These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Deyo
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#141 - 2012-09-18 15:19:32 UTC
Blawrf McTaggart wrote:
I don't really understand why CCP continue to do this "pendulum" style of balancing. Make something overpowered -> useless -> overpowered -> useless.


I am afraid this will happen. It will make TD's either a "must fit module" or nerf them to oblivion (like sensor dampeners of old). At least make them 2 separate modules, instead of piling everything on poor TD's.
Aineko Macx
#142 - 2012-09-18 15:19:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Aineko Macx
Range and damage nerf to HMLs is absolutely right, tho maybe a bit too heavy handed as proposed.

TD/TC/TEs affecting missiles is a very interesting change, I approve. I also approve of changes to T2 missile ammo.

Are we finally gonna see more HAM Drakes now?

iveeCore 3.0: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#143 - 2012-09-18 15:19:46 UTC
Lord MuffloN wrote:
For everyone comparing blasters to heavy missiles, you're dead wrong and they should be compared to HAM's.


HAMs still need a slight damage boost IMO. But, yeah, this.
Way Rin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#144 - 2012-09-18 15:20:38 UTC
thus missile ships lined by turrets fallof

Sorry for my bad English...
Lady LowSec
The Magnificents
#145 - 2012-09-18 15:20:40 UTC
OMG Leave the missiles alone! they need a buff not a Nerf. Missiles take time to reach their target. And when guns shoot, it is almost instant. Buff the missiles, don't Nerf them. Some of us are purely caldari and live and die by missiles. And why in the world would a tracking disruptor affect missiles? Crows would be ineffective of anything now beside just tackle. You guys already messed up the paper thin bombers switching them to a close range ship instead of the long range we loved when they used cruise missiles.

The game gets better, then u make it way worst in the very next patch. LEAVE THE MISSILES ALONE!
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#146 - 2012-09-18 15:21:16 UTC
Rexorol wrote:
A small request from CCP: Can you let us know which ships you approve of and feel are nicely balanced so I can just fly those?

I feel like I wasted 5 months of training with specializing in Caldari cruisers and HML's now. Yeah, I can take advantage of what I learned before the nerf, but if the hammer is going to come down this hard on both their damage and their range, there really isn't any point to flying Caldari missile cruisers/battlecruisers after this winter expansion.

Time to start speculating on what will be considered overpowered next, and get my skill training started before it happens.



It's incredibly relaxing to have trained all T2 weapons :smug:

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Arthello
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2012-09-18 15:21:46 UTC
How about fixing the Drake before you nerf all the other BC's. The Drake is the number 1 overpowered ship in EVE at the moment.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#148 - 2012-09-18 15:23:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Vladimir Norkoff
After mulling these Missile changes over for a bit, where does this leave Caldari? They have historically been the "long-range" race. But now all their long-range weapons suck in the medium ship class. Even ECM is getting the (well deserved) nerfbat in the winter.

To make matters worse. The standard doctrine of long-range/high-PG vs short-range/low-PG weapons was reversed for Hvy Missiles & HAMs. And Caldari ships had the low powergrid to push them towards hvy missiles. The Drake can use HAMs effectively. Not so much with the Nighthawk, Crapacal, and Cerb.

Some sort of missile change needed to be made. But I think the overall effect is going to be rather severe for Caldari specced players. It'll be like Gallente's 2008, but all at once instead of spread out over 3 expansions.
Sirane Elrek
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#149 - 2012-09-18 15:23:41 UTC
I'm picturing a world where, instead of making sweeping changes across the board twice a year, CCP could make small iterative changes once a month or so, and watch the effect. Then maybe change some more if it wasn't enough.
Meditril
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#150 - 2012-09-18 15:23:52 UTC
Allandri wrote:
Meditril wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar
-Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect:
Max flight time (with optimal range script)
Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script)
-Make TDs affect Missiles
Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and explosion radius
Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time


The first one (tracking enhancers) will make missile boats absolute frigate murders. Just change your script and viola you can switch from long range to anti-frig point defense. A very bad decision.

The second one (TDs affect missiles) will make TDs the must have module for all frigates... having "must have" modules is very sad.


Must have modules currently include a long / short point and a prop mod


This is true, but not a reason to add one more module to the list of "must have modules".

@Devs: Will there be a difference how Tracking Enhancers and TDs are affecting Guided vs. Unguided missiles? Currently it is for example not possible to change (reduce) explosion radius of Unguided missiles with Warhead Rigor Catalyst rigs as far as I know. Will this mean that Unguided missiles will be only affected 50% by Tracking Enhancers / TDs compared to Guided missiles?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#151 - 2012-09-18 15:24:16 UTC
Arthello wrote:
How about fixing the Drake before you nerf all the other BC's. The Drake is the number 1 overpowered ship in EVE at the moment.



But Tengus are just fine even though they do more DPS, have more tank, better resists, longer targetting range and higher sensor strength, faster m,issile velocity and are much smaller and faster, because you like flying those, right? Roll

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#152 - 2012-09-18 15:24:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Harari
20% nerf to damage is ridiculous.

I mean holy ****, drakes cannot reasonably expect to kill ANYTHING now, except in giant blobs where the damage nerf is meaningless because everything gets 1 shot anyway.

A ******* single rep myrmidon can permatank a max skilled drake with 3 bcs and furies.
Sebastian Hoch
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#153 - 2012-09-18 15:26:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sebastian Hoch
Blawrf McTaggart wrote:
I don't really understand why CCP continue to do this "pendulum" style of balancing. Make something overpowered -> useless -> overpowered -> useless.


I have observed the same and not just in ship changes. I think it is by design--the purpose being to 'reset' the game board once groups and individuals have aligned themselves around related goals and achieved great success exploiting a mechanic. The desired result is to keep fresh challenges alive in the game at the cost of what was was achieved and fairly won. This applies to training/ doctrines and isk sinks, Anomoly buff/nerf, tech buff/nerf, Gun mining buff/nerf, incursion buff/nerf, FW buff/future nerf, ect.. Each change provides a new "gold rush" that players make goals around and eventually reap above average rewards, but whose welcome is worn out over time. The principle extends to the training goals that players make.

Unlike other MMO's, which drive massive content infusions with new releases, Eve has to keep more or less the same universe interesting.

What we really need CCP to provide is the new character choice of a Panda and this game will be crap until they do that.
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#154 - 2012-09-18 15:26:43 UTC
All I'm hearing is "Ohnoooz, my long range weapons don't nearly outdamage my close range weapons anymore!"

Look at hybrids and cry me a river.

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
Z1gy
Vindicator Corporation
#155 - 2012-09-18 15:27:07 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hello everyone! we've got another F&I balance thread for you all, covering tentative plans for missiles in the Winter expansion plus a hurricane fittings nerf that doesn't really need it's own thread.

I'd like to start off by reminding people that everything in these F&I threads is open to changes, however there are some significant balance issues being dealt with here that will need to be solved in one way or another. There are also some details that remain to be ironed out but we wanted to get these ideas out to you all as early as possible.

I'll start off with the orphan announcement. In the Attack Cruiser thread we also announced changes to medium gun fittings. We're going to be changing the hurricane at the same time but I wanted that thread to stay dedicated to the specific cruiser balance instead of getting derailed so we're moving that here.
Since we planning to reduce the powergrid needs of all medium artillery by 10% across the board, we are also planning to subtract 225 PG from the Hurricane, leaving it with a base powergrid of 1125.
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.
The hurricane will likely receive significantly more changes when we get to battlecruisers in the balance pass, but this is designed as a compensation for the drop in Arty PG and to help alleviate the problem of Arty ships having so much free PG when they use autocannons.




what about those that use armor hurricane? 1600mm plate?
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#156 - 2012-09-18 15:27:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Misanth
It's a bloody joke that CCP keeps balancing this game around fleet combat. Even if you'd argue that fleet combat is the ultimate "goal" in EVE, it's still lag riddled and so full of pilots + potential varieties/different roles/segmets of the fleet, that that's just wrong to begin with.

* Drake is not overpowered in any way until you field a blob of them.
* Tengu has too high damage output overboard when it combines the dmg + engineer subsystem, but a cloaky Tengu for example has lower damage output than a recon. This could easily be tweaked by (as a wise man told me) a simple RoF fix. The balance between the kin and non-kin damage is good as is.
* Nighthawk is already very low on the pecking order and does need alot of love, especially in the damage department (but it's also quite sad it can't even sport an X-L booster).
* Caracal and Cerberus lol. Khanid ships with HML lol.

TL;DR HML is not an issue, balancing game around fleet combat is, and a tweak for the Tengu damage subsystem could be in place.

(edit; oh, I could buy the argument that HML hits frigs too easily.. tho the damage output of HML's is not an issue, in fact it's pretty low in non-dps-subsystem-Tengu cases)

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
BadAssMcKill
Aliastra
#157 - 2012-09-18 15:28:12 UTC  |  Edited by: BadAssMcKill
Missiles are not turrets, I really don't like having TDs/TEs affecting them.


EDIT: Also PG grid nerf on the 'Cane makes it so that you can't fit a 1600mm plate and 425s even with the extra highslots empty unless my math is off
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#158 - 2012-09-18 15:28:13 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Arthello wrote:
How about fixing the Drake before you nerf all the other BC's. The Drake is the number 1 overpowered ship in EVE at the moment.



But Tengus are just fine even though they do more DPS, have more tank, better resists, longer targetting range and higher sensor strength, faster m,issile velocity and are much smaller and faster, because you like flying those, right? Roll


If only drakes were nerfed, only newer/poorer players would be effected.
Thalen Draganos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#159 - 2012-09-18 15:29:27 UTC
Bagehi wrote:
Lord MuffloN wrote:
For everyone comparing blasters to heavy missiles, you're dead wrong and they should be compared to HAM's.


HAMs still need a slight damage boost IMO. But, yeah, this.

If HM are supposed to be the same as rails, arty and beams then maybe they should be fixed first and then a slight reduction to the HM and a slight buff to HAMs to equalize things. Not a range nerf to HMs though if they are supposed to be the LR version. That's a bit much.
Danny Centauri
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#160 - 2012-09-18 15:29:53 UTC
Wow quite shocking to read the comments, why on earth are you people comparing HMLs to pulse/blasters/autos? For god sake atleast compare like to like weapons platforms to spot weaknesses.

Don't like the HML changes, I find med rails a hell of a lot more frustrating! If you really want to compare drake to blaster boats atleast use HAM stats otherwise reading your posts is just cringe worthy.

EVE Manufacturing Guide - Simple guides to manufacturing in EVE for both beginners and more experienced players.