These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2021 - 2012-09-20 17:44:54 UTC
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
4 BCS, 6 Launchers with Scourge Fury....added a tech 1 loading accel rig and warhead cat rig, and turned of include reload time...still only getting 686....EFT v 2.16...


[Tengu, Tengu fit]

Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

Medium Shield Booster II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
EM Ward Field II

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
[Empty High slot]

Medium Bay Loading Accelerator II
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Medium Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard I

Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
Tengu Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay
Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst
TriadSte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2022 - 2012-09-20 17:50:46 UTC  |  Edited by: TriadSte
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
4 BCS, 6 Launchers with Scourge Fury....added a tech 1 loading accel rig and warhead cat rig, and turned of include reload time...still only getting 686....EFT v 2.16...


[Tengu, Tengu fit]

Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

Medium Shield Booster II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
EM Ward Field II

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
[Empty High slot]

Medium Bay Loading Accelerator II
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Medium Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard I

Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
Tengu Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay
Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst



Odd:

Just did this also, same EFT version I get 761 DPS 2739 volley.

Heat takes it upto 896

This is without implants...
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2023 - 2012-09-20 17:51:20 UTC
The Bazzalisk wrote:
Again, I say HMLs are not OP compared to other LR platforms. Close up, other LR platforms will all have similar performance to the HML with short range ammo. At long range there are other factors to consider. You can't just say 'HML does x damage at x range, other medium guns do y damage at y range thus HMLs are overpowered'

On an unbonused ship, using short range ammo, the stats are as follows.

Heavy Beam Laser - 37dps, 159 alpha
250mm Railgun - 34dps, 161 alpha
Heavy Missile Launcher - 31dps, 264 alpha
720mm Artillery Cannon - 28dps, 424 alpha

Those numbers look fairly balanced to me. Ah you say - but HML can shoot to much further range than these guns with that dps, and at long range it will trump them completely.

Not true. The only time HMLs are really going to be used past 40k is in gang fights, and in gang fights there are logis and travel time. The travel time will negatively affect the dps, and makes the alpha much less significant due to the extra time logistics pilots have to prepare.

At medium-long range, HML will have the best dps - but it can be affected by other factors which other medium guns will not be.

Firewalling only affects missiles.

At that kind of range, assuming the guns are in their optimal ranges, the guns will not really be affected by tracking much. Missiles are always affected by radius/velocity.

Guns can use tracking computers and tracking enhancers to mitigate range/tracking issues. Missiles cannot do the same for their radius/velocity.

Guns apply instant dps or big instant alpha strikes in the case of artillery. Missiles do not do the same.

Guns can switch between long range and short range ammo, and at short range, a long range gun with short range ammo will trump the dps of a HML. A HML cannot switch to another type of missile to get more dps.

QFT. Seeing some people seems to deliberately skipped these facts and go straight to "hell yeah! nerf dem HMLs!!!" for some reason.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2024 - 2012-09-20 17:52:10 UTC  |  Edited by: HELLBOUNDMAN
Garviel Tarrant wrote:



There i fixed that quote for you.

Also HML's were the highest dps long range weapon by FAR, and they will still have more dps than comparable long range weapons after the nerf.

l2p?


^this^

However, if you use my proposed idea for exchanging the ranges of fury and precision missiles to be more in line with other weapon systems then you get this.....

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1947535#post1947535


Yeah, I do keep posting this but only because CCP won't let me start a new thread with my idea...They locked the last one.
Terik Deatharbingr
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2025 - 2012-09-20 17:53:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Terik Deatharbingr
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
4 BCS, 6 Launchers with Scourge Fury....added a tech 1 loading accel rig and warhead cat rig, and turned of include reload time...still only getting 686....EFT v 2.16...


[Tengu, Tengu fit]

Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

Medium Shield Booster II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
EM Ward Field II

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
[Empty High slot]

Medium Bay Loading Accelerator II
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Medium Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard I

Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
Tengu Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay
Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst


So reload time doesn't account for anything? Also, your cap lasts just under 3 minutes and you need a 5 cpu rig for it to work....

Edit....had tech II bcs....but still....a two minute cap for an obvious mission ship?
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2026 - 2012-09-20 17:55:07 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:

Duel ASB Cyclone is amazing, but let's be honest here. That kind of micromanagement is far beyond the ability of your average block member.

I have no doubt there are all kinds of people theory crafting in hopes to find the new FOTM fleet ship that does everything and all the pilot has to do is press F1 to be effective. There are those screaming that the Drake is now worthless, but the fact is it will still be a solid ship. It just will require some higher piloting skill to achieve that.



The drake would still be a decent ship after the missile nerfs, however, they haven't gotten to the drake nerfs yet eiher.

I'm pretty sure it's going to see a pretty substantial EHP nerf...
Aaron Greil
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2027 - 2012-09-20 17:59:40 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Unit757 wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Unit757 wrote:
So, even with the 20% nerf, these things are still well inline with other long ranged weapon systems.


With a 20% damage nerf drakes will be doing much less dps than any other tier 2 bc.

With a 25% range nerf it will have way less range than all other bcs in general.


Yes, because 350ish DPS @ 50KM is "Way less" then any other long ranged BC. Use a HAM drake, it hits farther and harder then most other short ranged battlecruisers.


Look at my balance suggestions in my quoted post above...

It makes more sense with those changes, and no range or dps nerf would be required.



You are comparing the most common fits before the change. A FMP harbi with scorch hits about at 20 km. So compare the dps of a HAM drake with a FMP harbi or a 425 cane. Compare a HML drake to a beam harbi.

Even if you did, including the nerf, the drake still outranges the harbi (shooting aurora) and out dps aurora. On the other hand, multifrequency out dps HMLs at 15 km (in a heavy beam).
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
#2028 - 2012-09-20 18:02:15 UTC
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:

But the Drake and the Tengu are still limited to kinetic considering the damage bonuses they currently have.


Which is apparently changing and Caldari boats are getting rof/omni damage bonus instead of kinetic only.

Terik Deatharbingr wrote:

Bigger Picture for skill training:
While yes, it is quicker to get into T2 Heavies.....HOWEVER:

To take a raw toon with with no implants and no remap, it would take 367 days to get HM, HAM, Cruise and Torps to lvl 5 specialization and all the support skills...no love to Light Missiles and Torps

To take a raw toon with no implants and no remap, it would take 349 days to get PERFECT Gun specializations of both types for Lasers or Hybrids, less for Projectiles as you don't need controlled burst


Maybe let's try something more realistic.

In order to get good cruise/hm/assault/torp Caldari missile skills
level 4 spec + support
you need 98days on typical toon ( +3 implants and proper remap )

In order to get small/medium/large turret skills for one racial turret
level 4 spec + support and 2xsupport on level 5 ( rank 2 ) which are prerequisites for large turret specs
you need 89days on the same toon

You want to get into drake with T2 missiles?
You can do it much faster than any other race could with their battlecruisers and T2 guns.

You want to get into Raven/Navy Scorp?
You don't need any turret training and you only need basic drone training because you mostly relay on missiles and light drones.
Gallente needs both turrets and drones training for all battleships.
Minmatar needs turrets+missiles or turrets+missiles+drones or turrets+drones on their battleships.
Amarr needs turrets+drones to use Geddon ( other battleships are less demanding in terms weapons but that is one exception )

In the end you need more skill training than just turrets to make those races effective while Caldari can do that with missiles and T2 light drones.
Lili Lu
#2029 - 2012-09-20 18:10:00 UTC
Noisrevbus wrote:
Today Attention assuming 3x dmg mod / 6-slot tanks:

An HBL Harby will put out 460 dps @ 60 and then gradually lose dps up to 82km.
An HML Drake will put out 490 dps @ 60 and then maintain 410 dps up to 84km.

The Harby will also gradually raise it's dps at closer range up to 690 with Gleam.
The Drake will raise it's dps down to 75km and stop around 550 dps with Fury.

The Harby will have a 55k unboosted tank.
The Drake will have a 65k unboosted tank, assuming the 6-slot / two midslot utility.

The Drake have the ability to fill up it's utility with tank mods, but then outsource accuracy control (webs, painters).
The Harby have the accuracy control inherent through it's ability to manipulate transversal and the range/tracking mods.

The problem is that everyone, including CCP, look at the balance only from a large fleet projection-buffer perspective, and scenarios where larger groups can outsource layers of the necessary effects and buffers can be volleyed.

That is the same reason they want to apply TD to Missiles without realising what it does to the accuracy-component in the context of them not having transversal modifiers. Think about what effective application of TD at smaller scales will do in combination with sig-tanking (AB) concepts to Missiles - which it won't do to Turrets. Think 100mn setups with TD.

If CCP wanted to nerf the Drake, they should have adressed Tech I insurance and things like medium rigs on BC.

Tearing up the entire pre-existing balance . . .

Your actions have continuously fed the "Drake" as you have tried to nerf it. I hope it's different this time, but your shallow perspective haven't changed. I had hoped Fozzie would be a bit of a spaceship-jesus in that regard, but direction remain.

Noisr, I'm going to have fun with this post.

First, wtb 9 low slot Harby (3 damage mods and 6 slot tank) and 7 mid slot Drake (6 shield tanking mods and a mwd).

Moving on, I looked at your dps numbers and laughed. You included drones. Sure lets have everyone wait for slow assed Hammerheads and Hobgoblins to plod out 60km on each ship. In the real world (of eveP) they don't. You could throw drone damage onto close range dps I suppose but that would still not be a pure comparison of the weapon systems, just the two ships. Stripping your drone dps from the figures, while keeping your 3 damage mod fits (although I think 2 damage mods on beam harby and hml drake is more realistic) the dps at 70 km (assuming that Harby is fitting two TC to hit 70km optimal) the Harby's aurora dps is 305. The Drakes 70km dps is 445 with scourge fury.

I don't know out of where you pulled your "unboosted" tank figures (oh wait I think I know P) and you call them 6-slot (please sell me your 9 low slot Harby Lol). Regardless, losing 3 low slots leaves 3 low slots for tank on the Harby and fitting a 1600, mwd, and 7 heavy beams requires 2 acr and a pdu or 3 acr. Sadly you will struggle to break 50k ehp on tank. Meanwhile that Drake has 5 mids to devote to tank, if it wants and will be in the 80-100k ehp or more range depending on how many slot and rigs it wants to devote to tank. Btw the Harby will need a sensor booster so it can lock at 70+km. So yes both of these are fleet fits, but that is the nature of 70km BCs. Both ships need to outsource their tackle.

Which brings up your false assertion that everyone looks at balance only from a large fleet perspective. No. You keep claiming this but where is your support. It is not enough to declare you know what everyone else is thinking, prove it. Anyway, I'll throw in your drone dps on the close range dps figures. Yep, 690 for the gleam Harb, 550 for the Drake. Guess what the range of that 690 is on the Harby even with two TCs for optimal. It's 9.7km. That Harby hits 550 dps at less than 20km. And if we are to erroneously accept your argument that tracking is so easy for the beam Harby to overcome I'll switch those TCs to tracking scripts. Optimal now 7km and dps drops to Drakes at 13km.

"They want to apply TD to Missiles without realising what it does to the accuracy-component in the context of them not having transversal modifiers" what does that even mean?What? Of course missiles don't have transversal modifiers. They do have explosion radiuses and explosion speeds. That is what TDs, TEs, TCs are proposed to affect (in addition to flight time or speed). What don't you understand about CCPs proposed changes? None of us know the exact numbers yet.

Sig tanking and ABs? Ok, AHACs do this, and guess what effect it has on turret ships? Other than that I don't know what you are moaning about. I really don't foresee everyone putting ABs on their frigs and Cruisers for roams anywhere soon because missiles can be disrupted. Noone is so cavalier about getting tackled or loves to plod through a bubble (unless they have a fleet comp and logis - AHACs). The ab wouldn't work without the logis and boosts. As for 100mn (presumably tech IIIs you are talking about because I don't know of any other and you aren't seriously talking about 100mn ab BSs?) they **** off everyone already irrespective of turret or missile.

Simply put, there is no pre-existing balance. People have not been flying Drakes and Tengus in such numbers simply because of your fecetious "popularity" argument. Read Fozzie's comments https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1942484#post1942484 Drake usage is due to advantages which leads to popularity. Popularity does not lead to usage.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2030 - 2012-09-20 18:14:34 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
Dude...I've got it up on EFT right now....let's see the fit....Obviously then you are rigging for damage and sacrificing a lot of tank


Are you using 4 BCS and Skource Fury? All level 5?


My mission fit

highs
6 x hml II
(or 6 x ham II)

mid
2 x dread guristas em ward field
Gist B-type explosive deflection Field
Pithum c-type medium shield booster
PWNAGE - target painter

Low
4 x BCU II

Rigs
3x CCC I
subs
dissolution sequencer
amplication node
augmented capacitor reservoir
Accelerated ejection Bay
gravitationl capacitor

dps(all kinetic dps) - range
rage - 840 @27.2
Javelin - 590 @ 45.6

Precision - 455 @ 63.3
Fury - 672 @ 113.9

(remember to knock off about 5km from range)

So, that's the stats and fit
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2031 - 2012-09-20 18:16:35 UTC
So are my missiles now going to get critical hits like turrets do? Perfect and well-aimed strikes?? Or should we keep ignoring those in looking at DPS for medium range weapon systems?
TriadSte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2032 - 2012-09-20 18:16:59 UTC
I also think its wise that we look into the non PVP book here.

To get half decent HML dmg you need 4 BCUs, that is alot of dmg mods for medicore damage. I think CCP are crazy to adjust this.

I am all for balance but I don't see why HMLs need nerfing. They're not crazy damage at all.

Im unsure as to why the Drake has not been looked at really. Those things have BS sized tanks but CCP instead wants to heavily nerf a weapon type thats not huge on DPS.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#2033 - 2012-09-20 18:20:57 UTC
CCP stick with these nerfs the more people keep talking about DPS it just shows they have no concept of DPS at range as they think every other ship can have 400+ DPS out past 50K.

I am beginning to think the louder the cries the better this is for the game.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2034 - 2012-09-20 18:25:48 UTC
I'm just going to repeat it once more:

HMLs are long range weapons.

HMLs are clearly out of balance in regards to dps and range when compared to long range turrets.

The compensation for the travel time of missiles are generous fitting requirements that allow for a substantial tank.

As the engagement range decreases, so does the travel time of missiles. Yet the tanking ability of the HML ship doesn't decrease. This is why the long range turrets have the ability to switch to close range higher damage ammo.

Long range turrets get to pop frigates at long ranges, HMLs get to pop frigates at close ranges (Precision missiles are getting buffed).
Miss Le NerfSxBye
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2035 - 2012-09-20 18:27:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss Le NerfSxBye
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
So are my missiles now going to get critical hits like turrets do? Perfect and well-aimed strikes?? Or should we keep ignoring those in looking at DPS for medium range weapon systems?

^This and also a speed increase to missile boats make up for loss of engagement range (25%?)
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2036 - 2012-09-20 18:28:47 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
I'm just going to repeat it once more:

HMLs are long range weapons.

HMLs are clearly out of balance in regards to dps and range when compared to long range turrets.

The compensation for the travel time of missiles are generous fitting requirements that allow for a substantial tank.

As the engagement range decreases, so does the travel time of missiles. Yet the tanking ability of the HML ship doesn't decrease. This is why the long range turrets have the ability to switch to close range higher damage ammo.

Long range turrets get to pop frigates at long ranges, HMLs get to pop frigates at close ranges (Precision missiles are getting buffed).



again, dps at range can be better balanced if they swap the ranged of all fury and precision guided missiles.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1947535#post1947535
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2037 - 2012-09-20 18:29:48 UTC
Miss Le NerfSxBye wrote:
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
So are my missiles now going to get critical hits like turrets do? Perfect and well-aimed strikes?? Or should we keep ignoring those in looking at DPS for medium range weapon systems?

^This and also a speed increase to missile boats make up for loss of engagement range (25%?)


and an extra mid slot for the drake so it can fit a wmd/afterburner like the rest of them
Oleszka
Syntropia Of Avatara
#2038 - 2012-09-20 18:33:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Oleszka
@Eckyy
Yes some people quit becasue they was mad of this learning change and told this would be only the beginning of skill changes.
The Hangar was not available some time, so you could see only the usless Captains john.


@Graviel Tarrant
yes i do, but most of them are low qualitiy player and many of the new player are also alts.


i dont like the Tengu, but i like the Nighhawk!
why in hell the Tengu is a better CommandShip than the Nighhawk?
and why is the Tengu a "better" mission boat than ohter ships?
thats not the fault of the missiles, its the fault of the Tengu!!!


Why are you expanding Tracking Disruptors instead of fixing defenders?
We had been working on fixing defenders, but the issue was that they caused a very high amount of lag between their own CPU load and the changes in behavior they would cause.

sems to me you doing something wrong....i think you try to shoot every missile with one other? did you try to use a flare to guid more than one missiles to it with some change of success?


Will the TE/TC/TD changes affect unguided missiles like HAMs and Torps?
The plan is for them to affect all missiles, yes.

The plan is bad, because lunchers and turrets becoming the same with only the differenc missiles need x time to hit the Target.
The conclusion is, we dont neet missiles anymore... right?

**EvE-Movie, take a look and enjoy it **PushMe
Lord Ryan
True Xero
#2039 - 2012-09-20 18:35:57 UTC
Caldari the new Gallente. Well not really Gallente has good caps atleast.


I think we'll see a new trend in 2012. A 50/50 split for new pilots Amarr/Minmatar.


Now a know why there's been so many Tengu pilots on the market the last couple months. Got to get rid of them before the rest of us find out about the nerf.

BTW WTS Tengu alt.

Do not assume anything above this line was typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2040 - 2012-09-20 18:42:44 UTC
Oleszka wrote:


i dont like the Tengu, but i like the Nighhawk!
why in hell the Tengu is a better CommandShip than the Nighhawk?
and why is the Tengu a "better" mission boat than ohter ships?
thats not the fault of the missiles, its the fault of the Tengu!!!


NO!!!!

Sure, the tengu may be OP, but it being OP is not why it's a better mission boat than other missile boats.

I've flown every missile dedicated boat above a tengu in the caldari line and the only ones that were decent at missions were the scorpion navy issue and the golem, however, they both were still quite lack luster in many ways.

SNI because it had lack luster dps
Golem because it took a lot of damage, short range, high isk/sp investment weak to ewar, and while the tank looked good on paper, the incoming dps was so much that it couldn't keep up.
This is because if your target is within range of you to hit it, then you're within its optimal.


The tengu is not the best pve missile boat because it's OP, it's the best pve missile boat because the rest are under P.