These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5401 - 2012-10-26 22:53:13 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:
Its also the only *missile* system which will be used in PvP by Caldari medium or large hulls. The Torps in that list are bombers (meta 4 ..) and Cruises and HAMs are not there. So yes, there are many HMLs used, but not because they rock so much but because they are the only option which does not suck for Caldari missile PvP above frig size.

Projectiles kills are more than missiles (#2) + hybrids + lasers together! So what is out of balance? Missiles? Thats the same logic which was used by Mr. George W. Bush when he invaded Iraq ...

1) There is no HAM because they are obsoleted by HML. Can you invalidate this assertion ?

2) Raven may not be properly balance, but it's turn will come by the summer expansion.

3) As I said, a weapon can be OP, that's not a reason to leave another OP system alone.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5402 - 2012-10-26 22:55:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Noemi Nagano wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Looking at the top 20 weapons:
Top 20 lists HML II as the top overall weapon for kills.
The only other weapon type of the same class listed, 720 atrillery, has about a quarter of the kills.
HML is clearly not balanced with it's peers.


Its also the only *missile* system which will be used in PvP by Caldari medium or large hulls. The Torps in that list are bombers (meta 4 ..) and Cruises and HAMs are not there. So yes, there are many HMLs used, but not because they rock so much but because they are the only option which does not suck for Caldari missile PvP above frig size.

Projectiles kills are more than missiles (#2) + hybrids + lasers together! So what is out of balance? Missiles? Thats the same logic which was used by Mr. George W. Bush when he invaded Iraq ...

In the Med LR category, yes, HML's are out of balance. If we were seeing an overall nerf to missiles, which save the range of Fury we aren't, you might have a more compelling counter argument by pointing out all the different projectile variants listed. But this does help point out again what is being said about HML's. The combination of minmatar ships and weapons, OP as they all seem cannot produce a single combination that topples the numeric superiority of the drake + HML combo in a list where the Med LR weapon class across all platforms is under represented.

Edit: But all this is still placing too much stock in a single data source without a breakdown or various factors under which the kills were made. I'd be glad to just argue the evekill top 20 is more trending than proof and leave it at that.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5403 - 2012-10-26 23:01:57 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

Let me rephrase a) : Only way to stop missiles from hitting you is defender missiles (which are brocken) or smartbomb (which require at least one high slot and devoure your cap).
You forgot "outtrack or outrange them" in b).



You can outrun/outrange missiles too. And you can outrun a missile in air, you never can do that with turrets.

About your - really stupid!! - argument about this Drake vs. Cane: you said a LONGRANGE Cane will not outdps a LONGRANGE Drake. I showed you how wrong you are, and didnt even count Drones in. Nor speed. You cant blame me for your stupid and wrong claim. If you think its ok to spread lies you have to face it if others discover them as such. So dont really blame me. I just corrected what you got wrong.

I didnt object btw to the fact HML are better than their peers. I object to the fact they are so much better in game that their out of line. There are plenty things in this game which are better than others. As long as there is just one missile system on top in the comparison of medium and large long and short range weapons I really dont think something is out of order in a gamebreaking way. You just dont like the idea of a missile system being better than turrets in something, thats all :) atm med short, and large long and short are dominated by turrets. Missiles dont play a role there, none at all. Its not out of order when missiles play a major role in the only remaining niche.

Drakes dont break this game. They never did, and they never will. And HML does not break this game either. And it never will. Projectiles as a whole seem to be pretty strong atm, and if one kind of weapon has more kills than the other 3 together one gets the impression there is something out of line. But - its not the Projectiles alone. Its the combination of them with the ships which give a bonus to them. And its also that quite stupid 30% bonus on TEs for falloff ...

Bouh, you said things like Cruise Raven is best DPS when everyone knows this might be true on paper. But amazingly in game the Raven is not there in PvP. You said Caldari should have trained Hybrids when you perfectly know turrets need different support skills than missiles. You then compared it with Gallentes need to skill for Drones when you perfectly know that EVERY race has to train Drones for PvP, and the only thing which Caldari will not need to do is the (admitted long) training for Heavy t2 and Sentry t2, because they simply dont have a ship to use them.

Minmatar need so many SP you said then, because they need to skill it all, missiles and Drones and Projectiles and Shield and Armor. When you perfectly know in the same time that next to no Minmatar ship atm relies on missiles, most of them dont even use them for their spare highslots but prefer something else there.

Thats how it is going with you, you say something which is wrong and you know how wrong it is. And then you blame me for reacting to all those stupid comments, great stuff.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5404 - 2012-10-26 23:06:18 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

In the Med LR category, yes, HML's are out of balance. If we were seeing an overall nerf to missiles, which save the range of Fury we aren't, you might have a more compelling counter argument by pointing out all the different projectile variants listed. But this does help point out again what is being said about HML's. The combination of minmatar ships and weapons, OP as they all seem cannot produce a single combination that topples the numeric superiority of the drake + HML combo in a list where the Med LR weapon class across all platforms is under represented.


The problem with HML are not HML, but the absence of other working systems. Simple as that. If there was just one Projectile system which would work well, you would see 170k kills with it and no kills with the rest. A bit simplified, admitted. But I hope you get that point.


Tyberius Franklin wrote:


Edit: But all this is still placing too much stock in a single data source without a breakdown or various factors under which the kills were made. I'd be glad to just argue the evekill top 20 is more trending than proof and leave it at that.


I agree with you here, the data source might overrepresent null sec in comparison to other things (Zealot numbers seem to indicate that for example).

I would like to hear your honest opinion, Tyberius, as you seem to be a reasonable person: do you regularly PvP in lowsec and feel like Drakes are out of line and the only ships there? Or do you think other ships are there in similar numbers and doing their thing too?
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5405 - 2012-10-26 23:11:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Noemi Nagano
Bouh Revetoile wrote:


1) There is no HAM because they are obsoleted by HML. Can you invalidate this assertion ?.


Its the other way round: there are only HML because HAM are so much inferior in the real game to their peers that it makes not much sense to use them outside of tournament environments. And they need too much PG. I would fully agree to the idea of exchanging PG of HML and HAM, since *this* would really bring them in line with turrets, where short range needs less PG than long range. Makes sense too, because you need tank close range, whereas longrange you can sacrifice a bit of it ..

Bouh Revetoile wrote:

2) Raven may not be properly balance, but it's turn will come by the summer expansion.


We have to see if it will get balanced.

Bouh Revetoile wrote:

3) As I said, a weapon can be OP, that's not a reason to leave another OP system alone.


As long as missiles win only one category and suck in the other 3 I dont agree with you. Its simple: fix the rest, then nerf the one which is in your perception out of line. I bet a nice ammount of ISK that a fix of Cruises, HAMs and Torps and the Caldari ships which use them so they are a viable alternative to their peers (=on par with the top) would lead to not that much more missiles in the list, but far less HML and more of the others. As it should be ..

PS: Besides, me and others here had an idea which could help to get the basic dilemma of balancing esp. long range missile systems with their peers, having dedicated sniper ammo, dedicated short range ammo and standard mid range. Atm we dont have sniper ammo, so either we wont have range (because the range has to be nerfed,so missiles dont out-DPS turrets too much on paper) or we wont have enough damage (other way to nerf) or turret users cry. With the invention of t2 long range missiles it would be easier to bring stuff in line. But you Bouh just say that would make missiles pointless (why?) or "like turrets" (how so?)...

PPS: Once and for all: HML are good. They are the best in their game (medium long range from 35km til end of flight time). But they are not OP or gamebreaking, and they also have drawbacks. These things you will not know though if you never use them :)
Lili Lu
#5406 - 2012-10-26 23:15:19 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:
I dont need to discredit your so called arguments Bouh. I showed you with numbers how you were wrong when you wanted numbers. Then you said "uh oh, nevermind, those numbers dont matter" .. I ripped all this BS apart you and others spread about the so called OP HML. HML are fine in some things and not so good in others. If HML/Drake were so OP like you claim, then Eve would be Drake/HML only. Eve-kill says Projectiles are number 1 weapons, with more kills than the other 3 together. Doesnt really fit to your picture, does it? Maybe its because your picture is wrong. And because you are wrong. Really, I dont need to discredit you or your arguments. Its been all done, and its been all said. Yours and others lies wont get true facts if you just repeat them again and again. :-)


I've been following that exchange Noemi. I think you are referring to Jorma. I think he has dismissed your citation to eve-kill top twenty. A source that I used to point out flaws in your arguments much earlier in this monster thread.

Eve-kill top twenty is about our only statistical source. You've been salivating since the first of the month at the big use of Zealots and said see the drake is not tops. Unfortunately for you now later in the month Drakes and Tengus have risen to their usual place. Although not at the former numbers where they were represented 2 or 3 to 1 on the next place ship they are back on top again.

But that's just it, you have to see the numbers and understand them. You just totalled up all projectile weapons and didn't differentiate sizes and types, didn't compare them to ships that can use them in the top-twenty, and didn't understand whether it was the weapon system itself or the mods often fit with them or the ship hull bonuses that promote their use.

1 Drake 89139
2 Maelstrom 73477
3 Zealot 68909
4 Tengu 68443
5 Tornado 55385
6 Hurricane 52761
7 Rokh 49749
8 Naga 42530
9 Loki 41803
(10 Huginn 28239) uses HML or Projectiles
16 Stabber FI 21654
17 Cynabal 20774


Here we are concerned with medium long range weapons. But for ***** and giggles lets throw in medium short range weapons also. 55K HML II, being used on two ships, Drake and Tengu. Then lets lump together 425 AC II 30k, 220 AC II 18k, 720 arty 13k, dual 180 AC II 7.5k. Now collectively those medium projectile guns outnumber HML IIs. However, those weapons are being fit on Cane, Loki, Huginn, SFI, and Cyn. 68.5k medium projectiles, 55k HML in total. But those medium projectiles are spread accross 4 or 5 ships. The HML use is spread accross 2 ships plus maybe some Huginn use. Raw totals don't tell the tale.

The heavy use of medium projectiles does not suggest that any one of them is too powerful. Some of those canes are fitting 425 ac, some are fitting 720 arty, etc, but mostly those ships are making good use of ac. Why? I argue it is because TEs are giving a 30% bonus on the falloff those guns use as opposed to the 15% optimal they don't care about. If it was purely the gun it would be one gun variant and it's numbers would be huge. But when the ship bonuses and the mods associted are working in concert with the general weapon type too well you get this kind of distributed numbers within the class of weapons.

I pointed out to you previously when you were salivating over the huge numbers of Zealots (which I knew wouldn't hold up against Drakes, lol) that it wasn't necessarilly heavy pulse IIs that put them there. The reappearance of Zealots was easilly traceable to the new tech II plates. The many Cynabal and Loki on that list are likely playing on falloff ship bonuses synergizing with TE 30% falloff. I don't see ac as needing a trim, but TEs yes, they need a trim. When you combine huge falloff compounding ship and mod bonuses with mobility advantages of course they are going to be used heavily.

Learn to analyze the numbers Noemi, not just cite to them. And also learn to understand the analysis of the weapons in isolation. You need to understand and engage in both to discern where the power differentials are coming from.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5407 - 2012-10-26 23:16:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Noemi Nagano wrote:

I would like to hear your honest opinion, Tyberius, as you seem to be a reasonable person: do you regularly PvP in lowsec and feel like Drakes are out of line and the only ships there? Or do you think other ships are there in similar numbers and doing their thing too?

I lack any decent sample of lowsec PvP experience, so can't answer this.

I'm curious though as to why keeping HML as is is desirable over a rebalanced of HAM/Torp/Cruise. Keeping one system out of balance isn't worth sacrificing all the others, and if you use the defense, "well the others suck," it's pretty much what you are doing.
Kenshi Hanshin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#5408 - 2012-10-26 23:21:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenshi Hanshin
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kenshi Hanshin wrote:
Spc One wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:

How is that different from T2 short range ammo for turrets?

Turrets can't be smartbombed or destroyed with defenders.
Also turrets do instant damage, while missiles have to fly to target first to apply damage.
basically missiles can be turned off if enemy wants it.


You are also forgetting or not mentioning the biggest disadvantage of missiles. You have a cycle time plus the flight time of the missiles to the target. The end result is a true cycle time approximately twice that of the turret counterparts. That alone I would argue balances missiles. Otherwise, missiles will deal less damage than Turrets over time (dps).

I like using missiles and I don't have an issue with tracking disruption being applied. However, I do have an issue with a range and damage nerf. When turrets already have an advantage in those areas. For the following reasons:

1) Turrets have no travel time for shots. Thus their true cycle time is much lower than missiles (~2x faster)
a) Missiles have the launcher cycle time + missile travel time
2) Turrets have a greater default range than missiles. Take a look at the absurd effective ranges for autocannons & pulse-lasers.
3) Turrets are immune to any form of interception once fired.
a) Missiles can be intercepted or detroyed by Defender missiles or smartbombs
b) Only way to stop turrets is to break the lock, use turret disruption and/or cap-warfare
4) Projectile weapons are the most OP weapons in the game wrt T2 and T1 variants. In addition can deal all damage types.

I am gonna add to this later...

1) Missile travel time does not increase cycle time, it just imposes a delay between cycle completion and damage application. this is a one time cost when considering a single target as hits will occur at the same rate as the cycle time, not accounting for movement as Doppler effect can increase or decrease the rate of hits compared to cycle time.

2) Missiles have greater skill based advantages for range than turrets. Both skills provide a greater percentage boost as well as apply to the entire flight time allowing them to be multiplicative compliments of each other whereas turret skills affect optimal or falloff separately. Also missiles suffer no falloff degradation to damage.

3) Valid, but not widely used as those measures are largely ineffective and require certainty of enemy composition to be worth fitting over alternatives.

4) Maybe, but even in the midrage LR weapon group HML has more kills than Artillery in the top 20


1) Missile travel time doesn't affect cycle time directly. Yet it does affect the rate at which damage is dealt at range. That said, HMLs are the only missile system used in PvP. Cause missiles as a general rule suck balls to turrets. Everyone knows that! Why do you think Gallente (Blaster) and Minmatar (Projectile) fits are the most common in PvP?!

2) Missiles don't have traditional falloff. Missiles are affected by your speed. If you move away or transversally the damage I, for example, could deliver with HMLs is significantly reduced. In addition, missiles are affected more than turrets by target signature-radius.

3) There is this wonderful idea called espionage aka recon. Try using it!

4) Really?! Look again at the overall count by all weapons systems. Projectile weapons have more kills than HMLS, Lasers and Hybrids combined. You are telling me that HMLs are unbalanced cause they are the only missile system that even manages to make the list? If this keeps up I think we all know what everyone will be skilling up Projectile weapons!

The idea of balance is that weapons have relative strengths and weaknesses. Let's take a look at them shall we?

Autocannons are supposed to be very close range, high damage (dps) and omni-damage. Presently, autocannons have taken the middile ground and the highest DPS. Blasters are supposed to middle of close range with high damage: Thermal and Kinetic. Presently, blasters are the shortest ranged and eclipsed by autos. Pulse lasers are supposed to be the longest ranged of the CQC weapons with the lowest damage (EM & Therm), presently correct.

Rockets are extremely close range with sucky damage. HAMs have laughable range and good DPS. Torpedoes are close ranged but are essentially useless against anything smaller than BCs. So far we have godly Autos and worthless torps, HAMs and rockets. Now the longer range group!

Artillery are supposed to be high salvo damage and slowest ROF. Presently, arty has damage modifiers that are at least 4 points higher than the nearest competitor: aka OP. Railguns are supposed to medium damage and medium ROF. Presently, the railguns have an okay damage but are eclipsed by the former. Beam lasers are supposed to have the highest ROF and lowest salvo damage of long-range. At the moment that is going according to plan.

Light missiles have 'meh' damage and good range. The range is the only good thing. HMs have the best damage and range of the long-range missiles. YAY! Finally something that makes a Caldari pilot happy! Cruise missiles have good damage as long as your target is a BC are larger and good range. In short, cruise misiles and light misiles suck!

If you want a balance make missiles affected by tracking computers, tracking enhancers and ECM.

I hereby motion that all projectile weapons have to be nerfed by 50% to make things even.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Noemi and Lili make the points much better than I do here.
Unit757
North Point
#5409 - 2012-10-26 23:26:30 UTC
In terms of the HML in general, I support this slight nerf to them. I think the systems true effectiveness will come forth when battle cruiser re-balancing hits, and the drakes bonuses potentially change, whether that be positive, or negative. As for how it is now, and how they intend it to be, I see it more as a true long range weapon then the other medium sized turrets. Even after these changes, it's still going to project better damage, farther, then the others will. Yes, a 250mm railgun or a heavy beam laser will have better numbers using close range ammo, but in most cases your going to run into tracking issues. In order for a 250 to match it's range, your going to be losing serious DPS.

I own a few drakes, I rarely use them. In most cases, I'm more inclined to take a 250mm ferox over an HML drake, because of a turrets ability to pop small targets easier, given the right circumstances. But if I know I'll be looking at an engagement at +30, I will take the drake hands down.

I think later down the road, all of the medium long range weapons need a serious look at, not just HMLs, because right now it feels more like the other long range guns are more medium range, while the HML is the only noteworthy weapon able to project decent damage at ranges beyond 40km.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5410 - 2012-10-26 23:34:13 UTC
Kenshi Hanshin wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kenshi Hanshin wrote:

You are also forgetting or not mentioning the biggest disadvantage of missiles. You have a cycle time plus the flight time of the missiles to the target. The end result is a true cycle time approximately twice that of the turret counterparts. That alone I would argue balances missiles. Otherwise, missiles will deal less damage than Turrets over time (dps).

I like using missiles and I don't have an issue with tracking disruption being applied. However, I do have an issue with a range and damage nerf. When turrets already have an advantage in those areas. For the following reasons:

1) Turrets have no travel time for shots. Thus their true cycle time is much lower than missiles (~2x faster)
a) Missiles have the launcher cycle time + missile travel time
2) Turrets have a greater default range than missiles. Take a look at the absurd effective ranges for autocannons & pulse-lasers.
3) Turrets are immune to any form of interception once fired.
a) Missiles can be intercepted or detroyed by Defender missiles or smartbombs
b) Only way to stop turrets is to break the lock, use turret disruption and/or cap-warfare
4) Projectile weapons are the most OP weapons in the game wrt T2 and T1 variants. In addition can deal all damage types.

I am gonna add to this later...

1) Missile travel time does not increase cycle time, it just imposes a delay between cycle completion and damage application. this is a one time cost when considering a single target as hits will occur at the same rate as the cycle time, not accounting for movement as Doppler effect can increase or decrease the rate of hits compared to cycle time.

2) Missiles have greater skill based advantages for range than turrets. Both skills provide a greater percentage boost as well as apply to the entire flight time allowing them to be multiplicative compliments of each other whereas turret skills affect optimal or falloff separately. Also missiles suffer no falloff degradation to damage.

3) Valid, but not widely used as those measures are largely ineffective and require certainty of enemy composition to be worth fitting over alternatives.

4) Maybe, but even in the midrage LR weapon group HML has more kills than Artillery in the top 20


1) Missile travel time doesn't affect cycle time directly. Yet it does affect the rate at which damage is dealt at range. That said, HMLs are the only missile system used in PvP. Cause missiles as a general rule suck balls to turrets. Everyone knows that! Why do you think Gallente (Blaster) and Minmatar (Projectile) fits are the most common in PvP?!

2) Missiles don't have traditional falloff. Missiles are affected by your speed. If you move away or transversally the damage I, for example, could deliver with HMLs is significantly reduced. In addition, missiles are affected more than turrets by target signature-radius.

3) There is this wonderful idea called espionage aka recon. Try using it!

4) Really?! Look again at the overall count by all weapons systems. Projectile weapons have more kills than HMLS, Lasers and Hybrids combined. You are telling me that HMLs are unbalanced cause they are the only missile system that even manages to make the list? If this keeps up I think we all know what everyone will be skilling up Projectile weapons!

The idea of balance is that weapons have relative strengths and weaknesses. Let's take a look at them shall we?

Autocannons are supposed to be very close range, high damage (dps) and omni-damage. Presently, autocannons have taken the middile ground and the highest DPS. Blasters are supposed to middle of close range with high damage: Thermal and Kinetic. Presently, blasters are the shortest ranged and eclipsed by autos. Pulse lasers are supposed to be the longest ranged of the CQC weapons with the lowest damage (EM & Therm), presently correct.

Rockets are extremely close range with sucky damage. HAMs have laughable range and good DPS. Torpedoes are close ranged but are essentially useless against anything smaller than BCs. So far we have godly Autos and worthless torps, HAMs and rockets. Now the longer range group!

Artillery are supposed to be high salvo damage and slowest ROF. Presently, arty has damage modifiers that are at least 4 points higher than the nearest competitor: aka OP. Railguns are supposed to medium damage and medium ROF. Presently, the railguns have an okay damage but are eclipsed by the former. Beam lasers are supposed to have the highest ROF and lowest salvo damage of long-range. At the moment that is going according to plan.

Light missiles have 'meh' damage and good range. The range is the only good thing. HMs have the best damage and range of the long-range missiles. YAY! Finally something that makes a Caldari pilot happy! Cruise missiles have good damage as long as your target is a BC are larger and good range. In short, cruise misiles and light misiles suck!

If you want a balance make missiles affected by tracking computers, tracking enhancers and ECM.

I hereby motion that all projectile weapons have to be nerfed by 50% to make things even.

1) Damage is dealt at the same rate as cycle time aside from Doppler effect with an initial delay.
2) Missiles also have a much lower tendency to miss completely. Especially at close range where LR turrets are useless.
3) There is a counter to than called variance in fleet composition. Sure your firewall is keeping our drakes out of the fight, to bad it's not working for every other ship we brought! Good job!
4) Yes really, look again for MEDIUM, LONG RANGE TURRETS. Count the number on the list. Combine them and see if they beat HML II. For the debate of whether HML is ballanced within it's class the number of people killed by 1400 Howitzers and 200mm autos is irrelevant.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5411 - 2012-10-26 23:36:50 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Noemi Nagano wrote:

I would like to hear your honest opinion, Tyberius, as you seem to be a reasonable person: do you regularly PvP in lowsec and feel like Drakes are out of line and the only ships there? Or do you think other ships are there in similar numbers and doing their thing too?

I lack any decent sample of lowsec PvP experience, so can't answer this.


Thanks for this answer then, its nice someone is honest. I think atm the Drake is not overrepresented in lowsec or highsec PvP. I have yet to see proof for the opposite.

And Lili, I understand those numbers much better than you think I do :)

I also see that the projectile weapons will be used by many ships, and the HML by just 2. But IMO you do it wrong when you think its because of the OPness of those 2 ships with HML, its because other options for Caldari missile PvP (med & large size) just dont exist atm.

And balancing the flat damage "curve" of HML vs turrets will be a problem, whichever approach you take. I am sure there are better ways than the nerf we now have. There could have been worse ways though. But its not the end, TDs will really give trouble to missile users, and thats what bothers me most - I just dont see how missiles should ever be on par when the only system which actually is on par gets nerfed and some others receive a small buff (which might as well keep them in their underused role) but the next nerf is just incoming.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5412 - 2012-10-26 23:38:22 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:

The problem with HML are not HML, but the absence of other working systems. Simple as that. If there was just one Projectile system which would work well, you would see 170k kills with it and no kills with the rest. A bit simplified, admitted. But I hope you get that point.

That is completely wrong. People don't use 425mm railguns because 250mm are broken but because they are effective on the Rokh. People don't use HML because they don't have a BS but because they are more effective than any other medium size long range weapon : a Drake can even outdps a railgun Proteus !

The only long range medium size weapon used are artilleries, and that is only because of their alpha, useful to blap frigates at range, though, when you don't have the required number to blap your target, HML are better.

BTW, I showed you a Drake, a usable one, which outdps a hurricane at ALL ranges. You just discarded it, despite your absence of knowledge in low/nullsec warfare.

Oh, and as a side note : Drakes are 32% of our BC kills/loss this week. There is 12 BC. That's way above what it should be, even after removing the obsolete BC. In the stats, the Drake come second to Hurricane, and the trends confirm itselves. Drake are about one on three battlecruiser you can encounter in low or nullsec. Drake online you said ?

To further study these stats, we can see that Hurricanes are a little more than one on three BC too, that mean that the other 10 BC shares the last 33%.

And don't fool me, the hurricane is beyond, and it's being nerfed. Why does the drake shouldn't ?

PS : ever seen a torp typhoon ? I did. Do you know the Cyclone ? It does have missiles about one time on three.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5413 - 2012-10-26 23:46:48 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

1) Damage is dealt at the same rate as cycle time aside from Doppler effect with an initial delay.


I agree here. The only problem flight time might have is DPS in air which will never apply to a target (either because the target is dead or because the missile ship which fired them is no longer there).

Tyberius Franklin wrote:

2) Missiles also have a much lower tendency to miss completely. Especially at close range where LR turrets are useless.


Agreed on the first, the second depends a bit but is also not completely wrong :D

Tyberius Franklin wrote:

4) Yes really, look again for MEDIUM, LONG RANGE TURRETS. Count the number on the list. Combine them and see if they beat HML II. For the debate of whether HML is ballanced within it's class the number of people killed by 1400 Howitzers and 200mm autos is irrelevant.


Tyberius, I agree with you in medium long range HML are strong. But please dont forget the facts which are behind this: 1) the ship which uses them most is cheap to skill and fit and has good EHP 2) its the only missile system in the list apart from meta 4 Torps which are for bombers and for sure not used on Caldari PvP BS 3) the absence of all other missile systems in the list of working/viable stuff leaves all those missile skilled Caldari who want to PvP with HML and nothing but HML 4) PG reqs of HAM are higher than HML which means people who are risk averse and like to put more tank will gravitate even more to HML, having more range AND more tank unlike with the turret peers.

If PG reqs for HML and HAM would be exchanged and HAM would be working (which they maybe will, cant say for sure yet) then there might be a fair bit less HML and maybe some HAM in that list. And the numbers for HML would go down even more so if Torps and Cruises would work on Ravens in PvP.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#5414 - 2012-10-26 23:49:36 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:


You can outrun/outrange missiles too. And you can outrun a missile in air, you never can do that with turrets.



u think that a ship moving fast enough to out run a missile is gonna be hit by a turret? Shocked

and ur calling other ppl stupid...

take it u dnt realise that a missile ship that is being chased has a greater effective range as its pursuer is moving toward it. they also have a greater DPS if their pursuer is getting any closer.

this is how travel time is balanced.

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
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5415 - 2012-10-26 23:50:24 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:
And balancing the flat damage "curve" of HML vs turrets will be a problem, whichever approach you take. I am sure there are better ways than the nerf we now have. There could have been worse ways though. But its not the end, TDs will really give trouble to missile users, and thats what bothers me most - I just dont see how missiles should ever be on par when the only system which actually is on par gets nerfed and some others receive a small buff (which might as well keep them in their underused role) but the next nerf is just incoming.

You really thing that if we nerf the dps of drakes and tengu by 40% at long range (50km) everyone would be happy ? Because that's what would be needed to make them on par with med LR turrets.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5416 - 2012-10-26 23:50:52 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:


Oh, and as a side note : Drakes are 32% of our BC kills/loss this week. There is 12 BC. That's way above what it should be, even after removing the obsolete BC. In the stats, the Drake come second to Hurricane, and the trends confirm itselves. Drake are about one on three battlecruiser you can encounter in low or nullsec. Drake online you said ?.


How can it be Drake online, when the Drake is second? About that Cane nerf, we will see what it does. If the Cane gets worse, a Minmatar pilot has other options though. In every shipclass.

A Caldari can go frigs, or ECM. Or snipe with Nagas and Rokhs, but for missiles its game over.

Because ...

Bouh Revetoile wrote:


PS : ever seen a torp typhoon ? I did. Do you know the Cyclone ? It does have missiles about one time on three.


.. neither the Phoon nor the Cyclone came to my mind as Caldari ships so far. Maybe I was wrong there. Or maybe you missed the point, again? :)
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5417 - 2012-10-26 23:52:49 UTC
Oh, and I forgot this unknowledgeable talk too : rockets do are used A LOT in low sec. And *I* know about this,because I encounter them regularly.
Cazador 64
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#5418 - 2012-10-26 23:53:44 UTC
So just got off test did side by side with this pilot.
This guy flies CNR Sniper boats in incursions.
After this patch my CNR will be rendered useless for a Sniper boat in incursions.
With T2 Ammo flight time on cruise got taken down to under 120KM

As a incursion sniper I am needed to hit past 150. So I fit tech 1 as there are no faction ammo on test atm and I was back out to a good range but the DPS was way down. Looking at everything I would have to switch to faction ammo effectively nerfing my DPS by over 100 points. This these numbers there will be no need for anyone to take a CNR into an incursion as a sniper ever..

Great job CCP not only did you take the HML out of pvp and pve you took the Caldari missiles sniper boats out of incursions also.
Unless I missed something I will be canceling all my accounts and my rl friends will follow.
and no i will not be giving away any of my stuff or isk.
Noemi Nagano
Perkone
Caldari State
#5419 - 2012-10-26 23:54:01 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Noemi Nagano wrote:
And balancing the flat damage "curve" of HML vs turrets will be a problem, whichever approach you take. I am sure there are better ways than the nerf we now have. There could have been worse ways though. But its not the end, TDs will really give trouble to missile users, and thats what bothers me most - I just dont see how missiles should ever be on par when the only system which actually is on par gets nerfed and some others receive a small buff (which might as well keep them in their underused role) but the next nerf is just incoming.

You really thing that if we nerf the dps of drakes and tengu by 40% at long range (50km) everyone would be happy ? Because that's what would be needed to make them on par with med LR turrets.


No, that would be not needed. I gave an idea of how it could be, but you didnt answer (way before in this thread). Sorry, but I wont do all that work again. Numbers have been there. You said it would make missiles "bad turrets" .. and failed to explain why.
Lili Lu
#5420 - 2012-10-26 23:57:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Noemi Nagano wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Noemi Nagano wrote:

I would like to hear your honest opinion, Tyberius, as you seem to be a reasonable person: do you regularly PvP in lowsec and feel like Drakes are out of line and the only ships there? Or do you think other ships are there in similar numbers and doing their thing too?

I lack any decent sample of lowsec PvP experience, so can't answer this.


Thanks for this answer then, its nice someone is honest. I think atm the Drake is not overrepresented in lowsec or highsec PvP. I have yet to see proof for the opposite.

And Lili, I understand those numbers much better than you think I do :)

I also see that the projectile weapons will be used by many ships, and the HML by just 2. But IMO you do it wrong when you think its because of the OPness of those 2 ships with HML, its because other options for Caldari missile PvP (med & large size) just dont exist atm.

And balancing the flat damage "curve" of HML vs turrets will be a problem, whichever approach you take. I am sure there are better ways than the nerf we now have. There could have been worse ways though. But its not the end, TDs will really give trouble to missile users, and thats what bothers me most - I just dont see how missiles should ever be on par when the only system which actually is on par gets nerfed and some others receive a small buff (which might as well keep them in their underused role) but the next nerf is just incoming.


Yes, Tyberius is being honest in stating he lacks any sample of lowsec. The point I have have been making over and over agian to you is that both you and I do as well. So your statement is false, you do not know of drake overrepresentation or underrepresentation in lowsec.Idea But CCP is able to sample usage.

Also, by your logic we should see two drone boats in that list. We don't. It is not because there are "only two working missile boats" that we see drakes and tengus up there. We don't see Myrms and Domis there because they might be "the only working drone boats." If it was just that every missile user crowded into these two ships they would not be at the top. Their unique weapon advantages and ship bonuses put them at the top. The lack of those explains the absense of Domis and Myrms.

As for TDs cry a river. Turrets have had that problem for a long time. My guess is the eventual numbers on the TC/TE bonuses and TD detraction will be more muted than we currently have for turrets. However, at this time caldari missile and mid-slot blessed frigs are laughing it up with unbonused TDs on turret frigs and destroyers. That will have to change as well.