These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Replaceing "bonus to heavy and heavy assault missile kinetic damage"

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aischa Montagne
Blut-Klauen-Clan
#1 - 2013-03-25 08:05:53 UTC
Hello there,

I would like to suggest to replace direct enhancement of missle damgae with an enhanced rate of fire.

I am always irritaded that the Boost is only going into one type of damage. I think this is quite odd. And how can a ship enhance a self propelled weapons damage?

I propose to enhance ROF for missle Ships. Faster Fireing Rockets is an indirect Damage boost. And it makes for game explanation easier to argument and emagine why a ship has better stats in it.

With none self propelled weapontypes like laser or projectils, you can always argument with better targeting system or better ancored weapon pods. But for rockets it does not sound possible in general.

I guess you linked the damage boost to kinetic to make Missle boats mor judgeable. However you got the same problem with Projectils. And Minmatar do not have the Problem that their bonus stats are linked to one special Weapon type.

Well at least this would I prefer.
Sigras
Conglomo
#2 - 2013-03-25 09:58:37 UTC
just as soon as i get blasters that can shoot EMP or explosive :P
Dave Stark
#3 - 2013-03-25 10:21:56 UTC
if you don't like the drake's bonuses, fly a cyclone.
monkfish2345
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-03-25 10:46:01 UTC
Whilst i understand what your trying to achieve, you should have a think about what CCP need to do with the game, there is good reason weapons got grouped and we are seeing more and more ships with less guns and dmg bonus' applied.

All of this is done to reduce the lag so you can better enjoy your playing experience. Missiles in particular are quite resource heavy (when compared to guns). I suggest you look up the drakes of destiny dev blogs and you might better understand why this isn't a great idea.
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#5 - 2013-03-25 10:47:29 UTC
monkfish2345 wrote:
All of this is done to reduce the lag

WHA?...... LOL.

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison
monkfish2345
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-03-25 10:55:30 UTC  |  Edited by: monkfish2345
Tonto Auri wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
All of this is done to reduce the lag

WHA?...... LOL.



Lol that is some horrible grammar. Regardless, the reasoning is true, the more they are able to reduce individual actions the less processing needs to be done, less notifications and updates etc etc. Missiles are a particular issue because they need to be given flight paths etc. while all of this is not a massive issue when running missions or something it does not scale well.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#7 - 2013-03-25 11:08:06 UTC
monkfish2345 wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
All of this is done to reduce the lag

WHA?...... LOL.



Lol that is some horrible grammar. Regardless, the reasoning is true, the more they are able to reduce individual actions the less processing needs to be done, less notifications and updates etc etc. Missiles are a particular issue because they need to be give flight paths etc. while all of this is not a massive issue when running missions or something it does not scale well.

[citation needed]

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
monkfish2345
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#8 - 2013-03-25 11:11:45 UTC  |  Edited by: monkfish2345
monkfish2345 wrote:
I suggest you look up the drakes of destiny dev blogs and you might better understand why this isn't a great idea.



Drakes of destiny part 1

Drakes of destiny part 2

edit:fixed failed links
Prib Afuran
Doomheim
#9 - 2013-03-25 11:15:14 UTC
They just balanced the drake.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#10 - 2013-03-25 11:17:29 UTC
monkfish2345 wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
I suggest you look up the drakes of destiny dev blogs and you might better understand why this isn't a great idea.



Drakes of destiny part 1

Drakes of destiny part 2

edit:fixed failed links

Yeah I bet they have done nothing on the server front since 2010 to help with the lag.

Tell me more about how they removed one launcher from the Drake to help with lag, and then made the Cyclone a missile boat.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
monkfish2345
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-03-25 11:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: monkfish2345
Hannott Thanos wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
I suggest you look up the drakes of destiny dev blogs and you might better understand why this isn't a great idea.



Drakes of destiny part 1

Drakes of destiny part 2

edit:fixed failed links

Yeah I bet they have done nothing on the server front since 2010 to help with the lag.

Tell me more about how they removed one launcher from the Drake to help with lag, and then made the Cyclone a missile boat.


Regardless of what they have done, missiles have never and will never scale particularly well because their is a need for more processing to be done for them compared to guns. if you look even after all of the improvements they made then the majority of the CPU tick was still dealing with adding and removing missiles from space. what they actually changed was how this information was given to clients.

adding a new missile ship (with a launcher less) makes very little difference, a large aspect of the re balancing was to get people away from all using particular types of ships and have a more varied and balanced battlefield. the fact is that it was common to see whole fleets of only drakes, so changing them to cyclones would make little difference. 1 launcher + rof i'd guess that you'd end up causing a similar amount of load.

Edit: and yes they did add another method to combat lag, TiDi, something they would not have introduced if they could simply keep making processing savings with no consequence.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#12 - 2013-03-25 11:48:34 UTC
Lag is a consideration for missile RoF, but at this point mainly just for smaller missiles.

We generally avoid rocket RoF bonuses for server load reasons, and when we're giving larger percentage bonuses like the 10% damage bonus on the drake we will avoid doing those with RoF because -50% RoF on HMs and HAMs could become a load problem. However we're perfectly fine with giving 5% per level RoF bonuses to cruiser sized weapons for the most part.

All lag considerations aside, we consider RoF and damage bonuses to be two separate and useful parts of our toolbox for ship balancing. RoF bonuses give more dps but less alpha and more ammo consumption. Damage bonuses can be done to either one damage type, all damage types, or even to different damage types in different amounts (like the Hookbill).

We plan to continue using both types of bonuses as needed.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
MainDrain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2013-03-25 11:54:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Lag is a consideration for missile RoF, but at this point mainly just for smaller missiles.

We generally avoid rocket RoF bonuses for server load reasons, and when we're giving larger percentage bonuses like the 10% damage bonus on the drake we will avoid doing those with RoF because -50% RoF on HMs and HAMs could become a load problem. However we're perfectly fine with giving 5% per level RoF bonuses to cruiser sized weapons for the most part.

All lag considerations aside, we consider RoF and damage bonuses to be two separate and useful parts of our toolbox for ship balancing. RoF bonuses give more dps but less alpha and more ammo consumption. Damage bonuses can be done to either one damage type, all damage types, or even to different damage types in different amounts (like the Hookbill).

We plan to continue using both types of bonuses as needed.


I thought OP was more considering it from a ingame (lore) technological perspective as well.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2013-03-25 11:56:31 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Lag is a consideration for missile RoF, but at this point mainly just for smaller missiles.

We generally avoid rocket RoF bonuses for server load reasons, and when we're giving larger percentage bonuses like the 10% damage bonus on the drake we will avoid doing those with RoF because -50% RoF on HMs and HAMs could become a load problem. However we're perfectly fine with giving 5% per level RoF bonuses to cruiser sized weapons for the most part.

All lag considerations aside, we consider RoF and damage bonuses to be two separate and useful parts of our toolbox for ship balancing. RoF bonuses give more dps but less alpha and more ammo consumption. Damage bonuses can be done to either one damage type, all damage types, or even to different damage types in different amounts (like the Hookbill).

We plan to continue using both types of bonuses as needed.


CCP Fozzie any thoughts on what impact making projectiles and hybrids have a similar profile to missiles in regard to being velocity based instead of instant hit would have on the server?

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#15 - 2013-03-25 11:57:02 UTC
Ahh from that perspective I don't really have an explanation, we have skills and module and implants that affect it as well so obviously the capsule interface has some way of affecting the way missiles in the New Eden universe do damage.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#16 - 2013-03-25 11:57:04 UTC
Fozzie to the rescue, thanks!

Now if I only could get a word on how the Eris will look after rebalance. I want to love that ship!

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#17 - 2013-03-25 11:58:41 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Lag is a consideration for missile RoF, but at this point mainly just for smaller missiles.

We generally avoid rocket RoF bonuses for server load reasons, and when we're giving larger percentage bonuses like the 10% damage bonus on the drake we will avoid doing those with RoF because -50% RoF on HMs and HAMs could become a load problem. However we're perfectly fine with giving 5% per level RoF bonuses to cruiser sized weapons for the most part.

All lag considerations aside, we consider RoF and damage bonuses to be two separate and useful parts of our toolbox for ship balancing. RoF bonuses give more dps but less alpha and more ammo consumption. Damage bonuses can be done to either one damage type, all damage types, or even to different damage types in different amounts (like the Hookbill).

We plan to continue using both types of bonuses as needed.


CCP Fozzie any thoughts on what impact making projectiles and hybrids have a similar profile to missiles in regard to being velocity based instead of instant hit would have on the server?


I can pretty safely say that the realism and gameplay benefits of that would not outweigh the time needed to change how all that code works and make it not burn down the servers.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
MainDrain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2013-03-25 11:59:16 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Ahh from that perspective I don't really have an explanation, we have skills and module and implants that affect it as well so obviously the capsule interface has some way of affecting the way missiles in the New Eden universe do damage.


Good enough for me!

I can see the sense in inherently designing a ship to perform better against its most common threats (Guristas) by shooting damage to hit them hardest (kinetic)
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#19 - 2013-03-25 12:02:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Hannott Thanos
If it is a question of lore, then a bonus to missile kinetic damage may simply be the Caldari specializing in hitting ships where they know they have structural weaknesses to kinetic forces.

To explain the Hookbill with 10% general damage bonus and 20% kinetic, then those kinetic weak spots on ships are also prone to damage from regular missiles, but more so from kinetic damage.

So maybe the ship has integrated targeting systems for hitting weak kinetic spots

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#20 - 2013-03-25 12:03:08 UTC
Fozzie since you're responding to stuff at the moment any thoughts on the excessive range of rockets and HAMS?

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

12Next page