These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End
#521 - 2012-09-18 20:10:29 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Caldari missile shipline is officially dead now. After those changes Caldari missile ships beyond frig-size will become as rare as damp-focusing Lachesis nowadays. Let's see all categories of missiles.

1. Frig size.
1.1. Rockets: almost fine, it's just their DPS is weak.
1.2. Light missile launchers: noone use them, propably we will see them now and then as often as small railguns. Low dps, hard to fit.

2. Cruiser size.
2.1. Rapid light missile launchers: beyond some gimmick fits almost never used and I highly doubt they will after Winter.
2.2. Heavy missile launchers: now they will have a terrible DPS while being the only choice a missile boat of this size can fit without crippling itself. With upcoming Drake nerf it won't be used much.
2.3. HAML: they just useless. Hard to fit, extremely short range that can't be buffed by overpowered TE and TC. On top of that low dps and can't hurt small targets.

3. Battleship size.
3.1. Torpedoes: outside of bombers torps are awful. Extremely short range and can't even do full damage to the Death Star without gazilion of target painters.
3.2. Cruise missiles: too much range that noone needs, very low damage output and cant hurt cruiser-size targets without TP's or a lot of rigs + very good missile skills.

4. Capital size.
Don't know much about that, but I know for sure that capital-sized missile launchers are worse than capital-size turrets.

So what do we have:
Bad for PvP and bad for PvE missile ships. There are almost no point ever training:
- Light missiles
- HAM
- HM (after Winter)
- Cruise missiles
- Caldari capitals
The only viable missile types we left with are rockers and torps (for SB only). I want my SP in missiles back.



Mostly good points; Cruises will still be good for PVE as they are unaffected by this change (Except vs. Sansha? They TD right?)

Director of Frozen Corpse Industries.

Proletariat Tingtango
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#522 - 2012-09-18 20:10:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Proletariat Tingtango
So hey look, I hated drakefleet and i dont mind the pvp ramifications, but what am I supposed to make money with in nullsec as a low-sp pilot? I can salvage off of kinder vets sometimes, but that's a finite and pretty limited source of isk. I'm just now able to do forsaken hubs on my own, and that's my only steady source of isk. With these nerfs on the board it really sounds like you're dicking low-sp pilots that live in nullsec out of one of their major sources of income, which wasn't that major to begin with.

I was also slowly training for a tengu to rat and now i'm second guessing that. Did you guys even think this nerf through? Do you actually want people to never use the drake or heavy-missile based ships ever again?

It seems like you could have reduced the viability of heavy missiles in pvp without completely screwing low-sp income sources.

Edit: And if anyone tells me that I should mine I will take a veldspar asteroid and cram it waaayyy up your ass.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#523 - 2012-09-18 20:10:56 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
War Kitten wrote:
If you're going to compare long range guns and HMLs, use the long range tech II ammo in the HML too.

Then do your graphs again with CN scourge vs. CN antimatter and Navy MF.

At least talk apples to apples. Then you can at least make useful comparisons.



You're suggesting that the shorter range, higher DPS, faction HML ammo should be able to be projected consistently farther than the falloff of most the other long-range turret platforms?

I completely understand comparing apples to apples - but the problem is that a shorter range, high DPS ammo is outclassing falloff ranges on long-range turret platforms. The purpose of the graph wasn't to make a direct comparison, is was to highlight this specific imbalance.


I'm not suggesting that at all.

I'm suggesting you make comparisons that are meaningful. Yes, scourge missiles project farther than their counterpart in damage for turrets. But those graphs cherry pick some of the worst DPS turret ammo and compare them to the 2nd best HML ammo, simply to try and compare range projections.

Compare Tech II long range ammo across the board.
Compare Faction DPS ammo across the board.
Compare Tech II high DPS "tracking" ammo across the board.

Then compare the results of each of those graphs to find the balance. Don't cherry pick your data.

HMLs need a nerf, don't get me wrong, but they need to be compared fairly and honestly. My gut still says 20% damage reduction on top of 25% range reduction is an over-nerf and will kill HML use entirely.

But I'll wait for the above graphs (or make them myself if CCP is hiring amateur game designers and wants to pay me :) ).

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Lord Ryan
True Xero
#524 - 2012-09-18 20:10:56 UTC
Instead of endless cycle of nerf, buff nerf, nerf and nerf some more. just make every weapon the same but with differeent names and get it over with.

Do not assume anything above this line was typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient.

I'm Down
Perkone
Caldari State
#525 - 2012-09-18 20:11:19 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
I don't think one player ever said Heavy Missiles needed a massive DPS nerf. I think most people said nerf range... Yet you go way over the top by doing both in huge totals.

Fozzie is proving how bad CCP is becoming. Drone on every god damn ship in game, Lazy EWAR that's way OP now... No seperation of TD's and missile disruption. No separation between T1 cheap bullshit, and T2 expensive.... mildly better ships.

Do you guys even get what this game once was? I mean ******* hell, lets just murder every principle the game was built on.
OlRotGut
#526 - 2012-09-18 20:11:46 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Caldari missile shipline is officially dead now. After those changes Caldari missile ships beyond frig-size will become as rare as damp-focusing Lachesis nowadays. Let's see all categories of missiles.

1. Frig size.
1.1. Rockets: almost fine, it's just their DPS is weak.
1.2. Light missile launchers: noone use them, propably we will see them now and then as often as small railguns. Low dps, hard to fit.

2. Cruiser size.
2.1. Rapid light missile launchers: beyond some gimmick fits almost never used and I highly doubt they will after Winter.
2.2. Heavy missile launchers: now they will have a terrible DPS while being the only choice a missile boat of this size can fit without crippling itself. With upcoming Drake nerf it won't be used much.
2.3. HAML: they just useless. Hard to fit, extremely short range that can't be buffed by overpowered TE and TC. On top of that low dps and can't hurt small targets.

3. Battleship size.
3.1. Torpedoes: outside of bombers torps are awful. Extremely short range and can't even do full damage to the Death Star without gazilion of target painters.
3.2. Cruise missiles: too much range that noone needs, very low damage output and cant hurt cruiser-size targets without TP's or a lot of rigs + very good missile skills.

4. Capital size.
Don't know much about that, but I know for sure that capital-sized missile launchers are worse than capital-size turrets.

So what do we have:
Bad for PvP and bad for PvE missile ships. There are almost no point ever training:
- Light missiles
- HAM
- HM (after Winter)
- Cruise missiles
- Caldari capitals
The only viable missile types we left with are rockers and torps (for SB only). I want my SP in missiles back.




What are these Cruise missiles you speak of? lol ;)
Lucien Eginald
Vulture Mine Ore and Holdings
#527 - 2012-09-18 20:12:10 UTC


Nerfs just don't make sense to me. Buffs make more sense.

Let's go with the premise "Eve is Real," and it takes place in space. Progress is what folks in space would want, not steps backward. If your ship is underpowered, under tanked, etc, you would move to a better ship / weapon / armor / or shield combo, right? You wouldn't ask folks around you to make their ships worse.

Let's really go with Eve being real. When a pilot docks up and meets up with the local repair / engineering shop they wouldn't say, "Make my ship worse....." That would be like saying I want a 12mpg car instead of the 36mpg car I currently run. What's real about that?
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#528 - 2012-09-18 20:12:15 UTC
Lord Ryan wrote:
Instead of endless cycle of nerf, buff nerf, nerf and nerf some more. just make every weapon the same but with differeent names and get it over with.


Stop being so bad.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Reticle
Sight Picture
#529 - 2012-09-18 20:13:22 UTC
Mourning Souls wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

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.


How is that an upshot? From my understanding the word "upshot" is supposed to be a good thing.

Full rack of 720's with a MWD and LSE right now only requires a ACR, needing a RCU2 as well isn't an upshot.

"upshot" is a way of saying "in essence" or "basically" or "this is the key information, all else is left out"
Wolfstorm
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
#530 - 2012-09-18 20:14:19 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
I don't think one player every said Heavy Missiles needed a massive DPS nerf. I think most people said nerf range... Yet you go way over the top by doing both in huge totals.

Fozzie is proving how bad CCP is becoming. Drone on every god damn ship in game, Lazy EWAR that's way OP now... No seperation of TD's and missile disruption. No separation between T1 cheap bullshit, and T2 expensive.... mildly better ships.

Do you guys even get what this game once was? I mean ******* hell, lets just murder every principle the game was built on.


These new design team are ****. I think it's time for another revolution and the burning of jita mark 2 to teach em to not put their pants on their head and do some real damn work. Cus really it ain't that hard - I should know, it's what I do elsewhere.

Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#531 - 2012-09-18 20:14:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
War Kitten wrote:


I'm not suggesting that at all.

I'm suggesting you make comparisons that are meaningful. Yes, scourge missiles project farther than their counterpart in damage for turrets. But those graphs cherry pick some of the worst DPS turret ammo and compare them to the 2nd best HML ammo, simply to try and compare range projections.

Compare Tech II long range ammo across the board.
Compare Faction DPS ammo across the board.
Compare Tech II high DPS "tracking" ammo across the board.

Then compare the results of each of those graphs to find the balance. Don't cherry pick your data.



You keep saying this but I think you're confused. There is no T2 long range ammo for HMLs. You're thinking of Javelin missiles which are only usable in HAMs.

The T2 missiles for HMLs are:
Precision Heavy Missile for taking down frigates.
Fury Heavy Missile for taking down battlecruisers and up.

Both have lower range than their T1 equivalent. Fury HMs are not far behind and actually have an even better dps/range ratio than CN Scourge HMs. So no, there is no cherry picking going on. The discrepancy really is that large.
Arduemont
The State of War.
#532 - 2012-09-18 20:15:01 UTC
Im sorry CCP but a 20% reduction in Heavy Missile damage is way out of line. I agree with the range decrease, because they have a ridiculously high range for medium sized weapon. But a 20% reduction in damage is catastrophic. Caldari are reknown for their missile boats and as it stands none of thier missile platforms are useful. There are only three truly useful Caldari missile boats, Golum, Tengu and Drake... two of which use heavies.

You will destroy the Caldari ship line like this. The Caracal is already terrible and useless, and that uses heavies, your just going to make it worse. Not to mention the Cerb is one of the most useless of the HACs, and your definitely going to make that worse. If it wasn't before it definitely will be now.

I very rarely think badly of CCP, but that change will make me deaply unhappy.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf

Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#533 - 2012-09-18 20:17:31 UTC
My Moros can do 18kdps while my tengu barely scrapes the 600dps mark. Therefore missiles are fine and this nerf is uncalled for.

No sig.

Lili Lu
#534 - 2012-09-18 20:17:50 UTC
The Bazzalisk wrote:
I think you seem to forget that Caldari is the most popular race so of course Drakes are going to be the most popular battlecruiser.

And which came first the chicken or the egg?

I do not find the qq-ing itt surprising. So many people that entered this game in the last 3 or so years followed the obvious easy path, Drake -> Tengu and that's basically all you needed. That is being taken away.

Seriously, though it does surprise me that so many are failing to notice concurrent buffs that should be welcome. Faster missiles, removal of tech II ammo penalties, improved unguided missiles, and if the current frigate and cruiser rebalancing is any indication the hated kinetic bonus is being done away with (which is interesting for where it leaves Gallente tech II resists?).

People really need to take a deep breath, slow down and read the op. And as usual try to read the previous posts itt because some of the arguments have already been stated and even addressed. For instance, it appears likely that TDs base stats will be altered/reduced so that they don't become the new old-style multispec, per one of Fozzie's followup posts.

As for ships, welcome to wishing they could move faster to general BC rebalancing and on to tech II cruisers and BCs.

So it appears the two overused BCs will be getting an interim nerf. Thanks Ytterbium btw. At least the Drake is not getting a direct one, and really all the but it will be useless posters should wait for the comprehensive rebalance. CCP is wisely choosing to trim these two ships back in the interim and most likely balance the other BCs up to them. This will mean that the newly buffed cruisers won't just slide back into weaksauce in comparison. Did you all really expect that they could buff the other 6 BCs up to current Drake and Cane standards and just moot all the work on Cruisers?

Seriously, light missiles are getting a buff. I would bet that cruises could be getting a similar buff when they start addressing BSs and BS sized weapons. This is a process folks.

Maybe if all you whining are correct and armor turret boats come to dominate the killboards and pve activity the way the drake and tengu have you can wait 3+ years for that to get fixed. Welcome to a more complex game. A game where you want to train something other than one race of ships and one weapon system. And where you don't just load your lows with damage mods and your mids with tank, hit f1 and watch the missiles travel to your target. Welcome to thinking about how you get range, or damage application, and have to balance that with tank. Hey at least you don't need to worry about cap for your guns on top of that.Blink
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
#535 - 2012-09-18 20:18:36 UTC
The Cerb will get CCPs attention next year, just wait for it.
Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#536 - 2012-09-18 20:19:42 UTC
Also, a Revelation can reliably score hits at 200km yet an Osprey struggles to obtain a mining yield of over 600m3.

No sig.

ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#537 - 2012-09-18 20:20:28 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
Hi everyone!

We appreciate that any such threads are always bound to generate strong opinions for and against anything being discussed but I'm asking you to please consider if what you're posting is constructive before you click the post button.

If you feel that a post is breaking the rules, trolling/ranting and so on, please use the report button to let the moderators know to have a look.

Lastly, personal attacks against CCP employees are both against the rules and viewed very poorly and may well lead to forum privileges being revoked.

Thanks and fly safe.

PS: As a final note, please note the wording of CCP Fozzie's post; these are tentative plans and as such are subject to change/complete reversal as always. Please consider that before going off on the deep end!

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#538 - 2012-09-18 20:21:11 UTC
Lord Ryan wrote:
just give me back my SP..

THIS! Straight

—Ω—

Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
#539 - 2012-09-18 20:24:12 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:

good post


Thank you for this 'voice of reason' post Lili.
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#540 - 2012-09-18 20:25:50 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
I don't think one player every said Heavy Missiles needed a massive DPS nerf. I think most people said nerf range... Yet you go way over the top by doing both in huge totals.

Fozzie is proving how bad CCP is becoming. Drone on every god damn ship in game, Lazy EWAR that's way OP now... No seperation of TD's and missile disruption. No separation between T1 cheap bullshit, and T2 expensive.... mildly better ships.

Do you guys even get what this game once was? I mean ******* hell, lets just murder every principle the game was built on.



Hey look on the bright side, your TDing HAM Sacs are starting to look good!

~