These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#721 - 2012-09-18 22:50:51 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Marcus Harikari wrote:
NONONO drake already does less dmg than other BC's why 20% dmg drop??

Confirming massive blobs of Brutix's and Myrmidons being able to apply full damage at 80km.


Only if your alliance ticker is AHARM.... Twisted

-Liang

Zing!
Smeethan
New Eden Corporation 98442441
#722 - 2012-09-18 22:51:58 UTC
John Ratcliffe wrote:
I think the Drake and HML changes are ********. Really not impressed.

An option to refund SPs now wasted in Missiles would seem appropriate.



as a daily drake flyer I know this will these changes will NOT be good for me and my drake. I am now switching. Thanks and I am not telling you what i'm switching to because that will be nerfed next.

as always ... NERF QQ **** u ccp etc
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#723 - 2012-09-18 22:52:57 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Look at all of these terrified Tengu/Drake pilots flailing at the windows.


The funny thing about it is that if people bothered to engage their brain instead of simply flailing about they'd see that this is likely going to result in a net boost to the PVE Tengu. Consider that HAMs aren't being directly nerfed but you'll have a low and 2 'utility' mids on the optimal PVE setup to spend on TE/TCs. Just how far are we going to be able to push the range these HAM Tengus? How much better is the damage application going to be? My gut feeling says that they're going to be a lot better than today's HML setup for virtually all practical use cases.

-Liang

Yeah, I was irritated at first until I realize this is probably the likely case scenario.


again you still nee web/Target painter to make hams worth while on tengu iv tried it its not good at all plus the fact that you NEED to faction fit and you NEED 6 slots for prop+tank , AB sba x2+medium bosoter (or 2 small boosters and 1 amp) then 2 hardners.

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
NinjaTurtle
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#724 - 2012-09-18 22:53:36 UTC
Misanth wrote:

* TD is fine in present state, but should never hit the field in the suggsted affect-all-role


Ya that's a good way of putting it. TDs already had that "p much good in any scenario" power and it seems like they may be too OP on unbonused ships now.
Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
#725 - 2012-09-18 22:53:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Seleene
Grath Telkin wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


I assume you're talking about the Arty Loki and Arty Sleip? Those... are not really common fits. Even still, they're kinda underwhelming. The Muninn would matter except for the whole LRHACs not mattering at all. The Absolution and Legion both need some buffing.

And the HAM NH is actually getting a pretty massive buff. And the HML NH is getting a relative boost next to the Tengu, which I personally find to be a good thing.

-Liang


How is a HAM NH getting any boost? How does it in any way bring it in line with a tengu? I mean seriously dude, do you just throw **** out there and hope it sticks or do you have an actual reason for what you say?

Arti Loki and Arti Sleip were never common for one particular reason, fittings. That just changed drastically.


All missile ships are getting a boost via the TE/TC change. The Arty Loki and Arty Sleip weren't common because they're underwhelming, not because they were particularly hard to fit.

-Liang


Yeah, I agree, an Artillery Sliep that does 600+ DPS and 5000 alpha with great speed, drone and slot flexibility and shield tanking logistics (which everyone knows are superior is in no way good.

TE/TC change isn't a boost, it's a straight nerf to a NH which doesn't have the built in range bonus that the tengu does.

The devs didn't even consider the fact that the only arguement for missiles doing too much damage was the Tengu... Yet the only reason this is true is because they gave the tengu an ungodly 7.5% ROF bonus on top of 6 launchers and a massive tank and plenty of low slots.... heaven forbid they actually fix the problem with the ship, not the problem with the missiles.

Hence, the only problem with missiles that was ever argued was range.


See what happens when you start posting actual content in your post that can be refuted? you get ***** slapped.


Thats it Yaay, rage because you're in an alliance that had one viable fleet comp that just got nerfed into the ground.

You've already been destroyed by Fozzie in the other thread with all your made up ****. Here, let me help, finish you off:


Missile ships will now be forced to make the same sacrifices as turrnet ships to extend the range of their weapons, giving up tank and utility slots to achieve their longest ranges. So while the Nighthawk got a little gimped on its overall range, it can give up a low and or mid and easily get that range back, with the added bonus of being able to hit smaller targets harder if they want.


Also please stop flinging out 4 damage mod fits that nobody but you would ever undock and use in a fight, it makes you look dumb when you post.

Missiles got nerfed and now AAA has no viable doctrines outside of Arty Loki's (you remember, the ship you claim in your post that nobody uses only thats not true and multiple alliances are currently using alpha lokis as a part of a doctrine) and you're mad about it, we get it, but you just keep posting this stupid outright false bullshit to try and save you from that fate. You're like the Fox News of fitting Yaay.



Grath Tekllin for CSM 8.

2004-2008: Mercenary Coalition Boss

2007-2010: CCP Game Designer | 2011-2013: CSM6 Delegate & CSM7 Chairman

2011-2015: Pandemic Legionnaire

2015- : Mercenary Coalition Boss

Follow Seleene on Twitter!
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#726 - 2012-09-18 22:54:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Laura Dexx
John Ratcliffe wrote:
I think the Drake and HML changes are ********. Really not impressed.

An option to refund SPs now wasted in Missiles would seem appropriate.


Yeah, like they refunded SP for the falcon change, gang boosting command ships when t3s came out and when they nerfed nano. Oh wait. You've had your flavor of the month, it's time for other ships and weapons to step into the limelight.
Shizuken
Venerated Stars
#727 - 2012-09-18 22:54:50 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Shizuken wrote:
DeBingJos wrote:
-Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit)

Just noticed this! Holy crap CCP, 20% nerf to damage and 25% nerf to range?!



What?What?What?


Yeah, not sure if my current mission drake fut will be able to do L4's anymore...



You'll still have the DPS to finish them, it just might take you a bit longer than before. Alternatively you can skill up to a Raven or any other BS and diversify to avoid future nerfs by making sure you can fly ships from multiple races with multiple weapons types at your disposal.


Sounds good. I have the worst skillset though. I am a master at flipflopping training plans on a regular basis. I am currently spending the next year trying to clean that up... That is why I rely on the Drake for L4's
Kiandoshia
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#728 - 2012-09-18 22:54:52 UTC
Here's the question...

Can I use tracking links to get back super long range tropedoes?
John Ratcliffe
Tradors'R'us
IChooseYou Alliance
#729 - 2012-09-18 22:54:54 UTC
Smeethan wrote:
as a daily drake flyer I know this will these changes will NOT be good for me and my drake. I am now switching. Thanks and I am not telling you what i'm switching to because that will be nerfed next.

as always ... NERF QQ **** u ccp etc


Agreed.

I have a CNR & SNI but prefer to Lvl 4 in a Drake because HMs apply damage more effectively again Cruisers and smaller than CMs. I have been considering training for a Tengu, but thanks to these idiotic nerfs I won't bother.

I guess I'll have to train for a Mach now.

Oh, and **** you CCP.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#730 - 2012-09-18 22:54:56 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1912574#post1912574

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Improving solo options without either killing fun aspects of group play or making solo too easymode is definitely a goal of ours

Yeah, thanks for new TDs - now we gonna have even 'more' options Lol [:clown:]

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#731 - 2012-09-18 22:55:09 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Haquer wrote:



Let's pull up the top 20 page on eve-kill dot net

Rank Weapons Kills
1 Heavy Missile Launcher II 78177
2 425mm AutoCannon II 20772
3 Heavy Pulse Laser II 15799


Yeah, you're pretty much full of ****. Heavy missiles are OP and should be nerfed.


You can correlate that with the Drake being the top ship. HMLs on most other ships are meh. Hell, this is also almost all kinetic damage! If you change to something else, it's much less. I can guarantee you that maybe 75000 of those HML II kills were using kinetic missiles grunted out of a drake. The problem is the combination of traits the Drake has/had that make it viable. Nobody screams bloody murder if you put HMLs on a Rook, or a Lachesis. Also what about the Minmatar missile boats that are going to be negatively impacted by this, such as the new Bellicose this winter? Well, it's probably going to become Caracal II and the bane of frigates and destroyers everywhere. Making the Caracal useless.

Watch how this all changes after winter. Caldari and Gallente are going to be having a tea party together, down at the "least used ships" rung of the ladder.


Nopes, it'll be Caldari and Amarr, with Gallente being top dog small scale, and Minmatar for blobs.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#732 - 2012-09-18 22:56:21 UTC
Seranova Farreach wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Look at all of these terrified Tengu/Drake pilots flailing at the windows.


The funny thing about it is that if people bothered to engage their brain instead of simply flailing about they'd see that this is likely going to result in a net boost to the PVE Tengu. Consider that HAMs aren't being directly nerfed but you'll have a low and 2 'utility' mids on the optimal PVE setup to spend on TE/TCs. Just how far are we going to be able to push the range these HAM Tengus? How much better is the damage application going to be? My gut feeling says that they're going to be a lot better than today's HML setup for virtually all practical use cases.

-Liang

Yeah, I was irritated at first until I realize this is probably the likely case scenario.


again you still nee web/Target painter to make hams worth while on tengu iv tried it its not good at all plus the fact that you NEED to faction fit and you NEED 6 slots for prop+tank , AB sba x2+medium bosoter (or 2 small boosters and 1 amp) then 2 hardners.

You're overtanking.

Then again I'm faction fitting too, but I have AB, MSB, 1 SBA, and 2 hardeners. I have a mid slot left over.

When you add the tracking enhancer to missiles, the explosion radius/velocity doesn't matter as far as battleships go, and once I switch damage to shooting cruisers and frigates I can swap out the script instantly to reduce explosion radius/increase explosion velocity.

Alternatively I can take out my fourth BCS and put in a TE for a constant flight time/ER/EV buff.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#733 - 2012-09-18 22:56:24 UTC
Bilaz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:

Yeah, I agree, an Artillery Sliep that does 600+ DPS and 5000 alpha with great speed, drone and slot flexibility and shield tanking logistics (which everyone knows are superior is in no way good.

TE/TC change isn't a boost, it's a straight nerf to a NH which doesn't have the built in range bonus that the tengu does.

The devs didn't even consider the fact that the only arguement for missiles doing too much damage was the Tengu... Yet the only reason this is true is because they gave the tengu an ungodly 7.5% ROF bonus on top of 6 launchers and a massive tank and plenty of low slots.... heaven forbid they actually fix the problem with the ship, not the problem with the missiles.

Hence, the only problem with missiles that was ever argued was range.


See what happens when you start posting actual content in your post that can be refuted? you get ***** slapped.

To be honest every missile ship give more damage than their turret counterpart @ 50-60km (or @100 if hacs) range. Tengu was just made to be better than drake, which was much better than everything else caldary had - and that everything else was better than their analogs.

For instance cerberus with 2 damage mods give 350 where other hacs have 260. Plus much better "tracking", tank and such. Same stuff with drake - but with more slots, ehp, resists, drones and less cap management problems. nighthawk have what - 100 more dps than drake? pretty sure that it is much better than astarte and absolution, and more tank than arty-sleipnir. Maybe not better becouse med arty is quite broken also - but not much worse either.

So no - problems are not only with drake and tengu - problems with heavy missiles we also have. Another problem is passive shield tank - both tengu and drake are massievly overtanked - and frankly most ships are shield tanked nowdays. While i do not think like Fon that every second ship is horribly overtanked, i do agree that LSE and rigs are major parts of the problem.

a
re you insane? look at NH vs sleipnir . NH gets a nominal tank and if these changes come barley 350 dps while sleipnir gets nearly 1k dps with 425s+1HAM launcher and usually enough PG and mids for a good XL booster fit. hell even cane gets 800ish dps our equivelent tier 3 BC dosnt even come close even when useing HAMs

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#734 - 2012-09-18 22:56:33 UTC
John Ratcliffe wrote:
I think the Drake and HML changes are ********. Really not impressed.

An option to refund SPs now wasted in Missiles would seem appropriate.


No SP refund for you. Learn to adapt like everyone else.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#735 - 2012-09-18 22:57:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Two step
Liang Nuren wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Marcus Harikari wrote:
NONONO drake already does less dmg than other BC's why 20% dmg drop??

Confirming massive blobs of Brutix's and Myrmidons being able to apply full damage at 80km.


Only if your alliance ticker is AHARM.... Twisted

-Liang


We are but a small corp, we don't have massive blobs... Big smile

(also, alliance ticker is K162)

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#736 - 2012-09-18 22:57:45 UTC
Bilaz wrote:
both tengu and drake are massievly overtanked


drake- yes, it has a big tank

tengu - no...not at all. Look at the proteus. 200k tank with armor easily. Look at the Loki. 100k tank easily wth a single 1600 plate. Tengu has trouble getting 100k passive tank, and thats with only 2 mid slots left over for MWD and disruptor. Plus, the real issue lies with 100MN tengus, their tanks are not huge at all, its just their speed mitigating damage that makes it seem that way. Even moreso, to fly an 100mn tengu, you NEED to pimp fit it, and having an extremely expensive tengu should be OKAY to have it as a powerful ship. You don't see people constantly flying 1.5bil lokis and legions, like people do with tengus, but if you did, you could surely get 150k-200k armor tank on them as well, just as the tengu gets a good tank when combined with 100mn. However, its tank is not massively unbalanced. Just its damage projection, and reducing its range and a bit of its damage (hopefully not 20% however) is a reasonable way of fixing it up to be more balanced. However- nerfing it into oblivion will make 100mn tengus no longer useful, taking away a lovely style of playing that many people hold dear. (This isn't me whining, I personally don't fly 100mn tengus because I don't have the ISK to buy something too pimped.) Nerfing a form of warfare is really bad for the game. It takes away people's skills using a certain tactic. For example - some people have really practised with kiting others, and thus use it a lot in PvP because it is what they are good at. 100MN tengus require a lot of thinking to manuever properly, and taking out this playstyle really isn't a particularly good/fair idea.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#737 - 2012-09-18 22:57:54 UTC
Seranova Farreach wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Look at all of these terrified Tengu/Drake pilots flailing at the windows.


The funny thing about it is that if people bothered to engage their brain instead of simply flailing about they'd see that this is likely going to result in a net boost to the PVE Tengu. Consider that HAMs aren't being directly nerfed but you'll have a low and 2 'utility' mids on the optimal PVE setup to spend on TE/TCs. Just how far are we going to be able to push the range these HAM Tengus? How much better is the damage application going to be? My gut feeling says that they're going to be a lot better than today's HML setup for virtually all practical use cases.

-Liang

Yeah, I was irritated at first until I realize this is probably the likely case scenario.


again you still nee web/Target painter to make hams worth while on tengu iv tried it its not good at all plus the fact that you NEED to faction fit and you NEED 6 slots for prop+tank , AB sba x2+medium bosoter (or 2 small boosters and 1 amp) then 2 hardners.


A few comments:
- The cycle time on the TP means that it's generally not that worthwhile. Or, it feels like more work and if I wanted to work I'd fly a Golem.
- We aren't just seeing a range increase from the TEs - we're also seeing damage application. Think of the TE/2 TCs as like 3 extra Flare/Rigor slots (that actually work).
- You don't need that much tank for L4s.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#738 - 2012-09-18 22:58:08 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Look at all of these terrified Tengu/Drake pilots flailing at the windows.


The funny thing about it is that if people bothered to engage their brain instead of simply flailing about they'd see that this is likely going to result in a net boost to the PVE Tengu. Consider that HAMs aren't being directly nerfed but you'll have a low and 2 'utility' mids on the optimal PVE setup to spend on TE/TCs. Just how far are we going to be able to push the range these HAM Tengus? How much better is the damage application going to be? My gut feeling says that they're going to be a lot better than today's HML setup for virtually all practical use cases.

-Liang

Yeah, I was irritated at first until I realize this is probably the likely case scenario.


again you still nee web/Target painter to make hams worth while on tengu iv tried it its not good at all plus the fact that you NEED to faction fit and you NEED 6 slots for prop+tank , AB sba x2+medium bosoter (or 2 small boosters and 1 amp) then 2 hardners.

You're overtanking.

Then again I'm faction fitting too, but I have AB, MSB, 1 SBA, and 2 hardeners. I have a mid slot left over.

When you add the tracking enhancer to missiles, the explosion radius/velocity doesn't matter as far as battleships go, and once I switch damage to shooting cruisers and frigates I can swap out the script instantly to reduce explosion radius/increase explosion velocity.

Alternatively I can take out my fourth BCS and put in a TE for a constant flight time/ER/EV buff.

i dont believe i am overtanking, the tank barely stands up to AE4 bonus room dps at full speed while popping webber frigs.

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
Thash Hirarashi
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#739 - 2012-09-18 22:58:13 UTC
I recently just trained for a tengu. If these changes are implemented, can I get sp refunded?
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#740 - 2012-09-18 22:58:27 UTC
Seranova Farreach wrote:
Bilaz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:

Yeah, I agree, an Artillery Sliep that does 600+ DPS and 5000 alpha with great speed, drone and slot flexibility and shield tanking logistics (which everyone knows are superior is in no way good.

TE/TC change isn't a boost, it's a straight nerf to a NH which doesn't have the built in range bonus that the tengu does.

The devs didn't even consider the fact that the only arguement for missiles doing too much damage was the Tengu... Yet the only reason this is true is because they gave the tengu an ungodly 7.5% ROF bonus on top of 6 launchers and a massive tank and plenty of low slots.... heaven forbid they actually fix the problem with the ship, not the problem with the missiles.

Hence, the only problem with missiles that was ever argued was range.


See what happens when you start posting actual content in your post that can be refuted? you get ***** slapped.

To be honest every missile ship give more damage than their turret counterpart @ 50-60km (or @100 if hacs) range. Tengu was just made to be better than drake, which was much better than everything else caldary had - and that everything else was better than their analogs.

For instance cerberus with 2 damage mods give 350 where other hacs have 260. Plus much better "tracking", tank and such. Same stuff with drake - but with more slots, ehp, resists, drones and less cap management problems. nighthawk have what - 100 more dps than drake? pretty sure that it is much better than astarte and absolution, and more tank than arty-sleipnir. Maybe not better becouse med arty is quite broken also - but not much worse either.

So no - problems are not only with drake and tengu - problems with heavy missiles we also have. Another problem is passive shield tank - both tengu and drake are massievly overtanked - and frankly most ships are shield tanked nowdays. While i do not think like Fon that every second ship is horribly overtanked, i do agree that LSE and rigs are major parts of the problem.

a
re you insane? look at NH vs sleipnir . NH gets a nominal tank and if these changes come barley 350 dps while sleipnir gets nearly 1k dps with 425s+1HAM launcher and usually enough PG and mids for a good XL booster fit. hell even cane gets 800ish dps our equivelent tier 3 BC dosnt even come close even when useing HAMs


You're comparing apples to oranges. Compare a 425 sleip to a ham nh, or a hm nh against an arty sleip. Not a HM nh to a 425 sleip.