These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

The Missile Problem
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#61 - 2013-12-06 21:46:53 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Dr Sraggles wrote:
Light missiles are perfectly healthy (if maybe even need a range nerf) because they apply their damage well. All those ships (with one notable exception) use the Light Missile Launcher II or Rocket Launcher II which are still effective for their classes (frigs/dessies).



Now i don't want to live in perfectly healthy game in that case. Because they are worst thing for small scale pvp that could ever happen. They are blantly op and everyone who does a bit of small scale pvp knows this.

Thanks, that's why i don't want "perfectly healthy" balance for medium missiles. I rather keep them "sick".


Dafuq?
Naomi Anthar
#62 - 2013-12-06 21:56:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Anthar
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Dr Sraggles wrote:
Light missiles are perfectly healthy (if maybe even need a range nerf) because they apply their damage well. All those ships (with one notable exception) use the Light Missile Launcher II or Rocket Launcher II which are still effective for their classes (frigs/dessies).



Now i don't want to live in perfectly healthy game in that case. Because they are worst thing for small scale pvp that could ever happen. They are blantly op and everyone who does a bit of small scale pvp knows this.

Thanks, that's why i don't want "perfectly healthy" balance for medium missiles. I rather keep them "sick".


Dafuq?


Are you ... yhmmm slow on mind ? No offence by it's easy to understand what i said. Me and many others(yeah not just me)... we don't want HM's to be what light missiles are in small weapons category. I rather keep things broken than break it even more by going into such disgusting level of overbuff.

It's not like HAMs are **** - they are not , rapids are also not bad - despite drawback of long reload its single weapon system capable of firing "smaller" ammunition hence better damage projection. HM's could use VERY SMALL buff. Damage one not application. (because long range weapon systems are supposed to "track" worse - in case of missiles worse explosion stats etc).
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2013-12-06 22:02:26 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Now i don't want to live in perfectly healthy game in that case. Because they are worst thing for small scale pvp that could ever happen. They are blantly op and everyone who does a bit of small scale pvp knows this.

Thanks, that's why i don't want "perfectly healthy" balance for medium missiles. I rather keep them "sick".

Dafuq?

LOL, when missiles are in their healthy state l33t turret pilots become terrified so much they refuse to undock and won't stop crying on forums how missiles are OP until CCP finally cripples them with a mace. Dunno why heavy missiles comes to mind.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#64 - 2013-12-06 22:06:47 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Dr Sraggles wrote:
Light missiles are perfectly healthy (if maybe even need a range nerf) because they apply their damage well. All those ships (with one notable exception) use the Light Missile Launcher II or Rocket Launcher II which are still effective for their classes (frigs/dessies).



Now i don't want to live in perfectly healthy game in that case. Because they are worst thing for small scale pvp that could ever happen. They are blantly op and everyone who does a bit of small scale pvp knows this.

Thanks, that's why i don't want "perfectly healthy" balance for medium missiles. I rather keep them "sick".


Dafuq?


Are you ... yhmmm slow on mind ? No offence by it's easy to understand what i said. Me and many others(yeah not just me)... we don't want HM's to be what light missiles are in small weapons category. I rather keep things broken than break it even more by going into such disgusting level of overbuff.

It's not like HAMs are **** - they are not , rapids are also not bad - despite drawback of long reload its single weapon system capable of firing "smaller" ammunition hence better damage projection. HM's could use VERY SMALL buff. Damage one not application. (because long range weapon systems are supposed to "track" worse - in case of missiles worse explosion stats etc).

Have you met Bouh from the RLML thread? His spelling and grammar are better but his ideas are just as stupid as yours.
If you stepped outside of your turrets and went to the other side of the tracks where missiles live and gave them a try you wouldn't be saying such obviously stupid things.
The only people that I have seen, in over 4 pages here and over 130 pages in the RLML thread, that object to a complete missile rework are the ones that have never had to try and make missiles work while CCP40sec and CCPFizzle are kicking you in the teeth.
Edit: Go take a torp BS, not a Stealth Bomber, and try to kill something smaller than a POS with torps. Go ahead. Take cruise missiles and try and engage something smaller than a BS. You're going to say it's great since cruise missiles got their super-OP mega buff that made all the poor little downtrodden turret users cry into their blankies at night but we'll see how long you survive against that ship that doesn't have to sacrifice it's tank to kill you since you probably have next to no tank if you're shooting something smaller than the Death Star.
Naomi Anthar
#65 - 2013-12-06 22:18:57 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Dr Sraggles wrote:
Light missiles are perfectly healthy (if maybe even need a range nerf) because they apply their damage well. All those ships (with one notable exception) use the Light Missile Launcher II or Rocket Launcher II which are still effective for their classes (frigs/dessies).



Now i don't want to live in perfectly healthy game in that case. Because they are worst thing for small scale pvp that could ever happen. They are blantly op and everyone who does a bit of small scale pvp knows this.

Thanks, that's why i don't want "perfectly healthy" balance for medium missiles. I rather keep them "sick".


Dafuq?


Are you ... yhmmm slow on mind ? No offence by it's easy to understand what i said. Me and many others(yeah not just me)... we don't want HM's to be what light missiles are in small weapons category. I rather keep things broken than break it even more by going into such disgusting level of overbuff.

It's not like HAMs are **** - they are not , rapids are also not bad - despite drawback of long reload its single weapon system capable of firing "smaller" ammunition hence better damage projection. HM's could use VERY SMALL buff. Damage one not application. (because long range weapon systems are supposed to "track" worse - in case of missiles worse explosion stats etc).

Have you met Bouh from the RLML thread? His spelling and grammar are better but his ideas are just as stupid as yours.
If you stepped outside of your turrets and went to the other side of the tracks where missiles live and gave them a try you wouldn't be saying such obviously stupid things.
The only people that I have seen, in over 4 pages here and over 130 pages in the RLML thread, that object to a complete missile rework are the ones that have never had to try and make missiles work while CCP40sec and CCPFizzle are kicking you in the teeth.
Edit: Go take a torp BS, not a Stealth Bomber, and try to kill something smaller than a POS with torps. Go ahead. Take cruise missiles and try and engage something smaller than a BS. You're going to say it's great since cruise missiles got their super-OP mega buff that made all the poor little downtrodden turret users cry into their blankies at night but we'll see how long you survive against that ship that doesn't have to sacrifice it's tank to kill you since you probably have next to no tank if you're shooting something smaller than the Death Star.


I know missiles well - my brother is FULL CALDARI TRAINED in missiles, nothing else.
So yeah i know how they work from frigate to battleship included.
You do understand also that not everyone is native English speaker. You also do understand EVERYTHING i said here.
You just don't agree so you went with terrible argument , probably worst argument you can use on international forum. The poor english.
Now i know it's not that bad. I often don't pay much attention to grammar or interpunction. Maybe i should do this more. But disgusting person like you, who can only come up with such ****** arguments, are not someone who i will talk to again.

Now i'm so sorry, i'm so sorry that i think that missiles are not in need of buffs.

But that is my friggin right to give my own feedback. You don't like it ? Ok don't like it then. But try to talk with arguments, not telling me that i'm not entitled to my own oppinion, just because i don't edit and triple check my posts for grammar mistakes etc. You just proved and many others that what i'm saying is EASY to understand.

So screw you dude.

CCP thanks for good missile balance we got now . Just nerf light missiles and we are set.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#66 - 2013-12-06 22:30:58 UTC
Actually the spelling/grammar comment was 1 sentence out of that entire post.
And of course you're entitled to your own opinion, but it's wrong. Missiles don't work nearly as well as you think they do, and your asking for a light missile nerf to balance it all out clearly shows that.
But to echo your own sentiments, screw you too. Big smile
Ronny Hugo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2013-12-06 23:46:15 UTC
I think that at some point we just have to forget about balancing the stats, and instead just balance the costs. So the best weapons and ships are more expensive than the worse weapons and ships. Having a 1 to 1 kill/death ratio against another alliance is good if you manage it with cheaper ships (you can also more easily replace those ships, so at least newbies would be thrown in the cheaper ships).
The races will never have equal ships, so stop trying, just make each ship in each weight-class best at something in its weight-class.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#68 - 2013-12-06 23:54:57 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:

CCP thanks for good missile balance we got now . Just nerf light missiles and we are set.


Rofl...
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#69 - 2013-12-07 06:38:12 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Just nerf light missiles and we are set.

show us on the doll , where light missiles touched ur hull

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

Void Weaver
R-isk-Y
#70 - 2013-12-07 14:14:43 UTC
Quote:
I know missiles well - my brother is FULL CALDARI TRAINED in missiles, nothing else.
So yeah i know how they work from frigate to battleship included.
You do understand also that not everyone is native English speaker. You also do understand EVERYTHING i said here.
You just don't agree so you went with terrible argument , probably worst argument you can use on international forum. The poor english.
Now i know it's not that bad. I often don't pay much attention to grammar or interpunction. Maybe i should do this more. But disgusting person like you, who can only come up with such ****** arguments, are not someone who i will talk to again.

Now i'm so sorry, i'm so sorry that i think that missiles are not in need of buffs.

But that is my friggin right to give my own feedback. You don't like it ? Ok don't like it then. But try to talk with arguments, not telling me that i'm not entitled to my own oppinion, just because i don't edit and triple check my posts for grammar mistakes etc. You just proved and many others that what i'm saying is EASY to understand.

So screw you dude.

CCP thanks for good missile balance we got now . Just nerf light missiles and we are set.


Ok Naomi I think you need to relax a little... I don't feel you are contributing to this thread with anything useful... I don't really care what your brother does or doesn't do, EVE is complex enough that you cannot gain a well formed idea about a particular part of the game without trying it yourself.

As an example I would not go to a "Lasers Need a Change" thread and say "LASERS ARE FINE STUPID PPL", simply because I have no experience with them.

Give your feedback but don't freak out when we counter it.

Thats All im going to say to you.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#71 - 2013-12-07 16:56:44 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
So screw you dude.

Today's thread brought to you by the letters "F" and "U". Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#72 - 2013-12-07 22:29:03 UTC
Void Weaver wrote:
Quote:
I know missiles well - my brother is FULL CALDARI TRAINED in missiles, nothing else.
So yeah i know how they work from frigate to battleship included.
You do understand also that not everyone is native English speaker. You also do understand EVERYTHING i said here.
You just don't agree so you went with terrible argument , probably worst argument you can use on international forum. The poor english.
Now i know it's not that bad. I often don't pay much attention to grammar or interpunction. Maybe i should do this more. But disgusting person like you, who can only come up with such ****** arguments, are not someone who i will talk to again.

Now i'm so sorry, i'm so sorry that i think that missiles are not in need of buffs.

But that is my friggin right to give my own feedback. You don't like it ? Ok don't like it then. But try to talk with arguments, not telling me that i'm not entitled to my own oppinion, just because i don't edit and triple check my posts for grammar mistakes etc. You just proved and many others that what i'm saying is EASY to understand.

So screw you dude.

CCP thanks for good missile balance we got now . Just nerf light missiles and we are set.


Ok Naomi I think you need to relax a little... I don't feel you are contributing to this thread with anything useful... I don't really care what your brother does or doesn't do, EVE is complex enough that you cannot gain a well formed idea about a particular part of the game without trying it yourself.

As an example I would not go to a "Lasers Need a Change" thread and say "LASERS ARE FINE STUPID PPL", simply because I have no experience with them.

Give your feedback but don't freak out when we counter it.

Thats All im going to say to you.


Much nicer response than that post deserved.
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#73 - 2013-12-07 22:31:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Walkuris
Void Weaver wrote:
Quote:
I know missiles well - my brother is FULL CALDARI TRAINED in missiles, nothing else.
So yeah i know how they work from frigate to battleship included.
You do understand also that not everyone is native English speaker. You also do understand EVERYTHING i said here.
You just don't agree so you went with terrible argument , probably worst argument you can use on international forum. The poor english.
Now i know it's not that bad. I often don't pay much attention to grammar or interpunction. Maybe i should do this more. But disgusting person like you, who can only come up with such ****** arguments, are not someone who i will talk to again.

Now i'm so sorry, i'm so sorry that i think that missiles are not in need of buffs.

But that is my friggin right to give my own feedback. You don't like it ? Ok don't like it then. But try to talk with arguments, not telling me that i'm not entitled to my own oppinion, just because i don't edit and triple check my posts for grammar mistakes etc. You just proved and many others that what i'm saying is EASY to understand.

So screw you dude.

CCP thanks for good missile balance we got now . Just nerf light missiles and we are set.


Ok Naomi I think you need to relax a little... I don't feel you are contributing to this thread with anything useful... I don't really care what your brother does or doesn't do, EVE is complex enough that you cannot gain a well formed idea about a particular part of the game without trying it yourself.

As an example I would not go to a "Lasers Need a Change" thread and say "LASERS ARE FINE STUPID PPL", simply because I have no experience with them.

Give your feedback but don't freak out when we counter it.

Thats All im going to say to you.


Non sense, not having tried something in EvE are absolute prerequisites on this forum. Don't get us all edited out for having experience with what we are talking about. And speaking of lasers (which I swear I don't use) they are fine. So fine in fact, they make ALL Amarr ships good Edit:Wait OP (sorry I'm new at this).. Especially because they don't neeed ammo. Can we make that a thing now plz? LAsers OP they don't use ammo! P.S. Sorry really having the ***** and giggles now. :O
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#74 - 2013-12-07 22:46:37 UTC
On a serious note. There are five threads concerning the missile problem(s) that I know of at the moment.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3823191#post3823191 Mine, about SP.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=294382&find=unread Ransu Asanari multifaceted clusterguck discussion.

The RlML thread in features and ideas.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=301515 Missile debate in ships and modules DHB Wildcat.

This thread.

Figured I'd summarize for clarity. Also my thread is dying and I thought it was interesting :( wehhhh..
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#75 - 2013-12-07 22:58:03 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:


CCP thanks for good missile balance we got now . Just nerf light missiles and we are set.


yeah because 64dps(with max skills and only when using kinetic damage) condor is too stronk Roll; or maybe the person flying it is just better than you.

I've been killed many times by light missiles and when it happens I hold my hands up and say the better pilot won; I had more dps, and better tank but I just couldn't get them in scram range, and I couldn't slingshot out of disruptor range; it had nothing to do with the missiles dps or damage application it was all about the tactics, and the other person was better than me. Learn from your mistake and move on. If you must moan about it don't be offended when someone calls you out for the stupidity of your statements.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#76 - 2013-12-08 00:16:37 UTC
We really need to start learning to stop feeding the trolls… The problems with all missiles can be summarized in four short points:

• Phoenix dreadnought
• Heavy missiles and drakes
• Cruise missiles and torpedoes
• Rapid light missile launchers

The Phoenix dreadnought, well - it just sucks (even the CSM supported a thread for reimbursement the other day). The HML adjustment nerfed damage, range and damage application (it only needed a the range nerf and a slight damage adjustment). Cruise missiles became so OP with their rebalance than almost no one uses torpedoes now. And finally, rapid launchers. In addition to transitioning from a solo PvP to blob weapon, there was a 23% overall damage nerf (so now you have a weapon that's completely useless).

• Fix the Phoenix once and for all; no more of this gradual change crap. Good grief, it's been how many years now? Embarrassing doesn't even begin to describe it.
• Reinstate the damage application for HMLs and un-nerf the Drakes.
• Dial back the range on cruise missiles and buff the damage for torpedoes.
• Revert back to the original rapid light launchers and first iteration of rapid heavy launchers.

CCP-Fall doesn't know what he's doing.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#77 - 2013-12-08 00:45:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Zvaarian the Red
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
We really need to start learning to stop feeding the trolls… The problems with all missiles can be summarized in four short points:

• Phoenix dreadnought
• Heavy missiles and drakes
• Cruise missiles and torpedoes
• Rapid light missile launchers

The Phoenix dreadnought, well - it just sucks (even the CSM supported a thread for reimbursement the other day). The HML adjustment nerfed damage, range and damage application (it only needed a the range nerf and a slight damage adjustment). Cruise missiles became so OP with their rebalance than almost no one uses torpedoes now. And finally, rapid launchers. In addition to transitioning from a solo PvP to blob weapon, there was a 23% overall damage nerf (so now you have a weapon that's completely useless).

• Fix the Phoenix once and for all; no more of this gradual change crap. Good grief, it's been how many years now? Embarrassing doesn't even begin to describe it.
• Reinstate the damage application for HMLs and un-nerf the Drakes.
• Dial back the range on cruise missiles and buff the damage for torpedoes.
• Revert back to the original rapid light launchers and first iteration of rapid heavy launchers.

CCP-Fall doesn't know what he's doing.


Cruise missiles aren't that bad. They are quite effective against other battleships and have crazy range. Not saying they couldn't use a little work (and they have fundamental issues in PVP), but I'd be ecstatic if I woke up tomorrow and all the other missiles you listed suddenly measured up to cruise missiles.

Edit: Just realized you are suggesting a nerf to cruise missiles. WTF? People don't use torps because they are trash.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#78 - 2013-12-08 01:04:47 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Cruise missiles aren't that bad. They are quite effective against other battleships and have crazy range. Not saying they couldn't use a little work (and they have fundamental issues in PVP), but I'd be ecstatic if I woke up tomorrow and all the other missiles you listed suddenly measured up to cruise missiles.

Edit: Just realized you are suggesting a nerf to cruise missiles. WTF? People don't use torps because they are trash.

What I suggested was to dial back the range with cruise missiles, ie: reduce flight time by maybe 25% (keep velocity). The fact that they can hit out to over 350km when you can only target to 250km doesn't seem problematic? And as for torpedoes, I suggested a damage buff. Something like a straight 10-15% damage increase.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#79 - 2013-12-08 01:15:44 UTC  |  Edited by: zbaaca
torp are one of most closest range weapon . it just needs buff like ~20+% range and will become usefull

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#80 - 2013-12-08 02:01:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Fourteen Maken
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Cruise missiles aren't that bad. They are quite effective against other battleships and have crazy range. Not saying they couldn't use a little work (and they have fundamental issues in PVP), but I'd be ecstatic if I woke up tomorrow and all the other missiles you listed suddenly measured up to cruise missiles.

Edit: Just realized you are suggesting a nerf to cruise missiles. WTF? People don't use torps because they are trash.

What I suggested was to dial back the range with cruise missiles, ie: reduce flight time by maybe 25% (keep velocity). The fact that they can hit out to over 350km when you can only target to 250km doesn't seem problematic? And as for torpedoes, I suggested a damage buff. Something like a straight 10-15% damage increase.


The fact Incursion fleets looking for optimal efficiency don't want cruise missile pilots, suggests they are not OP. They are rarely used outside of lvl4 mission running so I don't see any evidence for them being OP. If your sitting at long range it's much better to have high alpha instant dps turrets, if people are using Cruise over Torps it has more to do with the poor damage application of torpedo's than range.