Player Features and Ideas Discussion

oh god , your butt should realy get a treatment , all this strained whining has a negative effect on it , pls stop makeing up bs in all your posts

As someone who used to use heavy missiles and now don't I do have some sympathy with the people who don't want their TE's nerfed. Just to remind you though, when the Heavy Missile Thread was announced we ended up with 300+ pages of mostly whine telling ccp that it was a terrible idea, they went ahead and did it anyway.

However there was a small number of posts in that thread where people said 'this is not a good idea, 20% reduction in damage is too high, 10% is fairer for x,y,z reason etc. CCP listened and changed the proposed nerf from 20% to 10%.

That's what I am not seeing too much of in this thread. Before I get flamed, all I am saying is that if you don't like the nerf, instead of saying this is terribad propose something else, come up with another way of balancing the module. Only a few posts in this thread have done this (and I've read every post in the 40+ pages so far).

I don't approve of all of the nerfs and I don't like this obsession with balance/homogenisation, but I won't be so churlish as to say that CCP do what they like and don't listen to the player base, don't forget that the missile dps nerf was 10% in the end, and AAR now use nanite paste instead of cap as they were initially proposed. These changes are player suggestions taken up by the team, so they do listen. Make your case and you might get listened too as well.

ok, so you guys are nerfing TEs.. fine with me...
But please dont Forget to pimp my Vargur, some extra Powergrid would be nice, so i can fit Artys.
If u reall gona nerf our Falloff, then please make sure we can fit Artys, and Vargur has such a low powergrid......

In my opinion that's a very harsh nerf taking away most of the only advantage Minmatar has left these days.

And if Minnie were arguably overpowered in Frig, Cruiser and Battlecruiser departments a year ago, this is not the case now. After the rebalancing sweep for those classes, Minmatar are already nearing the bottom.

Nerfing TE without any compensation will probably push Minmatar rock bottom. And yes, I am aware TE are used by other weapon systems than projectiles too, but none rely on them as much.

And no, I don't rage on nerfing the only race I fly, I have Specialization at IV for every weapon system and all ship classes except Caldari Battleship (which I'm training now) at V.

Hi Naomi,

I see you're still posting this 100 times a day. Keep it up man, if you reach 100.000 forum posts saying the same thing, you'll win EVE. And you're damn near.

On a different note, kinda sad to see those worms finally finished eating what was left of your brain.

Indeed, no wonder. They only pick on those who have so little to begin with that even defending against them is nearly impossible.

I think your grid is a little off. The one you have labeled TC with Falloff script should be 30/00/15. But still your point is well illustrated.

However, you could hold your breath. They did partially cave to the player response in the HM damage nerf. They did recognize some problems and sent back for internal testing the proposed TC/TE/TD changes affecting missiles. Notice these were adjustments and reevaluations of the extent of the change they have determined is in the game's best interest, not a total abandonment of their plans. So there was a HM damage nerf. The "tracking" mod changes for missiles are still coming. And here I could easily see a 30%, 25%, or even 20% change on the range nerfs to TE optimal and falloff instead of the initially presented 33% nerf to range effects.

On eve-kill Minmatar ships for March (and we are at the end of the month) currently occupy 11.5 of the top 20. Some of that is missile minny ships. And, some of those minny turret ships are often fit with arty for the alpha and not autos for the kiting. But even there the TE is sitting behind both providing a method of getting mobility and range.

Basically there need to be some buffs to range for ships that armor tank. If you are a brick you need a range option to combat mobility endowed ships. Thus Amarr appears to be urged through lack of midslots into brick armor tanking. Of course it is difficult to fit beams and an armor tank due to grid. This is partially why of all the short range guns pulse lasers have to longest optimal. This is also another reason why CCP needs to be very careful with the tracking mod changes for missiles. HAMs and Torps, and to a lesser extent rockets could end up with great range and with the typical shield tanks once again provide an obvious and excellent kiting platform that currently ac/minny ships provide.

So, yes to TE nerf. Maybe toned down from the current proposal.

Yes to tracking mod effects on missiles. But only if base range on short range missiles get a nerf, and if the effects on range are more moderate with missiles than they are with turrets. Also, base effects on turrets of TDs needs a simultaneous nerf, while the specialized ships need a slight buff. And to finish with tracking mods there needs to be an examination of whether these effects should all be contained in one module or a pair of modules. This is so especially in the case of TDs once they start to affect all turrets and launchers, lest they become a new multispec ecm of doom module.

Simultaneously, CCP needs to think about the turrets themselves. Beams need a slight optimal buff, maybe. They have the same optimals as arty, but nowhere near the falloff. One could even reduce the damage on them if Tachyons were to become the next fotm. And I still think the alpha on arty was slightly overdone. Imo they could gain a little cycle speed and dps in exchange for losing a little of their current volley damage.

edit - Dana v Naomi. Battle of the posting alts.

Problem is here that the effect from TEs overall is very varied - I don't really have time to find examples for a wide variety of cases and anyone can post specific examples to support their view on this and ignore that just as many examples exist that don't. So a straight forward compromise isn't as easy here as it is with say the HML damage/range.

For instance the shield moros fit I like to use at the range its mostly used (yes this is PVE use) - I can get away with using antimatter currently and hitting for ~9600dps with this change* it will go from hitting 9600dps at that range to 7160dps which is a pretty big change and require me to be constantly swapping between lead and antimatter ammo to keep my damage effective.


*Its at the edge of effective range for AM, lead gives 10K dps at the same range but requires constant swapping as stuff gets closer so not worth using it for the very small damge decrease.

This is probably a good nerf to TE, but there is one little thing buggering me with the TC: Why is there a graphical effect showing people if I use one?

Please, remove that stupid effect.

Hi Fozie!! Wow - I though this thread was dead already. Please can you expand! I know you've already said that TEs are Broken - Can you tell me what the symptoms are? What are we looking to see changed - or what are we wanting this to address. Are we looking to make the long range weapons more predominant - are we looking to reduce combat ranges (which is what I think will happen) - Are we looking to stimulate the economy as more ships will dies because they are in point range - Or is this actually the last part of balancing the Minmatar down?

Please dude - let me know what the thinking is. I already hurt after the drones and the 'Caine - I understood the Caine nerf but the drones have me confused and resentful. It's easier to swallow when you know why. But the TE issue. That really does come right out of the blue for me!