These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Glasgow Dunlop
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1201 - 2012-09-19 11:29:28 UTC
Giveth in 1 hand, taketh away in the other with a wtf nuke powerd hoover.

All those shiny missle graphics for nothing . . . . .

@glasgowdunlop #tweetfleet

TDSIN Director : Join 'TDSIN pub' for more info, Join today!

Glasgow EVE Meets Organiser
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
#1202 - 2012-09-19 11:29:41 UTC
Do we really need to nerf an already crappy weapon system, making every Heavy Missile boat near useless on its own. Not to mention the amount of crying we will hear from the lvl4 mission runners who use them.

Can someone tell me exactly how a TD can affect a system that does not track? Lets be real if you want to effect missiles, do the work and make a mod that does it. Not just assign the attribute to a Mod that shouldn't.

vr
East

PS. If HML are a cruiser size weapon, and CML are a Battle ship size weapon, it seems to me that we need a new weapon system for the BCs. Otherwise the BC's should have more than enough PG / CPU for a full rack of Cruiser sized weapons

IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES:  " I drank WHAT?!"
ito kazami
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1203 - 2012-09-19 11:30:43 UTC
the most idiotic thing ccp has done to this game ...
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#1204 - 2012-09-19 11:31:22 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
60 pages of players who get that small changes to two ships make more sense than sweeping changes that affect an entire class of combat that by far wasn't problematic beyond two ships.

60 pages of people saying nerf range, but lay off nerfing dps.

60 pages of people saying focus specifically on the drake/tengu.



Who wants to bet this "constructive feedback" gets overlooked and we see this proposition go through unchanged.


This will happen, absolutely, no question. As was proved with the unified inventory farce, CCP don't really care if people disagree with their proposals, they go ahead and do them anyway. Then when the inevitable shitstorm happens, they try and backtrack and make emergency "iterations". Just enough of them to make us think that they are addressing the problem, but aren't really.

Again with the unified inventory, a lot of the promised iterations never happened, and I believe that they never will.


CCP philosophy:

Bring crap in regardless, and when riots occur, do a couple of slight amendments to keep people quiet until it all dies down. And...... on to the next bit of crap.
feihcsiM
THE B0YS
#1205 - 2012-09-19 11:37:21 UTC
Seranova Farreach wrote:
Beachura wrote:
Unfortunately I fear that the nighthawk has been caught up in this and will suffer horribly because of this.


s
some eft warriors already crunshed numbers its normal dps of like 450 to 550 will drop off to like low 300s.


How does this compare with Rail Astarte, Arty Sleipnir, Beam Absolution?

It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
PetersmithII
Ilusions 2 play
#1206 - 2012-09-19 11:37:45 UTC
For me CCP lost its minds they must be complete droged or drinked if let this pass ..
And i dont cry yes i am caldari pilot but i can fly lal ships with all guns all TII variants so i dont care ..
But there are new guys who trained for missles and u compelte ruin their SP try to rat in drake its **** even now try it after you do this in sansha space for example or anywhere where u cant use kin dmg .. u never see so bad dmg out put there will be cruisers doing more dmg then drake Big smile

U have to be realy .... sry for this but if u wanna change use of heavy missles then nerf them by -20(30)% dmg boost their range by +10(20)% so they should be used for snipe from 100+km..
If u lower both they just be ussles .. for expamle this is the way how to make diference between heavy and HAM what u do is just crazy **** becose some ppl cry about drake blob.. Or just lower rezistance on drake it will be good move too caldary loose only one good ship for pvp .. If the heavy missiles are soo uber why nobody fly cerberus ?

And if TDs will work against misseles i hope u remove thats **** so when i am in warp i cant do any ******* dmg to ship .... its nerf for missles like hell they should be explode even when i warp off u forget this is one of the biggest unadwanted in game and nobody cares?
PetersmithII
Ilusions 2 play
#1207 - 2012-09-19 11:38:58 UTC  |  Edited by: PetersmithII
feihcsiM wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
Beachura wrote:
Unfortunately I fear that the nighthawk has been caught up in this and will suffer horribly because of this.


s
some eft warriors already crunshed numbers its normal dps of like 450 to 550 will drop off to like low 300s.


How does this compare with Rail Astarte, Arty Sleipnir, Beam Absolution?


if u compare what is range of this ships ? 60 km i doubt it ..
Its realy sad u dont use your education for count numbers like max range of these ships and all these ship u said can do one thing witch missle boat cant they can warp on whoot warp out and they do dmg... missiles ship cant do this ...
Signal11th
#1208 - 2012-09-19 11:43:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Signal11th
feihcsiM wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
Beachura wrote:
Unfortunately I fear that the nighthawk has been caught up in this and will suffer horribly because of this.


s
some eft warriors already crunshed numbers its normal dps of like 450 to 550 will drop off to like low 300s.


How does this compare with Rail Astarte, Arty Sleipnir, Beam Absolution?



It seem you can get 700dps from an Arty Sleipnir using T2 Arty, a tad more than the nighthawks 300 it looks like. (obviously you have to factor in drone dps as well).

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#1209 - 2012-09-19 11:43:28 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
60 pages of players who get that small changes to two ships make more sense than sweeping changes that affect an entire class of combat that by far wasn't problematic beyond two ships.

60 pages of people saying nerf range, but lay off nerfing dps.

60 pages of people saying focus specifically on the drake/tengu.



Who wants to bet this "constructive feedback" gets overlooked and we see this proposition go through unchanged.



One of the issues I have is that I get the impression from the CSM posts in this thread that they have already "signed off" on these changes on our behalf and we should just "Build a bridge and get over it".

My view on Heavy Missiles is that:
They simply have too much range. So I support the range nerf even though I feel it should have been closer to 40% total range reduction with TC/TE offering better range by sacrificing Tank/Gank
Missiles need a viable counter that works. Defender missiles should be reworked into a real point defence weapon that effectively shoots down missiles and drones. There should also be another module that reduces your signature radius as a missile counter that is simply a "Chaff and Flare" Launcher. Obviously this module would have drawbacks for it's use but it would work as an effective solo missile counter.

TL;DR
Range nerf is good
Damage nerf is bad
Do not give TD's the ability to effect missiles
Fix or rework point defence (read defender missiles)

Disclaimer: I have not read a CSM post that stated the exact quotes from above. The phrases in quotation marks above are purely my perception of the CSM's stance and attitude to the players opinion voiced in this thread. I make no personal attacks on players, devs, CSM members or ISD members and have attempted create a post containing constructive feedback. Lets see if the ISD edit this post in their current campaign vs free speechTwisted


a
rnt you forgetting that missles are physical and can be destroyed by smartbombs and bombs?

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
Merkal Aubauch
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#1210 - 2012-09-19 11:47:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Merkal Aubauch
Seranova Farreach wrote:
Spugg Galdon wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
60 pages of players who get that small changes to two ships make more sense than sweeping changes that affect an entire class of combat that by far wasn't problematic beyond two ships.

60 pages of people saying nerf range, but lay off nerfing dps.

60 pages of people saying focus specifically on the drake/tengu.



Who wants to bet this "constructive feedback" gets overlooked and we see this proposition go through unchanged.



One of the issues I have is that I get the impression from the CSM posts in this thread that they have already "signed off" on these changes on our behalf and we should just "Build a bridge and get over it".

My view on Heavy Missiles is that:
They simply have too much range. So I support the range nerf even though I feel it should have been closer to 40% total range reduction with TC/TE offering better range by sacrificing Tank/Gank
Missiles need a viable counter that works. Defender missiles should be reworked into a real point defence weapon that effectively shoots down missiles and drones. There should also be another module that reduces your signature radius as a missile counter that is simply a "Chaff and Flare" Launcher. Obviously this module would have drawbacks for it's use but it would work as an effective solo missile counter.

TL;DR
Range nerf is good
Damage nerf is bad
Do not give TD's the ability to effect missiles
Fix or rework point defence (read defender missiles)

Disclaimer: I have not read a CSM post that stated the exact quotes from above. The phrases in quotation marks above are purely my perception of the CSM's stance and attitude to the players opinion voiced in this thread. I make no personal attacks on players, devs, CSM members or ISD members and have attempted create a post containing constructive feedback. Lets see if the ISD edit this post in their current campaign vs free speechTwisted


a
rnt you forgetting that missles are physical and can be destroyed by smartbombs and bombs?


and dont have falloff or tracking and can switch damage type and always hit?
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1211 - 2012-09-19 11:47:17 UTC
CCP.. just think about Tracking Disruptors, Smartbombs AND Defender missiles. All possible options, against one weapon system will not work!
Stop this crap with TD affecting missiles or remove defender missiles and stop smartbombs affecting missiles!
After this crappatch you can not use missiles in PvP AND PvE. And bring that a$$hole, who had this idea, here so that we can ask why he thinks, that this would be a good idea. Three possibilities to desrupt one weapon system. Thats dumb!
PetersmithII
Ilusions 2 play
#1212 - 2012-09-19 11:47:53 UTC
One more thing i forgot TDs its again comlete fail only if u remove defence missles from game complete otherwise it just anti missile ... i cant rat becose they are rats what do TDs and rats what do deff missles i will be afected with both and my dmg will be lowered by 20 % thats what i always want Big smile
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#1213 - 2012-09-19 11:48:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Laura Dexx
Signal11th wrote:
feihcsiM wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
Beachura wrote:
Unfortunately I fear that the nighthawk has been caught up in this and will suffer horribly because of this.


s
some eft warriors already crunshed numbers its normal dps of like 450 to 550 will drop off to like low 300s.


How does this compare with Rail Astarte, Arty Sleipnir, Beam Absolution?



It seem you can get 700dps from an Arty Sleipnir using T2 Arty, a tad more than the nighthawks 300 it looks like. (obviously you have to factor in drone dps as well).


Range? Hit quality? Why are you ignoring the other two command ships? Is it because you've got nothing sensible to say? Long range damage platforms are supposed to be weak, in favor of a larger range to produce the damage in. Artilleries have a longer range, but a lot of it is fall-off, which means the quality and accuracy of the damage will quickly drop to a point where you'll be wishing you'd brought heavy missiles instead.

You can't have your cake and eat it. There will ALWAYS be trade-offs, now missile boats will have to deal with having to make a choice, too.

EDIT: I just read the drone DPS bit. Aside from the fact that you can't even control drones past 59 kilometers, they won't even be applying any sensible amount of damage since they'd be spending 90% of their uptime trying to reach a target instead.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1214 - 2012-09-19 11:53:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
CCP Fozzie,

Not sure if you're still reading this or not.

However, how about instead of nerfing the drake and hurricane, you buffed the harbi and myrm?

More bandwidth on the myrm (enough to field 5 large drones) and more CPU / Cap on the harbi. Give the harbi, prophecy and brutix all additional mid slots.

Also, if you looked at armor tanking, such as the speed penalties, I think you'd find that you would open up more options for fleet compositions rather than trying to limit them.

Please say you're still keeping up here.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Recoil IV
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1215 - 2012-09-19 11:54:34 UTC
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Hmm, doesn't this missile/TE change mean TEs really need considering for a nerf/reduction of the last buff they got?



-Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit)

^_^ means heavy missiles will have even less damage.lets compare this

right now a drake has about 450 dps`ish with fury and 5 t2 drones
compared to a hurricane that has well over 800 dps with t2 drones :D

gg ccp
Naara Elein
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1216 - 2012-09-19 11:58:33 UTC
Recoil IV wrote:
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Hmm, doesn't this missile/TE change mean TEs really need considering for a nerf/reduction of the last buff they got?



-Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit)

^_^ means heavy missiles will have even less damage.lets compare this

right now a drake has about 450 dps`ish with fury and 5 t2 drones
compared to a hurricane that has well over 800 dps with t2 drones :D

gg ccp


The Drake has long range weapons.

The Cane has short range weapons.

Fair comparison? Put HAM's on the drake or Arty on the cane, then can compare.
Lev Arturis
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1217 - 2012-09-19 11:58:35 UTC
I for one would like to thank CCP Fozzie to have the courage to grab that hot iron.

Drake and Tengu are the most popular ships in PvE and PvP because of the combination
range/damage/tank (sig for Tengu).

I'm agreeing on all proposed changes except you should think about making a new and seperate
"missile disruption" module. Otherwise the classic TD is morphing into a swiss army knife.
Lev Arturis
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1218 - 2012-09-19 11:59:52 UTC
Zagdul wrote:
CCP Fozzie,

Not sure if you're still reading this or not.

However, how about instead of nerfing the drake and hurricane, you buffed the harbi and myrm?

More bandwidth on the myrm (enough to field 5 large drones) and more CPU / Cap on the harbi. Give the harbi, prophecy and brutix all additional mid slots.

Also, if you looked at armor tanking, such as the speed penalties, I think you'd find that you would open up more options for fleet compositions rather than trying to limit them.

Please say you're still keeping up here.



Battlecruiser getting the rework later. The PG change on the Cane might be only a hotfix.
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#1219 - 2012-09-19 12:00:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Laura Dexx
Recoil IV wrote:
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Hmm, doesn't this missile/TE change mean TEs really need considering for a nerf/reduction of the last buff they got?



-Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit)

^_^ means heavy missiles will have even less damage.lets compare this

right now a drake has about 450 dps`ish with fury and 5 t2 drones
compared to a hurricane that has well over 800 dps with t2 drones :D

gg ccp


See how much that hurricane is doing at 20 kilometers. Then see how much of that 800 remains when you're at 80 kilometers. There goes your argument.


Lev Arturis wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
CCP Fozzie,

Not sure if you're still reading this or not.

However, how about instead of nerfing the drake and hurricane, you buffed the harbi and myrm?

More bandwidth on the myrm (enough to field 5 large drones) and more CPU / Cap on the harbi. Give the harbi, prophecy and brutix all additional mid slots.

Also, if you looked at armor tanking, such as the speed penalties, I think you'd find that you would open up more options for fleet compositions rather than trying to limit them.

Please say you're still keeping up here.



Battlecruiser getting the rework later. The PG change on the Cane might be only a hotfix.


They've said before it's just a stopgap measure to offset the fact that artilleries are receiving a decrease in powergrid usage. As a nice feature, they've taken out the possibility for an autocannon hurricane to fit everything it wants without having to make a choice.

These dev blogs are far from over. Expect to see another three or four.
Recoil IV
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1220 - 2012-09-19 12:00:20 UTC
Naara Elein wrote:
Recoil IV wrote:
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Hmm, doesn't this missile/TE change mean TEs really need considering for a nerf/reduction of the last buff they got?



-Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit)

^_^ means heavy missiles will have even less damage.lets compare this

right now a drake has about 450 dps`ish with fury and 5 t2 drones
compared to a hurricane that has well over 800 dps with t2 drones :D

gg ccp


The Drake has long range weapons.

The Cane has short range weapons.

Fair comparison? Put HAM's on the drake or Arty on the cane, then can compare.


yet.cane has more speed,agility,more depensive capability against frigates and other small ships.drake does not.