These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3101 - 2012-09-26 18:29:43 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
You've got it very easy vs small targets and will continue to.

Looking forward to another 50 pages.


Do you know what explosion velocity is? Or explosion radius?

Looking forward to more of your posts.


You loose 9 DPS against a mwd hurricane, whaaaaaaaa.

I linked the calculator about 100 pages back.
Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3102 - 2012-09-26 18:30:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Schneider
Lallante wrote:
Reticle wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
It's funny seeing people comparing hml dps to long range turrets with t2 sniper ammo. That isn't proper ammo. Do you drake noobs even know what tracking is? You've got it very easy vs small targets and will continue to.

Looking forward to another 50 pages.

missiles can be destroyed. projectile ammo can't. deal with that first, then we can have this conversation



How often does that happen in practice? Defenders dont work, smartbombs are rare and take a LOT of luck or timing to even hit.

Quite often. Actually a lot of our engagements vs tengus involves firewalls.

Also, surprise! we're not the only one who use them... Just because you don't know how to do it, doesn't mean other people don't know how to do it as well.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave
Bloutok
Perkone
Caldari State
#3103 - 2012-09-26 18:34:50 UTC
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3104 - 2012-09-26 18:46:54 UTC  |  Edited by: HELLBOUNDMAN
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.
Bloutok
Perkone
Caldari State
#3105 - 2012-09-26 18:48:30 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.



So, maybe it could have been a 70km very hard hitter... ?
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3106 - 2012-09-26 18:49:18 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
@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...............
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#3107 - 2012-09-26 18:49:43 UTC
Sarah Schneider wrote:
Lallante wrote:
Reticle wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
It's funny seeing people comparing hml dps to long range turrets with t2 sniper ammo. That isn't proper ammo. Do you drake noobs even know what tracking is? You've got it very easy vs small targets and will continue to.

Looking forward to another 50 pages.

missiles can be destroyed. projectile ammo can't. deal with that first, then we can have this conversation



How often does that happen in practice? Defenders dont work, smartbombs are rare and take a LOT of luck or timing to even hit.

Quite often. Actually a lot of our engagements vs tengus involves firewalls.

Also, surprise! we're not the only one who use them... Just because you don't know how to do it, doesn't mean other people don't know how to do it as well.


They only exist as a tactic due to the ubiquity of drakes and tengus. With HMLs and tengu nerfed it simply wont be worth bringing a firewall.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3108 - 2012-09-26 18:50:16 UTC
Bloutok wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.



So, maybe it could have been a 70km very hard hitter... ?


Yes, it would have been.

However, being pitted against any other teir 3 bc, it would have been dead before it could hit very hard.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#3109 - 2012-09-26 18:51:29 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
@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...............



All those questions have been answered when asked previously. Read the various devposts in this thread
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3110 - 2012-09-26 18:51:38 UTC
Lallante wrote:


They only exist as a tactic due to the ubiquity of drakes and tengus. With HMLs and tengu nerfed it simply wont be worth bringing a firewall.


except for the fact that the reduced range means less time you have to spend getting into your optimal, therefore firewalls will become more popular.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#3111 - 2012-09-26 18:52:32 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.

to finish your sentence: ... to compete at a role that required instant dmg application. Well obviously. Perhaps I should complain that the gallente stealth bomber doesnt use drones/hybrids?
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#3112 - 2012-09-26 18:53:13 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Lallante wrote:


They only exist as a tactic due to the ubiquity of drakes and tengus. With HMLs and tengu nerfed it simply wont be worth bringing a firewall.


except for the fact that the reduced range means less time you have to spend getting into your optimal, therefore firewalls will become more popular.


There wont (hopefully) be as many Tengu and Drake blobs, so firewalls will be pointless
Bloutok
Perkone
Caldari State
#3113 - 2012-09-26 18:53:28 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.



So, maybe it could have been a 70km very hard hitter... ?


Yes, it would have been.

However, being pitted against any other teir 3 bc, it would have been dead before it could hit very hard.


So, it would have needed a drake tank ? :)
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3114 - 2012-09-26 18:53:44 UTC
Lallante wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
@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...............



All those questions have been answered when asked previously. Read the various devposts in this thread



except for the fact that none of my particular questions have been answered on this thread
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#3115 - 2012-09-26 18:54:51 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Lallante wrote:

When you get to the point of "there are no good t1, non-frig, non-capital, missle ships, that are caldari, other than a drake" you are talking so incredibly specialised set of limits that your comments loses all force.

There are also no t1 amarr tracking disruptor non-frig platforms other than an Arbitrator. So what?


Except that Arbitrator is tracking disruptors is specialized EWAR and missiles are supposed to be Caldari replacement for guns. How about viable T1 non-frig Winmatari Projectile ships?


Exactly. Lallante got it so completely wrong, its next to pointless to quote him/her anymore, seriously ... we are talking of the CALDARI weapon system, not of some specialised logi/ewar stuff here! Break every projectile ship in t1 for winmatar, break every laser-ship t1 for Amarr, just leave the Frigs alone. Then you see what you want us to accept.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3116 - 2012-09-26 18:55:42 UTC
Bloutok wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.



So, maybe it could have been a 70km very hard hitter... ?


Yes, it would have been.

However, being pitted against any other teir 3 bc, it would have been dead before it could hit very hard.


So, it would have needed a drake tank ? :)



Nope, but due to the inferior nature of a missile boat compared to a turret boat, it would have needed significantly more EHP than turret tier 3 bcs.

So, instead of turning a glass cannon into a plastic cannon, they opted to get rid of missiles on it and instead went with turrets.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#3117 - 2012-09-26 18:56:19 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
Lallante wrote:
[No. Currently the entire game revolves around Tengus and Drakes. This is one of the most important balance issues to fix.


Oh please. It's hard to take anything else you say seriously when you post grossly inaccurate generalizations like this. Roll

Even worse is if you actually belief it. I went on a roam last night and saw ONE drake the entire time in low sec. And not a single Tengu. Saw TONS of other ships, including Lokis.



Quote:

Rank Weapons Kills
1 Heavy Missile Launcher II 98813
2 425mm AutoCannon II 28425
3 Heavy Pulse Laser II 21575

Rank Platform Kills
1 Drake 215572
2 Zealot 120980
3 Hurricane 57661
4 Tengu 44304


Sorry nop. Statistically proven facts.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#3118 - 2012-09-26 18:57:44 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Lallante wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
@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...............



All those questions have been answered when asked previously. Read the various devposts in this thread



except for the fact that none of my particular questions have been answered on this thread


Yes, they have. For example its been said that CCP will look at increasing some missiles speed but that this will probably not happen for HMLs as they feel they are fast enough.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3119 - 2012-09-26 19:00:41 UTC
Lallante wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Bloutok wrote:
I wonder if the Caldari tier 3 had been a missile boat if we would have been having such a long thread about nuking the drake to oblivion ? Big smile



The Naga was originally going to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, due to the massive engagement time, and the lack of pretty much any EHP, it was a sitting duck and would die before a single volley even hit..

How's that for weapons balancing?

They had to turn a missile boat into a turret boat just so it could even compete.

to finish your sentence: ... to compete at a role that required instant dmg application. Well obviously. Perhaps I should complain that the gallente stealth bomber doesnt use drones/hybrids?


all bombers are comberable to other bombers.


Your comparison is also way off base.
However, had they designed each of the stealth bombers to use the weapons of their race than odds are the manticore would be a turret boat just to compete.

What I'm stating is that the Naga was originally designed to be a torp/cruise boat.

However, since missiles are inferior to turrets when it comes to setting up a class cannon style build, then it was either buff naga EHP, or make it a turret boat.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3120 - 2012-09-26 19:02:17 UTC
Lallante wrote:


Yes, they have. For example its been said that CCP will look at increasing some missiles speed but that this will probably not happen for HMLs as they feel they are fast enough.


They are increasing missile velocities in order to bring actual range more in line with what is on paper.

That said, they haven't specified any type of compensation or anything the answered the questions I asked.