These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Yank Sin
#3581 - 2012-09-29 23:02:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Yank Sin
Ok here is the real reason why balancing is going on IMO. Eve has always been a game for the more mature minded player. The type of player that would set a 20 day skill to get a 10% gain total on a skill that only gives 2% per level. The players that are coming into eve now are looking for the quick fix and are not will to put in the time or the planning for their toon. I have seen this 1st hand in a corp I joined up with awhile back. All the players were new 3-6 months old with some around a year old. They did not want to take the time to train the skills needed to advance in the right way it was quick get the skill to level 3 so I can get the next big ship.

Balancing IMO is to level the playing field between eve’s old style players that take the time and planning to train and eve’s new style player that just wants everything now. IMO ccp is leveling the field between the 2 different styles of players so that the new style player does not quit. Balancing should be done to make ships and mods better not worse. Why make the people that took the time and planning to train their skills to lv5 change their play style?

Players that take the time to train from support skills on up to lv5 to make there toon the best in a certain race of ship or weapons class should be in an elite class. And that elite class of player should have an advantage over the player that does not want to invest the time to do the same. So don’t nerf our mods, ships and weapons and call it balancing! Instead go out and fix the things that are really broken.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#3582 - 2012-09-29 23:13:40 UTC
Aaron Greil wrote:
I don't know if there has been any more consideration about making a separate module for missiles rather than adding additional effects to the tracking enhancer/computer. Seriously, i think this would be a major help, and help keep the diversity between guns and missiles. This would allow fittings for the new mods to be tailored for missile ships.

You know, if they release another module for it, they are gonna have to double the bonus on both modules, because we can only bring half as many of each. you want that to happen?

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#3583 - 2012-09-29 23:16:19 UTC
Yank Sin wrote:
Ok here is the real reason why balancing is going on IMO. Eve has always been a game for the more mature minded player.
The type of player that would set a 20 day skill to get a 10% gain total on a skill that only gives 2% per level.
The players that are coming into eve now are looking for the quick fix and are not will to put in the time or the planning for their toon.
I have seen this 1st hand in a corp I joined up with awhile back. All the players were new 3-6 months old with some around a year old. They did not want to take the time to train the skills needed to advance in the right way it was quick get the skill to level 3 so I can get the next big ship.

Balancing IMO is to level the playing field between eve’s old style players that take the time and planning to train and eve’s new style player that just wants everything now. IMO ccp is leveling the field between the 2 different styles of players so that the new style player does not quit. Balancing should be done to make ships and mods better not worse. Why make the people that took the time and planning to train their skills to lv5 change their play style?

Players that take the time to train from support skills on up to lv5 to make there toon the best in a certain race of ship or weapons class should be in an elite class. And that elite class of player should have an advantage over the player that does not want to invest the time to do the same. So don’t nerf our mods, ships and weapons and call it balancing! Instead go out and fix the things that are really broken.


Your post gave me cancer, so I fixed it up a little.

And man, what is balancing in your mind? And what is broken in your mind?

Nerfing/buffing IS balancing.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Yank Sin
#3584 - 2012-09-29 23:38:21 UTC
The changes that happened to the mining barges that form of balancing should be done. The current changes that are going on IMO is not to make a ship or mod better but it's to level the playing field between players.

Leveling the playing field between players that have access to the same skill books, implants, ships and mods should not be done. Once you start this type of balancing you take way from the players that do put the time in to max out there training.

IMO your telling people that took the time to max out there skills your better than your neighbor that does not want to invest the time like you did so I'm going to make things even by nerfing your ship and mods.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3585 - 2012-09-29 23:42:12 UTC
Eckyy wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Yeah, but to train a turret boat to the efficiency I have missiles at will take quite some time. At least 100 days.

I shouldn't have to cross train to another weapon system to get efficiency.

It should be available with my current weapon systems.


If Caldari missile ships are still superior to turret ships with BS IV and Large guns IV, I'd say the difference really isn't very big - cents on the dollar, so to speak.

If you're interested, I really do recommend the Nightmare path, you'll be pleasantly surprised with how well it works.

[Nightmare, 1]
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II

Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Script
100MN Afterburner II
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
X-Large Shield Booster II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Large Energy Discharge Elutriation II
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation I
Large Ancillary Current Router I


All V and T2 fit (except for guns - Navy Tachs) and Navy Multi, you can lob 820 gun DPS out to 43+41km. You can also tank 475 rainbow DPS (382dps sustained) using a T2 cap injector, or 464dps (368 sustained) against EM/Therm using specific hardeners. It has an afterburner and can do 317m/s. It has the tracking to hit most cruisers orbiting at 20km, though those that get closer will have to be killed by drones.

Sound pretty comparable to your Tengu eh? Faction fit it and it really starts to shine.

/Sarcasm. Honestly, the Tengu is OP.


Well, a maxed out machariel is gonna take me 236 days to the nightmare's 153 days (thanks to some energy weapon skills and max caldari bs already)

Not exactly the range or damage selection of the Mach, but not bad at all.

See, the tengu is the best pve missile boat, and there's nothing like these two ships for us.

Kinda wish the golem didn't suck so bad.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#3586 - 2012-09-29 23:44:48 UTC
Yank Sin wrote:
The changes that happened to the mining barges that form of balancing should be done. The current changes that are going on IMO is not to make a ship or mod better but it's to level the playing field between players.

Leveling the playing field between players that have access to the same skill books, implants, ships and mods should not be done. Once you start this type of balancing you take way from the players that do put the time in to max out there training.

IMO your telling people that took the time to max out there skills your better than your neighbor that does not want to invest the time like you did so I'm going to make things even by nerfing your ship and mods.


Ok. So you mean they changed skills to give 0% at lvl 5? I missed that memo I guess. I don't think you know what balancing means dude. They are making obsolete hulls viable, and people with better skills will still have better skills. Pilots will still be bad and shitfits and counterfits will still be here.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Sigras
Conglomo
#3587 - 2012-09-30 00:28:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
I shouldn't have to cross train to another weapon system to get efficiency.

It should be available with my current weapon systems.

That is pure idiocy, there are some things certain weapon systems do that others just cant; thats what makes them different and interesting.

I trained lasers and I want to be part of an alpha fleet . . . walt, my zealot only does 1/3 the alpha of a muninn?! why arent all weapons the same???!!!!!!!111oneoneone

or

I trained drones and I want to snipe . . . wait, my sniper drones cant move and make me imobile??!! NNNNNOOOOOooooOOOOooooo!!!!!

some weapons are better at things than others, thats why we have different weapon systems not just the same weapon with different names.

As several people have pointed out, the missile ships will be just fine after this change; in fact, every missile system except for heavy missiles is getting a buff: HAMs cruise, torps, rockets, and standards are all missiles too . . . if you dont like what they did to heavy missiles, go pick a ship that specializes in a different kind of missile and fly that.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#3588 - 2012-09-30 01:30:06 UTC
Sigras wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
I shouldn't have to cross train to another weapon system to get efficiency.

It should be available with my current weapon systems.

That is pure idiocy, there are some things certain weapon systems do that others just cant; thats what makes them different and interesting.

I trained lasers and I want to be part of an alpha fleet . . . walt, my zealot only does 1/3 the alpha of a muninn?! why arent all weapons the same???!!!!!!!111oneoneone

or

I trained drones and I want to snipe . . . wait, my sniper drones cant move and make me imobile??!! NNNNNOOOOOooooOOOOooooo!!!!!

some weapons are better at things than others, thats why we have different weapon systems not just the same weapon with different names.

As several people have pointed out, the missile ships will be just fine after this change; in fact, every missile system except for heavy missiles is getting a buff: HAMs cruise, torps, rockets, and standards are all missiles too . . . if you dont like what they did to heavy missiles, go pick a ship that specializes in a different kind of missile and fly that.


not gonna go through every post to find that, but if its genuine then thats hilarious.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Eckyy
United Caldari Navy
United Caldari Space Command.
#3589 - 2012-09-30 01:49:16 UTC
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Eckyy wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Yeah, but to train a turret boat to the efficiency I have missiles at will take quite some time. At least 100 days.

I shouldn't have to cross train to another weapon system to get efficiency.

It should be available with my current weapon systems.


If Caldari missile ships are still superior to turret ships with BS IV and Large guns IV, I'd say the difference really isn't very big - cents on the dollar, so to speak.

If you're interested, I really do recommend the Nightmare path, you'll be pleasantly surprised with how well it works.

[Nightmare, 1]
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II

Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Script
100MN Afterburner II
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
X-Large Shield Booster II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Large Energy Discharge Elutriation II
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation I
Large Ancillary Current Router I


All V and T2 fit (except for guns - Navy Tachs) and Navy Multi, you can lob 820 gun DPS out to 43+41km. You can also tank 475 rainbow DPS (382dps sustained) using a T2 cap injector, or 464dps (368 sustained) against EM/Therm using specific hardeners. It has an afterburner and can do 317m/s. It has the tracking to hit most cruisers orbiting at 20km, though those that get closer will have to be killed by drones.

Sound pretty comparable to your Tengu eh? Faction fit it and it really starts to shine.

/Sarcasm. Honestly, the Tengu is OP.


Well, a maxed out machariel is gonna take me 236 days to the nightmare's 153 days (thanks to some energy weapon skills and max caldari bs already)

Not exactly the range or damage selection of the Mach, but not bad at all.

See, the tengu is the best pve missile boat, and there's nothing like these two ships for us.

Kinda wish the golem didn't suck so bad.


Fun comparison fit assuming changes to TE's give +15% flight time:

[Golem, 1]
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Tracking Enhancer II

100MN Afterburner II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
X-Large Shield Booster II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Cap Booster 800

Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Large Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II
Large Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II

Tank (omni) with AB off:
Golem - 530 / 401 sustained
Nightmare - 475 / 399 sustained

^ Both ships have the option of swapping out a painter/TC for a boost amp or specific hardener if they need it.


DPS figures don't include drones.

DPS @ 43km (Nightmare optimal w/Multi)
Golem - 948
Nightmare - 820

DPS @ 49km (Golem max theoretical range with faction ammo)
Golem - 948
Nightmare - 813 (Navy Multi is best ammo)

DPS @ 74km (Golem Javelin max theoretical range)
Golem - 743dps
Nightmare - 662dps (Xray is best ammo)

Golem can't hit past 74km, Nightmare can hit up to 137km (optimal) with radio, for 347dps. Realistically, I don't think anything beyond 74km is necessary to complete missions but it can be useful in a few.

Below 20km, the Nightmare is basically unable to hit orbiting battlecruiser hulls and below (if I remember correctly, but it might just be cruiser hulls).

If TE's give a bonus to explosion velocity and explosion radius (let's call it 15%), the Golem will able to effectively apply full DPS to a cruiser sized hull even with faction ammo. As it is, it's very nearly able to do this already. It will be able to apply nearly 75% of its DPS to Cruisers with Rage torps, and full damage to BCs and above.

The Nightmare is locked to EM and thermal damage. This isn't a problem if you only ever want to rat or run missions in Amarr areas. The Golem has full damage type selection.

The Golem has more tank and uses far fewer cap booster charges.

The Golem has a much larger cargohold if you'd like to loot and salvage, or hold more booster charges.

The Golem has a bonus to tractor beams which can significantly speed up some missions.

The Golem is faster than the Nightmare by about 10%.

The Golem is more agile than the Nightmare by about 10%.

The Nightmare locks targets about 25% faster.

The Golem is weak against Guristas due to its low sensor strength.


Food for thought.
Tgarius Storm
Empire Storm
#3590 - 2012-09-30 02:06:05 UTC
I have three accounts and I mainly fly Tengus, I pay a lot of ISK to outfit these and will still lose them to cap drain, they have a bullseye on them as it is. I have invested years in missile skills just to optimize the Tengu and now your wanting to ruin them. We are mainly a WH corp. and you already added cap draining to the sleepers which has made it much more difficult now your taking away our DPS. I feel it is very unfair to Tengu pilots to make this change and the thought that you can just screw with my entire way of playing EVE like this makes me very upset. I can guarantee you that I do not feel I have any kind of unfair advantage in my Tengu's.. I pay a lot of ISK to outfit them and there should be some advantage to this. I've already had to change the fits to try and compensate for cap draining sleepers, we really don't PVP in our ships because they are always a target and the first thing evryone does is cap drain them to death (Litterally).
Eckyy
United Caldari Navy
United Caldari Space Command.
#3591 - 2012-09-30 02:11:23 UTC
Tgarius Storm wrote:
I have three accounts and I mainly fly Tengus, I pay a lot of ISK to outfit these and will still lose them to cap drain, they have a bullseye on them as it is. I have invested years in missile skills just to optimize the Tengu and now your wanting to ruin them. We are mainly a WH corp. and you already added cap draining to the sleepers which has made it much more difficult now your taking away our DPS. I feel it is very unfair to Tengu pilots to make this change and the thought that you can just screw with my entire way of playing EVE like this makes me very upset. I can guarantee you that I do not feel I have any kind of unfair advantage in my Tengu's.. I pay a lot of ISK to outfit them and there should be some advantage to this. I've already had to change the fits to try and compensate for cap draining sleepers, we really don't PVP in our ships because they are always a target and the first thing evryone does is cap drain them to death (Litterally).


What other ships would be comparably good to your corp's Tengu fit for what you do? Just curious.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3592 - 2012-09-30 02:16:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Doddy wrote:
The whole point of eves split weapon system and split tanking system is to get to the same place by different roads. If you want to make the roads the same there is no point in having differences in the first place.



That's what I got at in a point above.

We dont' want armor tanking and shield tanking to be exactly alike, but there are places where they get too far apart.

Same can be said between missiles and turrets.

For instance, turret boats would be geatly assisted if TEs were mid slot accessible because they're better than tracking computers.

With shield tanks they have to use cap flux coils and cap relays, but they would be greatly helped by being able to use cap rechargers that can be used in mid slots on armor boats...

So, there are times where there's too much differenciation and other times where there's not enough.



Tracking enhancers are better then computers.

Lol no
If you want both effects, just take the scirpt out, even unscripted a TC is better ....as in gas a greater effect.....in comparison to a TE.
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#3593 - 2012-09-30 02:44:07 UTC
180 pages, should be worked out by now.

I wonder if the people complaining at page one worked out every missile type has been buffed by the TC/TE change. Aye, 180 pages, they would have figured it out by now. Not like they are dumb as sh!t or anything.

So Fozzie Bear, still reading this crap?

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
Bloutok
Perkone
Caldari State
#3594 - 2012-09-30 02:50:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloutok
sYnc Vir wrote:
180 pages, should be worked out by now.

I wonder if the people complaining at page one worked out every missile type has been buffed by the TC/TE change. Aye, 180 pages, they would have figured it out by now. Not like they are dumb as sh!t or anything.

So Fozzie Bear, still reading this crap?


So, you just said that the only thing being changed in the entire line of cruisers / BC is the TC/TE, nothing else is being buffed / nerfed / invented / changed / modified ?
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
#3595 - 2012-09-30 03:07:13 UTC
No opinion on the the changes to all but the Heavy Missiles. As for heavy missiles I think a 20% damage reduction may be a bit much. Missiles in general have a lower DPS than most other weapon types. I do agree that the damage they do in comparison to the Heavy Assault Missiles is a bit on the high side. If I had a choice I would go with a 10% damage reduction on Heavy Missiles and a 5% damage increase on Heavy Assault. A 20% damage reduction would cause the Tengu to no longer be a viable option over a BS in lvl4 missions. I am a dedicated mission runner and my current setup is an Orca w/ a Noctis and Tengu in the ship hanger (and a few extra ships for other purposes packaged in the hangers). With a signifcant damage reduction in Heavy Missiles I would then have to decide weather to take 40+mins on a lvl4 mission with the tengu or a 10min mission in a golem vs the current 15-20min tengu/10min golem ... the reason I don't currently use a golem is because of the time consumed relocating agents hence the use of an Orca.

Also for future balancing of the Tengu's tank please keep in mind that anyone bringing Neuts is going to beat a Tengu. Even mission rats with Neuts are difficult for a Tengu when there are more than 6 BS class.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3596 - 2012-09-30 04:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: HELLBOUNDMAN
Eckyy wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Eckyy wrote:
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
Yeah, but to train a turret boat to the efficiency I have missiles at will take quite some time. At least 100 days.

I shouldn't have to cross train to another weapon system to get efficiency.

It should be available with my current weapon systems.


If Caldari missile ships are still superior to turret ships with BS IV and Large guns IV, I'd say the difference really isn't very big - cents on the dollar, so to speak.

If you're interested, I really do recommend the Nightmare path, you'll be pleasantly surprised with how well it works.

[Nightmare, 1]
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II

Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Script
100MN Afterburner II
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
X-Large Shield Booster II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Large Energy Discharge Elutriation II
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation I
Large Ancillary Current Router I


All V and T2 fit (except for guns - Navy Tachs) and Navy Multi, you can lob 820 gun DPS out to 43+41km. You can also tank 475 rainbow DPS (382dps sustained) using a T2 cap injector, or 464dps (368 sustained) against EM/Therm using specific hardeners. It has an afterburner and can do 317m/s. It has the tracking to hit most cruisers orbiting at 20km, though those that get closer will have to be killed by drones.

Sound pretty comparable to your Tengu eh? Faction fit it and it really starts to shine.

/Sarcasm. Honestly, the Tengu is OP.


Well, a maxed out machariel is gonna take me 236 days to the nightmare's 153 days (thanks to some energy weapon skills and max caldari bs already)

Not exactly the range or damage selection of the Mach, but not bad at all.

See, the tengu is the best pve missile boat, and there's nothing like these two ships for us.

Kinda wish the golem didn't suck so bad.


Fun comparison fit assuming changes to TE's give +15% flight time:

[Golem, 1]
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Tracking Enhancer II

100MN Afterburner II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
X-Large Shield Booster II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Cap Booster 800

Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Torpedo
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Large Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II
Large Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II

Tank (omni) with AB off:
Golem - 530 / 401 sustained
Nightmare - 475 / 399 sustained

^ Both ships have the option of swapping out a painter/TC for a boost amp or specific hardener if they need it.


DPS figures don't include drones.

DPS @ 43km (Nightmare optimal w/Multi)
Golem - 948
Nightmare - 820

DPS @ 49km (Golem max theoretical range with faction ammo)
Golem - 948
Nightmare - 813 (Navy Multi is best ammo)

DPS @ 74km (Golem Javelin max theoretical range)
Golem - 743dps
Nightmare - 662dps (Xray is best ammo)

Golem can't hit past 74km, Nightmare can hit up to 137km (optimal) with radio, for 347dps. Realistically, I don't think anything beyond 74km is necessary to complete missions but it can be useful in a few.

Below 20km, the Nightmare is basically unable to hit orbiting battlecruiser hulls and below (if I remember correctly, but it might just be cruiser hulls).

If TE's give a bonus to explosion velocity and explosion radius (let's call it 15%), the Golem will able to effectively apply full DPS to a cruiser sized hull even with faction ammo. As it is, it's very nearly able to do this already. It will be able to apply nearly 75% of its DPS to Cruisers with Rage torps, and full damage to BCs and above.

The Nightmare is locked to EM and thermal damage. This isn't a problem if you only ever want to rat or run missions in Amarr areas. The Golem has full damage type selection.

The Golem has more tank and uses far fewer cap booster charges.

The Golem has a much larger cargohold if you'd like to loot and salvage, or hold more booster charges.

The Golem has a bonus to tractor beams which can significantly speed up some missions.

The Golem is faster than the Nightmare by about 10%.

The Golem is more agile than the Nightmare by about 10%.

The Nightmare locks targets about 25% faster.

The Golem is weak against Guristas due to its low sensor strength.


Food for thought.



The only problem with the golem is that it has over 100m larger signature.

This is a significantly larger signature.

Edit... Oh, and it has half the sensor strength....

Honestly, those two issues are what hold Marauders back from being the kings of pve, which is what I feel they should be.

I've suggested npc ewar immunity for Marauders to give them this, but who knows....
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3597 - 2012-09-30 04:32:11 UTC
Ajunta Pal wrote:
No opinion on the the changes to all but the Heavy Missiles. As for heavy missiles I think a 20% damage reduction may be a bit much. Missiles in general have a lower DPS than most other weapon types. I do agree that the damage they do in comparison to the Heavy Assault Missiles is a bit on the high side. If I had a choice I would go with a 10% damage reduction on Heavy Missiles and a 5% damage increase on Heavy Assault. A 20% damage reduction would cause the Tengu to no longer be a viable option over a BS in lvl4 missions. I am a dedicated mission runner and my current setup is an Orca w/ a Noctis and Tengu in the ship hanger (and a few extra ships for other purposes packaged in the hangers). With a signifcant damage reduction in Heavy Missiles I would then have to decide weather to take 40+mins on a lvl4 mission with the tengu or a 10min mission in a golem vs the current 15-20min tengu/10min golem ... the reason I don't currently use a golem is because of the time consumed relocating agents hence the use of an Orca.

Also for future balancing of the Tengu's tank please keep in mind that anyone bringing Neuts is going to beat a Tengu. Even mission rats with Neuts are difficult for a Tengu when there are more than 6 BS class.



Personally, I loved the golem damage.

However, the weakness to pretty much anything including simple incoming damage due to sig radius is what truly hendered it.


I have no problem losing the tengu as my mission boat, I just wish I had a missile boat with the same efficiency to replace it before that happened.

Oh well....

I'm sure our missile boat bs's will eventually become more efficient in lvl 4 missions. The problem is based on the current rate of rebalance, we're looking at 6 months to a year before they even touch t1 bs's, yet alone t2....
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#3598 - 2012-09-30 04:41:00 UTC
Bloutok wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
180 pages, should be worked out by now.

I wonder if the people complaining at page one worked out every missile type has been buffed by the TC/TE change. Aye, 180 pages, they would have figured it out by now. Not like they are dumb as sh!t or anything.

So Fozzie Bear, still reading this crap?


So, you just said that the only thing being changed in the entire line of cruisers / BC is the TC/TE, nothing else is being buffed / nerfed / invented / changed / modified ?


I said no such thing. I pointed out all missiles are having there ranges increased, which is a good thing for missile pilots. Didn't mention anything else at all either good or bad. I may have called some people dumb, but they wont figure that out what with the stupidity and all, so don't worry about it.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
Eckyy
United Caldari Navy
United Caldari Space Command.
#3599 - 2012-09-30 05:03:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Eckyy
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:

Personally, I loved the golem damage.

However, the weakness to pretty much anything including simple incoming damage due to sig radius is what truly hendered it.


I have no problem losing the tengu as my mission boat, I just wish I had a missile boat with the same efficiency to replace it before that happened.

Oh well....

I'm sure our missile boat bs's will eventually become more efficient in lvl 4 missions. The problem is based on the current rate of rebalance, we're looking at 6 months to a year before they even touch t1 bs's, yet alone t2....


Honestly, both ships are as big as whales anyway. The Nightmare gets a small damage reduction against torps, but anything else (including turret ships) will hit them both for full damage anyway.. The Golem has a fine tank with just T2, and you can practically nap while missioning if you faction fit it. What's the problem?

The sensor strength is an issue - so don't run missions against Guristas, run them in Gallente or Minmatar space. You'll make more isk in Minmatar space anyway.

So the conclusion is: the Golem has superior damage, tank, cap, speed/agility, and a nifty tractor bonus, and yet it's somehow inferior to the Nightmare (how?) - which, btw, is probably the best laser platform in the game (at least for missions).

???
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3600 - 2012-09-30 05:11:00 UTC
Ya know, one thing that hasn't been factored into this nerf is all the rebalancing going on.

They're introducing more powerful combat cruisers, ewar cruisers, etc etc... This is also the same with frigs.

These rebalances, especially to ewar, could be enough to break the current status que of the drake and tengu.

So, if we push for this nerf now, it could lead to inadequacy in hmls, and how long will this go on until it is rebalanced again.

This, and the changes to TDs are a good reason to hold off and get some feedback before the nerf to hmls goes through..