These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#2961 - 2012-09-25 16:12:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Aliventi
CCP Fozzie wrote:
[quote=MIrple]
Out of curiosity what exactly are you guys hoping you'd see from a BC balance pass that would change your opinion of this missile proposal? The Drake has a fine set of bonuses so once heavy missiles are balanced I don't expect I'd want to change it very drastically.

If I was to find the time by some miracle to skip ahead and fix another few ships along with this pass it would be the Nighthawk and Cerb, not the Drake.

I would live a mini release balancing the BCs/HACs/Commands ships. Cause Caldari HACs well.... suck. The only thing I think the drake could do with is a ROF bonus instead of a Kinetic damage bonus. Yeah cool and all. But I want more damage types that deal DPS than kinetic. If you do that then the drake should carry around more than just 1 type of ammo like all the other ships in the game.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#2962 - 2012-09-25 16:25:25 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Out of curiosity what exactly are you guys hoping you'd see from a BC balance pass that would change your opinion of this missile proposal? The Drake has a fine set of bonuses so once heavy missiles are balanced I don't expect I'd want to change it very drastically.

If I was to find the time by some miracle to skip ahead and fix another few ships along with this pass it would be the Nighthawk and Cerb, not the Drake.

I would live a mini release balancing the BCs/HACs/Commands ships. Cause Caldari HACs well.... suck. The only thing I think the drake could do with is a ROF bonus instead of a Kinetic damage bonus. Yeah cool and all. But I want more damage types that deal DPS than kinetic. If you do that then the drake should carry around more than just 1 type of ammo like all the other ships in the game.


yes please buff the drake instead of nerfing it, as if we aren't already solving imaginary problems in this thread...

I should buy an Ishtar.
Luscius Uta
#2963 - 2012-09-25 16:39:18 UTC
At last, CCP no longer wants us to play Drakes & Tengus Online :)

But the question remains, should Autocannons be nerfed as well? They are not such all-round weapons like HMLs, but they still have four strong points:

-very easy to fit due to low CPU/PG requirements
-consume no cap
-have great faloff
-can do any type of damage

Now, I don't say we should change any of the above (that would be quick and dirty, but silly way to fix the problem), but we could make some more subtle, unique changes (just so we don't end up with Hurricanes Online instead of Drakes Online). For example, since they are (from science's perspective) the most primitive, 20th century-like weapons in EVE, let's make them overheat faster than other weapons - this could be just enough to stop them being so prevalent in PvP and still won't change them drastically or make them sucky.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#2964 - 2012-09-25 16:49:32 UTC
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
[quote=DR BiCarbonate]*looks at eve-kill stats*

Pirate - 1
Caldari - 3
Amarr - 3
Gallente - 2

Hurricane, Tornado, Maelstrom, Loki, Thrasher, Hound, Rifter, Huginn, Scimitar, Stabber Fleet Issue, Sabre....yeah...Drakes need a nerf. Lol



Its a good think nothing on the drake has changed only the HML has changed so not sure how you are saying the drake has changed in any way.


Oh wow....let's grab your hand....The HML will affect 2 ships more than anything....the Drake and the Tengu, 66% of caldari PVP ships in this list here....If you were to alter projectile turrets...are you not changing the ships that fit them?

Here's why I don't understand...if, in fact, the drake is so OP, why, as an Amarr/Caldari pilot, am I wishing I was minmatar instead?? Why don't these guys crying it's so OP fly drakes instead?? Why is the HML, drake and tengu so op, when 11 of the top 20 ships on this kill board are, in fact, Minmatar?

To truly "balance" this....would a nerf to the Volley of arty's and increasing it's RoF be just as much a work toward's the "balance" they so desire?


Guess what I fly Drakes and I am for this change. If you cant figure out that HAMS are the short ranged versions I cant help you either. If you want to argue that HAMS need to have there fitting requirements changed to make them easier to fit to be more in line with other weapon systems I am for that. To say that a ship is now worthless because of a change to HML is just silly. Yes more people are flying Matari at the moment but there can be more factors into this then just there guns. It comes more down to the fact that they are to easier to fit then other races. Cane is getting a change. Hound and Huginn are missile ships also Scimi doesn't shoot anything. So while yes there are a few missile ships its not Projectiles that are the issue.
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#2965 - 2012-09-25 16:49:54 UTC
Lallante wrote:



I think you are seriously underestimating the effect of TE/TCs working on HAMs. Being able to extend HAM range and effectiveness vs small targets 30 - 60% may well prove to be the new FOTM. I think we should wait and see before buffing HAMs (except maybe fittings, to bring them in line with other close range weapon systems)


Obviously.

The issue then becomes how to fit TE's into the limited low slots of Caldari missile ships. The same applies to TC's -- though the Drake has enough mid slots to at least make this a possibility.

Missiles are the Caldari signature weapon system, yet looking at the situation today we see that once we move beyond rocket frigates, Caldari pilots have only one generally useful T1/T2 missile platform: the Drake. Nor will this improve with this patch, and the concern is that CCP will essentially break the only missile ship Caldari pilots have left.

I don't object to nerfing the Drake but in my opinion CCP needs to hold off on this until they are ready to fix the Caldari ships that are currently broken.
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#2966 - 2012-09-25 17:05:03 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Out of curiosity what exactly are you guys hoping you'd see from a BC balance pass that would change your opinion of this missile proposal? The Drake has a fine set of bonuses so once heavy missiles are balanced I don't expect I'd want to change it very drastically.

Battlecruisers:
- projectiles: 3
- lasers: 3
- drones: 1 and 1/2 (Harbinger)
- hybrids: 4
- missiles: 1 (one!)

At least 1 more missile BC is desperately needed. I think it could be... Cyclone!
Just switch it to 5/5 layout for turrets and missiles, and give it the following bonuses:
7.5% shield boost,
5% projectiles damage,
5% missiles ROF;
and make it possible to fit 5 HAML + 3 autocannons with decent tank.

This way we'll have Drake for long range, being best with HML, and Cyclone for close range brawl. Gladly, "battlecruisers" is not race-specific skill, so caldari players can easily start flying it (ironically, CCP wants to change it, which I disagree - but who cares).
Well it looks very much the same as Typhoon - but it's only at first glance. Typhoon is much more versatile as it is now, and mostly armor-tanked, with all the consequences.
Terik Deatharbingr
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2967 - 2012-09-25 17:12:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Terik Deatharbingr
MIrple wrote:
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:
[quote=DR BiCarbonate]*looks at eve-kill stats*

Pirate - 1
Caldari - 3
Amarr - 3
Gallente - 2

Hurricane, Tornado, Maelstrom, Loki, Thrasher, Hound, Rifter, Huginn, Scimitar, Stabber Fleet Issue, Sabre....yeah...Drakes need a nerf. Lol



Its a good think nothing on the drake has changed only the HML has changed so not sure how you are saying the drake has changed in any way.


Oh wow....let's grab your hand....The HML will affect 2 ships more than anything....the Drake and the Tengu, 66% of caldari PVP ships in this list here....If you were to alter projectile turrets...are you not changing the ships that fit them?

Here's why I don't understand...if, in fact, the drake is so OP, why, as an Amarr/Caldari pilot, am I wishing I was minmatar instead?? Why don't these guys crying it's so OP fly drakes instead?? Why is the HML, drake and tengu so op, when 11 of the top 20 ships on this kill board are, in fact, Minmatar?

To truly "balance" this....would a nerf to the Volley of arty's and increasing it's RoF be just as much a work toward's the "balance" they so desire?


Guess what I fly Drakes and I am for this change. If you cant figure out that HAMS are the short ranged versions I cant help you either. If you want to argue that HAMS need to have there fitting requirements changed to make them easier to fit to be more in line with other weapon systems I am for that. To say that a ship is now worthless because of a change to HML is just silly. Yes more people are flying Matari at the moment but there can be more factors into this then just there guns. It comes more down to the fact that they are to easier to fit then other races. Cane is getting a change. Hound and Huginn are missile ships also Scimi doesn't shoot anything. So while yes there are a few missile ships its not Projectiles that are the issue.



Did I mention anywhere anything about HAM's or short range guns....no. Yes, I do think they need to adjust fitting requirements of both HAM's and Torps.

And while you can argue it's not just the guns....bottom line is when you're a sniper fit, you look for alpha...now you show me any weapon system that rivals that of the Arty? Maelstrom, Tornado Fleets? Beams and Hybrids MAY be able to keep up on dps, but it's because of a faster firing rate....their alpha blows...and have you EVER seen a Cruise alpha ship? lmao

We are talkinng about bringing weapons within range of each other...I don't care....but do it across the board. It's why so many fly minmatar....no cap wasted on guns with a high alpha compared to their gun counter parts....give them all alpha with slower firing rates or lower alpha with faster firing rates, doesn't matter. But when running blobs, gangs, fleets, whatever you want to call them...bottom line is it's all about the alpha. Ganking....all about the alpha....solo pvp...dps/alpha, but seeing as the fights normally aren't that long, does the Amarr really benefit from not having to reload? Only time that is ever taken into consideration is for pos bashing.
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#2968 - 2012-09-25 17:29:42 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I really can't believe noone is noticing the phantom buff thats in TE's...

Its going to change entirely how missile boats are fitted..


We noticed. Caldari Missile boats don't have the low slots to make this matter. For mixed weapon ships like the Cyclone it will be insane, but for Caldari? Not so much.

Here's a better one: What effect do you suppose the TD's affecting missiles change will have on Caldari rocket frigates that are only doing a hundred or so DPS today?
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#2969 - 2012-09-25 17:38:07 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I really can't believe noone is noticing the phantom buff thats in TE's...

Its going to change entirely how missile boats are fitted..

We noticed. Caldari Missile boats don't have the low slots to make this matter. For mixed weapon ships like the Cyclone it will be insane, but for Caldari? Not so much.

How come?
Drake = 4 low slots, Cyclone = 4 low slots.
As for Typhoon - yes, "insane" could be the right word ;-)
Dhuras
The Classy Gentlemans Corporation
Moist.
#2970 - 2012-09-25 17:43:54 UTC
AS is the drake bonuses are fine, it makes it a good noob ship, survivable, but not damagey enough for them to wreck everything in sight. I can see that heavy missiles needed a bit of a debuff but this is over the top. way less range, way less damage, and vulnerable to TD's. heavy missiles will be practically useless except as an ancilliary weapon system as used on cyclones. These nerfs would be okay if they were reduced in severity. make the damage nerf 10% instead of 20 and the range nerf 15-20%.
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2971 - 2012-09-25 18:29:32 UTC
Yayyy! Let's make sure every weapon is "balanced" (aka works the same, is affected by the same modules, has the same range and damage outputs)! Down with diversity and using different strategies!
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2972 - 2012-09-25 18:52:30 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
Down with diversity and using different strategies!


But when that diversity and different strategies mean everyone using Drakes and Tengus...
LtauSTinpoWErs
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2973 - 2012-09-25 19:21:47 UTC
CCP Fozzie,

Can you also adjust the fitting requirements for Torpedo Launchers compared to Cruise Missile Launchers?

As I showed for Heavy Assault Missile Launcher IIs, they are the only close range weapon for cruiser sized ships that have a greater demand on fitting requirements compared to their long range counterpart, the Heavy Missile Launcher II.

It is the same story for battleship sized weapons: All long range weapons (projectile, hybrid, and laser) require greater power grid and CPU compared to their close range sisters. However, Torpedo Launchers require 1838 PG and 88 CPU where Cruise Missile Launchers only need 1313 PG and 66 CPU. Hopefully you will consider fixing this as well. Thank you.
Hirimatsu Yamamoto
AGGRESSIVE ASSET RELOCATION
#2974 - 2012-09-25 20:03:34 UTC
DeBingJos wrote:
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

Tier 3s were in my opinion a bad idea to begin with so no comment.



I love you.


Ditto. ^_^
Athina Alarei
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2975 - 2012-09-25 20:12:02 UTC
Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine?
(Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability)
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#2976 - 2012-09-25 20:28:45 UTC
Athina Alarei wrote:
Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine?
(Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability)


Train now for HAMS and you will be probably better then you were before.
Athina Alarei
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2977 - 2012-09-25 20:30:23 UTC
MIrple wrote:
Athina Alarei wrote:
Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine?
(Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability)


Train now for HAMS and you will be probably better then you were before.


I literally JUST finished HM spec lvl 3 :( lol
Doddy
Excidium.
#2978 - 2012-09-25 20:30:56 UTC
Athina Alarei wrote:
Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine?
(Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability)


You will do a bit less dps at a bit less range but you will be able to fit tracking enhancers/computers if you want to boost effectiveness against smaller stuff and precisions will no longer suck. oh and you will loose less volleys thanks to velocity.
basically you wont be as good against bs (extra volley?) but will be better against frigs. there will be a few missions where the range nerf might hurt you but not many tbh.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#2979 - 2012-09-25 20:41:26 UTC
Athina Alarei wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Athina Alarei wrote:
Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine?
(Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability)


Train now for HAMS and you will be probably better then you were before.


I literally JUST finished HM spec lvl 3 :( lol


This will not come out till Mid December so you have plenty of time to train for HAMS if/when you need to. Think it is only 15 day train for level 5.
Doddy
Excidium.
#2980 - 2012-09-25 20:43:37 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
At last, CCP no longer wants us to play Drakes & Tengus Online :)

But the question remains, should Autocannons be nerfed as well? They are not such all-round weapons like HMLs, but they still have four strong points:

-very easy to fit due to low CPU/PG requirements
-consume no cap
-have great faloff
-can do any type of damage

Now, I don't say we should change any of the above (that would be quick and dirty, but silly way to fix the problem), but we could make some more subtle, unique changes (just so we don't end up with Hurricanes Online instead of Drakes Online). For example, since they are (from science's perspective) the most primitive, 20th century-like weapons in EVE, let's make them overheat faster than other weapons - this could be just enough to stop them being so prevalent in PvP and still won't change them drastically or make them sucky.


To be honest two of those or not that important. Thier great fall off comes at the expense of great optimal. The damage type thing is a red herring, its far less useful than missile damage as its not pure (you are always doing some dps in the wrong damage type) and limited by range. T2 close range and long range only do exp/kin, medium range/high trackng has no em. Sure will never get caught out with totally the wrong damage types like amarr, but its not great.

Consuming no cap is an advantage, but one shared with all missiles.

So really its the fitting and the thing you didn't mention - the tracking, which seems excessively good at times.