These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

ETA on Missile Changes Part 2

First post
Author
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#21 - 2013-01-28 19:21:07 UTC
We're not changing the relationship between tracking modules and missiles in Retribution 1.1

That's all I can say for certain at this time.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

fukier
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2013-01-28 20:24:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We're not changing the relationship between tracking modules and missiles in Retribution 1.1

That's all I can say for certain at this time.



i assume this will ahve to wait for teh bs/torps/cruisemissile rebalance first?

then we can see if and how te/tc/td will work on and against missiles?

At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Jaiimez Skor
The Infamous.
#23 - 2013-01-28 21:10:19 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We're not changing the relationship between tracking modules and missiles in Retribution 1.1

That's all I can say for certain at this time.


Thank you for sparing the time to respond and atleast letting us know. It is appreciated :)
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#24 - 2013-01-28 22:41:13 UTC
Jaiimez Skor wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We're not changing the relationship between tracking modules and missiles in Retribution 1.1

That's all I can say for certain at this time.


Thank you for sparing the time to respond and atleast letting us know. It is appreciated :)

Does mean that everything still seems to be on the table too. A lot of options seem open.
Jacid
Corvix.
#25 - 2013-01-28 23:28:26 UTC
Not a fan of this idea why not just fix defender missiles to effect either targeted ships or incoming missile dps to fleet. Balance the firing rate of defender missiles launchers to be able to nullify a larger portion of dps from slower moving missiles but as the range decreases between the two ships more missiles get through the defenses..
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#26 - 2013-01-28 23:39:12 UTC
One module to counter the two main weapon system is a bad idea, as stated before.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Naomi Anthar
#27 - 2013-01-29 00:13:08 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We're not changing the relationship between tracking modules and missiles in Retribution 1.1

That's all I can say for certain at this time.


Not good , really not good. Keeping Tengu unaffected by Sansha EWAR and BloodRaiders EWAR for so long only forces even more players into this really annoyingly overpopular ship. If you want everyone to fly Tengu , maybe name game Tengu Online.
How is that for example that Sensor Dampening affects everyone, ECM affects everyone, Target Painting and Stasis Webifier too. But for no reason missiles are not only capless so unaffected by energy neutralizers but also completly unaffected by tracking disruption ?

Why so much hate against tracking disruption ? Why laser or dunno rail boat must suffer range reduction from 60km to 7km in Sansha DED 5 when missile boat couldn't care at all (just an example)? VS what faction it's better to be armed with guns than missiles ? Yup Tengu online. I'm not talking about pvp only. Look at PvE. EWAR should work vs all equally.

I need really some clear answer why it's ok that sensor dampener or ecm can shutdown anyone but tracking disruption completly useless vs drone boat or missile boat ? How is that ? Even in 21th century missiles are guided by computer systems so they can be disrupted . Actually even in 21th century it's easier to cheat rocket than bullet. In this game for some unknown reason you cannot disruput electronics of missile launcher or onboard drone controller(for example drones tracking/range).
Naomi Anthar
#28 - 2013-01-29 00:16:47 UTC
Altrue wrote:
One module to counter the two main weapon system is a bad idea, as stated before.


You already got many modules that counter every weapon system in this game except titans or sieged dreads. Namely : ECM, sensor dampener.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#29 - 2013-01-29 00:56:19 UTC
Jacid wrote:
Not a fan of this idea why not just fix defender missiles to effect either targeted ships or incoming missile dps to fleet. Balance the firing rate of defender missiles launchers to be able to nullify a larger portion of dps from slower moving missiles but as the range decreases between the two ships more missiles get through the defenses..


This.

Or something damn well like it!

In real life, ships have these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

And here it is in action firing 4500 bullet a minute...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgpQBZF2sZQ

Having to activate the freaking defender missile module each time a volley of missiles is incoming is laughable and its completely broke on everything except the rats scripted to use them.

Please replace them with something like linked Big smile

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#30 - 2013-01-29 02:39:48 UTC
Also, as long as missile users (of which I am occasionally a one) are going to have to use extra mids and lows to fit TEs and TCs to counter these new mandatory disruption modules, I'd like a boost to tanking and damage on shield tanked ships that use missiles... because I now can't use those slots to fit tank or ballistic controls, so ships that have to use shields/missiles will need a buff to compensate for the effective loss of low and mid slots.

Thanks. (also, are we beginning to see why this might not be the best idea?)
Naomi Anthar
#31 - 2013-01-29 02:44:52 UTC
Paikis wrote:
Also, as long as missile users (of which I am occasionally a one) are going to have to use extra mids and lows to fit TEs and TCs to counter these new mandatory disruption modules, I'd like a boost to tanking and damage on shield tanked ships that use missiles... because I now can't use those slots to fit tank or ballistic controls, so ships that have to use shields/missiles will need a buff to compensate for the effective loss of low and mid slots.

Thanks. (also, are we beginning to see why this might not be the best idea?)


Sure you can be compensated as much as gun users. Fair enough same treatment.

Thanks. And btw we don't see this as bad idea. It's called balance mate. Like it or not we are not compensated for using TE and TC on gunboats why missile users should be? We are penalized by tracking disruptors, why missile users don't suffer with us. That's balance . Time to forget easy mode and face all effects of EWAR along with gunboats.
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#32 - 2013-01-29 03:31:24 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Paikis wrote:
Also, as long as missile users (of which I am occasionally a one) are going to have to use extra mids and lows to fit TEs and TCs to counter these new mandatory disruption modules, I'd like a boost to tanking and damage on shield tanked ships that use missiles... because I now can't use those slots to fit tank or ballistic controls, so ships that have to use shields/missiles will need a buff to compensate for the effective loss of low and mid slots.

Thanks. (also, are we beginning to see why this might not be the best idea?)


Sure you can be compensated as much as gun users. Fair enough same treatment.

Thanks. And btw we don't see this as bad idea. It's called balance mate. Like it or not we are not compensated for using TE and TC on gunboats why missile users should be? We are penalized by tracking disruptors, why missile users don't suffer with us. That's balance . Time to forget easy mode and face all effects of EWAR along with gunboats.


Guns are balanced with these modules in mind. Missiles are not.
Naomi Anthar
#33 - 2013-01-29 03:36:12 UTC
Paikis wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Paikis wrote:
Also, as long as missile users (of which I am occasionally a one) are going to have to use extra mids and lows to fit TEs and TCs to counter these new mandatory disruption modules, I'd like a boost to tanking and damage on shield tanked ships that use missiles... because I now can't use those slots to fit tank or ballistic controls, so ships that have to use shields/missiles will need a buff to compensate for the effective loss of low and mid slots.

Thanks. (also, are we beginning to see why this might not be the best idea?)


Sure you can be compensated as much as gun users. Fair enough same treatment.

Thanks. And btw we don't see this as bad idea. It's called balance mate. Like it or not we are not compensated for using TE and TC on gunboats why missile users should be? We are penalized by tracking disruptors, why missile users don't suffer with us. That's balance . Time to forget easy mode and face all effects of EWAR along with gunboats.


Guns are balanced with these modules in mind. Missiles are not.


You are talking like TE and TC will not benefit missile users . They will as will TD. So it's not like TE and TC's are must or are punishment. They will improve performance of your missile systems even when not affected by TD's. Look at bright side of that ? When there is no TD around those systems will let you make some new builds , provide better stats for dunno missile flight time, speed ? Not sure what they will give atm, but they will boost you. It's not like gun users put those modules on ship against TD's , they put them because they benefit us greatly. You will receive benefits too if you get such module. You don't want ? Fine. But TD's must affect missile ship, period. You must undestand that, there is no logical explanation why missiles must receive special treatment for no reason.
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#34 - 2013-01-29 04:28:33 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Altrue wrote:
One module to counter the two main weapon system is a bad idea, as stated before.


You already got many modules that counter every weapon system in this game except titans or sieged dreads. Namely : ECM, sensor dampener.

Up until recently damps were absolute ****, and ECM is ONLY good on bonused hulls. With TD's however, you can reduce a ships effective range by over 40% on an unbonused hull with just one module. That might not sound like much, especially since damps can reduce locking range by that, but consider for a second the fact that a ships locking range is typically much higher than its fighting range (unless building specifically for long range).

Now make TD's affect missiles. Boom. Single best module in game. Mount one to beat down anything but a drone boat. But drone boats have an entirely different set of issues. All of a sudden everybody's using a TD on all the ships. Geegee, thanks for overpowering a module. So much for fitting choices. We're now down a slot on all ships because that's the TD slot. Amarr becomes hardly competitive due to a lack of slots to fit TD's to while also trying to cram in a cap booster (to help the atrocious cap), a web, a scram, and a prop. Whee, isn't this fun?

I figure that's probably why CCP isn't doing it now, at least.
Naomi Anthar
#35 - 2013-01-29 05:14:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Anthar
Goldensaver wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Altrue wrote:
One module to counter the two main weapon system is a bad idea, as stated before.


You already got many modules that counter every weapon system in this game except titans or sieged dreads. Namely : ECM, sensor dampener.

Up until recently damps were absolute ****, and ECM is ONLY good on bonused hulls. With TD's however, you can reduce a ships effective range by over 40% on an unbonused hull with just one module. That might not sound like much, especially since damps can reduce locking range by that, but consider for a second the fact that a ships locking range is typically much higher than its fighting range (unless building specifically for long range).

Now make TD's affect missiles. Boom. Single best module in game. Mount one to beat down anything but a drone boat. But drone boats have an entirely different set of issues. All of a sudden everybody's using a TD on all the ships. Geegee, thanks for overpowering a module. So much for fitting choices. We're now down a slot on all ships because that's the TD slot. Amarr becomes hardly competitive due to a lack of slots to fit TD's to while also trying to cram in a cap booster (to help the atrocious cap), a web, a scram, and a prop. Whee, isn't this fun?

I figure that's probably why CCP isn't doing it now, at least.


I'm tired of this. I'm tired. It's ok it destroys gunboats , but not ok when owning missile boats ? Stop trolling dude. Damps are good vs everything, ecm vs everything. Face it man, face it . This was said gonna happen. Not now but it will. You like it or not. Everyone using TD's ? Oh so what ? Everyone also can use damp and ECM. Stupid missiles were too long unaffected i'm glad this is getting changed.

And in the end it won't be the best . ECM still can do better affect drone boats too and logis. Hell even dampener affect logis and drone boats while TD cannot. I don't see how TD's outperform dampeners and ECMs , modules that can shut down every possible ship including drone boats and logis. Something TDs cannot do.
TD was too gimped already. Not working vs logis, not working vs drone boats, not working vs missiles. All in all you can cry a river. But missiles will be affected, done face it.

Edit: Also another thing. Having module that can compete for mid slot is bad thing ? Oh yeah i welcome more such bad things. Sure Amarr ships lack mid slots. But what is the relation between that and TD's ? EW frigates and EW cruisers still can fit even 2 if needed. You are really so scared , so scared of this change that you put some irrelevant arguments into this discussion. Talking about this or that. Trying to justify unfair edge and advantage of missile systems... But it won't work i'm afraid. Play with EFT ... sometimes fitting tracking enchancer or/and tracking computer can be tricky on well for example on drake ;).

I really think that there is nothing to be added to this discussion atm. Fozzie said it's not going to happen with this patch. Shame really. But trying to turn this thread into - please don't make TD affect missiles is wrong. Balance is not bad thing, enjoy it , dont hate it.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2013-01-29 06:23:35 UTC
1. Turret ship are designed and balanced with TE/TC in mind. They do not sacrifice dps/tank for it as you might think, they have those tank and damage built in hull. They don't sacrifice slots because they build with considering free slots for it. Turrets ships have spare CPU for those modules. Missile ships however are not, forcing usage of tracking modules on them will just make them weaker (nerf) without a proper reason.
2. Due to difference in mechanics of turrets and launchers reducing missile velocity + flight time is a way more harsh than reducing optimal and falloff. If your optimal/faloff reduced you still can hit BIG_FAT_SLOW_TARGET. If your missiles simply refuse to fly you don't hit anything.
3. Same for reducing tracking and explosion radius/velocity. With reduced tracking you still land wrecking hits on OBLIVIOUS_APPROACHING_FRIGATE because of 0 transversal. With reduced explosion velocity and increased explosion radius you won't do any meaningful damage on same target (not that missile damage was good on small targets anyway).
Naomi Anthar
#37 - 2013-01-29 07:37:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Anthar
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
1. Turret ship are designed and balanced with TE/TC in mind. They do not sacrifice dps/tank for it as you might think, they have those tank and damage built in hull. They don't sacrifice slots because they build with considering free slots for it. Turrets ships have spare CPU for those modules. Missile ships however are not, forcing usage of tracking modules on them will just make them weaker (nerf) without a proper reason.
2. Due to difference in mechanics of turrets and launchers reducing missile velocity + flight time is a way more harsh than reducing optimal and falloff. If your optimal/faloff reduced you still can hit BIG_FAT_SLOW_TARGET. If your missiles simply refuse to fly you don't hit anything.
3. Same for reducing tracking and explosion radius/velocity. With reduced tracking you still land wrecking hits on OBLIVIOUS_APPROACHING_FRIGATE because of 0 transversal. With reduced explosion velocity and increased explosion radius you won't do any meaningful damage on same target (not that missile damage was good on small targets anyway).


1. Then now it will be balanced with launchers in mind. And how is that bullshit about missile ships sacraficing anything more than gun boat ? Look at raw statistics. There nothing you are talking about. Raw EHP is almost same on ships from same class. Spare CPU ? LOL, you know you got much more base CPU on missile boat to start with , like gunboat got more PWG. So it's another out of ... oh nvm but irrelevanta argument. And my english is not perfect but i totally don't understand last sentence in point 1. And if it's what i think then ... oh cmon. So it's ok you got ecmed or dampened but not tracking disrupted. I completly cannot comprehend this logic. Maybe i'm just plain stupid. If you want more ballistic controls then i want more heat sinks etc... No proper reason ? And maybe you give proper reason why missiles are not affected in first place and guns yes?

2. Who said what will be reduced and by what %. Let devs decide what will be reduced and by what amount. And how is that " If your optimal/faloff reduced you still can hit BIG_FAT_SLOW_TARGET" - you play same game as i do ? For example when my range was once reduced from 60km to 7km i couldnt hit targets 30km away. Don't want to call you idiot but how is my laser hitting anything if my range got reduced to 7km(falloff too) and target is 30km away? You miss with missile(or do not reach target) and i miss. Fair and simple.

3. I shouldn't even comment on that. You really think reducing tracking speed does nothing to gunboats ? Oh cmon you almost force me to say something about your inteligence. And wait for numbers from dev's . They will tests so it will equally punish missile and guns. Don't cry now, wait for facts and numbers. Sure you will cry anyway, because losing unfair advantage is not good obviously for missile user but hell who cares - justice will be done.

I'm posting alot for one reason. Why is that ship equipped with stupid ecm can jam everything, why is that dampener can damp everything . And damn td's are just plain good or plain garbage (most of the time). You are vs missile boat. You have to run for your life. You are vs drone boat - same story. In gang ? What gang would want to have Tracking disruption E-war ship ? What if they come up against some missile based fleet ? What if they will come against dunno drone boats (algoses or **** like that just example) ? What if the will come against gang supported by logis ? In so many situations it's better to have ECM or damp E-war.

Now it's getting fixed so finnaly TD's are not useless in majority of situations but only in MANY situations. Is that bad ? No it's actually very good. And that's why CCP said this is going to be part of this game.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want missile ships to be ruined and forgotten. It's not about that. I want this game to be balanced and fun for everyone. I want every ewar to be useful in many situations and while diffrent equally powerful. At this very moment tracking disruption is too unreliable and too situational. And that is not fair. I still think it should also affect logis somehow and droneboats.(but a bit diffrent i guess) Because why not ? Other ewar works too. Some of you would actually want just only gunboats exclusively suffer from all kinds of ewar. Why is that i ask ?

Edit: also additionally to crush your point 1 - come and show me single missile boat that got less High + Mid + Low total slots than gunship from same class . Talking about sacrificing. You know nothing about sacrficing, but time to learn. Looks like putting tracking enchancer on gunboat does not reduce amount of my free low slots... oh wait it DOES.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2013-01-29 07:42:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Sinigr Shadowsong
Seems that you are really mad. No reason arguing at this point.
PS: I fly in missile ships <5% of my undocked time.
Naomi Anthar
#39 - 2013-01-29 07:43:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Anthar
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Seems that you are really mad. No reason arguing at this point.


Better be mad , than plain bad.
Ps: Who cares? Your all 3 points were joke as shown above. Btw "No arguments for arguing at this point." fixed it for you.
Caitlyn Tufy
Perkone
Caldari State
#40 - 2013-01-29 07:59:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
We're not changing the relationship between tracking modules and missiles in Retribution 1.1

That's all I can say for certain at this time.


Thanks, boss. A question, though - since we're discussing it in this thread, are there any plans to do anything with Defenders? :)

/ducks the incoming tomato
Previous page123Next page