These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#1641 - 2012-09-19 19:36:11 UTC
like most i got side tracked by the (IMO) ridicules HML proposal, but other questions pop up.

Are Tracking Computers/Tracking Enhancers going to stack now with Rigor and Flare and missle flight time/speed rigs? And if not, WHY not.

Unstacked TCs/TEs with certain rig combinations could mean some REALLY long ranged HAMs that would simply replace HMLs in mid ranged fights.lol. And since HAMs fire so much faster, that could cause more lag issues in fleet fights, no?
Dante Lioncourt
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1642 - 2012-09-19 19:37:40 UTC
But seriously guys do you not think that CCP has
got plan for the rest of the caldari missile boats that never get used that
would balance this out ?

For example the cerb which could be a awesome long range missile boat with wicked speed
Or maby they have a suprise for the ferox ?
This is EVE anything is possible , just be positive Big smile
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#1643 - 2012-09-19 19:37:47 UTC
LtauSTinpoWErs wrote:

On a side note, I would love to start seeing T2 FOF missiles :)


Me too, FoF missles I could tell "hey, just shhot the frigs" or "please ignore those structures" lol Doubt it would ever happen though.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#1644 - 2012-09-19 19:38:14 UTC
Dante Lioncourt wrote:
But seriously guys do you not think that CCP has
got plan for the rest of the caldari missile boats that never get used that
would balance this out ?

For example the cerb which could be a awesome long range missile boat with wicked speed
Or maby they have a suprise for the ferox ?
This is EVE anything is possible , just be positive Big smile


you must be new......

lol
The Steel Harpy
12killers
Vocate Draconis
#1645 - 2012-09-19 19:38:54 UTC
patrick elektros wrote:
this is about CCP making more money, by making people train other skills and this nerfs people making in game money, in effect making it harder for people to pay for plex with in game isk. in effect hoping that people will in turn have to pay real money to play the game. ccp has been about making money, ad not about working with the players on some level fora while now. and this is aNERF on tengus and drakes, the 2 biggest ratting boats in the game.

you got an issue with this, let ccp know, make them rollback the nerf, but keep in mind walmart only rolls back items it's raise prices on first.

the moderate change would have been 7.5% reduction in missile damage and 5% in range. this wasnt against goons or anybody else, it was against all of us to pay more to play (notice plex prices at an all time high) and since the plex sellers are lookin to sell higher price plex and the plex buyers wont be able to make the money, maybe plexes will drop, but i doubt it.


CCP keep in mind we will find better fits for better ships, no matter what you do you need to remember that nerfing pvp/pve ships and buffering industrials is the first step to being like wow, and your sandbox will get sludge in it.



This! CCP have buffed carebears so much-that non-consensual pvp in hi sec is wrecked-oh! Wardecs? Erm-the carebears don't undock anyway-not like those overtanked Macks can't handle it anyway-but there ya go. But those of us who DO live in null sec & want to make a living? Oh well-time I trained that Legion anyway. I/we who have enough sp's will adapt and survive as ever-but this WILL hurt a great many players-especially those of a Cadari nature <---- Other races deserve a buff-particularly Gallente-Hybrids STILL suck-canes/drakes/tengus are used for a reason-you want to change stuff fine-but at once? I think you'll find Jita riots are the least of it-as well as lots of unsubs-people think life in null sec is cushty-it can only be cos we work hard, we don't just log in to our Macks in Brape & click a mouse once an hour.

Nerfng decent ships without giving viable alternatives is ********. You WILL lose accounts because of this-why fly Caldari? I can't think of a single reason now *sigh* I have plenty of others-but not everyone has that luxury, so -1 Caldari-this one will be on ice-welcome to WOW in space.
Lili Lu
#1646 - 2012-09-19 19:39:59 UTC
Nyla Hunt wrote:

Valid really?, I am exercising my right to disagree, and so did Onictus - he retorted sarcastically to my post and I told him what I thought of it and thus the circle of debate/insults goes....

Just to clarify I trained 3 years to master all Caldari/Indy things(ID10T). Just so you know there is no browny points in the game Ugh

O btw next time I want your opinion- Ill give it to you.....

I suppose I should correct my own post in that you do have a corp history and are not in a noob corp. But it is an npc corp and you don't appear to have any pvp history http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=1107465

Now maybe all you ever do in this game is pve. That's ok. But then you can't expect this game to cater to all the people like you that identified the esiest pve ship progression when the game decides to alter that easy progression. Lili has heavy missile spec 4. I have two other characters that I pve'd wtih and damn right I took advantage of that easy route through Drakes. But you don't see me on here thinking only what is best for me and not giving a crap about what is best for the game as a whole.

Also, "(ID10T)" Ooh, that's clever and I'm incredibly hurt. Wanting my opinion is not your call. You post here you are open to getting everyone's opinion. Grow up.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1647 - 2012-09-19 19:40:37 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dante Lioncourt wrote:
But seriously guys do you not think that CCP has
got plan for the rest of the caldari missile boats that never get used that
would balance this out ?

For example the cerb which could be a awesome long range missile boat with wicked speed
Or maby they have a suprise for the ferox ?
This is EVE anything is possible , just be positive Big smile


you must be new......

lol

I guess it's just my imagination that every ship in the game is being reworked?
Lord Ryan
True Xero
#1648 - 2012-09-19 19:41:11 UTC
Dante Lioncourt wrote:
But seriously guys do you not think that CCP has
got plan for the rest of the caldari missile boats that never get used that
would balance this out ?

For example the cerb which could be a awesome long range missile boat with wicked speed
Or maby they have a suprise for the ferox ?
This is EVE anything is possible , just be positive Big smile

No I think most of us lost faith along time ago.

Do not assume anything above this line was typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient.
Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1649 - 2012-09-19 19:43:46 UTC
If the Tracking Computer (etc.) now effect missiles .... doesn't that conflict with the Target Painter module?

Or did i miss something here?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1650 - 2012-09-19 19:43:48 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
like most i got side tracked by the (IMO) ridicules HML proposal, but other questions pop up.

Are Tracking Computers/Tracking Enhancers going to stack now with Rigor and Flare and missle flight time/speed rigs? And if not, WHY not.

Unstacked TCs/TEs with certain rig combinations could mean some REALLY long ranged HAMs that would simply replace HMLs in mid ranged fights.lol. And since HAMs fire so much faster, that could cause more lag issues in fleet fights, no?


I'm going to assume that they stack. I'm super curious what kind of range bonuses and damage application bonuses we'll see though. It'll really be the deciding factor on whether or not this is a nerf to HML or a massive boost to missiles as a whole. It feels like a moderate to large boost to most missile platforms.

Consider that a sniping TC Cruise Raven will really smack cruisers in the face if those TCs work out well.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Dante Lioncourt
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1651 - 2012-09-19 19:44:15 UTC
You have lost faith ,
You must be saved my brothers follow me to missile heaven where you will saved
by thousands of unnerfed HMs that will slap your face gently P
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1652 - 2012-09-19 19:44:17 UTC
Karsa Egivand wrote:
If the Tracking Computer (etc.) now effect missiles .... doesn't that conflict with the Target Painter module?

Or did i miss something here?


They should do different things. TPs affect the target while TCs affect your ability to project and apply damage.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Veryez
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
#1653 - 2012-09-19 19:45:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


I believe the main source of disagreement here comes from comparisons between Heavy Missiles (a long range weapon platform) and short range weapons like autocannons or blasters. Once upon a time Heavy Missiles were the only medium missile system, and therefore shared features from both close range and long range weapons. Later Heavy Assault Missiles were introduced and were quite good, but Heavy Missiles still overshadowed them since they did similar damage at close range and HMs had the advantage of steller long range performance. There are legitimate problems with many long range weapon systems at the medium size, but the fact that people have gotten used to comparing Heavy Missiles with short range guns should be taken as one of the signs that Heavies are far too good.


I would disagree with the assertion that Heavy Assault missiles are 'quite good' currently their explosion velocity is below that of the average t1 cruiser, with the buff you are giving t1 cruiser velocity this winter they will fall further behind. This should be looked at closely to see if the current HAMs are still 'quite good' compared to the buffed cruisers coming out.

CCP Fozzie wrote:


  • This change will make Tracking Disruptors very overpowered!
    • That is a very valid concern and one we will be continuing to look very closely at. Some options on the table include making TDs affect missiles at a lower severity to guns, dropping the base power of TDs and increasing the bonus from TD bonused ships, or splitting off a separate set of missile disruptor modules that use the same skill and get the same ship bonuses as tracking disruptors (in the same way that ECM ships have different racial jammers). One way or another we will be working with you all to make sure Ewar is as balanced as possible before release in Winter.


    First off this is a very valid concern, I believe the 2 types of TD's (much like types of ECM) to be a very interesting solution. Second, you cannot seriously believe ECM and Target painters are in any way close to each other in balance, yet you give ECM a 15% bonus and painters a 7.5% bonus per level. Painters have long been the joke of EW, and if you are seriously considering 'balancing them' you should start with reduced cycle times (like 4 sec) and bigger boosts on ships w/target painters (like 15% per level). The fact that you are not touching this module shows to me you probably haven't used it very much.

    CCP Fozzie wrote:


    Are you even open to changing any of this or are you just planning to ignore everyone?
    We are a long way from release and none of these proposals are set in stone. What I will say is that we are set in the belief that heavy missiles do need changes to bring them closer in power to other long range weapons. The details of how that happens is definitely up for debate.


    You present an excellent arguement for reducing the DPS in heavy missiles, and I think many agree with that, however what is the justification for also reducing the range? Looking at unbonused ships (yet definate missile ships), The Kertral gets 42.2k out of light missiles, the Nighthawk gets 84.4k out of heavies, and the navy Scorp gets 168.8k out of cruise. Surprisingly enough this 2x progression also follows in Artillery, Beam lasers (excluding the tach which remains in a league of it's own), and Railguns. So how can the range on heavy missiles be so out of alignment if lights and cruise missiles are ok and it follows the same paradigm of other long range weapons?
    Jenn aSide
    Worthless Carebears
    The Initiative.
    #1654 - 2012-09-19 19:46:50 UTC
    Karsa Egivand wrote:
    If the Tracking Computer (etc.) now effect missiles .... doesn't that conflict with the Target Painter module?

    Or did i miss something here?


    It just might depending on how they do it.

    The Painter only affects one target and has a cycle time, fall off ect ect. The TC/TE has none of those problems and affects every salvo the missile ship fires, the TE has no cycle time and the TC's cycle time is irrelevant.
    Onictus
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1655 - 2012-09-19 19:49:01 UTC
    Karsa Egivand wrote:
    If the Tracking Computer (etc.) now effect missiles .... doesn't that conflict with the Target Painter module?

    Or did i miss something here?



    All things bring equal, that is a presumed double whammy, bigger Sig AND faster explosion.

    Battleship missiles anyone.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1656 - 2012-09-19 19:49:10 UTC
    Karsa Egivand wrote:
    If the Tracking Computer (etc.) now effect missiles .... doesn't that conflict with the Target Painter module?

    Or did i miss something here?

    No more that the tracking mods conflict with webs for turrets now. And there is still the fact that, like webs, TP's affect the target and as a result any allied parties while TE/TC's only affect one ships performance.
    Rommiee
    Mercury Inc.
    #1657 - 2012-09-19 19:50:19 UTC
    Bloodpetal wrote:
    To help Fozzie out...


    Balance changes requires tweaking stats.

    The Unified Inventory was a huge code undertaking from the FOUNDATION of EVE up to the highest levels of EVE codes. Making changes on a whim after work was done would've required whole amounts of weeks or more to be scrapped and redone. So, making changes there wasn't just a matter of punching a number in a spreadsheet and adjusting it.

    Unified Inventory needed a lot of love when it came out, but it wasn't because they were ignoring you.



    To help you out....

    There were weeks, yes weeks of replies in the Unified Inventory thread detailing the exact problems that the new system would introduce. Very reasonable and sensible suggestions were made by a large number of people BEFORE this was introduced onto TQ.

    All these were ignored and it was brought in regardless. Then surprise, surprise most of the EVE community were screaming about the EXACT same problems that were spotted by us on SISI.

    So.... Yes, they did completely ignore all the feedback that was given (and there was a lot of it). I think it was a fair question to ask if it is going to happen again.
    Karsa Egivand
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #1658 - 2012-09-19 19:52:01 UTC
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Karsa Egivand wrote:
    If the Tracking Computer (etc.) now effect missiles .... doesn't that conflict with the Target Painter module?

    Or did i miss something here?


    It just might depending on how they do it.

    The Painter only affects one target and has a cycle time, fall off ect ect. The TC/TE has none of those problems and affects every salvo the missile ship fires, the TE has no cycle time and the TC's cycle time is irrelevant.


    That would make the target painter an even more niche module than it is already...
    Warde Guildencrantz
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #1659 - 2012-09-19 19:55:54 UTC
    LtauSTinpoWErs wrote:

    On a side note, I would love to start seeing T2 FOF missiles :)


    Noooooo, delete them from the game already

    TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
    Yuri Wayfare
    Suddenly Ninjas
    Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
    #1660 - 2012-09-19 19:57:36 UTC
    patrick elektros wrote:
    this is about CCP making more money, by making people train other skills and this nerfs people making in game money, in effect making it harder for people to pay for plex with in game isk. in effect hoping that people will in turn have to pay real money to play the game.


    You do realize that every PLEX on the in-game market was bought by another player? And that this other player paid more real-world money for it than a normal 30-day subscription would have cost? "In effect" people buying PLEX for ISK are making CCP more money than regular subscribers.

    "Suddenly, trash pickers! HUNDREDS of winos going through your recyclables." -Piugattuk

    Be careful what you wish for.