These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Aegis] Missile balance package

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dani Maulerant
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#181 - 2015-06-20 04:49:53 UTC
If this allows for TD's to affect missiles, I hope it's not a whole different module, but rather scripts for the current TD modules.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#182 - 2015-06-20 08:11:03 UTC
I have felt for a long time that heavies just needed more raw damage. I would quote my own posts but that's a lot of work for no reason.

Thanks to the balance team for taking this route with heavies. Indeed they might even need another small damage boost in a while.

As far as the missile mids and lows go I'm not sold on the idea but reserve criticism for later. 5% of one application stat or another is not the same as turret mids which give crazy **** like 15% to multiple stats.
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#183 - 2015-06-20 08:58:52 UTC
Kelron Renalard wrote:
Quote:
Heavy Missile Damage is being increased by 5% for all Heavy Missile Types


Does this include Heavy Assault Missile? I'm not sure about it.


HAM's are already incredibly powerful and does not need a buff.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#184 - 2015-06-20 09:15:40 UTC
I don't like the way this modules being implemented. Without promised ewar how do they estimate in what state missiles are? If they become OP, nerfbat will come and missiles guidance modules will be necessity ( and we will have tanking problems here). This isn't nerfing Ishtar by 2,5% at stat. I feel it's like "we don't know what to do with missiles, so let's introduce new modules and see what happen". S*** storm will happen. Rise admited somewhere that there's a thin line between missiles being underpowered and overpowered.

For those who want "tracking disruptors" working on missiles. There's no such thing as "tracking" with missiles. What stat should be affected then? It's not that simple as with turrets tracking.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Kadesh Priestess
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#185 - 2015-06-20 09:31:41 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
For those who want "tracking disruptors" working on missiles. There's no such thing as "tracking" with missiles. What stat should be affected then? It's not that simple as with turrets tracking.
Just rename to weapon disruptors, why won't it work?
Arla Sarain
#186 - 2015-06-20 10:10:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Why won't it work?


Keras Authion wrote:

-The missile tracking disruption is tacked on to tracking disruptor. Result: tracking disruptor becomes a really lucrative if not a must-have defensive module and missile ships lose tank/utility/dps to the MGE or MCE if they want to keep the current level of effectiveness. True for gunboats too in a part as the tracking disruptor becomes more common in fits.


Staple fits will include tackle, TD and drones for damage.

Hence no missile TD. Anything that these module will bring can be countered by damps.
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#187 - 2015-06-20 10:16:13 UTC
This is fantastic stuff. However:

Hanazava Karyna wrote:
Now we need only some effective EWAR that works on missiles.


... I will admit I'm kinda in agreement with Hanazava. The cynical side of me (read: 90% of me) expected you to nerf missiles and require these new mods just to keep them workable. You didn't, and I kinda want to hug the devs in charge of it, but I think the time has come for maybe alternate TD scripts? Or a missile specific TD.

TLDR: Overjoyed that missiles are getting some love, and think this is great stuff, but I think it's now the right time to add in a countermodule.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#188 - 2015-06-20 10:50:19 UTC
Capqu wrote:
[Talwar, tfi]

Type-D Attenuation Signal Augmentation
Damage Control II
Ballistic Control System II

5MN Quad LiF Restrained Microwarpdrive
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines, Targeting Range Script

Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Light Missile

Small Ionic Field Projector II
Small Hydraulic Bay Thrusters I
Small Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I

110~km range
150 dps
10 mil


Lock range 72km.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#189 - 2015-06-20 10:59:38 UTC
As Arla Sarain wrote. Damps will be good to countermeasure that modules.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Gorski Car
#190 - 2015-06-20 12:10:54 UTC
These modules are really strong.

Collect this post
Mornak
Exotic Dancers Union
Hatakani Trade Winds Combine
#191 - 2015-06-20 13:23:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mornak
What will happen if i turn off / swap script of one of these modules while missiles are already on their way? ...will the missiles boni be defined at launch or recalculated mid-flight?
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt
Empusa.
#192 - 2015-06-20 13:31:17 UTC
I like this.

What could you do else here CCP?
1. decrease volume of HMs and HAMs too
2. remove kinetic lock
3. do something with garmur and orthrus - they ruin the game (as well as svipul) and need nerf.
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#193 - 2015-06-20 13:36:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Airi Cho
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt wrote:
they ruin the game (as well as svipul) and need nerf.


Svipul and Confessor got nerfed already.
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#194 - 2015-06-20 14:30:17 UTC
I also have some concerns that without adequate stacking penalties, these modules could greatly enhance the power of gank stealth bombers. A Nemesis or Manticore with mids and lows full of these guidance modules could apply massive damage to cruisers, destroyers, and even frigates. With no recalibration delay and the element of surprise, torpedoes will far surpass rockets for assaulting small targets, including Asteros.

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#195 - 2015-06-20 15:11:51 UTC
Chance Ravinne wrote:
I also have some concerns that without adequate stacking penalties, these modules could greatly enhance the power of gank stealth bombers. A Nemesis or Manticore with mids and lows full of these guidance modules could apply massive damage to cruisers, destroyers, and even frigates. With no recalibration delay and the element of surprise, torpedoes will far surpass rockets for assaulting small targets, including Asteros.


I don't get why everyone assumes those wouldnt have stacking penalties. What do you base such assumptions on?
Porucznik Borewicz
GreenSwarm
#196 - 2015-06-20 15:24:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Porucznik Borewicz
CCP Rise wrote:
We would have liked to include disruption modules to go along with these enhancement modules but there are actually some technical hurdles we need to figure out and we didn't want to keep holding back on adding these in the mean time. Look for those sometime in the future.
Looks interesting. I think having a single weapon systems disruptor would be enough. Just add functionality to the Tracking Disruptor that is already in the game, change the module name to something more general and make it run 4 different scripts, 2 for turrets and 2 for missile launchers.
Mr LaboratoryRat
Confederation of DuckTape Lovers
#197 - 2015-06-20 18:47:13 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Jassmin Joy wrote:
Any thoughts on the effectiveness of SmartBombs on missiles and the ability to firewall them?

Yes, but we haven't had a chance to post that thread quite yet.


Dear Fozzy,

SmartBombs are reaaaaaalllly overdue for a revise. Please please please
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#198 - 2015-06-20 18:47:56 UTC
Airi Cho wrote:
Chance Ravinne wrote:
I also have some concerns that without adequate stacking penalties, these modules could greatly enhance the power of gank stealth bombers. A Nemesis or Manticore with mids and lows full of these guidance modules could apply massive damage to cruisers, destroyers, and even frigates. With no recalibration delay and the element of surprise, torpedoes will far surpass rockets for assaulting small targets, including Asteros.


I don't get why everyone assumes those wouldnt have stacking penalties. What do you base such assumptions on?


The rigs don't have them.
stoicfaux
#199 - 2015-06-20 19:07:40 UTC
Airi Cho wrote:
Chance Ravinne wrote:
I also have some concerns that without adequate stacking penalties, these modules could greatly enhance the power of gank stealth bombers. A Nemesis or Manticore with mids and lows full of these guidance modules could apply massive damage to cruisers, destroyers, and even frigates. With no recalibration delay and the element of surprise, torpedoes will far surpass rockets for assaulting small targets, including Asteros.


I don't get why everyone assumes those wouldnt have stacking penalties. What do you base such assumptions on?

The potential imbalance is that TPs, MGC/MGEs, Rigor/Flare rigs, and Webs do not stack against each other and since their effects on the 2nd part of the missile damage formula are multiplicative, it could potentially lead to something nasty.

For example, rough numbers show that a Cruise Phoenix with 4 MGCs/wScripts, coupled with a Hyena or Rapier(?) that can land 3 bonused TPs and a 60% web on a shield tanked MWD'ing Ishtar can one shot the Ishtar (however links might save the Ishtar.) I wouldn't consider that a particularly imbalanced edge case though.


Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#200 - 2015-06-20 19:19:08 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
As Arla Sarain wrote. Damps will be good to countermeasure that modules.


against range scripts yes... but for close range setups damps wont cut it.

What i would propose...is this

Currently Caldari have only one form of ewar and that is ECM.

ECM is very strong because of this. I would nerf ECM so that it only breaks the lock and remove the targeting delay penalty (think of target spectrum breaker)

This would then open Caldari to a second type of ewar which IMO should be the EQ of TD but for Missiles.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.