These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4741 - 2012-10-16 15:33:15 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Opertone wrote:

I am afraid that messing with my torpedoes will make my Golem very sad. Now buff my damage output on torpedoes and I can forget about your horrible missile debuf idea.


This proposed change is a very significant buff to torpedoes.



Even with these changes there is still no reason to fly a Caldari Torpedo BS. And Cruise Missiles remain a joke.



i was under the impression that fozzie was talking about torpedoes as a weapon, not cruise missiles, and not caldari BSes which have not gone through a balancing pass as of yet.

Cruise missiles will undoubtedly be looked at soon, as well as making the raven more PvP worthy rather than just a straight PvE runner.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
#4742 - 2012-10-16 16:17:49 UTC
Fozzie do you plan to reduce power requirements for armour plates? With new reduced cane power grid I’m having trouble seeing how armor cane will remain viable. Armor tanking is already less favourite choice on canes compared to shield tanking, and given that shield tanks are less power hungry then armor tanks this disparity will grow even bigger.

Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows...
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4743 - 2012-10-16 16:35:55 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Opertone wrote:

I am afraid that messing with my torpedoes will make my Golem very sad. Now buff my damage output on torpedoes and I can forget about your horrible missile debuf idea.


This proposed change is a very significant buff to torpedoes.


Even with these changes there is still no reason to fly a Caldari Torpedo BS. And Cruise Missiles remain a joke.


That's because it's well understood that the problems with current torp Raven are located within both torps and the Raven hull itself, so you can hardly expect changes which don't address the Raven to solve the problem. Likewise with Cruise. So we'll just have to wait until tiericide gets to BS. Although Cruise is a really complicated problem...

Still, the torp GMP change is a very hefty boost - people have talked about cutting torp explosion radius down to 400 m before, but here CCP charge straight in with a cut to 337.5 m! That means full torp damage to a webbed Drake, no loss of damage to the hard signature cap. More of a problem is the entire utility of BS in small-gang combat where mobility is life, but, again, that's a BS problem, not a missile one, so don't look for a solely missile solution.

I do not believe that the GMP boost to rockets is justified, particularly in conjunction with Jav rockets becoming useful.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#4744 - 2012-10-16 16:46:39 UTC
well rockets already have a sig rad of 20 for T1 which is lower than drones!!!
and T2 rage 34 javelin is even less they do need to change that for sure

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#4745 - 2012-10-16 16:54:20 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We base our balancing decisions on the good of the game....


I will be brief.

This issue is a whole lot bigger than the Drake. The perception CCP has given many Caldari players is that it is always Hot-Drop O'Clock when it comes to sticking it to them. Again, it’s not about the Drake, it’s about the entire picture.

You need to actually FIX some of the many broken Caldari ships.

They need to be good enough that people from other races wish, if only briely, that they had trained to fly them. Right now that’s not the case. Ever. Even with this winter update. The opposite is always true. No one who can fly the Vagabond wishes they could trade it for the Cerberus. No one is looking at the new Rupture or Vexor and wishing they could fly the new joke Moa instead. No one wants to swap their battleship, any battleship, for a Raven. No one is bummed because they are stuck flying the crappy Thrasher. No one has ever said, “Man that Nighthawk sure is a sweet ship compared to this piece of junk Sleipner.” Hell, the new Minmatar EWAR cruiser will be a better missile boat than the Caldari missile boat. How silly is that? The problem isn’t the new Bellicose, it’s the way you build Caldari ships. It’s CCP’s Caldari standard which seems to be:

Aspire to mediocrity…then fail to hit the mark.

That’s what you guys have got to change. The Drake might be overpowered, but worrying about that is like trying to figure out how much to leave for a tip when you left your empty wallet at home.
Qaidan Alenko
Eezo-Lution Inc.
#4746 - 2012-10-16 17:07:11 UTC
TheLast Poofighter wrote:
==Snip == It seems like there really could be all kinds of creative solutions and the route taken was rather bland and boring. Defender pulses, defender arrays, robo-nano-dragons, cloaked defender missiles - really, you have a whole universe of creative options here. ==Snip ==

I read this part and a Anti-Missile Defense style Sentry Drone went zipping through my head...
Go ahead... Get your Wham on!!!
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#4747 - 2012-10-16 17:08:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Yes i would like to see the caracal getting a stronger bonus say 7.5% to ROF and the bellicose losing a medium drone to balance them a bit more after-all surely the caracal should do more dps than a ewar cruiser and being an attack cruiser surely it should be lighter and faster too the bellicose is lighter and quicker than most of the cruisers how does that make sense?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#4748 - 2012-10-16 17:13:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Noemi Nagano
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
<- snip -> tons of clueless stuff deleted) <- snip ->

Now Noemi, stop writing until it is for posting your killboard please, and with *relevant* pvp, and go for some lvl4 missions with your drake ? Or just stop talking about my gallente "skills".


I posted one of my PvP alts KB. If you cant read I wont help. And I dont do l4s in a Drake. If I do them (which I sometimes do) then I take either my Mare or my Mach. Guess why :)

Your Gallente "skills" (its good you set it in quotation marks :D ) clearly excelled when you fitted those 2 ships. Even better they were when you failed to see a big difference of Harbinger and Drake - their drone bay. And bandwith. Although I thought you should be familiar with drones, as a Gallente pilot ...
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#4749 - 2012-10-16 17:21:55 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Opertone wrote:

I am afraid that messing with my torpedoes will make my Golem very sad. Now buff my damage output on torpedoes and I can forget about your horrible missile debuf idea.


This proposed change is a very significant buff to torpedoes.



Even with these changes there is still no reason to fly a Caldari Torpedo BS. And Cruise Missiles remain a joke.




Quoted again. For truth again.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#4750 - 2012-10-16 17:28:58 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We base our balancing decisions on the good of the game....


I will be brief.

This issue is a whole lot bigger than the Drake. The perception CCP has given many Caldari players is that it is always Hot-Drop O'Clock when it comes to sticking it to them. Again, it’s not about the Drake, it’s about the entire picture.

You need to actually FIX some of the many broken Caldari ships.

They need to be good enough that people from other races wish, if only briely, that they had trained to fly them. Right now that’s not the case. Ever. Even with this winter update. The opposite is always true. No one who can fly the Vagabond wishes they could trade it for the Cerberus. No one is looking at the new Rupture or Vexor and wishing they could fly the new joke Moa instead. No one wants to swap their battleship, any battleship, for a Raven. No one is bummed because they are stuck flying the crappy Thrasher. No one has ever said, “Man that Nighthawk sure is a sweet ship compared to this piece of junk Sleipner.” Hell, the new Minmatar EWAR cruiser will be a better missile boat than the Caldari missile boat. How silly is that? The problem isn’t the new Bellicose, it’s the way you build Caldari ships. It’s CCP’s Caldari standard which seems to be:

Aspire to mediocrity…then fail to hit the mark.

That’s what you guys have got to change. The Drake might be overpowered, but worrying about that is like trying to figure out how much to leave for a tip when you left your empty wallet at home.


Fozzie, really: listen to this guy. Thats whats the feeling for most people who like to fly Caldari. I know there are some who are different. But really most *I* know feel exactly like that. Doesnt mean all of them will stick to Caldari, some just adapt and crosstrain... But its just pointless to treat an entire race like that. And when was the last time someone chose to crosstrain to Caldari? Ever? (if it was not just the ship skills for Gurista or Sansha ships ...)
Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
#4751 - 2012-10-16 17:31:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Irregessa
Onictus wrote:
Borascus wrote:

If you need 3 or more drakes to take it down missiles are too weak.



I'll throw you a question then.

Why exactly do you think the other three races use battleships over level 3? I'll give you three guesses.


That is 2 guesses too many, though the reason is that the drake has a tremendous tank compared to the other t1 BC.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#4752 - 2012-10-16 17:32:54 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
You need to actually FIX some of the many broken Caldari ships.

They need to be good enough that people from other races wish, if only briely, that they had trained to fly them. Right now that’s not the case. Ever. Even with this winter update. The opposite is always true. No one who can fly the Vagabond wishes they could trade it for the Cerberus. ***etc***


You'll find that there are many people who sit and think "why the hell did I train for this recon, I should have got a Falcon." Lots of people (atleast... PvErs) will sit there and think "why on earth did I train for this Legion/Prot/Loki I should have got a Tengu" and I'm sure plenty of people will sit there thinking "why bother with other BCs when you can use a drake that can do similar dps at 5x the range whilst tanking better and not even needing to be actively piloted."

Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware that Caldari have some terrible ships (I'm struggling to find a pvp option I like for my alt, so she's cross trained amarr for a HAM Legion) but they definitely have some plus sides. All the races have some ships that just can't serve a utility. Look at the current Amarr T1 cruiser range and the Prophecy. Aside from the Arbitrator they're all completely and utterly pointless. (and currently looking to be much better when the expansion lands!)

The changes Fozzie is making here with missiles and through the frig/destroyer/cruiser lines will work towards fixing some of the flaws that exist at the moment, as the balancing changes work through Battlecruisers and Battleships I'm sure things will even out through all ship types. I sure hope so as I'd love to be able to go fly a Nighthawk on my alt as it looks sweet :D
Aldeb Haraz
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#4753 - 2012-10-16 17:34:42 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We base our balancing decisions on the good of the game....



They need to be good enough that people from other races wish, if only briely, that they had trained to fly them. Right now that’s not the case. Ever. Even with this winter update. The opposite is always true. .


Right, all those Caldari ships are trash. Starting at the bottom:

Griffin
Merlin
Hawk
Harpy
Kitsune
Flycatcher
CN Hookbill
Blackbird
Falcon
Rook
Basilisk
Onyx
Tengu
Ferox
Drake
Vulture
Rokh
Widow
Nightmare
Rattlesnake
Chimera

These ships make up a large portion of the Caldari lineup and are all extremely relevant in PVP. They are all viable, and usually the best ship in their class. The myth that has been perpetuated that Caldari is trash in PVP and is only successful because of HML ships is factually wrong and should be put to rest.

Come winter, we also see the rest of the cruisers brought up: the Osprey becomes a strong support ship, the Caracal very effective at applying DPS at medium range, the Moa a decent shield brawler, and even forgotten ships like NH and Cerb can now make decent HAM fits.
Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
#4754 - 2012-10-16 17:39:15 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:


The changes Fozzie is making here with missiles and through the frig/destroyer/cruiser lines will work towards fixing some of the flaws that exist at the moment, as the balancing changes work through Battlecruisers and Battleships I'm sure things will even out through all ship types. I sure hope so as I'd love to be able to go fly a Nighthawk on my alt as it looks sweet :D



The way I look at it is that the ships that are broken now will be even more broken after the missile change, until they are rebalanced to make them useable again. It isn't like many people are using them now, so there isn't a lot of difference between 'broken' and 'even more broken'.

Having said that, the caracal should theoretically rebalanced as it is presented in this forum, right?
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#4755 - 2012-10-16 17:39:26 UTC
Chimera? notsureifserious

Only any good if you pimp fit it and are in a Pulsar wormhole.
TheLast Poofighter
Squirrel Horde
#4756 - 2012-10-16 17:44:27 UTC
Onictus wrote:
TheLast Poofighter wrote:
I am not sure I understand the reasoning behind making the missile platform behave like a turret platform. My understanding is that there are two separate skill trees as they are intended to behave and perform differently - I think most of the changes proposed would be widely accepted if the secondary skills of missiles were reimbursed and merge gunnery and missile skill trees to a "turrets" skill tree. As it would stand now this just seems like a huge hit to newer players who may have not cross trained for both disciplines (guns and missiles that is) and to one specific race that really isn't geared for pvp anyway.


Why? Missiles are applicable to all four races, as are the turret support skills. New players that AREN'T Caldari have to deal with this anyway. I'm an Angle pilot given the choice, I much prefer gallente and matar. However, I can also fly all four races BS and down with T2 weapons. The newer "caldari" players get to share the experince of newer Amarr, Gallente and Matari players and crosstrain.


TheLast Poofighter wrote:

Also I don't understand the reasoning of "defender missiles take up too much cpu so to fix a problem we are going to make everything behave the same." While I know that isn't a direct quote, it was kinda how it came across. Is it that difficult to fix a great idea that works very well for npc battle ships in level 4? It seems like there really could be all kinds of creative solutions and the route taken was rather bland and boring. Defender pulses, defender arrays, robo-nano-dragons, cloaked defender missiles - really, you have a whole universe of creative options here. I have always appreciated the complex Paper, Rock, Scissors nature of Eve but this change just kinda seems like we all get a rock. My rant is finished I am going to watch a Charlie Brown Halloween and wait for the extended DT to finish.


Their issue with defenders is hardware resources. For the rest of us smartbombs do fine.

TheLast Poofighter wrote:

PS - My daughter who has Down Syndrome is an avid player of Eve. I thought it would be a good idea for her to take up mining to prepare her for potential disappointments - however, she took more to POS management. She like to set up complex designs and shapes for hours on end. Her POS is large Amarr tower which she like to call "the Broken Potato Peeler." Would it be possible for the anchoring/un-anchoring and onlining/offlining times to get buffed?


You have no idea how most of us wish that lol



I think I stated why but here is another reason - because missle apocs, maels, hyperions and megathrons are just silly

Agreed - defenders use too many resources but a smart bomb does not why not fix this rather than homogenize? But this point confuses me further. So there are already mechanics in place that counter the "the amazingly high" dps of these long range weapons? Like the Firewall and alpha mael fleet? Are these hardware resource hogs? Again this sounds like lazy way out - maybe nerf the amount time dev's spend on the forums and buff the time they spend on developing.

And to address your final point - yes, somehow I knew my daughter with Downs could appeal to -A-.
TheLast Poofighter
Squirrel Horde
#4757 - 2012-10-16 17:47:04 UTC
Qaidan Alenko wrote:
TheLast Poofighter wrote:
==Snip == It seems like there really could be all kinds of creative solutions and the route taken was rather bland and boring. Defender pulses, defender arrays, robo-nano-dragons, cloaked defender missiles - really, you have a whole universe of creative options here. ==Snip ==

I read this part and a Anti-Missile Defense style Sentry Drone went zipping through my head...



You sir should get paid for that idea - much more interesting than a nerf. Yet alas, I can sympathize with CCP Fozzie. I am sure it is very difficult to live up to such debacles as Incarna.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#4758 - 2012-10-16 17:47:16 UTC
Irregessa wrote:
The way I look at it is that the ships that are broken now will be even more broken after the missile change, until they are rebalanced to make them useable again. It isn't like many people are using them now, so there isn't a lot of difference between 'broken' and 'even more broken'.

Having said that, the caracal should theoretically rebalanced as it is presented in this forum, right?


I've not really looked at the suggested new Caracal stats in any detail, but I'd imagine the way it has been balanced takes into account the missile changes. If anyone thinks it doesn't - go post in detail why so Fozzie can see it!

Without sitting there with a calculator and working out the dps figures with the changes to missiles I don't think things look too bad for them. Yes HML are getting a much needed nerf, but you lose the really lame missile penalties, HAM become more easy to fit and I believe also higher peak dps with rage missiles (applying the damage is seperate)
Caldari ships with their decent quantity of mid slots will need to adapt and fit more in the way of tackle (atleast a web/painter) to start making the most of the new missile systems and before long I'm sure everyone will be quite happy with their 700dps HAM drakes that still have 80k ehp :p

The thing as I see it, is that Caldari ships are now going to have to fit more than just a point in order to apply some dps, just like anyone with any form of turret does currently. You'll just no longer be able to sit at 70km going "haha heavy missiles lol"
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#4759 - 2012-10-16 18:20:46 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:


Fozzie, really: listen to this guy. Thats whats the feeling for most people who like to fly Caldari. I know there are some who are different. But really most *I* know feel exactly like that. Doesnt mean all of them will stick to Caldari, some just adapt and crosstrain... But its just pointless to treat an entire race like that. And when was the last time someone chose to crosstrain to Caldari? Ever? (if it was not just the ship skills for Gurista or Sansha ships ...)


still spouting bs

ppl cross train to caldari for merlins, drakes, tengus, rokhs, scorps, crows, falcons, basilisks, nagas.

ppl cross train to minmatar for less

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
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#4760 - 2012-10-16 19:20:06 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Noemi Nagano wrote:


Fozzie, really: listen to this guy. Thats whats the feeling for most people who like to fly Caldari. I know there are some who are different. But really most *I* know feel exactly like that. Doesnt mean all of them will stick to Caldari, some just adapt and crosstrain... But its just pointless to treat an entire race like that. And when was the last time someone chose to crosstrain to Caldari? Ever? (if it was not just the ship skills for Gurista or Sansha ships ...)


still spouting bs

ppl cross train to caldari for merlins, drakes, tengus, rokhs, scorps, crows, falcons, basilisks, nagas.

ppl cross train to minmatar for less


Some of them - accepted. Caldari logis and Caldari ECM are decent. Caldari frigs are ok too. Naga and Rokh seem to be pretty popular, but never thought one would actually crosstrain for them. And dont forget ... they are gunnery ships, and whats the main point about this all? Caldari Missile PvP. So ..