new thing" that replaces the Drake and Tengu becomes too popular... It's the same old crappy circles that CCP do instead of concentrating on things people have actually asked for.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#1099 - 2012-09-19 08:56:01 UTC
Webvan wrote:
*wonders how many subs CCP is going to loose over this"

Personally, if this were my game, I'd make everyone happ... less irritated by balancing ships up rather than nerfing them down. But hey, it's your game, your subs, your risk. I just hope I get an SP refund, because I'm not going to retrain my account on the clock over some lazy nerf.


translates to:

I'm a 5 yearold and more is always better!
Kmelx
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1100 - 2012-09-19 08:58:20 UTC
Kmelx wrote:
The proposed heavy missile changes go way too far, on top of what may be further nerfs to Tengus in the future the HML nerf would make the Tengu useless for both PVP and PVE, you'd get what 300-350dps on a PVP fit T3 or less? Yeah that's a great plan! Your using the nerf bat to beat Tengus to death, PVP tengus already do crap dps.

Tracking disruptor change is an awful idea, it would become by far the most overpowered module in the game and a must fit module to any and all PVP ships, currently the module is already powerful, but it is balanced by the fact that it does not work against missiles, keep it as it is.

-1 from me.