Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This will end exactly as frighters change. I have two words for you: "meaningfull choices". Nerf from the begining, I told you all. They will gather intel about change from TQ, chewing the results (devs are really bad at statistics) so I pressume missiles will be usefull in 1,5 to 2 years.

OF: anybody know how many devs taking care about balancing? Is it just Rise and Fozzman? Because both are losing it imo.

is it just me or has the amount of interaction / back-and-forth between the community and the dev's decreased in these balancing threads?

I am sure we used to have some blue bar's appear just about everyday back at the beginning of teircide and the balance pass. These days its "here are the new numbers" then if we are lucky an "ok we had a read and have changed the numbers slightly".

Ccp doesnt give a **** and have not for months now. They need to forget this rapid developmen cycle and reprioritize.

Basicly every ship that uses application rigs right now on Live server now needs 2-3 of the new modules to get the same values they got now, so i guess missiles end up less viable with the current stats

From what I've seen, and I could be wrong, CCP devs prefer to speak from on high when it comes to missiles. They don't seem to like a lot of discourse about the subject. This is why it is not uncommonly said that certain appendages are rigid from hate when missiles come up. I can't say for certain but I think that, at the least, missiles give devs the heebie jeebies. This.... uneasiness is exhibited when they try to force missiles into the turret mold when, in the past, they have justified missile imbalance because they're different from turrets.

Typed from my phone, just in case there are errors.

The Tempest never was a truly bad choice in a cruiser meta simply for having 2 heavy neuts while not being that slow. Just put any cruiser/BC next to a tempest in pointrange and see the cap drained. However the dps has been so anemic at 20k you'd usually be just better off flying a geddon, which also neuts, but has rapid heavies and drones. Some traits next to each other: Tempest got more dps, goes a bit faster, the geddon has longer range on the neuts and can choose from light to heavy drones. So the geddon isn't flat-out better at a tempest's job.

The day it hit TQ, I'll bring my Drake

I think proper balancing of missiles cannot avoid doing a full analytical breakdown. Following the dumbfire "Ishtar treatment" where you do small changes every update won't cut it.


The reality is that missiles have few real-time, reactive counters. That is burning away from the missiles and exploit their malleable effective range. That and ABs were the only real counters to missiles.

Missiles in general are not weak - the apply damage always and at ranges reaching as far as railguns. You definitely cannot apply previous turret principles to balance missiles.

Hence as the above post states, these upgrades are just a knee jerk reaction to the cries of "turrets have these modules - missiles should too" which is not a wise action.

I don't believe they are and I disagree on them getting overpowered, I mean overpowered to what?

The other day on SiSi I insta-popped that poor Crow (distance was 33km and I adjusted my position slightly to a very low transversal value and BOOM) in a Nightmare with tachyons, go figure. Now let's make a thread that claim that all turrets in EVE are overpowered too.
Imagine the following threadnought..

Nope, since you cannot fit torpedo launchers to Caracals anymore the volley damage is appropiate to the missile launcher amount and ship size.

What people are whining about are values from third party applications that almost show all information. How dare a missile volley applies damage from 0- flight time x missile speed (this one is very important)??

They never have but since the introduction of polarized guns they could now.

In the early days of New Eden missiles had almost 100% application but they couldn't reach that 100% volley damage and many ships used to have one or two launcher hardpoints, where crafty people put rocket launchers on to have defender missiles.

In case missiles would get 100% application those defender missiles will shoot down incoming missiles already and smartbombs can kill them to, that doesn't change.

Now the fear of those whiners and carebears is that with 100% application comes 100% damage which is not the same, so theoretical 1500hp damage volley from 6 grouped launchers can only do 100 / 80 / 70 / 50% of that 1500hp damage (base shield resistance values) which used to be multiplied with a factor but I don't recall the formular for that, it is somewhere in the old forums archive.

Since I am pvping I have some experience how a fight starts or how fast things can deteriorate or suddenly be turned depending what happens and the most common experience is that most people are starting to bail when a fight doesn't go as they had hoped.
Instead of making fun of missiles they should be taken a lot more serious, guns are taken serious all the time and for them the range does not change, for missles the range is not a constant but a maximum IF the ship fireing the missiles is sitting still AND IF the target is sitting still and only then true.

Typically, we hear back from developers on Fridays...