These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Lithorn
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3881 - 2012-10-01 22:06:45 UTC
There is one thing in the missile category that has been the running joke of Eve in my view for as long as I have been playing, that is auto targeting missiles. The performance of those have been disappointing or at best just barely functional for longer than I have been playing Eve. It's one of those skills that I ask myself "Why did I even bother to buy this skill book.."

Is there any plans to update them and make them relevant to Eve players?
Issues I remember were:
-- Missiles mindlessly auto-target large structures such as stations, asteroids, probably small animals (SQUIRREL!), anything but what they should be targeting.
-- Damage is very poor.

I saw a CCP developer announce he was working on them, I was hopeful after reading the annoucement but my hopes were crushed after I read that he was only working on the naming of them. Changes/improvements are commendable but that one was very underwhelming.

The removal of the penalties to the t2 missiles (I hope that still happens) is great news, those were not helpful to anyone.
I look forward to being able to use precision and javelin type missiles without having my speed cut in half. Ugh
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#3882 - 2012-10-01 22:19:52 UTC
Lithorn wrote:
There is one thing in the missile category that has been the running joke of Eve in my view for as long as I have been playing, that is auto targeting missiles. The performance of those have been disappointing or at best just barely functional for longer than I have been playing Eve. It's one of those skills that I ask myself "Why did I even bother to buy this skill book.."

Is there any plans to update them and make them relevant to Eve players?
Issues I remember were:
-- Missiles mindlessly auto-target large structures such as stations, asteroids, probably small animals (SQUIRREL!), anything but what they should be targeting.
-- Damage is very poor.

I saw a CCP developer announce he was working on them, I was hopeful after reading the annoucement but my hopes were crushed after I read that he was only working on the naming of them. Changes/improvements are commendable but that one was very underwhelming.

The removal of the penalties to the t2 missiles (I hope that still happens) is great news, those were not helpful to anyone.
I look forward to being able to use precision and javelin type missiles without having my speed cut in half. Ugh



The only problems with FOFs is that they shoot drones and that there aren't any rockets/hams/torps. If you disagree you are wrong.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#3883 - 2012-10-01 22:25:12 UTC
the only problem with FoFs is that they shoot random crap instead of actual hostiles half of the time.

I should buy an Ishtar.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3884 - 2012-10-01 22:31:12 UTC
Spc One wrote:

Bouh Revetoile wrote:


People cry about the falcon because it's the only effective EWAR ship. I.

You have to know that falcon has no tank, only ewar.

And yet each week you see some thread crying against the falcon. People don't cry about arazu, because damp are useless, and they don't cry about ^pilgrim, because TD are useless against missiles ; and rapier ? Well, TP are an offensive tool you can replace by a TC, so...

Fact are that ewar is not so terrible that people says. EWAR need you to dictate range or tracking to be used (ECM is useless on anything but specialized ships, and need faith in God, so a bit pointless to debate here). Damp, with the range of destroyers and above, you need at least two of them AND speed supremacy, what most ship cannot afford, and still subject to be pinned down and killed, or drones. TD ? More effective : "only" missiles ship are immune, but you still need speed supremacy, and you still are "very" vulnerable to anything who catch you.

Basicaly, ewar is kiters defence, but it's an all or nothing, exactly like blaster boat are an all or nothing : a good kiter, and you are dead.

That is ewar used offensively. That is effective, but that should be considering the risks you take for using such a tactic. EWAR could be used defensively too, if it wasn't so nerfed already.

BTW, even if affecting missiles, TD would not be better than ECM on most ships, because that would not prevent the missiles to damage you. And even if it was the case (frigate with larger missiles), then, that would not be different from turret ships, which don't even need TD to be unable to hit frigates.

EWAR is still said to be an advantage of armor tank versus shield tank, but that is a fallacy. Armor ships would use EWAR if it wa worth using it.
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
#3885 - 2012-10-01 22:49:41 UTC
My only problem is that this seems to make rockets even less useful. My poor Vengeance...

I mean seriously. Who was saying Rage rockets were overpowered?

But I'm not CCP Soundwave, so what do I know?
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#3886 - 2012-10-01 22:52:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
Jarin Arenos wrote:
My only problem is that this seems to make rockets even less useful. My poor Vengeance...

I mean seriously. Who was saying Rage rockets were overpowered?

Get something with turrets, it's far better and more superior.
Sigras
Conglomo
#3887 - 2012-10-01 22:54:14 UTC
Spc One wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:
just wanted to throw in here that with the new changes, HAMs you'll probably get to ~75m explosion radius which will DESTROY frigs.

Not really, battlecuisers and cruisers are slow and 15km range on hams means frigate could just run out of 15km range and frigate survives.


ummm where is everyone getting this 15 km range thing? whatever youre doing you're clearly doing it wrong.

CN HAMs go 20 km (probably more like 18 km)
Javelin HAMs go 30 km (probably more like 26 km)

This is on a ship with no bonuses to range, and no range rigs/implants, and doesnt take into consideration that you can fly away from your target forcing him to fly toward you increasing your effective range.
Doddy
Excidium.
#3888 - 2012-10-01 23:00:52 UTC
I'm Down wrote:


Just a natural Resistance of 90% on one damage type would make it much harder to firewall.


While i think you are way overstating firewalls, i do like this idea, giving missiles a stronger resist to thier specific damage type. Purely beacuse at the moment when you lob a bomb when you decloak and attack a ratter the bomb destroys your first wave of torps :(
Doddy
Excidium.
#3889 - 2012-10-01 23:03:29 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Lithorn wrote:
There is one thing in the missile category that has been the running joke of Eve in my view for as long as I have been playing, that is auto targeting missiles. The performance of those have been disappointing or at best just barely functional for longer than I have been playing Eve. It's one of those skills that I ask myself "Why did I even bother to buy this skill book.."

Is there any plans to update them and make them relevant to Eve players?
Issues I remember were:
-- Missiles mindlessly auto-target large structures such as stations, asteroids, probably small animals (SQUIRREL!), anything but what they should be targeting.
-- Damage is very poor.

I saw a CCP developer announce he was working on them, I was hopeful after reading the annoucement but my hopes were crushed after I read that he was only working on the naming of them. Changes/improvements are commendable but that one was very underwhelming.

The removal of the penalties to the t2 missiles (I hope that still happens) is great news, those were not helpful to anyone.
I look forward to being able to use precision and javelin type missiles without having my speed cut in half. Ugh



The only problems with FOFs is that they shoot drones and that there aren't any rockets/hams/torps. If you disagree you are wrong.


This tbh, fofs 2 volleying a kitsune that has you permajammed is way satisfying.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#3890 - 2012-10-01 23:04:37 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
To be clear, after these changes settle a bit we very well may revisit missiles depending on how they turn out. The days of balance and forget are over.

haven't hear this line before... no really
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#3891 - 2012-10-01 23:11:11 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
Marlona Sky wrote:


Is there something wrong with webbing the fire wall and moving around it?? Firewalls are fine. Sure they can be challenging to deal with for pilots who only know how to align, lock and shoot one target.


B/C everyone in Eve brings 1 firewall ship and doesn't know how to position each one in a different spot.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#3892 - 2012-10-01 23:14:28 UTC  |  Edited by: I'm Down
Elise Randolph wrote:

I'm told from a reliable source that HML TD'ing Sacrilege fleet can nullify the damage from turrets.

Though I must say, if you actually believe 6 large smartbombs render missile fleets moot, why have Drake fleets been amongst the popular for half a decade?


About the most educated post a CSM can make... glad you got elected bro... really serving the populace.

Yeah, lets not hammer firewalls down Elise.. not like your alliance hasn't figured them out perfectly... wouldn't want to make the game challenging for you at all.

You don't balance this game around the average player... I've always said that. You balance it around the players good enough to exploit the problematic features introduced. Because eventually, even the young less aware players start to figure out how to do it too and then the **** storm really kicks off.

Now try starting your next post w/o a jab at me and add some content somewhere along the line.


Missiles are about to take a huge nerf... God forbid the Devs give just a little back.
HELLBOUNDMAN
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3893 - 2012-10-01 23:17:46 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Lithorn wrote:
There is one thing in the missile category that has been the running joke of Eve in my view for as long as I have been playing, that is auto targeting missiles. The performance of those have been disappointing or at best just barely functional for longer than I have been playing Eve. It's one of those skills that I ask myself "Why did I even bother to buy this skill book.."

Is there any plans to update them and make them relevant to Eve players?
Issues I remember were:
-- Missiles mindlessly auto-target large structures such as stations, asteroids, probably small animals (SQUIRREL!), anything but what they should be targeting.
-- Damage is very poor.

I saw a CCP developer announce he was working on them, I was hopeful after reading the annoucement but my hopes were crushed after I read that he was only working on the naming of them. Changes/improvements are commendable but that one was very underwhelming.

The removal of the penalties to the t2 missiles (I hope that still happens) is great news, those were not helpful to anyone.
I look forward to being able to use precision and javelin type missiles without having my speed cut in half. Ugh



The only problems with FOFs is that they shoot drones and that there aren't any rockets/hams/torps. If you disagree you are wrong.


That, and for mission runners they shoot structures...
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#3894 - 2012-10-01 23:34:09 UTC
Although few people will care, I recommend making auto-targeting missiles better at hitting smaller targets (like ECM drones and closely orbiting tackle frigates). There are no T2 variants of these either.

I am disappointed to not see anything for citadel, but I can only hope that will come later (or I missed a post update).
Juris Macto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
#3895 - 2012-10-01 23:45:20 UTC
These changes are ********, thank you for nerfing the tengu into being worse than the hurricane in terms of high-dps ammo range.
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#3896 - 2012-10-02 00:25:52 UTC
Juris Macto wrote:
These changes are ********, thank you for nerfing the tengu into being worse than the hurricane in terms of high-dps ammo range.

Not just tengu, all missile ships are affected, hence obsolete.
Flatiner
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3897 - 2012-10-02 00:38:25 UTC
Wow I was already considering unsubbing my accounts due to lack of interesting content in eve -- ie it gets very repetitive for older players as ccp seems to cater to new players and not the vets anymore.

This missile change is crap as are fozzies ideas for these changes (and in general). Perhaps you should consult your player base (not just the goons either or other large alliances who have their hands in the ccp pot).

We the average player keep this game alive and now you want to take away a viable source of dps and ranged dps at that because why? Guns suck?

Why nerf the crap out of a good missile platform such as the drake or tengu because people who love guns cry when they can’t hit a target more than 80km out?

I for one hope ccp burns for this I would love to see a huge revolt and unsub with the "direction" ccp is going. You guys make startrek online sound better and better every time I read these ridiculous ideas and posts; at least I can walk in stations in startrek online (no we don’t forget what you promised us so long ago!)

My two cents, not a rant or a cry or whatever you want to call it, because frankly I could care less about what people have to say in this game and about what I post.

Have a good one

Flat
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#3898 - 2012-10-02 01:05:37 UTC
Wait, are furies getting speed penalties?
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3899 - 2012-10-02 01:06:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Spc One wrote:
Juris Macto wrote:
These changes are ********, thank you for nerfing the tengu into being worse than the hurricane in terms of high-dps ammo range.

Not just tengu, all missile ships are affected, hence obsolete.

I may be doing the math wrong but how are you getting those numbers. Doesn't work out on skilled characters with Fury v Quake if I've got the numbers right.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#3900 - 2012-10-02 01:06:57 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Updated stats

250mm Railgun II with Spike:
DPS: 20
Alpha: 92
Optimal: 65 km
Falloff: 15 km
Cap/sec: -1.1
PG: 187.2
CPU: 31.5

Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora:
DPS: 21
Alpha: 91
Optimal: 54 km
Falloff: 10 km
Cap/sec: -3.8
PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5)
CPU: 27.8

720mm Artillery II with Tremor:
DPS: 17
Alpha: 242
Optimal: 54 km
Falloff: 22 km
Cap/sec: 0
PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5)
CPU: 24

Heavy Missile Launcher II with Caldari Navy Scourge:
DPS: 26 (previously 29)
Alpha: 213 (previously 237)
Range: 63 km (previously 84)
Cap/sec: 0
PG: 94.5
CPU: 41.3
Explosion radius: 140 (previously 125)

The explosion radius change turns out to be roughly a 12% dps decrease against targets with a signature radius of 125 or lower (which is non-MWDing armor tanked T1 and T2 but not T3 cruisers). A target painter negates this.

The question is if this will be enough to curb the HML Drake proliferation. I would not be surprised if HML Drakes continued to be very popular in their bracket after this set of changes. What the numbers above don't reveal is the massive tank that a Drake can field (due to low fitting requirements of HMLs). The loss in HML range is also less severe than it appears since missile acceleration is improved at the same time. The increase in missile speed is a straight buff.

So yes, HML Drakes will be weaker overall and might have to fit a missile speed rig but I still don't see any competitors in their price class that offers a similarly good combination of dps, hitpoints and range.


Now compare it at closer ranges.