These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Change how the specific damage type bonus on missiles works

Author
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#1 - 2014-03-06 18:04:34 UTC
I dont fly a lot of missile ships, so maybe this is just goofy...

Rather than applying the bonus damage on certain hulls to one specific kind of missile, apply that damage bonus to any missile fired.

For instance, You have a Drake with 50% Kinetic Damage bonus using a Thermal missile... It deals 100 thermal damage and the bonus deals 50 Kinetic.

This resolves the pigeonholing of the damage while retaining some of the predictability of the damage type. You will still want to insure you are well covered in Kinetic when facing Caldari (or Explosive when facing Minmatar, and Kin/Therm when facing Gurista), but you don't get to just discount the damage all together when they arent using kinetic missiles.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#2 - 2014-03-06 18:14:57 UTC
Clever. I like it.

+1
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#3 - 2014-03-06 18:15:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Um.... No.

That either buffs all the other non bonused missiles to the same raw damage level as the type with the bonuses, or you now need to implement a nerf to the other missiles specific to that hull in order to bring them back down to the previous level of total damage, at which point they are even less useful then they were previously.

Also issues with missiles that were previously doing pure damage of one type now doing weird mixtures of things like EM/Kinetic.

But frankly, the major issue is that you don't have a reason why kinetic only bonused ships deserve to have that same bonus applied to the raw damage output of the other missile type. This would be a major buff to all kinetic bonused ships without having any drawback, and such a buff needs a lot of support to justify.

-1
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#4 - 2014-03-06 18:46:43 UTC
Its not just Kinetic only bonused ships. Minmatar only bonus Exlosive, and now Gurista will bonus both Thermal and Kinetic.

The problem has been discussed in practically every balance thread touching missiles or the ships that use them. One of the supposed benefits to missiles is the selectability of their damage, and the hulls with these bonuses lose a portion of that flexability. Clearly its not a balance point in how much the damage is allowable, the ships are balanced with the bonused dps in mind.

This would not make these ships more powerful, it would simply keep them from being penalized for not using the magic missile type. There is nothing that requires a counterbalance here.
Sigras
Conglomo
#5 - 2014-03-06 19:07:35 UTC
Im fairly certain the ships have a damage specific bonus intentionally. If CCP meant for them to have a damage bonus across all missile colors wouldnt they have simply given the ship a ROF bonus?
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#6 - 2014-03-06 19:16:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Did someone sneak in bonuses to explosive only damage when I was not looking on Minmatar ships, or do you just mean in that Minmatar ammo frequently deals explosive damage? Serious question.

Edit: Aside from the stealth bombers, which all have bonuses to their racial damage types.

And if you have problems with the bonuses applying only to one damage type, a much cleaner solution is to remove the bonus altogether and replace them with a boring generic 2% per level Rof or damage bonus, not buff all the other missiles to the same level by giving them Frankenstein's Monster style stitched together damage types while removing the pure damage type aspect of missiles on those boats.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-03-06 19:34:57 UTC
I wish my blasters could deal em damage.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

unidenify
Deaf Armada
#8 - 2014-03-06 20:02:57 UTC
I try to find reason why it is bad idea, I can't find good one.


Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#9 - 2014-03-06 20:03:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertrand Butler
Anhenka wrote:
Did someone sneak in bonuses to explosive only damage when I was not looking on Minmatar ships, or do you just mean in that Minmatar ammo frequently deals explosive damage? Serious question.


Talwar.

OP, there are a couple of reasons that you get specific damage bonuses to missile ships. For example, you see a lot of Kinetic missile bonuses in Caldari hulls because Caldari favor Kinetic damage, and because their ships would have to be nerfed somewhere else otherwise.

Remember, damage type bonuses exist to LIMIT a hull. Its completely intentional, and what you are asking for is just to buff a lot of missile ships.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#10 - 2014-03-06 20:09:59 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Did someone sneak in bonuses to explosive only damage when I was not looking on Minmatar ships, or do you just mean in that Minmatar ammo frequently deals explosive damage? Serious question.



I dont have a computer here to check but I am pretty sure the Minmatar missile frigate gets a bonus to just explosive. Like I said, I dont really fly missile ships much, though I love my Damnation--for which this isnt an issue.

Omnathious Deninard wrote:
I wish my blasters could deal em damage.


Me too. Not really the issue under discussion though.

Anhenka wrote:
And if you have problems with the bonuses applying only to one damage type, a much cleaner solution is to remove the bonus altogether and replace them with a boring generic 2% per level Rof or damage bonus, not buff all the other missiles to the same level by giving them Frankenstein's Monster style stitched together damage types while removing the pure damage type aspect of missiles on those boats.


True, but that would allow those ships to focus their damage anywhere they like. Just giving the bonus as a specific type of damage preserves the weakness of the bonus in being of a predictable type, while not completly gimping the damage for using the other ammunitions.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#11 - 2014-03-06 20:16:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Mike Voidstar wrote:

True, but that would allow those ships to focus their damage anywhere they like. Just giving the bonus as a specific type of damage preserves the weakness of the bonus in being of a predictable type, while not completly gimping the damage for using the other ammunitions.


Ok, so how are we nerfing it to compensate?

Because the proposed idea is a major buff to current kinetic bonused ships, assumed to be at an appropriate level of overall power. 25% increase in the damage deal when using the other three races of missiles is a significant buff that would move them above the intended level of power. Regardless of if the extra damage is kinetic, it's still 25% more damage overall.

Oh and I think Butler answered the explosive question: It's the Talwar. The Breacher no longer has an explosive bonus, if it had one. (No clue, I have not flown t1 dessies or frigs at all since long before the reworks and new dessie additions.)
unidenify
Deaf Armada
#12 - 2014-03-06 20:17:27 UTC
Bertrand Butler wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
Did someone sneak in bonuses to explosive only damage when I was not looking on Minmatar ships, or do you just mean in that Minmatar ammo frequently deals explosive damage? Serious question.


Talwar.

OP, there are a couple of reasons that you get specific damage bonuses to missile ships. For example, you see a lot of Kinetic missile bonuses in Caldari hulls because Caldari favor Kinetic damage, and because their ships would have to be nerfed somewhere else otherwise.

Remember, damage type bonuses exist to LIMIT a hull. Its completely intentional, and what you are asking for is just to buff a lot of missile ships.


I disagree

those ship which kinetic bonus exist is designed that max dps it get is through kinetic

for example Phoenix have 11k dps with Meta Launcher and faction torp with 4 Caldari Navy BCS only if it use kinetic

but if it switch to other damage then it reduce to 9k dps.

In compare to other Dreadnought, Moros do 15k dps and Naglfar do 13k dps as well in similar fit

even if we make it so Phoenix get kinetic bonus added to EM/EXP/THERM as extra kinetic damage bonus, it still do less dps than other dreadnought.


(reason I use Dreadnought because they are easy to compare while Drake is unique snowflake on its own)
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#13 - 2014-03-06 20:19:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
unidenify wrote:
~ Phoenix ~
(reason I use Dreadnought because they are easy to compare while Drake is unique snowflake on its own)

Full stop.

Let's never use the Phoenix in any way as a balancing point ever again. It's so bad that the best use for one is a scanning Phoenix for closing or suicide closing WH's.

Edit: Cerb gets a kinetic bonus, if we want to talk about a kinetic bonused ship lets use that, not the abomination that is a Phoenix.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#14 - 2014-03-06 20:21:22 UTC
Q: Can you apply a % kinetic bonus to munitions that don't deliver any kinetic damage to begin with?
Love the idea, though… Mjolnir with just a hint of Scourge. Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#15 - 2014-03-06 20:26:33 UTC
You dont need to nerf it to compensate. The limit is still there, the bonus is still focused where it always was.

It simply returns the flexability the weapon is supposed to have without allowing the pilot to focus the DPS where he wants it.

Caldari are only considered Kinetic focused because of that bonus. Nothing else points to it and nothing in what I suggest changes that.

This is not a huge buff to these hulls. They are already capable of the dps, and this does not change that. It does not even change the balance in how you set up a tank if you know you will be facing them.

It removes an arbitrary penalty for daring to use one of the supposed benefits of the weapon, without removing the downside of that penalty at all.

Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#16 - 2014-03-06 20:27:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertrand Butler
Cerberus is a good example indeed. Lets compare it to the Sacriledge, which is a -1 launcher cerberus with extra tank, less range and the ability to use all damage types equally.

How could a Cerberus remain balanced as is if the kinetic damage limit was removed?

Quote:
You dont need to nerf it to compensate. The limit is still there, the bonus is still focused where it always was.


You don't get it, do you? Selectable damage is a huge buff, and ALL missile ships already have it (you just do less damage if you choose another type in some hulls). The damage type bonuses exist to focus a hull while limiting its versatility. As should be. In other words, the hulls that have damage type bonuses ARE ALREADY PRE-BUFFED to address that limitation.
unidenify
Deaf Armada
#17 - 2014-03-06 20:33:44 UTC
about Cerberus, I check and it turn out that Cerberus do get a lot of dps with kinetic just from quick glare over basic fit over other HAC.

so, idk now if it is good idea or not

there are a few ships that need to be addressed so maybe need to be focus each instead this idea?
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#18 - 2014-03-06 20:38:39 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

It removes an penalty.


Let's make this as simple as possible.

A ship in balanced. The Cerberus is balanced.
I then remove a penalty from the Cerb that limited it's combat flexibility.
Is the ship still balanced, now that it is more flexible and adaptable in combat than it was in it's already balanced state?

The answer is no.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#19 - 2014-03-06 20:39:40 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Q: Can you apply a % kinetic bonus to munitions that don't deliver any kinetic damage to begin with?
Love the idea, though… Mjolnir with just a hint of Scourge. Lol


You mean in terms of scifi tech? Sure.

Caldari are all about efficiency. Thier launcher systems use technology usally applied in the accelerator mechanisms of hybrids to create a compression field on fuel storage to save space. This field has the happy side effect of making the missile frame much denser upon impact, imparting extra kinetic energy along with the warhead's payload.

The Minmatar attempted to copy this design, but their ship engineering didnt have the capability to create the extremely controlled currents required to keep the field stable. The result is that upon impact the field suddenly destabilizes resulting in a complete cookoff of the remaining fuel and a substancial explosion at the point of impact as well as the damage caused by the warhead.

The Gurista have had more sucess in this field, and while their alterations to the ship do not allow for the precision of the unaltered Caldari power systems, the result is a more focused blast at the point of impact, delivering both Kinetic and Thermal damage, though only about half of each.

Fluff is easy, even if its some of the funnest part.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#20 - 2014-03-06 20:47:21 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

It removes an penalty.


Let's make this as simple as possible.

A ship in balanced. The Cerberus is balanced.
I then remove a penalty from the Cerb that limited it's combat flexibility.
Is the ship still balanced, now that it is more flexible and adaptable in combat than it was in it's already balanced state?

The answer is no.


The question is more complex than that.

If I use one ammo type that is in all ways identical to the other three except it does 50% more damage, is the ship balanced at that level of performance. Obviously the answer is yes or we would all be singing the praises of our kinetic overlords.

If I then use a different ammo that is in all ways identical to the others, but does not do the 50% extra, am I still performing at that balanced level? Probably not.

The idea was to limit flexability of damage. This still does that.
123Next pageLast page