Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Yeah would be a shame if seemingly the majority (in this thread anyway) were overuled to satisfy the minority. God Forbid.

So firing guns when being TD and hitting in falloff is not less DPS? News to me.

If only we could see those smartbombing anti-missile firewalling ships outside of null warefare
If only we could see someone, who actually uses defenders
If only you could fit one of those TEs/TCs on your missile boats just like all other boats had to do all this time

Yes, but you can fix that by piloting, you can't with missiles. You just do less damage no matter the circumstances. Maybe making them move slower will fix a bit, but you can't really MAKE someone move slower, unless you have the modules to do it. It isn't really fair that one weapon system can pilot their way around an EWAR and the other one has to fit towards it.

[/quote]Yes, but you can fix that by piloting, you can't with missiles. You just do less damage no matter the circumstances. Maybe making them move slower will fix a bit, but you can't really MAKE someone move slower, unless you have the modules to do it. It isn't really fair that one weapon system can pilot their way around an EWAR and the other one has to fit towards it.[/quote]

You cant fix falloff by piloting unless you mean closing range. Hey guess what you can fix missiles the same way then also. Your argument on this is weak as now you suffer the same issues that turret pilots can face out in space. TD are being changed this winter also so hold on the sky is not falling at the moment.

That is the main difference between missiles and turrets. Missiles are easier because transversal is irrelevant. You don't have control over it. There is a reason why missile boats are considered noob friendly compared to turret boats.
You can't get the same maximal effectiveness from both turrets and missiles if the latter involves less skill and effort ( things which are essential for manual piloting ).

Giving you the ability to actually influence this factor ( through piloting ) would need a total rework of missiles.

Every time I read a demand for skillpoint reimbursement because of a game rebalancing, I feel the urgent need to encounter the poster piloting a T3 and kill him.

Every time someone demands sp reimbursement on the forums, his main should be stripped of 100k sp

You know, the more rage posts I read the more I think this nerf may not be too much.

All these rage posts talk about ALL missiles and ALL caldari now being useless.

Yet only Heavy Missiles have been changed and the TD change has plenty of counters (webs, painters, TCs, TEs).

If HMs really were so good that any other weapon system isn't even worthy of the consideration of Caldari players then I think the nerf might just be needed.

Good afternoon everyone. I know some people have been wondering if I'm still following the thread, so let me assure you that I have read every single post so far and I plan to keep that up.

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to let us know your opinions on these proposals. It's great to see so much passion from our customers, and I hope I'll be able to demonstrate from now to December and beyond how much I appreciate all your dedication.

I will ask everyone to please keep your feedback and your interactions with each other civil. Remember that this is the Features and Ideas forum, not the wild untamed expanse of General Discussion or the brutal gladiatorial pit of CAOD. This is the section of the forums where intellectual equals meet in mutual admiration to calmly and rationally discuss potential changes to the game, muse casually about overnight interest rates, and sip tea with our pinky extended.
Feedback is always more useful when it includes details about the problems you foresee from a specific change.

• "I don't agree with change X because I believe it will have effect Y for reasons A, B and C" is excellent and very persuasive feedback and I thank the large numbers of you who have provided this kind of feedback so far.
• "DIE IN A FIRE" is an example of significantly less useful feedback. It doesn't tell us which changes you object to, or what the reasons for your position are. In fact it even makes it hard to tell whether you actually object to the content of the change or are just experiencing an unusually strong craving for S'mores.

I'm going to cover a few of the themes I'm seeing in the feedback so far in a Q&A format. I don't have any adjustments to the proposal to announce at this time, but there are a few tweaks I'm mulling over at the moment.

[list]

The damage per second of heavy missile ships like the Drake seems low, why are you making it even lower?

I believe the main source of disagreement here comes from comparisons between Heavy Missiles (a long range weapon platform) and short range weapons like autocannons or blasters. Once upon a time Heavy Missiles were the only medium missile system, and therefore shared features from both close range and long range weapons. Later Heavy Assault Missiles were introduced and were quite good, but Heavy Missiles still overshadowed them since they did similar damage at close range and HMs had the advantage of steller long range performance. There are legitimate problems with many long range weapon systems at the medium size, but the fact that people have gotten used to comparing Heavy Missiles with short range guns should be taken as one of the signs that Heavies are far too good.

Why are you nerfing the weapon system when the real problem is two ships?

It is true that the use of heavy missiles is very strongly concentrated on the Drake and Tengu at this time. There are some problems with those ships that will need to be solved in time, and we also need to make ships like the Caracal, Cerb and Nighthawk more viable with Heavy Missiles. But doing that rebalance requires a stable foundation to build upon, and the truth is that Heavy Missiles were skewing the balance of everything they touched. The fact that the Drake is so dominant at long range damage when it has no range bonus, and the weakest damage bonus we give ships (5% per level to just one damage type) makes balancing through the ships themselves unfeasible. Once we get Heavy Missiles to some semblance of balance we can begin the work of making sure each individual ship is viable without having to go back and redo our work right away to compensate for a midstream weapon change.

Why nerf things when you could buff things instead?

When we are balancing in a game like Eve we always need to be concious of the danger presented by power creep. In some games where the progression is tied to ever advancing gear stats power creep isn't a big issue as it is built into the whole premise of the game. In a sandbox like Eve player advancement is tied to individual freeform goals and we need to make sure that the tools available are both interesting and balanced. Any time we buff something in Eve, we are nerfing every other item in the game slightly by extension. In a case like this we believe that the best course of action is to adjust the Heavy Missiles downwards to achieve balance.

It seems obvious that these changes are biased in favour of the Goons! Is that true?

Nope, we make balance decisions based on the ships and modules themselves not political blocs in game.

It seems obvious that these changes are biased against the Goons! Is that true?

Nope, we make balance decisions based on the ships and modules themselves not political blocs in game.

Can CCP reimburse skillpoints to people who have trained missiles?

In a MMO like Eve balance does change from time to time and skills will not be reimbursed unless their use is being removed from the game. If you believe that these changes make missiles useless then let us know why in as much detail as possible and if we agree the solution won't be to reimburse skills, it will be to adjust the proposal so that missiles are no longer made useless. Heavy missiles were the first medium weapon system I ever trained when I started playing Eve, and I have made excellent use of them through the years so I understand how good it feels to have skills invested in an extremely powerful weapon system. Most people who have been playing the game for a while can name a few times it has felt like their playstyle has been nerfed, because by definition the overpowered areas of the...

The HM's were too good for damage projection to begin with. This nerf just puts them back in line. Should've been done a long time ago.

....and to all whiners who are planning to unsubscribe because of HM nerf.

Can I haz your stuff??

Javelin loaded HAM's are the new HM's.