These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Phoenix and Citadel Missiles

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zomgnomnom
Contra Ratio
GameTheory
#341 - 2014-05-16 13:10:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Zomgnomnom
Burneddi wrote:
progodlegend wrote:

Just don't use phoneix's in a wolf-rayet wormhole.

Now that you're here, did they run this change past you guys? How on earth did none of you object? I voted for you dude god damn it.



Seconded, can you guys get in your skype channel and give Fozzie a mild whack with a rolled up news paper? P

Burneddi seems to have come up with a very good solution to the problems raised by this proposed change. Similar outcome on sub cap blapping but actually lets it hit a non moving capital. It's several Kilomoters long and sitting still.... There is no good reason it should be mitigating damage.

In real life we've been firing missiles out of the atmosphere, thousands of miles into orbit and intercepting a MOVING target a tenth the size ( if not smaller) of a Carrier since the 70's. In game we have warp drive and cloning technology but apparently have somehow forgotten how to math.
Suitonia
Order of the Red Kestrel
#342 - 2014-05-16 13:18:49 UTC
Why not just put a Signature Radius Penalty on the Triage module while it is active, for example,+50% signature. Then Triage Carriers will take full application from the Phoenix, the signature radius penalty won't affect gameplay in any other meaningful way.

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
Maru Sha
The Department of Justice
#343 - 2014-05-16 14:22:46 UTC
How does it effect POS defences?
ZecsMarquis
The Northerners
Pandemic Horde
#344 - 2014-05-16 14:55:41 UTC  |  Edited by: ZecsMarquis
Suitonia wrote:
Why not just put a Signature Radius Penalty on the Triage module while it is active, for example,+50% signature. Then Triage Carriers will take full application from the Phoenix, the signature radius penalty won't affect gameplay in any other meaningful way.


I've posted that proposal mean a-times in this thread. Thanks for the +1
ZecsMarquis
The Northerners
Pandemic Horde
#345 - 2014-05-16 14:58:10 UTC
ZecsMarquis wrote:
Suitonia wrote:
Why not just put a Signature Radius Penalty on the Triage module while it is active, for example,+50% signature. Then Triage Carriers will take full application from the Phoenix, the signature radius penalty won't affect gameplay in any other meaningful way.


I've posted that proposal mean a-times in this thread. Thanks for the +1


Edit function not working today. Many* a-times
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#346 - 2014-05-16 16:14:44 UTC
Pure and simple: This is bad game design.

When a Dev/Developers have to tweak this many peripheral things for ONE SHIP it means bad game design, regardless of the good intentions.

I have been a Phoenix pilot for more years than I can even recount (or care too), and flew it all of one time on a structure shoot many years ago. So while I want to see the ship viable, I also don't want to see this 'Bull(sh*t) in a china shop' approach.

You guys need to postpone this feature change until you come up with a better approach.

And I'm not gonna hold back here: CCP in front of a name does not make a good Developer...

Sorry CCP Fozzie but .... "you don't know Sh*t from Shinola" on this one.


~


Listen to your critics


#PHOENIXRESCUE

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers
#347 - 2014-05-16 20:00:17 UTC
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#348 - 2014-05-16 21:53:29 UTC
ShadowandLight wrote:
why cant i find the downvote button



Can you imagine the number of down votes =P
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#349 - 2014-05-16 21:57:15 UTC
Fozzie, friend,buddy,pal..

Please listen to the players on this one. The nerf is not needed at all. The phoenix already has a hard time hitting the broadside of a barn.

Reverse the nerf, and just either add a damage bonus to all damage types or a higher ROF bonus.

Keep the tank buff and people will be happy.
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#350 - 2014-05-17 01:03:22 UTC
more useless capital changes. keep ******* that chicken, CCP
Rusty Waynne
Rusty Waynne Corporation
#351 - 2014-05-18 06:59:52 UTC
Started training for a Phoenix when it was announced ships were being rebalanced, I hope now after all of this skill training that it would not have been for nothing.

CCP if you don't mind, could you not screw this up please? I'd like my newly obtained Phoenix to not be craptastic on fleet ops.

THX
BiggestT
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#352 - 2014-05-18 08:49:13 UTC  |  Edited by: BiggestT
If anyone is interested, I have graphed the new vs. old phoenix numbers here

To see the full reddit discussion of these graphs, see here (my reddit user name is deepandabear fyi)

It is quite clear that the higher DPS is not substantial enough to overcome sig tanking capitals.
TheMercenaryKing
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#353 - 2014-05-18 13:55:01 UTC
BiggestT wrote:
If anyone is interested, I have graphed the new vs. old phoenix numbers here

To see the full reddit discussion of these graphs, see here (my reddit user name is deepandabear fyi)

It is quite clear that the higher DPS is not substantial enough to overcome sig tanking capitals.


the problem with this s that it doesn't show the targets velocity.
BiggestT
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#354 - 2014-05-18 14:58:19 UTC
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
BiggestT wrote:
If anyone is interested, I have graphed the new vs. old phoenix numbers here

To see the full reddit discussion of these graphs, see here (my reddit user name is deepandabear fyi)

It is quite clear that the higher DPS is not substantial enough to overcome sig tanking capitals.


the problem with this s that it doesn't show the targets velocity.


If you check out the discussion, different velocities are analysed. The short story is, the explosion radius nerf is so significant, that velocity of the target is now far less important. Some one else made a (somewhat dodgy) graph that also shows velocity in that thread fyi.

So basically the missile velocity buff is not that useful. It will only help more when the target has a huge sig and is going 40-60ms (so a pretty marginal amount of cases).
Burneddi
Avanto
Hole Control
#355 - 2014-05-18 15:14:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Burneddi
BiggestT wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
BiggestT wrote:
If anyone is interested, I have graphed the new vs. old phoenix numbers here

To see the full reddit discussion of these graphs, see here (my reddit user name is deepandabear fyi)

It is quite clear that the higher DPS is not substantial enough to overcome sig tanking capitals.


the problem with this s that it doesn't show the targets velocity.


If you check out the discussion, different velocities are analysed. The short story is, the explosion radius nerf is so significant, that velocity of the target is now far less important. Some one else made a (somewhat dodgy) graph that also shows velocity in that thread fyi.

So basically the missile velocity buff is not that useful. It will only help more when the target has a huge sig and is going 40-60ms (so a pretty marginal amount of cases).

Here's an analysis on subcap application I made. I only considered two ships, but the results can be extrapolated quite well. Essentially the Phoenix becomes better at hitting things that would've both speed and signature tanked both the old and the new torpedo, while becoming worse at hitting things that couldn't signature tank the old torp but can signature tank the new one.

I'm yet to see an argument against my suggestion of just buffing the Explosion Velocity by 20% and leaving the Explosion Radius alone. I'm also yet to see any dev replies to any of the problems people have pointed out in this thread, aside from the one on page 12 or something which denied the existence of those problems despite there being quite concrete proof for them.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#356 - 2014-05-18 18:29:36 UTC
Was there any thought to increasing cargohold size, as the rate-of-fire bonus means the Phoenix requires more missiles now?
Orny
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#357 - 2014-05-19 00:04:55 UTC
Sounds good to me
BiggestT
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#358 - 2014-05-19 00:56:00 UTC
Burneddi wrote:
BiggestT wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
BiggestT wrote:
If anyone is interested, I have graphed the new vs. old phoenix numbers here

To see the full reddit discussion of these graphs, see here (my reddit user name is deepandabear fyi)

It is quite clear that the higher DPS is not substantial enough to overcome sig tanking capitals.


the problem with this s that it doesn't show the targets velocity.


If you check out the discussion, different velocities are analysed. The short story is, the explosion radius nerf is so significant, that velocity of the target is now far less important. Some one else made a (somewhat dodgy) graph that also shows velocity in that thread fyi.

So basically the missile velocity buff is not that useful. It will only help more when the target has a huge sig and is going 40-60ms (so a pretty marginal amount of cases).

Here's an analysis on subcap application I made. I only considered two ships, but the results can be extrapolated quite well. Essentially the Phoenix becomes better at hitting things that would've both speed and signature tanked both the old and the new torpedo, while becoming worse at hitting things that couldn't signature tank the old torp but can signature tank the new one.

I'm yet to see an argument against my suggestion of just buffing the Explosion Velocity by 20% and leaving the Explosion Radius alone. I'm also yet to see any dev replies to any of the problems people have pointed out in this thread, aside from the one on page 12 or something which denied the existence of those problems despite there being quite concrete proof for them.



Yeah, both analyses confirm it, citadel torps need some improvement to ER if the new phoenix is to be viable.
Freddie Merrcury
Fukushima Daiichi Electric Power Co.
#359 - 2014-05-19 03:04:24 UTC
I am honestly dumbfounded as to how this "rework" of the Phoenix got greenlighted in the first place.

Why is CCP so goddamn terrified of a capital being able to hit a subcap at all? Since when is a dread being able to do reasonable damage to a webbed and painted battleship "gamebreaking". Also thanks for the worthless tank bonus, having the by far largest tank sure helped the Phoenix before. At this rate, the next round of Phoenix "buff" will take galactic expansion into account when calculating the applied damage of citadel torps.


Incidentally, anyone in the market for a Phoenix by any chance?

I been kicked out of better homes than this.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#360 - 2014-05-19 07:53:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Was there any thought to increasing cargohold size, as the rate-of-fire bonus means the Phoenix requires more missiles now?

How many hours of firepower can it currently hold?
And how many hours will it hold after?

And how does that compare to the other caps.

Also going to restate what I said earlier.
Explosion Velocity should be at least the same as the fastest ship in the intended target class (Caps)
In this case Nid at 90 m/s
Explosion Radius should be no larger than the smallest ship in the intended target class.

There is no reason for a weapons system to not be capable of applying 100% of it's DPS to an unfitted ship in the right target class (Assuming matching skill levels, no implants & no boosts.) Implants, Boosts & Fittings will mitigate enough damage.
This should be true for all classes of missiles. (Pretty sure it's already 99% true for Guns)