These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#5601 - 2012-10-30 10:57:59 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:

Totally, it's not like there are any missile hulls with range bonuses Lol

Not range, velocity.

A Cruise Missile moves at the same velocity as a Heavy Missile, with the bonus they cover 50% more ground then the Drake hitting targets 50% farther in the same time. Cruise Missiles have a 50% effective range increase over the Drake with an option to go farther.

People who talk about Cruise Missiles should realize they only have one point of reference and that is the Raven and the Raven sucks. That and people wonder why it isn't a Fleet ship when Tier 3 Battleships pretty much rule that area, Abbadon, Mael, Rokh. Raven is the only Cruise Missile Ship and in comparison to the 1-5th the cost Drake...

* Not much more HP then a resist bonused Drake.
* Caps out easy with an MWD, many Drake fits are stable or near so.
* 6 Launchers instead of the 7 the Drakes has and the Drake can use Fury Realistically further pumping up its Dmg.
* 40% the Scan Res of a Drake.
* Same number of Mids.

Yeah Cruise Missiles are the problem. Roll Really though it is the missing launcher that ball kicks it the most.

Honestly if they gave the Raven 7 Launchers, 7 Mids / 4 Lows, Little bit more Scan Res Cruise Missiles would be looked at in a whole new light I guarantee it. The change to Fury and precision was enough, now they just need to fix the one ship that can use these things realistically.

I think you forget the old habbit. In the past, sniping was 150-200km range, and then, flight time become a problem, but not before IMO.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5602 - 2012-10-30 11:01:21 UTC
Noemi Nagano wrote:
I see Bouh and that other pilot who does not exist are still hanging with the Cruise Raven. Again I tell you, both of you .. train for one if you didnt do so already, buy one, hop into it and go for PvP with it. You will see how those great Pyfa/EFT/whatever numbers will let you perform on the server. If you dont then better stop speaking about how good it is/will be, because you seriously dont have a clue.

Ok, so you are speaking about solo/small gang brawling ; hence, you are refering to a Torp Raven ; hence, you are encountering Torp problem to apply damage to anything smaller than a BS.

GMP skill applying to Torp seem a relevant buff to me. I don't know if it will be enough, though BS rebalance is not there yet.

And no, no long range weapon work for solo/small gang work, unless very specific, and even then, only arties work, because of alpha, so CML are not really the only screwed system there.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5603 - 2012-10-30 11:59:17 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Hi everyone. Thanks to all of you who participated in testing on Duality this weekend. We're working to get you guys more and more access to the Retri changes so you can play with them more often.

Gonna answer a few questions that have been brought up more recently in the thread. I will mention that the discussion has devolved quite a bit recently and remind everyone that neither name calling nor hyperbole are generally very effective at swaying my opinion.

Why was the range of Fury missiles reduced?
Our goals for T2 ammo is that each ammo type should have a specific and useful role to play, but that the T2 ammo should not completely obsolete the T1 and faction variants. For this proposal we have removed the ship penalties and increased the damage bonus for Fury missiles while reducing their range and increasing the penalties to precision. The goal for all T2 ammo is that it should be the ideal choice in some combat situations and not others, so that you should never be best served by only carrying one type of ammo. Switching to Fury missiles when hostiles are closer/larger and using T1/Faction missiles at longer ranges is normal and expected behavior.
That being said, the exact numbers are of course up for discussion and if the 50% range is something that would put Fury missiles out of whack with their intended purpose and with their relative balance we may change those numbers. Don't expect a return to 90% range though.

Why not have one T2 longrange missile and one T2 shortrange missile with T1 in between for Cruise/heavy/Light missiles?
This is the pattern used by turrets and by short-range missiles, and it was an option we considered for long-range missile launchers. However in the end we didn't see a good reason to homogenize missiles and turrets in that way. As well, since T1 missiles have comparable range to T2 longrange turret ammo, we would have had to nerf T1 missile range further to keep that system balanced and I don't think you folks want that.

Why are you nerfing Heavy missiles while Cruise missiles suck?
Everyone knows it, Cruise missiles need help and that's a balance issue we are going to deal with. However we can only do so much at once and since medium weapon systems are so closely tied to the cruisers being rebalanced in Retribution we too this opportunity to bring some improvements to that area. We're going to buff Cruise missiles because leaving them as is would be stupid and everyone here knows it. I will note that these changes do represent a very significant buff to torps, so Caldari battleship pilots are getting some love in Retri, just not all the love that's coming.

What about projectiles?
There are a number of issues surrounding some Minmatar ships, some connected to the ships, some to the weapons and some to other modules. We've taken a first step by balancing the powergrid on the Hurricane, and the cruiser changes are going a long way towards providing strong competition to some popular Minmatar ships. We've got our eyes on more fixes to come, including tweaks to Tracking Enhancers.

Are you making these changes because you are part of a shadowy dev conspiracy to push the agenda of fat cat projectile conglomerates and stretching back to the original BoB BBQ in 1723?
How do you know? Did someone break the blood oath?

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5604 - 2012-10-30 12:00:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
Noemi Nagano wrote:
I see Bouh and that other pilot who does not exist are still hanging with the Cruise Raven. Again I tell you, both of you .. train for one if you didnt do so already, buy one, hop into it and go for PvP with it.


Yeah, because PvP should be solo iWin pwnage. Roll

If you want to do solo PvP in BS then you are already doing something wrong.

Go to nullsec with your Mach and see how long you can keep pwning.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#5605 - 2012-10-30 12:21:10 UTC
Those much maligned tracking enhancers allow blaster boats to extend their range out to scramble or point range. The new Thorax, for example, can hit 18km with optimal + falloff while using Nuetrons, Null, and one tracking enhancer. A TE nerf would hurt blaster boats more then projectile boats - all while trying to deal with a Winmatar problem that is fading naturally anyways.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5606 - 2012-10-30 12:29:19 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Those much maligned tracking enhancers allow blaster boats to extend their range out to scramble or point range. The new Thorax, for example, can hit 18km with optimal + falloff while using Nuetrons, Null, and one tracking enhancer. A TE nerf would hurt blaster boats more then projectile boats - all while trying to deal with a Winmatar problem that is fading naturally anyways.


The TE problem includes how powerful some kiting shield tanked Null blasterboats are. We're not looking at it simply as a Minmatar issue, don't worry.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#5607 - 2012-10-30 12:33:58 UTC
This is good news - Blasters and autocannons will finally regain some vital drawbacks - now you just need to double the alpha on rails and beams ;-)
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5608 - 2012-10-30 12:35:30 UTC
I'm just wondering why the new caldari destroyer is 25% slower than the caracal when they are both running MWDs...

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5609 - 2012-10-30 12:36:38 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
I'm just wondering why the new caldari destroyer is 25% slower than the caracal when they are both running MWDs...

Not the good thread for this, though this is a valid concern.
Alara IonStorm
#5610 - 2012-10-30 12:43:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

I think you forget the old habbit. In the past, sniping was 150-200km range, and then, flight time become a problem, but not before IMO.

I didn't forget, Rokh's the Caldari Sniper BS the Raven doesn't need to be.

Cruise Missiles firing to 120 at the same time it takes a Drake to fire to 75km is fine, that is a good range. Leave the Sniping to the Tier 3 Battlcriusers, Rokh's Apoc's and what have you. People should stop focusing on the Sniper aspect and being blind sighted by the long Flight Time.

The problem isn't so much the missiles as the one terrible ship that fires them.
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#5611 - 2012-10-30 12:44:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Are you making these changes because you are part of a shadowy dev conspiracy to push the agenda of fat cat projectile conglomerates and stretching back to the original BoB BBQ in 1723?
How do you know? Did someone break the blood oath?



It's on EVElopedia.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Alara IonStorm
#5612 - 2012-10-30 12:47:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Why are you nerfing Heavy missiles while Cruise missiles suck?
Everyone knows it, Cruise missiles need help and that's a balance issue we are going to deal with. However we can only do so much at once and since medium weapon systems are so closely tied to the cruisers being rebalanced in Retribution we too this opportunity to bring some improvements to that area. We're going to buff Cruise missiles because leaving them as is would be stupid and everyone here knows it. I will note that these changes do represent a very significant buff to torps, so Caldari battleship pilots are getting some love in Retri, just not all the love that's coming.

Will you be looking into the Raven as a platform? I am surprised you talk so much about Cruise Missiles and never mention the one ship that uses them. It really dose have a terrible overall configuration.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5613 - 2012-10-30 12:58:33 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Alara IonStorm wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Why are you nerfing Heavy missiles while Cruise missiles suck?
Everyone knows it, Cruise missiles need help and that's a balance issue we are going to deal with. However we can only do so much at once and since medium weapon systems are so closely tied to the cruisers being rebalanced in Retribution we too this opportunity to bring some improvements to that area. We're going to buff Cruise missiles because leaving them as is would be stupid and everyone here knows it. I will note that these changes do represent a very significant buff to torps, so Caldari battleship pilots are getting some love in Retri, just not all the love that's coming.

Will you be looking into the Raven as a platform? I am surprised you talk so much about Cruise Missiles and never mention the one ship that uses them.


We're going to rebalancing all of the battleships, including the Raven. Sorry for the confusion.

In case anyone has missed the overall plan from some earlier dev blogs, we're going to rebalance every ship in the game, sprinkled with some new ships here and there, and once we're done with that we're going to start right over again and rebalance every ship once more.

So unless a meteor hits CCP's offices or something you can always use this handy guide when in doubt. Smile

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Alara IonStorm
#5614 - 2012-10-30 13:13:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
CCP Fozzie wrote:

We're going to rebalancing all of the battleships, including the Raven. Sorry for the confusion.

In case anyone has missed the overall plan from some earlier dev blogs, we're going to rebalance every ship in the game, sprinkled with some new ships here and there, and once we're done with that we're going to start right over again and rebalance every ship once more.

So unless a meteor hits CCP's offices or something you can always use this handy guide when in doubt. Smile

Sorry I wasn't clear. I know you are rebalancing every ship but you often mention Cruise Missiles as a broken system currently. It however it doesn't seem that broken when you look at the one hull that uses them the Raven. It is short 1-2 Launchers or a Second Damage Bonus in comparison to its peers, 1 Launcher more on the Drake as well it has a bunch of other poor traits.

So what I meant was will you be looking into the Missiles or the one Hull that uses them primarily? Which one do you think is the more major issue and how will that affect plans for the second Battleship Missile Boat you said you would be converting the Phoon into? Will the Phoon be Cruise Capable and how is it expected to compete with the Raven in that category? Will Battleships be balanced around a six launcher only system while balancing the Drake around a 7th Launcher System?

I know this area of balance is a ways off so I am not trying to demand answers when you're probably not there yet but anything you have would be appreciated.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5615 - 2012-10-30 13:41:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
Alara IonStorm wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

We're going to rebalancing all of the battleships, including the Raven. Sorry for the confusion.

In case anyone has missed the overall plan from some earlier dev blogs, we're going to rebalance every ship in the game, sprinkled with some new ships here and there, and once we're done with that we're going to start right over again and rebalance every ship once more.

So unless a meteor hits CCP's offices or something you can always use this handy guide when in doubt. Smile

Sorry I wasn't clear. I know you are rebalancing every ship but you often mention Cruise Missiles as a broken system currently. It however it doesn't seem that broken when you look at the one hull that uses them the Raven. It is short 1-2 Launchers or a Second Damage Bonus in comparison to its peers, 1 Launcher more on the Drake as well it has a bunch of other poor traits.

So what I meant was will you be looking into the Missiles or the one Hull that uses them primarily? Which one do you think is the more major issue and how will that affect plans for the second Battleship Missile Boat you said you would be converting the Phoon into? Will the Phoon be Cruise Capable and how is it expected to compete with the Raven in that category? Will Battleships be balanced around a six launcher only system while balancing the Drake around a 7th Launcher System?

I know this area of balance is a ways off so I am not trying to demand answers when you're probably not there yet but anything you have would be appreciated.


Raven needs +1 mid -1 high +1 launcher, and a lot more fitting.

Then its good!

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#5616 - 2012-10-30 13:43:38 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hi everyone. Thanks to all of you who participated in testing on Duality this weekend. We're working to get you guys more and more access to the Retri changes so you can play with them more often.

Gonna answer a few questions that have been brought up more recently in the thread. I will mention that the discussion has devolved quite a bit recently and remind everyone that neither name calling nor hyperbole are generally very effective at swaying my opinion.

Why was the range of Fury missiles reduced?
Our goals for T2 ammo is that each ammo type should have a specific and useful role to play, but that the T2 ammo should not completely obsolete the T1 and faction variants. For this proposal we have removed the ship penalties and increased the damage bonus for Fury missiles while reducing their range and increasing the penalties to precision. The goal for all T2 ammo is that it should be the ideal choice in some combat situations and not others, so that you should never be best served by only carrying one type of ammo. Switching to Fury missiles when hostiles are closer/larger and using T1/Faction missiles at longer ranges is normal and expected behavior.
That being said, the exact numbers are of course up for discussion and if the 50% range is something that would put Fury missiles out of whack with their intended purpose and with their relative balance we may change those numbers. Don't expect a return to 90% range though.

Why not have one T2 longrange missile and one T2 shortrange missile with T1 in between for Cruise/heavy/Light missiles?
This is the pattern used by turrets and by short-range missiles, and it was an option we considered for long-range missile launchers. However in the end we didn't see a good reason to homogenize missiles and turrets in that way. As well, since T1 missiles have comparable range to T2 longrange turret ammo, we would have had to nerf T1 missile range further to keep that system balanced and I don't think you folks want that.

Why are you nerfing Heavy missiles while Cruise missiles suck?
Everyone knows it, Cruise missiles need help and that's a balance issue we are going to deal with. However we can only do so much at once and since medium weapon systems are so closely tied to the cruisers being rebalanced in Retribution we too this opportunity to bring some improvements to that area. We're going to buff Cruise missiles because leaving them as is would be stupid and everyone here knows it. I will note that these changes do represent a very significant buff to torps, so Caldari battleship pilots are getting some love in Retri, just not all the love that's coming.

What about projectiles?
There are a number of issues surrounding some Minmatar ships, some connected to the ships, some to the weapons and some to other modules. We've taken a first step by balancing the powergrid on the Hurricane, and the cruiser changes are going a long way towards providing strong competition to some popular Minmatar ships. We've got our eyes on more fixes to come, including tweaks to Tracking Enhancers.

Are you making these changes because you are part of a shadowy dev conspiracy to push the agenda of fat cat projectile conglomerates and stretching back to the original BoB BBQ in 1723?
How do you know? Did someone break the blood oath?


Any plans to make projectiles use cap/neutable?
Also when will you get to module tiercide?

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
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5617 - 2012-10-30 13:48:39 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Raven needs +1 mid -1 high +1 launcher, and a lot more fitting.

Then its good!

There's something called fitting choices. No ship should be able to fit everything it want without problems, and Torps have fitting comparable to LR turrets (LR and SR system fitting are reversed between missiles and turrets).

PG/CPU are meaningless if you don't have any choice to make.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5618 - 2012-10-30 13:57:22 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Any plans to make projectiles use cap/neutable?

Nope.

Harvey James wrote:
Also when will you get to module tiercide?

We're removing ship tiers because the lower tiers were just simply worse instead of different and this would make most ships useless. That problem is a lot less severe with modules (but I won't rule out changes to the balance between different meta levels of modules).

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Mangone
Plan.B
#5619 - 2012-10-30 14:01:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Mangone
Sigras wrote:

My point is that theyre all awful except for the tempest which has alpha strike; its not just the cruise raven that's broken.

Lets be honest, when is the last time you saw a rail mega/rail rokh/beam abaddon/beam apoc in combat?



Oh look at that railrokhs on field and on winning side.

http://kb.the-ink.com/index.php/kill_related/38890/

Or this.. Even more railrokhs. And your alliance is on losing side on that which means your alliance has been fighting against these railrokhs.

http://kb.the-ink.com/index.php/kill_related/38769/


I think the real question is when you have last sawn blaster rokhs on field...


And there is rail mega..

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=17559804


Havent saw beams in while tho..
Kai'rae Saarkus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5620 - 2012-10-30 14:04:42 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Those much maligned tracking enhancers allow blaster boats to extend their range out to scramble or point range. The new Thorax, for example, can hit 18km with optimal + falloff while using Nuetrons, Null, and one tracking enhancer. A TE nerf would hurt blaster boats more then projectile boats - all while trying to deal with a Winmatar problem that is fading naturally anyways.


The TE problem includes how powerful some kiting shield tanked Null blasterboats are. We're not looking at it simply as a Minmatar issue, don't worry.


Can we fix Armour tanking first? Please.

ATM shield tanked Gallente blaster boats are pretty well the only effective way to fly them. We need a lower (than 1600mm) EHP , higher manoeuvrability Armour tanking option.