Player Features and Ideas Discussion

To be honest, you are missing the sensor booster for this range, though you can easily drop a hardener ; tank is hardly needed at these ranges, as is the warp disruptor BTW.

PS : though yes, 3BCS fit is hardly a fail fit IMO.

What kind of DPS and is that post changes? It doesnt look like it with the range changes to HML though I may be wrong.

I suspect as the range closes, the ferox DPS (on EFT) will rise above the drakes. Which is what I'm saying about the ammo, its creating situations too strong at higher distances and falls away at the closer range options. Note not against "close range" systems, but "long ragne " systems excercising short range options.

I don't know if this is even a real issue, but a huge deal is made of the reach of HML and its damage but not so much about it not improving at shorter ranges either. The LR should probably lose some bite and if there was a short range variant not at the hardpoint level things would be easier to fine-tune.

414 and with stats on live server. Without drones and implants.



4x MagStab 250mm Ferox does 368 dps at 21,1 km with Javelin. Ever tried 250s at that range?

Kicking 10% off I get it closer to 372, unless heat/implants are involved? From EFT all level V

Anyhow, I still believe the real challenge to balance one way or the other is that flat damage profile. Creates skew at either end of the spectrum that is hard to adjust for. Something that good that far out shouldn't be as effective point blank, equally it could stand to have scarier options at short ranges.

As much as it may be said adding different ammo types to assist in ML balance may be seen as homogenisation, I think it allows much greater flexibility to tweak the systems. There's no reason adding these needs to erode the key differences between missiles and turrets. Still always hits, still can't crit, still has a flat range/DPS profile just more of them, allowing for fine grained tuning at a given engagement range.

Still too broad a pattern I think and those have other oddities like basically being designed to be shooting at bigger, slower targets.

If you don't like the idea I'm hardly offended, but these debates will rage until the end of time as long as a system has uniform damage application from 0 to 3 figure ranges. You cannot tune that without screwing it up somewhere in the range/DPS profile.


Fake Edit: Something else I spotted in Mirples post is the HAMs have better exp velo and exp radius than HML now. Which is....weird. Cool, but weird. Is that accurate and a factor of GMP affecting those and the HML increased?

On paper or not, I'm still of the mind the crux of the difficulty in balancing missiles is their range/DPS profile. It is simply too broad to allow proper fine tuning when coupled with the hardpoint situation.

It's not dissimilar to being unable to balance HML hulls whilst the HML are a bit 'out there'. The ammo options for these systems we currently have is a significant contributor to those systems being 'out there'.

Agreed. By all accounts though, people will be unhappy as long as these situations exist and can be exploited by pilots

I'm unclear as to how or where I inferred that...

I said: "as long as a system has uniform damage application from 0 to 3 figure ranges" these debates will continue. i.e. so long as a missile system is as effective at 0,10,50,100,150 km ranges, you're GOING to have anomalous damage at one or more of those ranges compared to anything else. The only way to address that is: ammo.

Edit: Or don't address it and we accept it and cease the debate :)

A troll poster is not someone who's posts you don't like, who disagrees with you, or uses sarcasm in disagreeing with you. FFS stop abusing that name. Look it up.

As for combat alts. FFS also, both of you post with characters that have a pvp presence. Especially you Noemi. I still am skeptical that that character you linked and asserted was yours is yours. His only post ever (in a recruitment thread) does not sound at all like you. Until you post on him and say "I am Noemi" all your statements betray you as someone with no experience of using turrets and no experience with pvp. Hell I could link anyone and say that's me.



OT, actually a 10% damage reduction would be 192 to 173, and yes the harsher damage application stats and range (not surea bout your numbers, tbh) would mimic the bad tracking and range of Tech II long range turret high damage ammo.

Again not sure about your numbers with precision. I believe the damage buff was 5% and not as you state only 5 points. Also, you are focusing exclusively on base stats and not adding in skills. So those precisions with max range skills will have a full 100% range on top of that base range. I don't think even with someone with only a couple levels of MP or MB trained that they'll be stuck not reaching long-point range. Regardless, there is still the TC/TE effects coming, at whatever values the devs put on those effects.

I may be misreading the changes, but it appears to me that painter support will become quite desirable for missile users. This is a buff to a class of ships and an ewar that has been underappreciated and underused. Once the TC/TE/TD changes occur both the painter and TD boats will get more importance. Again, both ewars need more relevance. I'm almost certain they will have to nerf the base effects on those two mods and increase the specialized ship bonuses, like was done for ecm and ecm boats.

This development would be in keeping with CCP's long standing assertion that eve is not meant to be a solo game.

edit - ok OT. I guess you are meaning only Heavy precisions between the damage normalization to tech I and the overall base 10% base damage nerf (again without running all the math). However, precision lights it appears are getting a definite damage buff. But I don't see a range nerf in the op for precision, only for fury. The velocity and flight time on precision not being normalized to tech I heavys and then cut in half as with fury.

No he is not a troll. A troll is someone that hides their identity and posts a facetious argument that he does not really believe in in order to make the postion he is pretending to promote look as ridiculous as it's detractors believe or to simply induce overly serious responses from detractors.

Noemi may be hiding his identity. But, he very much believes this is all a terrible nerf of the only weapon system I'm convinced he has ever used, missiles. Thus, he is not a troll, and likewise anyone that has disagreed with him itt is not a troll either.

Troll is a much overused label in these forums. Just because someone disagrees and might use sarcasm in their posts does not a troll make. If Noemi were a troll, he would be the best or worst troll ever depending on how you look at it. I don't see trolls devoting soooooooo much time and energy to their troll posts. And usually the temptation to over exageration surfaces. Noemi may be wrong, but I cannot say he has over-exagerated to the extent of a troll and betrayed a hidden disbelief in his statements.

Trolling is mostly done for the laugh factor when one decides eventually to disclose their actual disbeleif in their promoted position after the co-promoters have stupidly adopted some of the flawed arguments the troll posted, or the detractors have expended much rage and effort in debunking the flawed arguments. That is the true reward from being a troll poster. To get people you disagree with to adopt the flawed arguments of you concealed poster, so that you can destroy them later, or to just enjoy the over-serious reaction of the people opposed to the troll. A troll that never surfaces or succeeds in neither of those quests is probably a failure as a troll.

Noemi could say in his next post. Ok you are right, I was just being a troll. And I would have to say bravo for extending this thread to over 250 pages. But the comedy factor would be missing in that his arguments are not over the top, however much I disagree with him, and the timing would be very off, for any comedic value at this point.