These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#161 - 2012-09-18 15:30:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
I'd be OK with a 20% damage nerf to heavies if they gave the Drake 8 launcher slots!



DO IT FOZZIE YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO




EDIT: Oh yeah and give the Cerb another launcher too, plus some grid and CPU, for the love of mike.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

MisterNick
The Sagan Clan
#162 - 2012-09-18 15:30:26 UTC
Real men HAM Drake anyway Cool

"Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom."

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#163 - 2012-09-18 15:30:50 UTC
In other words, its another nerf to small gang and solo (where the damage nerf comes into play), and another buff to blobs (where the damage and range nerf doesnt matter nearly as much).


The entire theme of winter so far is "buff blobs, make solo impossible."

CCP obviously wants every in blobs (since making #s important makes ccp more isk), and is ok with removing small gang (lol ewar buffs, more free damage mitigation that is easier to get, nerfs to the most common solo ships)
Domiblob
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#164 - 2012-09-18 15:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Domiblob
This is pretty much the most badly thought out balancing change I've ever seen. I don't disagree for a second that the Drake is over-powered, but it's over-powered because it has a battleship sized tank and huge range (which isn't currently affected by tracking). The nerf to a Drake should be in the form of a reduction in tank, followed by a reduction in range, if anything. The last thing that needs touching is it's DPS, which is already it's most underwhelming quality.

Edit: The above applies to both PvP and PvE applications too. Have you considered how this will affect anyone who lives in Gurista space where the two ships most harshly hit by the change are the Drake and Tengu (the two ships primarily capable of dealing pure Kinetic damage at a decent level)? You effectively just nerfed a quarter of null-sec ratting too, and since the changes to Tech it is already difficult for null sec alliances to generate income. Ratting taxes are literally the only functioning method CCP have implemented of passively generating decent income from a member base, which you will also be hitting.
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#165 - 2012-09-18 15:31:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Yun Kuai
I have to agree with everyone else on this one. I love my drake and I love to go solo'ing in it, but when you kill the dps by 20%.....really ccp? really?

Nerf the range, acceptable.
Make them receptive to TD penalties, we'll see how much it hurts them
Kill their DPS: USELESS SHIP NOW Ugh

I agree, bring the nerf hammer down on drakes and canes, but make sure we nerf the right part and we do it efficiently and correctly. If we haven't learned anything in the past, panic nerfs to the extreme ruin ships for years to follow *cough* gallente *cough*

Also, side note: Someone better be looking at TD's native strengths at all lvl 5 skills on an non-bonused ship and how they can be avoided so that the entire eve playerbase doens't automatically fit scram/web/TD before going out to solo or small gang fights. They need to be specialized enough that they are useful, but not so much that they ruin everything.

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------

Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#166 - 2012-09-18 15:31:38 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
I'd be OK with a 20% damage nerf to heavies if they gave the Drake 8 launcher slots!



DO IT FOZZIE YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO




EDIT: Oh yeah and give the Cerb another launcher too, plus some grid and CPU, for the love of mike.


The ship model screams this should have 8 launchers.
Ensign X
#167 - 2012-09-18 15:32:03 UTC
Whiners: DRAEK AND TENGOO TOO POWERFUL! NERFFFF!!

CCP: Welp, they do make a good point. The Drake and Tengu both use Heavy Missiles, so let's nerf Heavy Missiles.

Random, intelligent ex-CCP employee: But won't that nerf every other ship that uses Heavy Missiles?

CCP: So what, nerfing 1 weapon system is WAY easier than nerfing 2 ships.

Random, intelligent ex-CCP employee: But aren't we already nerfing the Drake?

CCP: Shut up, you're fired.

Whiners: YAY!
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2012-09-18 15:32:25 UTC
have you considered to look at the maelstrom at the same time you look at the drake ? nerfing only the drake (and tengu) could have some not so nice consequences for quite a lot of pilots :(
Doddy
Excidium.
#169 - 2012-09-18 15:32:35 UTC
NiGhTTraX wrote:
The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS.
With 7x T2 HAM launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing Scourge outputs 401 DPS.

The Hurricane with 6x T2 720mm Artys and 2x T2 Gyrostabs with EMP outputs 371 DPS.
The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs with EMP outputs 477 DPS.

The new Drake will only have 0.8 x 321 = 257 DPS at a 25% lower range or 320 DPS with HAMs. It becomes the shittiest battlecruiser in terms of DPS. And if you nerf it further by reducing its tank, well.... Oh and now they can be tracking disrupted? Goodbye solo missile platforms!

CCP Frozie wrote:
The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm.


No other high tier battlecruiser requires implants or gun downgrading to fulfill its intended purpose. These decisions seem terrible on paper imho.


Hate to tell you this bud but fitting an oversize tank (LSE) is not "fulfilling its intended purpose". Having to fit smaller guns or use a fitting mod to fit a ship size aboves tanking mod seems pretty sensible to me......
The End
Order of the Resurrected
#170 - 2012-09-18 15:32:50 UTC
Why don't you just remove missiles altogether and just give us sticks and rocks to toss at one another ?
Vicar2008
MCMLXXVI
#171 - 2012-09-18 15:33:02 UTC
While the nerf to HML nerf to range i can agree with, the nerf to damage is pretty dam awful 20% and is a terrible terrible idea imo. Cerebus HAC has just went from bad to Eagle bad, and trust me there now both worst HAC there is.......
Melina Lin
Universal Frog
#172 - 2012-09-18 15:33:19 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly

Weren't these of all missiles the ones with the absolute shortest range? I hope they still make it out the launch tubes without a tracking mod. Cool
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#173 - 2012-09-18 15:33:23 UTC
Danny Centauri wrote:
Wow quite shocking to read the comments, why on earth are you people comparing HMLs to pulse/blasters/autos? For god sake atleast compare like to like weapons platforms to spot weaknesses.

Don't like the HML changes, I find med rails a hell of a lot more frustrating! If you really want to compare drake to blaster boats atleast use HAM stats otherwise reading your posts is just cringe worthy.



So your argument, if I am following it correctly, would appear to be:

"Medium rails are crappy and heavy missiles are good, so the right thing to do is make the missiles as crappy as the rails"

Yes?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#174 - 2012-09-18 15:33:27 UTC
Range reduction is great. As a drake pilot it was really unfair to the other BCs that I was so awesome cause I could hit so far.

However the damage reduction.... Well let's just say it's not so good. Drakes were already out DPS'ed by canes and the cane only had 6 turrets. In addition drakes are slower, can't fit neuts, have no damage type variety. My drake could hit maybe 400 DPS. Canes were hitting 550+ DPS. I think HMs should get a slight (5-10%) damage reduction, but HAMs should get a slight damage upgrade (5-10%). Really make HAM drakes competitive with Canes.

I can't wait to see what CCP has in store for the drake. But don't nerf HM damage by 20%. This in one thing that can be fixed with a nerf and a buff.
Lord MuffloN
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#175 - 2012-09-18 15:33:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord MuffloN
Some thoughts:

20% damage reduction? Maybe a bit too high, 10-15% perhaps.
Are the changes to range and so only for guided missiles or all?
TD's will need an overall nerf, not much.
Medium rails and beams still suck.
Hurricanes double damage bonus makes 720 artys "too good" compared to the rest of the mid sized weaponry, but I'm sure it'll be nerfed once the hammer swings to battlecruisers, oh, they're next on the list are they? *glee*

EDIT: Seeing Minmatar pilots having to choose between gank and tank, their misty eyes and dialated pupills along with the general panic and confusion, oh god, it's so sweet and so long overdue, the saying that he who waits for something good never waits too long, it's so true, it was all worth this.

But all in all I think most of the changes are good, keep it up!
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#176 - 2012-09-18 15:34:09 UTC
While I'm not particularly against those changes, I feel the need to state/remind a few things.

HAMs really are underused right now. Except for the few HAM Drakes and the HAM PVE Tengus (I don't see many HAM PVE Tengus, and everytime I suggest that a corpmate should use HAM, it's always the same "I want to shoot farther than 5kms, thank you"), every Tengu is a HM Tengu, every Drake is a HM Drake.

You should really look into those so you can released both changes at the same time.

I'm against the Hurricane change. Change one of the two damage bonuses to something else, remove the missile launcher slots and add a turret hardpoint. That would help with the PG nerf you want, wouldn't hurt the DPS so much, and it would definetly look cool.

This is a creative nerf, and it would still allow armor tanked autocanes. Which is good.

And about the HM missile changes, I really feel like the problem is the Drake, not the HMs. The Drake's problem is its tank. It has a good damage projection, low DPS and very high tank (That can challenge battleships' ).

This has to change. But I don't think that giving it an even worse DPS will fix it the way it should be fixed.

I'm pretty sure the solution revolves around the Drakes' bonuses.

Also, I don't know if It's completly out of the "Winter rebalance patch", but please, please look into BS sized missiles so that the Raven becomes a usable battleship again, for both PVP and PVE purposes (What I mean is that new Caldaries train for the Drake, and then train for the Tengu. Make it so that it's actually cool to aim for a usable Raven).

If you want a couple ideas for the Raven :

A PG buff (+3000 PWG so you can actually fit dual Heavy Neutralizers without fitting mods. It's a good way to make an otherwise baddish ship a good ship. The Tempest without its' neuts would be "meh").

A change to the "10% bonus to velocity for all BS sized missiles" bonus is required.

Along with this, buff torpedoes speed.

Who shoots Cruise missiles at long range ? I mean, for PVE purposes, you won't shoot farther than 100km anyway, and for PVP purposes...I don't think I need to explain.

Now Torpedoes. Without skills, they hit at 9kms. Which is...less than enjoyable. Maybe they'll be usable with the new tracking enhancer change and that'll be cool. But seriously. Give torps a bit more range, and switch that velocity bonus to something usable/useful. Maybe you'll end up with a usable PVP Missile battleship. Even tho I'm pretty sure this will never happen.
Sellendis
The Ares project
#177 - 2012-09-18 15:34:28 UTC
Holy crap people, its all ok, since we are getting a massive Cruise miss. buff.....o wait.....what? Didn't think so..

So can CCP tell us what Caldari ships we are supposed to fly?
Since the rest of the lineup are almost useless at their roles, Raven, CN raven, SNI.
What about rails? Crappy overall.

One working weapon system nerfed with range and dmg? Ok, what do we get in return?
Can we get 20% DPS and range buff for minmatar ACs? It would only be fair.
Grog Drinker
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#178 - 2012-09-18 15:35:03 UTC
Not sure I like the tracking changes with tds and missiles. The HML and cane nerf both look good and should shake up the meta game significantly.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#179 - 2012-09-18 15:38:21 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
and what about the heavy assault missile? doesn't it need a buff? noone uses them...


Well, thats because the HAM is supposed to be the high-damage, close range variant. Right now heavy missiles are a high-damage, long range variant. There's little reason to equip HAM's when you can get get almost the same DPS and much longer range. Scaling back the heavy missile DPS allows the HAM's to shine as the superior choice if you want maximum DPS. I predict that HAM's will become much more popular for Drakes, caracals, and other ships wanting to achieve optimum DPS in a fitting.


HMs > 10% decrease in damage
HAMs > 10% increase in damage

will make things more reasonable

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

Anessa Smith
Interference Inc
#180 - 2012-09-18 15:38:25 UTC
does it mean that faction HMLs with faction missiles are going to do more damage than t2 HMLs with t2 fury missiles?