These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Missiles and the future of caldari ships in EVE

Author
The Protato
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-11-28 20:27:00 UTC
Merch BAYLOR wrote:
ROFL....

It's like saying BLasters shouldn't do more damage than Rails since they have a reduced range.

You're funny!


You realise that they were being sarcastic...?
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#42 - 2012-11-28 20:29:41 UTC
I didnt realize that a slight nerf to one missile would kill a whole race. I guess the Caldari werent as powerful as they thought if a slight fart could push them off the edge. RIP Caldari race, if only you had another ship to choose from besides the Tengu/Drake. Roll

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2012-11-28 20:37:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
BuckStrider wrote:
Berendas wrote:
Caldari are fine. They have been fine (overpowered in some cases). Caldari-exclusive pilots seem to have a persecution complex about being a bad PVP race, and they are ofc dead wrong. I fly all 4 races in subcap PVP and about half of what I end up flying is Caldari.


Yeah those Raven and Rokh fleets are all the rage!

At last check PL was actually doing quite well with Rokhs post crucible. Also why is an HML nerf, a nerf to one of the 2 launcher types bonused on the drake, removing the ship from combat?
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#44 - 2012-11-29 08:21:23 UTC
Sarah Schneider wrote:
As far as dps goes, all HML ships are almost unaffected since the buff to T2 missiles raw damage and GMP practically nullifies the new penalties, to an extent that the nerf effect is so trivial to dps, they don't even matter.


That just wiffle I'm afraid.

Fury HML lose out on damage, (lots of) range, explosion velocity AND signature radius.


It's not the end of days but it's VERY noticeable and non-trivial.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-11-29 08:35:08 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Fury HML lose out on damage


Still better than T2 short range ammo for medium long range turrets at Fury range.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
(lots of) range


Still better than T2 short range ammo for medium long range turrets.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
explosion velocity


Still better than medium long range turret tracking.

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
signature radius


Still better than medium long range turret sig resolution.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-11-29 08:38:33 UTC
Hi Jorma, more sideways posting ignoring the point as always I see.

I'm not getting into this with you again.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-11-29 08:50:41 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Hi Jorma, more sideways posting ignoring the point as always I see.

I'm not getting into this with you again.


What is the point?
Lance Rossiter
CHAINS Corp
#48 - 2012-11-29 11:00:04 UTC
I'm still torn between whether to focus my training on lasers or missiles. The prospect of an upcoming nerf to the most interesting category of missile should be offputting, but the math just doesn't seem to give cause for concern to my relatively inexperienced eye: Damage / ROF for standard ammo at Tech I puts HMLs comfortably ahead of Beam Lasers to the point where it seems like they ought to be able to still absorb the nerf and come out fighting. Granted, they don't have the same access to high-damage ammo types, but that's offset by their lack of capacitor cost, ability to switch to auto-targeting versions, ease of access to pure versions of each damage type, and general effectiveness at any range up to their maximum.

On the other hand, lasers are very shiny.

It doesn't help that the Amarrian ship designs / progression are confusing as all get out: laser ships become close range missile boats at tech II, there's a lack of tech I missile boats (and yet they're turning the Inquisitor into something else?) but there's also strange gaps in the line up of "combat" rather than "attack" laser boats (and yet they're turning the prophecy into something else?) and the whole thing just kinda gives me a headache. At least the Caldari line up of missile boats is somewhat more consistent.
Kurt Saken
Star Cluster Wanderer
#49 - 2012-11-29 11:05:09 UTC
Silk daShocka wrote:
Feel free to abandon the caldari line.




As a Caldari and HAM fan i say no to this. The sky won't fall.
Long live the State.

Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#50 - 2012-11-29 11:43:02 UTC
I think the nerf is measured and sensible.

And if the Drake becomes kind of crappy and is not much used anymore, that's actually not so bad. It has had its time in the sun... years, actually. Time to shake up things a little and make something else the most popular BC.

Not that I think it'll happen, Drake's gonna be fine, especially with HAMs.

.

Nyaris Wolfe
SHUT UP SEV
#51 - 2012-11-29 12:49:40 UTC
I hate Drakes. Kill all drakes. Even and especially MY drake.

Mosty boring ship ever.

But come on a sec, Missiles were always going to need to have this done when compared to other weapon types they have range, they don't need power to fire, they do good damage and they're immune to tracking disruption, the only defense against a missile system is don't get targetted or move faster than they can.

Missiles are great and have their place, but this mass exodus from Missiles IF any such exodus occurs is going to be 99% people who are looking for the next easymode

I am an Alt who's main is too damn cheap to sub. http://aracimia.blogspot.co.uk/ Brony Capsuleer best Capsuleer!

Josef Djugashvilis
#52 - 2012-11-29 13:11:53 UTC
Kali Starchaser wrote:
So, I am hearing VERY discouraging things about the changes to missiles and many people I know are abandoning their caldari ships and starting over training for Gallente or Amarr ships/weapons. I am wondering if someone can 100% clarify these missile changes, and if they are as big of a change as I am hearing will there be an option to transfer the millions of points people have invested in missiles into something else of their choice?


If they know that missiles are going to take a hit, (pardon the pun) they will probably also know that drones are due for a bashing in missions as well.

This is not a signature.

Eli Green
The Arrow Project
#53 - 2012-11-29 13:32:25 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Van Kuzco wrote:
I actually think the new HAMs will clear C1s faster than the old HMs. I'm excited to try it out. Has anyone done so on the test server yet?

Maybe in a C1 you can use HAM, but C5 & C6 will be a huge PITA now as spawns can be well over 140 km away. Even with the increased speed subsystem, it took a HML Tengu a while to get into range, and now it will take even longer *sigh*


ohnoes maybe you'll have to get some lokis and dreads and do it like the rest of us Roll

wumbo

Emperors Bride
Space Mermaids
#54 - 2012-11-29 13:46:16 UTC
Eli Green wrote:


ohnoes maybe you'll have to get some lokis and dreads and do it like the rest of us Roll


So true.

Do it like the rest of us. Find the new cookie cutter ship with the cookie cutter fit to do the cookie cutter content.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-11-29 14:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Merch BAYLOR wrote:
Silk daShocka wrote:
Natassia Krasnoo wrote:
I spoke to an individual who was testing this on the test servers and they essentially said the HM nerf hammer was way too strong. They are barely, (and he heavily emphasized barely a couple times), above the power of HAMs now. He said the difference was actually minute and that HAMs ROF may put them over the top. I myself haven't had the time to test this, so if anyone could confirm this it would be great.


Working as intended.

You dont' think that HAMS are supposed to do more damage than heavy missiles, you know since they only go like 1/4 of the distance?



ROFL....

It's like saying BLasters shouldn't do more damage than Rails since they have a reduced range.

You're funny!



This is what most missile users are not understanding, this core change to missiles is awesome to bring it on pair with other weapon systems, of course I like my 130km HM shooting Tengu but I think this is not reasonably balanced.
If I want to hit with 720's above 120km I have to do total sacrifice on my tank prop mods to fit exclusively dmg/tracking computers TE's and rigs. But we're then comparing an orange (hurricane) with an apple (tengu) which is wrong.

Then we can start looking at same current tiers BC's, all LR fitted with T2 ammo, no tank and prop mods. Only dmg and range mods: HM's are completely out of whack compared with all other weapon systems of the same size one same tier BC.

So this change is for the greater good and I'll deal with this change on my Tengu, I'm also happy HAM's are getting such an awesome and deserved buff. -SR missiles in general-

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Sarah Schneider
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#56 - 2012-11-29 22:01:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Schneider
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Sarah Schneider wrote:
As far as dps goes, all HML ships are almost unaffected since the buff to T2 missiles raw damage and GMP practically nullifies the new penalties, to an extent that the nerf effect is so trivial to dps, they don't even matter.


That just wiffle I'm afraid.

Fury HML lose out on damage, (lots of) range, explosion velocity AND signature radius.


It's not the end of days but it's VERY noticeable and non-trivial.

It is not, and it is trivial because when talking about T2 missiles, the overall dps is practically increased with the new changes. Damage/dps decrease =/= damage penalties. Countering penalties in missiles are done by fitting mid slot mods. Dps mods are low slot mods. So when you minimize the penalties to an acceptable level, for instance in missiles say it's to deal it's max potential to battlecruiser hulls and above (or even cruisers and above), all it's left is the dps, which will get added bonus in the next patch.

A single TP with GMP at IV (even without rigors/flares) will still almost eliminate the penalties caused by exp. radius-target sig. The only thing left is the exp. velocity changes and since it's a 2 digit number (or 3 with good skills), -16% change is almost insignificant to the extent that it's the same as it is now.

Unlike guns, missile boats don't need TEs (yet), so even with stacking penalties, the potential dps difference in comparison is still pretty wide.

"I'd rather have other players get shot by other players than not interacting with others" -CCP Soundwave

John Caligan
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-11-29 22:21:51 UTC
Quite frankly, I am a bit peeved at the explosion radius increase and damage cut coming to HMs. I fly a PvE Drake in LV3's, and I already do crap damage against my targets. Now, I'm gonna do even less...
Oopsy Bear
Doomheim
#58 - 2012-11-30 00:17:08 UTC
John Caligan wrote:
Quite frankly, I am a bit peeved at the explosion radius increase and damage cut coming to HMs. I fly a PvE Drake in LV3's, and I already do crap damage against my targets. Now, I'm gonna do even less...


Is this sarcasm or do you not know what rigs to use or what to put into the low slots?
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#59 - 2012-11-30 01:07:26 UTC
Lance Rossiter wrote:
I'm still torn between whether to focus my training on lasers or missiles. The prospect of an upcoming nerf to the most interesting category of missile should be offputting, but the math just doesn't seem to give cause for concern to my relatively inexperienced eye: Damage / ROF for standard ammo at Tech I puts HMLs comfortably ahead of Beam Lasers to the point where it seems like they ought to be able to still absorb the nerf and come out fighting. Granted, they don't have the same access to high-damage ammo types, but that's offset by their lack of capacitor cost, ability to switch to auto-targeting versions, ease of access to pure versions of each damage type, and general effectiveness at any range up to their maximum.

On the other hand, lasers are very shiny.

It doesn't help that the Amarrian ship designs / progression are confusing as all get out: laser ships become close range missile boats at tech II, there's a lack of tech I missile boats (and yet they're turning the Inquisitor into something else?) but there's also strange gaps in the line up of "combat" rather than "attack" laser boats (and yet they're turning the prophecy into something else?) and the whole thing just kinda gives me a headache. At least the Caldari line up of missile boats is somewhat more consistent.

I prefer to think of the Amarrian line up as "pleasantly eccentric".

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

loki energon
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2012-11-30 14:21:57 UTC
John Caligan wrote:
Quite frankly, I am a bit peeved at the explosion radius increase and damage cut coming to HMs. I fly a PvE Drake in LV3's, and I already do crap damage against my targets. Now, I'm gonna do even less...


is this just a troll? really? if you arent clobbering L3 missions inna drake, i have one thing to say.
YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG.
a well fit drake can do 500+ dps. if thats waaay more than you are getting, check your fitttings, check your rigs, and for heavens sake train your support skills to at LEAST 4

kill em all.