Player Features and Ideas Discussion

CCP Foozie, can you provide any details concerning the thoughts about what the changes to the e.g. the drake may when you get to that. I know there are other missile ships as well, but here I will focus on the drake.

I think (rightly or wrongly) that a lot of the discussion in this thread is based on the fact that it is not clear what the end effect on e.g. the drake will be, i.e. missile changes + drake changes.

Since the drake is so widely used it is clear that a lot of people will be affected and that they have an opinion about the proposed change.

Speaking strictly from a PVE perspective (I do not have any PVP experience to make a judgment here) the drake is a good ship for missions as a missile ship because it has adequate firepower (not great) to destroy the NPCs while tanking the incoming damage. For me the ship and heavy missiles were also convenient because it had a nice range so I did not have to move too much around since the drake is rather slow, at least for the fit I used (my focus was on tank rather than damage, but I guess this is a matter of playing style). For new players it is also nice ship because it is easy to get into so you can start running level 3 missions and earning isk.

Since I guess the overall issue with the drake is its firepower combined with its tanking ability I guess you have to take both into account in order to estimate the overall effect.

In general, I feel that the suggested changes affect missile ships too harshly, especially the damage reduction (I can somewhat understand the range reduction), but without knowing the changes to the ships it is difficult to estimate the end effect on the ships (not just the drake).

Getting back to the drake, will there be ways to offset the damage reduction, e.g. by adding an 8th launcher thereby sacrificing some grid and cpu which may have been used for e.g. tank. What is the likelihood that the resistance bonus will be removed, again forcing the player to make tradeoffs in terms of tank and damage?

I think that knowing the direction of the changes to the ships could provide a clearer picture of the heavy missile changes, and ideally since the heavy missiles are so widely used on drake I think the changes to the heavy missiles should be used at the same time as the changes to the bcs, including the drake.

i approve this message.

as for the drake: if you really go through with the changes, you may want to look at its speed and agility. a HAM drake that goes 300 with afterburner will suffer from the same problems gallente ships have (being kited by everyone and their mother).
personally i prefer the drake to stay a slow, majestic brick... i mean creature. but if you nerf heavies to the palce where medium rails are now, people will have to rely on HAMs to be effective and a 300m/s battlecruiser won't do much in that regard.

@CCP

With most ships getting dps adjusted to a rof buff, have y'all considered increasing the ammo capacity of hams, hmls, torps, and cruise, or has this been overlooked?

Secondly, missiles already have a lot of issues with waisted volleys, have y'all considered a substantial velocity buff in exchange for reduced flight time in order to negate how much ammo an increased rate of fire will consume?

Lastly, I feel that increasing velocity in exchange for reduced flight time to the point where an individual ship would never have more than one volley in the air would not only nullify waisted volleys, but would also bring missiles more in tune with turrets on engagement time(though still having a delay) thus engagement time would be less of a factor in balancing.
Also, this would have the added benefit of catching targets faster, and reducing server lag, but wouldn't change their effectiveness against targets because great flight velocity does not effect dps.
So, that said, have y'all been considering a change like this in any way.


Ok, that wasn't the last thing.
Can y'all give us any information on the suggestions/ideas y'all are considering that we/yourselves have provided on this subject?
I know y'all may be afraid to put out any of this information, but i think you may not realize that we understand anything mentioned in this thread is subject to change just as ur OP is subject.
So, giving us that information would not harm anything, and maybe lead to some actual agreement on some of what y'all are now considering.


Here's hoping for a reply from you guys...............

For the winter patch, I could live with the missile changes if the Drake moves from a kinetic bonus to a RoF bonus. There are going to be a lot of broken ships until you get around to balancing them all... I'd really like to know, do you have any plans to prevent heavy missiles from becoming any LESS viable on ships that have missile hardpoints to fill utility highslots?

The reason I didnt use TEs or TCs is because we dont yet know their effect on missiles.

Yeah, the arty cane uses 2 TEs but guess what? after the change, the drake will be able to use 2 TCs and assuming they affect missiles equally, then the range change should be a wash.

and with that proposed fit, the drake still has more EHP than the arty cane, and it will be able to beat the pants off of frigates with 2 tracking computers + tracking scripts + buffed precision missiles.

TL;DR
comparing a 720 cane with two TEs against a drake with no TCs is moronic, and considering that we dont know the effects of the TCs on missiles then we cant use either.

This is all well and good, but the issue what never hams.

We're discussing heavy missiles and how their nerf will effect ships.

I think one module will work fine as long as you have 4 different scripts.
anti tracking
anti optimal
anti flight time
anti exp velocity/radius

However, if order for it not to be OP, there needs to be a duration on exchanging scripts.

Perhaps 30 seconds?

Then, ships like the pilgrim and curse can get a bonus that reduces the exchange time of swapping scripts.

However, reguardless of whether a ship has an exchange bonus or not, the window provided during a script swap could be devistating to the ship using the module.

So, if you don't plan ahead, then you might get boned

Indeed drake are not the most used BC in low sec, but you see it rather often enough, and the conditions are against them : very small gang everywhere. As soon as the gang size reach a dozen, you see them a lot more often. In pve, they are king, and that is when you don't see a tengu.

And saying caldari don't have anything else is completely wrong, and if you were in low sec, you would see it : there is as many of them as there is minmatar or gallente ships (I'm in gallente FW), and they are very effective : merlin, hookbill, condor, hawk, and many more, even caracals, and I don't even talk about ECM boats...

In nullsec, Naga are pretty common, and there is an alliance fleet doctrine based on the rokh.

Please, stop saying caldari don't have any ship beside the drake to pvp, that's completely wrong, and a proof of either ignorance or dishonnesty.

And some tips about future missiles :
- with TE/TC/TL, you will have the same range as before, and you will *murder* frigates ;
- TD will affect missiles, but :
- not every ship will use one because that require a med slot ;
- you *will* have at least one TE/TC to murder frigates ;
- you will still hit frigates and ennything ;
- if at long range, you are in a fleet, and very few fleet use EWAR, because it's hard to use effectively, or you are a point range and you don't care about range ;
- HAM, just go to the market and buy som ; "close" range combat is cool too, just do like everyone else ;
- HML will still be the best medium weapon system for long range.

No one said they should be used more, but with this nerf they wont be used at all except on a tengu, which are not very common in pvp due to the cost.


@bouh..

here are many ships out flying around that use missiles.

However, theyre not used because they use missiles.

There are generally other reasons someone is fly a particular ship and the reason is generally never missiles.

Hell, the drake and tengu arent even used cause they have missiles.

They'd probably be used a whole lot more if they were turret boats.

Now, there is nothing above a tengu that is commonly used in pvp as far as missiles centric boats.
Granted all that is generally left is the raven, navy raven, and navy scorpion. But still

Now, in pve nothing is more effective in missiles than the tengu, not even the golem.

Now, while this may be in part because the tengu is potentially OP, a lot of this has more to due with how inneffective missile boat battleships are.

Sure, they might be able to run lvl 4 missions, but they either suffer in dps, effective dps, or tank.
In the case of the raven, it is pretty much all 3.

Lol....this has to be the funniest thread I've ever written. People crying over not nerfing HML's....people crying over tengu and drake need a good nerfing . Both EFT warrioring to justify their cause....especially using fits that aren't justifiable....but hey, everyone twists the truths to fit themselves. Being a gallente pilot in NS, I had a choice....cross train minmatar and join the tornado fleets, or cross-train drake and join the drake blobs against either Zealots or Naga *still not sure I understand that doctrine*

For all those opposed....this isn't about nerfing the drake.....it, like the other already useless caldari missile boats is about the Tengu and all the rest are just a casualty. The drake might not be so bad as while missioning in my drake before I got my domi, I hated sticking with kinetic missiles....so long term, it might be beneficial considering all T2 gun ammo is 2 damage types at once. It might be a step back, but not a whole lot...might have to fly a little more, crap happens, can't change it. My domi is still sitting pretty as I watch youtube and let my sentries take stuff out. Drake was more fun, but hey, can't have everything.

For all those in favor....stop using crap numbers to justify your cause. Mission drakes do not run 4 BCS's....most dont even run 3 because they are a beotch to fit. So while yes, guns can sacrifice tank for more damage....you're putting out numbers that are the ABSOLUTE MAX....which no one ever does on a drake. Fleet battles...I've yet to see a fleet doctrine with more than 2 BCS's. If you say otherwise, you are lying.

For those saying that this is a buff.....while they might benefit from the ability to use any damage type....you argue that they'll be right back to their normal range with a TE or TC. Well, To fit a TE, they are going to have to drop their second BCS as the other two are normally passive shield recharges in order to keep up with dps on harder lvl 4's....This WILL effectively put this as the shortest long range weapon. And with a 20% reduction in damage, it would effectively be even MORE if they want to get their range back.

The problem with comparing the BC's against one another, is each *ok, well maybe only a couple, but hey* has it's own advantage. Personally I look forward to teiricide....I like the brutix and would like to see it more viable. How about some Hybrid love??? Why should Arty's be the only Alpha monster?? If I could do it all over again, I'd be minnie like most pirates are....you want an honest opinion on ships...befriend one and pick their brain because they have to survive on their own.

It's all about shaking it up....you'll have to grind longer to make isk and spend more months cross-training....eve wouldn't want you unsubscribing because you're bored ;)