Player Features and Ideas Discussion

The Drake Range isn't a problem, The drake dps isn't a problem, The Drake buffer isn't a problem, a problem is that when combined its a problem or that there isn't a good alternative.

However saying that Heavy Missiles need a nerf because the drake / tengu needs a nerf is completly the opposite. Other battlecruisers have no problems getting the same or longer range then a drake, nor do they have problems getting the same dps or more then a drake They do however lack getting the same effective hp's or a combination of the dps / range / buffer. But thats a SHIP problem and not a WEAPONSYSTEM problem.

So instead of looking at the Heavy missiles as a weapon platform to be nerfed look at the individual ships that need a nerf. The tengu missile subsystem suddenly is in line with one less launcher, the drake is in line with one less launcher and perhaps downgradeing its shield resist to 2 or 3% per level (or another bonus)

Lets take in consideration the reworked caracal with 2 bcu's with rapid light launchers vs Heavy missile launchers and current proposed missile changes. And lets compare this to a Thorax 250 Rail setup with 2 mag stabs

Caracal RLM 60.3km range 177 dps (214 dps up to 60km includeing drones) (Rapid Light Missile)
Caracal HML 91.5km range 203 dps (242 dps up to 60km includeing drones) (Heavy Missile Launcher)
Caracal HML 91.5km range 243 dps (280 dps up to 60 km includeing drones) (Heavy Missile Launchers with 20% damage bonus)
Thorax 250J 24.0km range 311 dps (470 dps up to 24km includeing drones) (250mm Rail Gun II with Javelin)
Thorax 250S 79.9km range 178 dps (336 dps up to 60km includeing drones) (250mm Rail Gun II with Spike)

In this example you see the caracal haveing a higher dps at long range (above 60km) but significantly lower below it. Even WITH 20% heavy missile damage (as it is now) its still 56 dps lower then the thorax up till 60 km range

Another thing that i would like to point out is the only 30 km and 30 dps range difference between the HML and the RLM launcher setup. With half the powergrid need and only a 30 dps drop, and a small range drop, The added power is more then enough to add an extra LSE TII

Dont get me wrong, i agree with the range nerf, and i agree that some ships that use heavy missile launchers need to be nerfed. But don't break the Heavy missile launchers themselves please!

CCP Fozzie,

Let’s start off by saying thanks for all the information you are providing us with the upcoming balances. A lot of good stuff is on its way and the Eve community cannot wait to start mixing things up.

A big problem I have seen recently is the changes to damage output of the heavy missiles. This will really put Caldari at a big disadvantage compared to the other races, in my opinion in cruisers and battlecruisers (which I believe are the two ship types mostly used for PVP). It already seems when I fit up a Caldari ship the DPS always ranks below other races. Making the DPS lower is going to prevent people using them for PVP and PVE.

Will there be adequate balancing done to Caldari’s cruisers and battlecruisers to make up for the big losses?

Changing the range is an acceptable starting point when it comes to the distance with heavy missiles, would much rather seen it start around 10% to 15% but can understand why they needed a Nerf anyway.

It seems like all too much is happening with changes to how missiles are going to be affected and more mods that affect guidance systems but I think it’s all a bit too much all at once.

puff puff passing it on-down,
Smoker

Old-school HAM Drake used to reliably beat other BCs in a close-range brawl, with the exception of the Myrm. Some things have changed since 2008 but it's still very competitive. It fell out of favour because HML Drakes was better, not beause HAM Drake was bad.

This is pretty much true. It all boiled down to the difference between Jav HAM vs HML - which is to say there wasn't much of one. Even if we ignored the HML changes, the addition of TEs affecting HAMs would have obsoleted the HML Drake in small gang PVP.

-Liang

Hmmm... the lack of intelligence comment came to mind about your post and repeatedly using "long run" in the same sentence. But hey, I didn't mention it as I wasn't here to insult you, but obviously that is your only real worth while tactic, sadly.

NGE threw off it's existing subscribers in an all out nerf of the game, and as a surprise patch since they knew existing subscribers would object beforehand. You seem quite content to shed loyal players here, which SOE/LA gambled on and lost. Nerfing serves no good purpose when it's far better to fix the broken things of this game to bring the rest of the fleet up to standard. It's a lazy fix indeed, and only divides the community, and yes possibly loosing accounts as you so elegantly pointed out, Sir.

Would still like to hear someone from CCP comment on the Firewall/Smartbomb problelm.

You're gonna "bring HMLs in line with other weapons" by both nerfing range and damage AND making the susceptable to tracking disruption, Shouldn't "other weapons" also becomes susceptable to both Defender Missles (lul) and Smartboms (not so lul)?

Hmm... i can see where that 20% came from - with it missiles would have similar (a bit better actually) dps to tech2 long rage ammo on lr-turrets. But missiles dont go past their range while turrets can somehow hit, plus turrets have close range ammo both tech 1 and 2 - dps one can get from beams or arty upclose. for instance hurricane can get 1.5 more damage going from tremor to emp, while drake get 10% boost when changing from t1 to close range t2. So it would be very nice if heavy missiles would get same options for 20-30 km range. It would be even better to have more tech 1 variants for different ranges - even if that meaning missiles would (like turrets) have not 8 t2 missiles (and f.o.f) per type, but two with race-specific damage profiles.

Second point about te giving bonus to both speed of explosion AND explosion radius. Last time i checked turrets have signature that get no benefit from tracking computers, but have huge effect on tracking. So why missiles are so different? maybe it would be a better idea to make either speed or size of explosion - unique to missile type contant to ensure that battleships are not swapping frigates with torpedoes or that light missiles cant scratch interceptors.

And yes HAMS - now becouse they are unguided they deal as much damage as heavy missiles (as example empty bellicose - no prop modules, nothing). After changes to heavy missiles that would be 20% more - but nowhere near other close range weapon systems. And its not only that but the fact that range on hams horribly short. Maybe new missile dynamics would help to get a few km on ham range, but its still too short to be effective anywhere outside web range. Pease note that 3k (or 5) km/s is quite slow and such missile cant hope to hit even vagabond on orbit - and that exactly what you would want to hit with hams (and as i said before - you would be lucky to get 60% or your dps on that vagabond simply becouse he is cruiser and you are loser missile user)
And thats even before we begin to think "why would anyone want to use a close range weapon when he/she can shoot on 70km with 700dps from naga?" - thus i think it may be a good idea (and time) to boost hams, possibly make their damage depend on range they flew - make them look like swarm minution and make more and more of the swarm miss target as they fly, or i dunno - make them aoe.

Other than that cant wait to see numbers te and track. disruptors give/take.

And Gila.

But yah, it's quite a weird decision by CCP to do a generalised weapon type nerf, rather than looking what causes the will to do the nerf to begin with. One is how a certain fairly-low-damage-and-well-allround-balanced ship being very powerful in blob combat. The other being how one t3, with a fairly low base damage output (200-250ish for a regular cloak setup Tengu) goes up to very-high (for a cruiser hull) when it combines the damage and engineering subsystem. Other t3's doesn't do the same.

If CCP had simply watched it this way, they'd probably be consider something more reasonable (like slightly tweaking the RoF bonus on the dmg subsystem, as that seems to be the main cause), and in the first case with the blob just flat out ignore it. As in blobs, there has always been a ship X that is the FotM and 'most versatile', while there's multiitudes of other ships playing support role for them. Drakes out of blob combat doesn't have all those light tacklers, dictors, fleet boosts, titanbridges etc to go, for one. And a solo PvP Drake has obvious flaws (not very agile, not great speed, easy to pin down and counter, fairly low damage, both weapon systems easily disrupted by smartbombs, fairly tight fit, cannot really active tank so definate high sig), with few perks (range, hits anything from frigs and up, decent buffer tank, ok-ish slot layout even for a Caldari).

TL;DR CCP just feels it's better to look at what blobs do, and blantanly strike down on a complete weapon system, rather than looking and what potential could be causing this skewed vision. We all know CCP wants everyone to fly blobs, bring friends to tackle for you so ships will never be balanced around the need for tackle slots for example. Ships that lives too long while dealing damage (no matter how low) obviously is doing "too much damage" (as they take time to kill, so the killers can't move on to next target faster). Lag and support compositions is not taken into consideration. Etc. And noone really knows why doesn't even look at how the Tengu goes from a low-damage balanced boat, to a high damage long-range platform just by fitting a single subsystem.

Do CCP even play this game, or are they just the same kind of mindless drones as the average pilots in the blobs?

Tengu-wise i can understand the range nerf and all, but 20% dmg reduction to heavy missiles is a joke.

Ahh ok because I'm now not everyone my post has no validity?

Ignore the drake and the tengu for now and lets take another ship I'm skilled for The Nighthawk.

Now I'm trained for it near perfectly but I never flew it because it was underpowered humm guess what I still won't be flying it because now it's even worse if that is possible, this affects too many ships to be considered good.