Player Features and Ideas Discussion

RTB....

why?

You really dont read what I say. You just pick a part and fail to understand even that.

I said

1) EITHER do it like it is now: each weapon system category (med LR, med SR, large LR, large SR) has systems which work well, and others which dont. Missiles win in just ONE of these 4 categories. And in no other. Guns win in the other three.

2) OR do it balanced: neither guns nor missiles win in any of those categories, guns and missile work with same efficiency in combat, so taking one or the other is just a matter of personal taste. This is not how it is right now.

If you want to change 1) so missiles are no longer on top in one category, but guns are on top in all, then this can not be called balance. I agree 1) is not perfect. But 1) without a missile system being in front in one of those 4 is worse. Esp. since I dont see 2) coming anytime soon.

And no, its not silly to say missiles are Caldaris signature weapon. It has been explained to you again and again why so many Caldari pilots feel like that. Its again *you* who doesnt get the point.

uve said before that drakes always do poorly in close range fights, but the last one i 1v1'd did pretty well on me (into structure) despite a thermal hole i already knew about.

HAM drakes do pretty well when they arent piloted and fit terribly. a couple of notes on stereo typical drake piloting:

- The reluctance of a lot of drake pilots to use anything but kinetic damage hampers their ability to take on shield tankers and many T2 ships.
- Scrams will often allow HAM drakes to kite better than disruptors, but u dnt see many of them used.
- The presence of EM hardeners and screen reinforcers leaves drake pilots more vulnerable to everything but lasers.

On the other hand, ive seen good pilots who are better prepared come out on top with a drake as many times as ppl in canes, the other to be nerfed BC

HAM drakes are good at what they do, and as far as i've seen, competitive before this buff. i'm suggesting that, if u've experienced HAM drakes constantly failing up close, it might just be down to pilot error.

if i was to go further and suggest that hardcore drake pilots have a reputation for being the most un-creative, un-resourceful, predictable and generally poorest pvp players in the game, would i be wrong?

_____________________
Tech Two Missiles
-Remove ship penalties from tech two missiles (ship velocity and signature radius)
-Precision: Increase bonuses to explosion velocity to +20%, increase damage to match T1 missiles
-Fury: Increase damage bonus to +35%, reduce flight time to 50% of T1, unify penalties to explosion radius (+72%) and velocity (-16%) across the sizes
-Javelin: Just remove ship penalties
-Rage: Increase damage bonus to +35%, Unify flight time to match T1, unify velocity penalty (-16.7%), unify penalty to explosion velocity (-14%), increase penalty to explosion radius (+72%)
_____________________

If you equate Rage and Fury then yes.

You see it's Fury that are 50% of tech I, so actually a little less than 50% range nerf. The idea being like high damage tech II turret ammo which is always very range limited. Rage is going to have same range as tech I torps etc.

If you can't relax your reflexive rage to read the op calmly and rationally, then why post? Reread it. Think about it. Then if you are still mad, at least you won't be sputtering mad, misreading, and misposting.

Exactly what I said before ...

And @Bouh: so you think 1) is bad and 2) is what we need, but fail to see 2) will not be there? Will you call it better balance if no missile system is on top or on par with top after the patch and all 4 categories medium & large long & short are won by turretships?

And about that "ignore history" thing. Fine, but then balance this out like OT Smithers suggested, in redesigning the missile skill tree. Make those supports the same, so cross training is easier (also for the turret users who want to go missile! ;) ) and change the skills like for turrets, small, med and large basic skills, and specs needed for going up.

Btw, why do people not just crosstrain to the Drake and flood Eve with it? Its so fast to skill missiles, remember?

Apart from that, I think Launchers magazines are not big enough. Should be adressed too.

I will lose my ship if I don't warp away.

Curse vs. Drake is one sided fight.

Yeah, I said that too before. Introduce low dps high range fast velocity sniper ammo, to be balanced on long ranges and cut ranges of higher damage ammo. Or even introduce more different ranges/different damage. Guess what they said? They didnt like that idea. Its simple, there are people here who just hate missiles with passion, and dont want to see on par or even on top in comparisons. They want missiles to be inferior to turrets. So they will object to any reasonable change idea and tell again and again just how OP missiles are.

What they want? They want missiles to get nerfed into something like a noob weapon, which works ok, but will never be on par with the best. So a real pro wont use it and use pro turrets instead. Thats the attitude, and we cant change those people. But we can point out their intentions :)

Best regards.

PS: To all those who say Drake/HML is OP, Tengu/HML is OP - adapt and use one! You yourself said how fast t2 HML can be trained up - go and adapt! Or die in fire :) Funny thing is, Drake/HML are so OP for such a long time (they have not been changed for quite a while), still its not Drake online. You had so much time to adapt, really ..

I don't think the devs think like that and in any case, (heavy) missiles might well be OP in the real world. As a non HML user barring the odd dabble at skill level 3, I don't feel qualified to say one way or the other.

Why should they be inferior? :) they are atm inferior in some aspects and superior in others. You simply fail to point out how they will be balanced if they get nerfed in the aspects in which they are superior *without* buffing them in those other things so they will not be inferior there anymore.

either make missiles on par with all other stuff (=perfect balance), or make them better in some things and worse in others, so the result is also an overall balance.

Will you deny the fact that when comparing large and medium long and short range systems only one of those 4 is atm rocked by missiles?

CM <<<< LRLT
Torps << SRLT
HAM < or << SRMT
HML > or >>> LRMT

if afterwards all are equal to turrets, fine. If afterwards one area is missile won, and the other are turret, also ok for me. I feel like both wont happen though.

Besides, Jorma, without a combat record I somehow fail to see why I should answer to your ever same questions again and again ..

You are asking for missiles to become turrets. This is stupid.

BTW, Caldari are ALREADY on TOP for long range damage dealing, either with HML on medium hull or with everything they have on large hull. They also have the BEST ewar AND shields.

You are not asking any balance, you are asking missiles to become turrets or caldari to be OP. Use turrets if you want turrets, and if you cannot appreciate missiles advantages, don't use them.

Drones don't share the skill tree with turrets, and that never was a problem. Gallente pilots always had and still *have to* skill for BOTH drones AND hybrids to use their ships. Infact, Caldari may be the ONLY race who can use effectively half it's ships with only one weapon system (amarr drone bays make them less good than caldari for this).

You categories won is nonsense. Missiles and caldari do have their strength. And ignoring small size is pretty convenient to you too. Ignoring *any*thing which don't go for your "don't nerf HML even if they are OP" sillyness.

Start by defining inferior vs superior. Cruise Missiles DO are superior to turrets at long range.

You know, there will ALWAYS be something on top of something. Caldari are on top of LONG RANGE combat and on top of shield tank and EWAR.

Skill for hybrids, and let these missiles be balanced. Missiles are NOT turrets, they will NEVER EVER be exactly like turrets, that would be the death of this game.

Now Noemi, if you don't mind bringing some real arguments, instead elephants being superior to hippopotamus, that would elevate the debate. As I already asked, start by defining "superior".