These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Wolfstorm
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#661 - 2012-09-18 22:09:09 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
i do not have anything to say on the hurricane but the proposed HML changes can only be called ham-handed (no pun intended). CCP please consider the following points:
1. the only two ships that are successful with heavy missiles are drake and tengu. the tengu gets a total 100% bonus to (kinetic) heavy missile damage. the drake has a superb slot layout and a great defensive bonus, making it a battleship-like brick. if you want to nerf these two ships, you should be nerfing the ships, not the weapon system.
2. making the tracking paradigm apply to missiles is stupid. not only does it make no sense, especially with unguided missiles, it also takes away game depth. after the change, the only real difference between heavy missiles and medium artillery would be that missile damage is delayed and has somewhat smaller alpha (but slightly more range).
3. the most dramatic failure would be to make tracking disruptors affect missiles. this would make them THE allround one-size-fits-all ewar. i can already see fleets of invincible merlins swarming any other fleet like fire ants.

now that that is out of my system, here is what i would suggest to bring missiles in line:
1. make the tengu's Accelerated Ejection Bay missile velocity bonus apply only to HAMs. (while you're at it, give the same bonus to the legion's Assault Optimization)
2. reduce HML flight time by 10-15%
3. remove one launcher hardpoint from the drake or make CPU tighter so that people have to decide between a full Rack of T2 launchers and 100k EHP.
4. increase the velocity of torps. their reach is currently the same as HAMs which is ludicrous.
5. do NOT make missiles affected by tracking. not only will this make the game more homogenous and boring, it will overbuff tracking disruptors and also throw PVE totally out of whack.

edit: the light missile changes seem allright.


This so much - It still doesn't really fix blobs, but blobs are a problem that can't be solved by nerfing ships. You want to fix blobs, you gotta fix fleets. and CCP doesn't have the balls to fix fleets.
Fluffy Hyena
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#662 - 2012-09-18 22:09:14 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
{...} The hurricane will likely receive significantly more changes when we get to battlecruisers in the balance pass, but this is designed as a compensation for the drop in Arty PG and to help alleviate the problem of Arty ships having so much free PG when they use autocannons. {...}

So the Hurricane will be wonky until the summer 2013 expansion? Since it will change then, maybe you could have a go at it now so you would not have to come back to it?
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#663 - 2012-09-18 22:09:41 UTC
So gamewide in mission hubs and across 0.0 ratting areas what are the 2 most common ships you see ratting and mission running?

The Tengu and Drake.

This thread is full of people whining about how they've spent all this time training for a Tengu that is now wasted. Thats a showing sign of something wrong. When the entire game tries for a single ship type (like say the vaga back in the Nano age) then that ship type is obviously skewed and out of balance.

Looking objectively as somebody who an use and fly every single ship type there is a reason you dont see Harbinger fleets or Brutix fleets with their medium gun kits fitted on them: A) the ship is nigh impossible to fit in those configurations and B) the weapons systems of those 2 are vastly out classed by the heavy missile.

Long ago when you roamed 0.0 you would see nothing but Ravens, because torps could shoot as far as cruise and nobody used anything else. Torp range was nerfed and the Tengu was released and suddenly the Raven was gone, because a better smaller ship made ratting easier. The Tengu also brought a level of safety to the ratter thats not been adjusted in any way, but giving the average ratter an align time of about 8 seconds, meaning by the time the hunters scan finishes the ratter was already on his way to safety.

The default ship to do NPCing in has become the HML Tengu, screaming that it needs a balance adjustment. Theres lierally no reason to use a BS in PVE at all right now and the Tengu is the reason.

Personally I'd rather just see the drake and Tengu nerfed because the nighthawk is pretty boss but I honestly dont see this as being as big of an issue as all the crybabies are making it out to be. You can achieve similar range if you just adjust your fit a bit and as far as DPS....


You are all aware that looking at DPS numbers on HML's is like comparting DPS numbers on artillery right? They're alpha weapons, their DPS doesn't mean **** all, its what their alpha is which is what matters, and their alpha will still be quite high.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#664 - 2012-09-18 22:09:56 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
War Kitten wrote:
If you're going to compare long range guns and HMLs, use the long range tech II ammo in the HML too.

Then do your graphs again with CN scourge vs. CN antimatter and Navy MF.

At least talk apples to apples. Then you can at least make useful comparisons.



You're suggesting that the shorter range, higher DPS, faction HML ammo should be able to be projected consistently farther than the falloff of most the other long-range turret platforms?


Are you suggesting that missiles should be instant damage?


No, he's suggesting missiles should be instant damage, and gunfire destroyable by smartbombs (and something you can travel away from while damage is 'in the air'). He's also suggesting guns need to separate all t2 specializations so you don't have to go through a whole tier to unlock heavier weapon types. He's also suggesting all gunnery should get a +x % dmg to their primary damage type, while having ammo for all other damage types too. P

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Signal11th
#665 - 2012-09-18 22:12:05 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


I assume you're talking about the Arty Loki and Arty Sleip? Those... are not really common fits. Even still, they're kinda underwhelming. The Muninn would matter except for the whole LRHACs not mattering at all. The Absolution and Legion both need some buffing.

And the HAM NH is actually getting a pretty massive buff. And the HML NH is getting a relative boost next to the Tengu, which I personally find to be a good thing.

-Liang


How is a HAM NH getting any boost? How does it in any way bring it in line with a tengu? I mean seriously dude, do you just throw **** out there and hope it sticks or do you have an actual reason for what you say?

Arti Loki and Arti Sleip were never common for one particular reason, fittings. That just changed drastically.


All missile ships are getting a boost via the TE/TC change. The Arty Loki and Arty Sleip weren't common because they're underwhelming, not because they were particularly hard to fit.

-Liang



Wow can't wait............Roll

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
T's little helper
Doomheim
#666 - 2012-09-18 22:12:25 UTC
Heavy missiles are already the weakest weapon, lowest damage, significant delay between launch and hit, low rate of fire.
If heavy missiles are too powerful on cruisers, then adjust the cruiser hulls, not the missiles or their launchers.
Can also agree on nighthawk, it has needed a boost for a VERY long time now. Changing misiles this much to the worse will have a dramatic effect on an already suffering ship, so if this change will ever happen, the nighthawk need extreme bonuses the very same day this change goes active.
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#667 - 2012-09-18 22:12:47 UTC
Fluffy Hyena wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
{...} The hurricane will likely receive significantly more changes when we get to battlecruisers in the balance pass, but this is designed as a compensation for the drop in Arty PG and to help alleviate the problem of Arty ships having so much free PG when they use autocannons. {...}

So the Hurricane will be wonky until the summer 2013 expansion? Since it will change then, maybe you could have a go at it now so you would not have to come back to it?


A couple of pages back I posted a Hurricane fit to show that yes, even with the changes, it's still not a problem to fit it with mediocre skills. You're just going to have to make some decisions about what you want, instead of just going 'I'll have 425s, a 1600mm, full tackle, an mwd and two medium neuts'.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#668 - 2012-09-18 22:13:15 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
Wow can't wait............Roll


I actually can't wait. The HAM Drake will be utterly ridiculous, and every other Caldari ship is getting a pretty massive boost as well. :)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#669 - 2012-09-18 22:13:41 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
No, I dislike this suggested change!

Those missle nerfs (range reduction /flight speed buff is ok) are horribad, its the only thing we had vs the superior armor tankers in pvpEvil.

Edit: Excessive spam removed - ISD Suvetar

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#670 - 2012-09-18 22:14:02 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


I assume you're talking about the Arty Loki and Arty Sleip? Those... are not really common fits. Even still, they're kinda underwhelming. The Muninn would matter except for the whole LRHACs not mattering at all. The Absolution and Legion both need some buffing.

And the HAM NH is actually getting a pretty massive buff. And the HML NH is getting a relative boost next to the Tengu, which I personally find to be a good thing.

-Liang


How is a HAM NH getting any boost? How does it in any way bring it in line with a tengu? I mean seriously dude, do you just throw **** out there and hope it sticks or do you have an actual reason for what you say?

Arti Loki and Arti Sleip were never common for one particular reason, fittings. That just changed drastically.


All missile ships are getting a boost via the TE/TC change. The Arty Loki and Arty Sleip weren't common because they're underwhelming, not because they were particularly hard to fit.

-Liang


Yeah, I agree, an Artillery Sliep that does 600+ DPS and 5000 alpha with great speed, drone and slot flexibility and shield tanking logistics (which everyone knows are superior is in no way good.

TE/TC change isn't a boost, it's a straight nerf to a NH which doesn't have the built in range bonus that the tengu does.

The devs didn't even consider the fact that the only arguement for missiles doing too much damage was the Tengu... Yet the only reason this is true is because they gave the tengu an ungodly 7.5% ROF bonus on top of 6 launchers and a massive tank and plenty of low slots.... heaven forbid they actually fix the problem with the ship, not the problem with the missiles.

Hence, the only problem with missiles that was ever argued was range.


See what happens when you start posting actual content in your post that can be refuted? you get ***** slapped.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#671 - 2012-09-18 22:14:18 UTC
T's little helper wrote:
Heavy missiles are already the weakest weapon, lowest damage, significant delay between launch and hit, low rate of fire.
If heavy missiles are too powerful on cruisers, then adjust the cruiser hulls, not the missiles or their launchers.
Can also agree on nighthawk, it has needed a boost for a VERY long time now. Changing misiles this much to the worse will have a dramatic effect on an already suffering ship, so if this change will ever happen, the nighthawk need extreme bonuses the very same day this change goes active.


I'm sorry, did you just say that Heavy Missiles are the weakest weapon system? And you said it with a straight face?

LolLolLolLolLol

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Signal11th
#672 - 2012-09-18 22:15:59 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
Wow can't wait............Roll


I actually can't wait. The HAM Drake will be utterly ridiculous, and every other Caldari ship is getting a pretty massive boost as well. :)

-Liang



As long as they use HAMS....oh and lose a slot for one or more tracking modules.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#673 - 2012-09-18 22:16:30 UTC
I'm Down wrote:

Yeah, I agree, an Artillery Sliep that does 600+ DPS and 5000 alpha with great speed, drone and slot flexibility and shield tanking logistics (which everyone knows are superior is in no way good.


Oh this is gonna be good. Lets see the fit. :)

Quote:

TE/TC change isn't a boost, it's a straight nerf to a NH which doesn't have the built in range bonus that the tengu does.


What...

The...

****...

?

The TE/TC change obviously isn't a boost.... because you say so?

Quote:
See what happens when you start posting actual content in your post that can be refuted? you get ***** slapped.


I have ***** slapped you every single time I've seen you post in any of these F&I threads. Literally. Every. Single. Time.

Never stop posting.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc
#674 - 2012-09-18 22:16:42 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
You are all aware that looking at DPS numbers on HML's is like comparting DPS numbers on artillery right? They're alpha weapons, their DPS doesn't mean **** all, its what their alpha is which is what matters, and their alpha will still be quite high.


This.
Wolfstorm
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#675 - 2012-09-18 22:16:49 UTC
Jean Leaner wrote:
Someone tell me why a heavy missile should do twice as much damage at long range as any other medium long range weapon system? Because its special?

Oh and don't do something silly like compare beam lasers with Gleam loaded to heavy missiles at 80km. Apples to Apples a drake does ~400 dps at max range, any other turret does 200-250.



It should because missiles are a shoot and forget - they can be destroyed in flight, out run, and in general aren't very good except at being constant up close and far away.

CCP is just lazy and can't be bothered to fix the real problems.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#676 - 2012-09-18 22:17:04 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
Wow can't wait............Roll


I actually can't wait. The HAM Drake will be utterly ridiculous, and every other Caldari ship is getting a pretty massive boost as well. :)

-Liang



As long as they use HAMS....oh and lose a slot for one or more tracking modules.


It's totally blasphemy that someone would want to get better damage application instead of better EFT damage.

Roll

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Michael J Caboose
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#677 - 2012-09-18 22:21:10 UTC
Has anyone crying about the proposed HM damage nerf stopped to consider that tracking enhancers and tracking computers would also provide an applied damage buff? They would improve explosion radius and velocity, enabling you to improve dps vs small and or fast targets. Something missile users have been asking for for ages. And they would return to you the lost range.

Doesn't really seem like much of a nerf you look past the EFT numbers. More like a nice buff to HAMs and torps.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#678 - 2012-09-18 22:21:17 UTC
Wolfstorm wrote:
...aren't very good except at being constant up close and far away.

Isn't that part of the issue? Being good at all ranges?
Signal11th
#679 - 2012-09-18 22:21:43 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Signal11th wrote:
Wow can't wait............Roll


I actually can't wait. The HAM Drake will be utterly ridiculous, and every other Caldari ship is getting a pretty massive boost as well. :)

-Liang



As long as they use HAMS....oh and lose a slot for one or more tracking modules.


It's totally blasphemy that someone would want to get better damage application instead of better EFT damage.

Roll

-Liang



Ahh sarcasm, lowest form of wit and all that.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#680 - 2012-09-18 22:22:51 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


I assume you're talking about the Arty Loki and Arty Sleip? Those... are not really common fits. Even still, they're kinda underwhelming. The Muninn would matter except for the whole LRHACs not mattering at all. The Absolution and Legion both need some buffing.

And the HAM NH is actually getting a pretty massive buff. And the HML NH is getting a relative boost next to the Tengu, which I personally find to be a good thing.

-Liang


How is a HAM NH getting any boost? How does it in any way bring it in line with a tengu? I mean seriously dude, do you just throw **** out there and hope it sticks or do you have an actual reason for what you say?

Arti Loki and Arti Sleip were never common for one particular reason, fittings. That just changed drastically.


All missile ships are getting a boost via the TE/TC change. The Arty Loki and Arty Sleip weren't common because they're underwhelming, not because they were particularly hard to fit.

-Liang


Yeah, I agree, an Artillery Sliep that does 600+ DPS and 5000 alpha with great speed, drone and slot flexibility and shield tanking logistics (which everyone knows are superior is in no way good.

TE/TC change isn't a boost, it's a straight nerf to a NH which doesn't have the built in range bonus that the tengu does.

The devs didn't even consider the fact that the only arguement for missiles doing too much damage was the Tengu... Yet the only reason this is true is because they gave the tengu an ungodly 7.5% ROF bonus on top of 6 launchers and a massive tank and plenty of low slots.... heaven forbid they actually fix the problem with the ship, not the problem with the missiles.

Hence, the only problem with missiles that was ever argued was range.


See what happens when you start posting actual content in your post that can be refuted? you get ***** slapped.


Thats it Yaay, rage because you're in an alliance that had one viable fleet comp that just got nerfed into the ground.

You've already been destroyed by Fozzie in the other thread with all your made up ****. Here, let me help, finish you off:


Missile ships will now be forced to make the same sacrifices as turrnet ships to extend the range of their weapons, giving up tank and utility slots to achieve their longest ranges. So while the Nighthawk got a little gimped on its overall range, it can give up a low and or mid and easily get that range back, with the added bonus of being able to hit smaller targets harder if they want.


Also please stop flinging out 4 damage mod fits that nobody but you would ever undock and use in a fight, it makes you look dumb when you post.

Missiles got nerfed and now AAA has no viable doctrines outside of Arty Loki's (you remember, the ship you claim in your post that nobody uses only thats not true and multiple alliances are currently using alpha lokis as a part of a doctrine) and you're mad about it, we get it, but you just keep posting this stupid outright false bullshit to try and save you from that fate. You're like the Fox News of fitting Yaay.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.