These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

@CCP Tracking Disrupters to Apply to Missiles?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#1 - 2012-03-27 00:31:30 UTC
So last night I watched many of the fanfest video archives and happened upon the last which featured a discussion of upcoming module additions and changes. What caught my eye was the announcement of an intended change to tracking disrupters so they will apply to missiles.

The presenter did not explain how they would debuff missiles but it got me thinking......WTF!@(*&)

So if this happens I see no reason to not also do the following:

1. Allow tracking computers to buff missile stats
2. Allow tracking enhancers to buff missile stats
3. Remove ship penalties from T2 missiles

What say you?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Belthazor4011
Battle BV Redux
#2 - 2012-03-27 00:35:07 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
3. Remove ship penalties from T2 missiles


Eh what?
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#3 - 2012-03-27 00:39:52 UTC
Belthazor4011 wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
3. Remove ship penalties from T2 missiles


Eh what?


CCP removed most ship penalties from T2 turret ammo that slow ships down, increase sig rad or other nasties like that. Mean while T2 missile retained these negative effects for no other reason than apathy.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#4 - 2012-03-27 00:45:29 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
So last night I watched many of the fanfest video archives and happened upon the last which featured a discussion of upcoming module additions and changes. What caught my eye was the announcement of an intended change to tracking disrupters so they will apply to missiles.

The presenter did not explain how they would debuff missiles but it got me thinking......WTF!@(*&)

So if this happens I see no reason to not also do the following:

1. Allow tracking computers to buff missile stats
2. Allow tracking enhancers to buff missile stats
3. Remove ship penalties from T2 missiles

What say you?


it might be nice from a balance point of view to have tracking enhancers and tracking computers affect explosion velocity and/or explosion radius and/or missile velocity. i do not see the logic though; how is tracking your target making your missile explode faster?
also, you would have to nerf some missile types and/or hulls to keep overall balance, which isn't exactly an easy task.

I should buy an Ishtar.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#5 - 2012-03-27 00:49:03 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
So last night I watched many of the fanfest video archives and happened upon the last which featured a discussion of upcoming module additions and changes. What caught my eye was the announcement of an intended change to tracking disrupters so they will apply to missiles.

The presenter did not explain how they would debuff missiles but it got me thinking......WTF!@(*&)

So if this happens I see no reason to not also do the following:

1. Allow tracking computers to buff missile stats
2. Allow tracking enhancers to buff missile stats
3. Remove ship penalties from T2 missiles

What say you?


it might be nice from a balance point of view to have tracking enhancers and tracking computers affect explosion velocity and/or explosion radius and/or missile velocity. i do not see the logic though; how is tracking your target making your missile explode faster?
also, you would have to nerf some missile types and/or hulls to keep overall balance, which isn't exactly an easy task.


Strawman

I think the point is that if there is a module that will debuff the system then must also be a module to buff it.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#6 - 2012-03-27 01:01:44 UTC
except when the debuff only affects pvp and only in a limited manner whereas the 'counter'-buff would affect almost all missile platforms in almost all combat situations.

I should buy an Ishtar.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#7 - 2012-03-27 02:08:49 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
except when the debuff only affects pvp and only in a limited manner whereas the 'counter'-buff would affect almost all missile platforms in almost all combat situations.


and?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Dato Koppla
Spaghetti Militia
#8 - 2012-03-27 02:12:24 UTC
I'm Caldari/Amarr specced, I've flown mostly in PvE with occasional pvp splashed in and my opinion on missiles vs guns...

Missiles just generally get the shaft from CCP. Pretty much all missiles are outclassed by their gun equivalents except maybe Heavy Missiles but I think thats more of the ships that use them are awesome rather than the weapon system itself. Missiles problems (applying full damage, travel time) completely eclipse its largely useless benefits of stupidly long range that can't be used for sniping due to travel time, 'never miss' but almost never do full damage w/o alot of support that is limited to rigs or midslot items that have issues like activation range (web), cycle time (tp) and that most missile boats are also shield boats which lack free mids.

Honestly missiles can only claim to be not outclassed PvE because you can fit alot of mods to help damage application thus fully capitalizing on the range and fact that missiles never miss and flight time matters much less. I find it quite ridiculous that although many justify lack of TE/TC on missiles because missile never miss, Torps are absolute crap because they can only really do full damage on battleships with huge signatures that are moving at snails pace (w/ nothing you can do to actually help the torps much), obviously target painting and webbing helps, but that helps guns just as much which get instant damage, 'critical' (wrecking) shots, ability to abuse transversal to do full damage to even frigs. Also quite a few gun boats get tracking bonuses, assisting them even further while I can only think of 2 missile boats with damage application bonus (Golem/Nighthawk). All this and guns get all the upgrade luxury in the world in terms of damage/range/tracking in the form rigs/low slots/medium slots.

/rant

What we need: Highslot tracking enhancers just to completely crap all over missiles.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#9 - 2012-03-27 02:18:05 UTC
Dato Koppla wrote:
I'm Caldari/Amarr specced, I've flown mostly in PvE with occasional pvp splashed in and my opinion on missiles vs guns...

Missiles just generally get the shaft from CCP. Pretty much all missiles are outclassed by their gun equivalents except maybe Heavy Missiles but I think thats more of the ships that use them are awesome rather than the weapon system itself. Missiles problems (applying full damage, travel time) completely eclipse its largely useless benefits of stupidly long range that can't be used for sniping due to travel time, 'never miss' but almost never do full damage w/o alot of support that is limited to rigs or midslot items that have issues like activation range (web), cycle time (tp) and that most missile boats are also shield boats which lack free mids.

Honestly missiles can only claim to be not outclassed PvE because you can fit alot of mods to help damage application thus fully capitalizing on the range and fact that missiles never miss and flight time matters much less. I find it quite ridiculous that although many justify lack of TE/TC on missiles because missile never miss, Torps are absolute crap because they can only really do full damage on battleships with huge signatures that are moving at snails pace (w/ nothing you can do to actually help the torps much), obviously target painting and webbing helps, but that helps guns just as much which get instant damage, 'critical' (wrecking) shots, ability to abuse transversal to do full damage to even frigs. Also quite a few gun boats get tracking bonuses, assisting them even further while I can only think of 2 missile boats with damage application bonus (Golem/Nighthawk). All this and guns get all the upgrade luxury in the world in terms of damage/range/tracking in the form rigs/low slots/medium slots.

/rant

What we need: Highslot tracking enhancers just to completely crap all over missiles.


I would like to subscribe to your newsletter


Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#10 - 2012-03-27 02:22:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Daniel Plain wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
So last night I watched many of the fanfest video archives and happened upon the last which featured a discussion of upcoming module additions and changes. What caught my eye was the announcement of an intended change to tracking disrupters so they will apply to missiles.

The presenter did not explain how they would debuff missiles but it got me thinking......WTF!@(*&)

So if this happens I see no reason to not also do the following:

1. Allow tracking computers to buff missile stats
2. Allow tracking enhancers to buff missile stats
3. Remove ship penalties from T2 missiles

What say you?


it might be nice from a balance point of view to have tracking enhancers and tracking computers affect explosion velocity and/or explosion radius and/or missile velocity. i do not see the logic though; how is tracking your target making your missile explode faster?
also, you would have to nerf some missile types and/or hulls to keep overall balance, which isn't exactly an easy task.


so......you agree that having tracking disrupters debuff missiles without a way to offset is a bad idea?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Alara IonStorm
#11 - 2012-03-27 02:26:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Patri Andari wrote:

Daniel Plain wrote:

it might be nice from a balance point of view to have tracking enhancers and tracking computers affect explosion velocity and/or explosion radius and/or missile velocity. i do not see the logic though; how is tracking your target making your missile explode faster?
also, you would have to nerf some missile types and/or hulls to keep overall balance, which isn't exactly an easy task.


Strawman

I think the point is that if there is a module that will debuff the system then must also be a module to buff it.


Roll That isn't a straw man it is an opinion. He did not purposely misrepresent your opinion but provided his own thoughts on the subject right below where you asked for an opinion. while calling it a straw man you ignored legitimate issues he brought up.

Just by stating something has a debuff that will be applied in 10% of all fights and almost never in fleets does not make it okay to give it a possible self buff. The issue that 200 HAM Drakes could post Drake balance with a TC hit to 60km with the accuracy of Heavies without the ability to counter because no fleet can organize 200 Disruptor onto 200 separate targets to counter such a hit.

To give Missiles use of TE's and TC's you would need to balance around their use tailoring the module so you both don't overpower any ship.

The poster said he would be interested in the game having these modules and I agree, but it is not a straw man to speculate on concerns with the mechanic and what steps Dev's would need to take to fix it.
Kolya Medz
Kolya Inc.
#12 - 2012-03-27 02:32:30 UTC
ughh more homoginizing...? Lets change the name to "Weapon Disruption Unit I" while we're at it.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#13 - 2012-03-27 02:33:30 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:

it might be nice from a balance point of view to have tracking enhancers and tracking computers affect explosion velocity and/or explosion radius and/or missile velocity. i do not see the logic though; how is tracking your target making your missile explode faster?
also, you would have to nerf some missile types and/or hulls to keep overall balance, which isn't exactly an easy task.


Strawman

I think the point is that if there is a module that will debuff the system then must also be a module to buff it.


Roll That isn't a straw man it is an opinion. He did not purposely misrepresent your opinion but provided his own thoughts on the subject right below where you asked for an opinion. while calling it a straw man you ignored legitimate issues he brought up.

Just by stating something has a debuff that will be applied in 10% of all fights and almost never in fleets does not make it okay to give it a possible self buff. The issue that 200 HAM Drakes could post Drake balance with a TC hit to 60km with the accuracy of Heavies without the ability to counter because no fleet can organize 200 Disruptor onto 200 separate targets to counter such a hit.

To give Missiles use of TE's and TC's you would need to balance around their use tailoring the module so you both don't overpower any ship.

The poster said he would be interested in the game having these modules and I agree, but it is not a straw man to speculate on concerns with the mechanic and what steps Dev's would need to take to fix it.
[/quote]

So we should not balance around ships and modules themselves but the potential for blobs of those ships and modules? Seriously?


Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Alara IonStorm
#14 - 2012-03-27 02:44:33 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:

So we should not balance around ships and modules themselves but the potential for blobs of those ships and modules? Seriously?

Oh look you figured out what a straw man is. Roll

Yes, yes you should balance around how those modules are used in blobs, you should balance around how those modules are used in gangs and how they are used solo.

Numbers lining up on a spreadsheet of buffs and debuffs don't matter if you over power or under power anything. So if a module in a blob makes that blob over powered and the counter designed is ineffective you can not just go with it.

Turrets were designed with module and rig buffs in mind while missiles were designed with only rig buffs in mind. If you want missiles to use module buffs you have to design ether the ship or the missile around it because the counter doesn't stack well.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#15 - 2012-03-27 02:48:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:

So we should not balance around ships and modules themselves but the potential for blobs of those ships and modules? Seriously?

Oh look you figured out what a straw man is. Roll

Yes, yes you should balance around how those modules are used in blobs, you should balance around how those modules are used in gangs and how they are used solo.

Numbers lining up on a spreadsheet of buffs and debuffs don't matter if you over power or under power anything. So if a module in a blob makes that blob over powered and the counter designed is ineffective you can not just go with it.

Turrets were designed with module and rig buffs in mind while missiles were designed with only rig buffs in mind. If you want missiles to use module buffs you have to design ether the ship or the missile around it because the counter doesn't stack well.


The same should not be done when assigning a module to debuff them of course Roll

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Dato Koppla
Spaghetti Militia
#16 - 2012-03-27 02:55:38 UTC
In terms of PvP, I don't see many missiles ships you can overpower w/ adding Missile TE/TC considering almost all of them are never used in PvP. Kestrel/Caracal/Raven/Cerberus/Hawk are either completely useless or heavily outclassed.

Drake & Tengu which are the only 2 really used Caldari missile boats in PvP, people have been crying overpowered for them for ages w/o the proposed changes. They're just excellent hulls to begin with and both have some sort of trump card that has little to actually do with missiles, lag making Drake fleets produce extreme alpha and epic tank on Drakes, and Tengus for being able to fit 100mn ABs and thus being unscrammable allowing it to capitalize on its extreme range (also not really a fleet boat so the 'flight time' problem isnt an issue) and its epic active tank.


Standards/Cruises don't completely suck because they have a use in PvE, however after running some mission gun boats like the Nightmare, frankly the instant damage and frig popping makes em better than missiles, but the general PvP consensus is that you'd get laughed out of a fleet if you fitted these on a combat vessel. Rockets/Torps? Complete garbage in my opinion, rockets have a lousy dps output with even lousier damage application, torps look pretty on eft but you'd have to be shooting a moon to get its full damage. Heavies and HAMs aren't too bad because both have good damage application and HAMs give decent dps as well (and both are usually fielded exclusively by Drakes/Tengus which are excellent ships as mentioned).
Alara IonStorm
#17 - 2012-03-27 02:58:52 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:

The same should not be done when assigning a module to debuff them of course Roll

Absolutely it should. You should take everything into account when balancing a weapon system.

What effect the debuff will have on solo or small gang ships, what effect it will have on blobed ships vs what effect the buff will have on solo / small gang ships vs what effect it will have on blobs.

You can not just add something just to have the buffs and debuffs line up on a spread sheet. You need to know how they will effect all aspects of warfare.
OfBalance
Caldari State
#18 - 2012-03-27 03:01:54 UTC
Kolya Medz wrote:
ughh more homoginizing...? Lets change the name to "Weapon Disruption Unit I" while we're at it.


Broken game mechanics are good because they create diversity.

In other news, public beaches have begun hiring blind lifeguards because while they cannot perform the task as well as their sighted counterparts, they are different and that's what counts!
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#19 - 2012-03-27 03:15:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:

The same should not be done when assigning a module to debuff them of course Roll

Absolutely it should. You should take everything into account when balancing a weapon system.

What effect the debuff will have on solo or small gang ships, what effect it will have on blobed ships vs what effect the buff will have on solo / small gang ships vs what effect it will have on blobs.

You can not just add something just to have the buffs and debuffs line up on a spread sheet. You need to know how they will effect all aspects of warfare.


Based on your sudden moment of clarity I suggest you re read the OP

CCP plans to make tracking disrupters debuff missiles. In that same presentation there was no mention of a re-balance of missiles around that debuff. Based on this alone I suggested they should add modules that enhance missiles (in this case re-purpose tracking computers and enhancers). If you have no objection to that.....why are you posting again?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Dato Koppla
Spaghetti Militia
#20 - 2012-03-27 03:19:18 UTC
CCP 1: Yo guys, how can we troll the missile users even more
CCP 2: I GOT IT, we'll make the long range weapons have REALLY long range, and then give all the ships that use them range bonuses
CCP 1: Genius! but what if they try to kite with short range weapons + bonus
CCP 2: Simple! We'll just make those ships slow too
CCP 1: Muahahahaha
123Next pageLast page