These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#1021 - 2015-08-04 17:21:13 UTC
/me pokes the microphone "Hello..?"

"echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "missiles still need help" "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.." "echo.."

Okay I left one hint in here but I feel so alone and abandonned now Sad

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1022 - 2015-08-04 22:56:24 UTC
So let's see what we have to look forward to in Galatea...
• Dominix re-design
• Camera kill-shot update (but no new cool explosions)
• Previously-announced fleep warp mechanics

And what's not in Galatea...
• Update to the MGC and MGE
• Proper missile rebalance package

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1023 - 2015-08-05 00:20:33 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
We are starting with 3 types in each group. Tech I, Compact (lower fitting requirements), and Tech II. Faction variations would certainly be on the table for later releases when we are happy with the tuning of numbers on these first mods.

Except most of us aren't happy with the numbers. But here's what you can do to fix them.

Missile Guidance Enhancer I ... 5%(+0.5) Ev, 5% Er
Pro-Nav Compact Missile Guidance Enhancer ... 6% Ev (+1.0), 6% (+0.5) Er
Missile Guidance Enhancer II ... 7.5% (+2.0) Ev, 7.5% (+1.5) Er
Mordus Legion Guidance Enhancer ... 10% Ev, 10% Er, 7.5% Mv, 7.5% Ft

Missile Guidance Computer I ... 6% (+1.0) Ev, 6% (+1.0) Er
Astro-Inertial Compact Missile Guidance Computer ... 7.5% (+1.5) Ev, 7.5% (+1.5) Er
Missile Guidance Computer II ... 8.5% (+1.0) Ev, 8.5% (+1.0) Er
Caldari Navy Guidance Computer ... 10% Ev, 10% Er, 6% Mv, 6% Ft
Dread Guristas Guidance Computer ... 10% Ev, 10% Er, 6% Mv, 6% Ft

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#1024 - 2015-08-05 07:49:35 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Let us know what you think!


We did. Now we are drawing cricles and repeatedly say the same things over and over again, mixed up with some more or less entertaining interludes and the common piano playing Fedos in the mix.


Now the 1 million isk question from us to you is, what do you think?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1025 - 2015-08-05 12:13:24 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Maybe this is the thread to ressurect my old idea

Short version: Add launchers which modify ammo properties - so long range ones add range but reduce precision, short range ones reduce range but add precision.

Long verison with some copy pasting:

It would give missiles some fine tuning options.

It would be to mirror the guns having smaller sized turrets per size class.

So guns have, for example:

Small Size 1 [Meta 1-N]
Small Size 2 [Meta 1-N]
Small Size 3 [Meta 1-N]
Medium Size 1 [Meta 1-N]
Medium Size 2 [Meta 1-N]
Medium Size 3 [Meta 1-N]

And so on

Launchers have:

Small size 1 [Meta 1-N]
Medium size 1 [Meta 1-N]
Large size 1 [Meta 1-N]


Add some more sizes, modify properties to give players meaningful choices and CCP no longer have to balance a weapon system doing XXX DPS at 0-250km.


As I see it:
>It would allow pilots to fit for a more defined role
>Allow CCP to have some flexibility in controlling the launchers and their meta with a lot more precision.
>Give launcher users fitting compromises - Currently there is no launcher equivalent analogous to dropping 425mm to 220mm AC's for fitting reasons
>Mitigates the problem of trying to balance a 0-100km+ weapon system into something which is "fair" across all ranges by breaking that engagement range down into chunks.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#1026 - 2015-08-05 14:18:31 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Maybe this is the thread to ressurect my old idea

Short version: Add launchers which modify ammo properties - so long range ones add range but reduce precision, short range ones reduce range but add precision.


Don't forget that missiles are drones in that they have the modifiers on them and the launchers on have a maxium ammo, reload time and cycle time on them, the missiles are not changed.

But maybe they can do it now.

My last offer would be to give all missles 5m explosion radius and 300m/s explosion velocity - missiles fixed and we can take another look at some tech one destroyers, Black Ops, small railguns, large railguns, remove capital ships and make some less useful subsystems more useful.

Then we can conquer the universe with what we want and not what we have to.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

BN0216 Lim
Members of Sheol
#1027 - 2015-08-05 15:25:46 UTC  |  Edited by: BN0216 Lim
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
I was going to say that Bastion will increase your fof range, but holy crap, I didn't realize they could go so far.
They out-range everything else.. out of bastion they hit 233km with my stats/skills, and hit like 290km or so in bastion.

lol... it's funny that these modules have apparently given a somewhat fix to fofs, but makes other missile types show their flaws

Yes, 233km sounds about right with a +5 missile projection implant. You can actually hit out to over 400km with the Barghest, although I'm honestly not sure the target would even be on grid...


I think you are confusing the role bonus of Barghest which the actual range bonus would be as same as a Raven or a Golem. It increases 200% of velocity, but decrease 50% of flight time = (1+2) x (1-0.5) = 1.5 which is equivalent to 50% increase of velocity of Ravens.

But anyhow, I don't need 223km or 400km missiles. I don't need an AFK golem.

I need... nothing with this ****.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1028 - 2015-08-05 15:57:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
BN0216 Lim wrote:
I think you are confusing the role bonus of Barghest which the actual range bonus would be as same as a Raven or a Golem. It increases 200% of velocity, but decrease 50% of flight time = (1+2) x (1-0.5) = 1.5 which is equivalent to 50% increase of velocity of Ravens.

But anyhow, I don't need 223km or 400km missiles. I don't need an AFK golem. I need... nothing with this ****.

I'm definitely not. I won't go into details how you can get 400km+ out of a Barghest - but it involves implants, rigs and utilizing both your lows and mids with MGEs and MGCs. The rig and slot configuration is different with the ships you mention, so even with the Golem's Bastion bonus it still falls short of the Barghest. You can probably get close to the same range with either of the Ravens, but you're going to seriously impair DPS in the process. There's also the huge difference in velocity, which really precludes using anything other than a Barghest (since you're looking at upwards of a half minute to reach these ranges otherwise). In any event, I was merely illustrating that you could get this range - not that it was necessarily feasible or even practical.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1029 - 2015-08-12 03:45:31 UTC
These modules are officially useless.
After spending several weeks trying to get them to work on just about every level across multiple hulls, I'm officially giving up. Here are a few points to ponder (feel free to experiment to draw your own conclusions):

Stacking penalties. The new stacking penalties have almost no impact on previous fits. T2 ships like the Cerberus and Golem only have 2 rig slots anyway, and most setups with three rig slots typically featured a pair of T2 rigors and a single T1 or T2 flare (depending on calibration available). These penalties serve only to deter running more than two of the new missile modules, which is kind of a joke when low slots are typically a premium on any ship - let alone missile-based hulls.

Rigors rule. Based on the current missile formula, rigors still reign supreme. Unlike flares (which cease having any effect once you reach or exceed a target's velocity), reducing your missile explosion radius below the target's signature has a retroactive effect on target velocity. A scripted MGC II gives you 15% explosion radius, 15% explosion velocity, requires CPU and is an active module. Against a stationary target or one where the base missile velocity already matches or exceeds target velocity - the MGC is worth less than a T2 rigor. The benefit from a passive MGE II is even more marginal, as it yields a whopping 5.5% explosion radius and 5.5% explosion velocity. Against a moving target, this is even less beneficial than a single T1 rigor. Heck, even a T1 flare provides more damage application than a MGE II. And again, it's not like low slots grow on trees (especially on ships like the Cerberus, Tengu or Golem).

Flight time. I honestly have no idea why this variable was even included - because it's borderline useless. Anyone that flies missile ships knows that unless it's a free hull bonus, you run hydraulic rigs to increase your missile velocity (and subsequent range). This not only reduces the frequency of lost volleys in transit, but increases the difficulty to outrun your missiles. Flight time and rocket fuel cache rigs do neither. So would you run a scripted MGC II just to give you +11% missile velocity?

Fitting requirements and tradeoffs. I won't even comment on the excessively high CPU requirements for these modules, but I'll once again point out that low slots are almost an endangered species on most missile-based ships. MGEs are a lost cause, so I'm going to skip over these entirely. Since a comparison has already been made between rigs and MGCs, let's look at target painters, stasis webs and warp scramblers. There is absolutely zero reason to run a MGC over a target painter, and outside of PvE stasis webs and warp scramblers are going to be far more important modules. In fact, almost anything is more valuable than a mid-slot MGC (any capacitor or shield augmentation, for example).

What's to be done?
These modules (and the "missile rebalance" package is an unmitigated disaster, and the only solution is to apply fire in liberal quantities... This need to be entirely scrapped and redesigned from the ground up.

1. Missiles operate at a fundamentally different level than drones or guns, so trying to make them behave in a similar fashion is an effort in futility (they need something unique). That being said, it should also be pointed out that T2 launchers do not benefit in the same manner with respect to specialization that T2 guns do (T2 gunnery specialization augments Faction ammunition, but T2 missile specialization has no effect on Faction ammunition). There's also the higher skill requirements, but I digress...
2. Missile formula (provided it can be found in the Legacy code, it's due for an update).
3. Kinetic pigeon-holing. Nuff said.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1030 - 2015-08-12 04:08:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Missile Rebalance

• Switch back to the old icons (no disrespect to the art department, but the new ones are not as nice as the originals)

• Missile Guidance Computers (MGC) and Missile Guidance Enhancers (MGE) are scrapped, and become the following new passive modules with the same fitting requirements:
- Missile Cache (MC), mid-slot (stacking penalized). Increases launcher ammunition capacity by 5/10/15%/20% (Meta, I, II, Faction).
- Missile Fire Control (MFC), low-slot (stacking penalized). Decreases launcher reload time by 10/15/20%/25% (Meta, I, II, Faction).

• This means the only way to apply missile damage is through rigs, implants, target painters, stasis webs or warp scramblers (or any combination thereof). No missile disruption modules or missile disruption tracking scripts.

• The missile formula is tweaked as follows, to allow for "critical" damage. This means that if a ship has a target 'dead to rights', then (and only then) missiles can apply up to 10% more critical damage. This will typically mean both exceeding the target velocity and falling under the target signature.
- old forumla = base damage * min[1, S/E, (S/E*Ve/Vt)^(ln(drf)/ln(5.5)]
- new forumla = base damage * min[1.1, S/E, (S/E*Ve/Vt)^(ln(drf)/ln(5.5)]

• All kinetic pigeon-holing dies a horrible death. There are too many ships to list, but the Drake instead receives a 25% bonus to ROF instead of a 50% bonus to kinetic damage.

• The explosion velocity bonus between rockets and light missiles is swapped. All other missiles receive a 10% increase to their base explosion velocity.

• All missile hit points are increased by an additional 50%

• All missile flight time is reduced by 25% and missile velocity subsequently increased by 25%

• Changes to various implants that allow missile users to also utilize all 6 Faction implants without impacting damage. This change obsoletes a few missile implants and introduces two new ones, which also bringing small missile implants on par with their gunnery counterparts.

• The following implants are shuffled around:
- Zainou 'Snapshot' Light Missiles LM-901 through LM-906 become LM-601 through LM-606 (slot 6)
- Zainou 'Snapshot' Rockets RD-901 through RD-906 become RD-601 through RD-606 (slot 6)
- Zainou 'Deadeye' implants MB-701 through MB-706 become MB-801 through MB-806 (slot 8)
- Zainou 'Deadeye' implants MP-701 through MP-706 become MP-901 through MP-906 (slot 9)
- Zainou 'Snapshot' FOF FR-1001 through FR-1006 become FR-901 through FR-906 (slot 9)
- Zainou 'Snapshot' Cruise (CM-601 through CM-606) and Zainou 'Snapshot' Torpedo (TD-601 through TD-606) become CM-701 through CM-706 and TD-601 and TD-606, respectively (slot 7)

• New missile implants are added (players now have a choice of more damage or the previous rate of fire)
- Zainou 'Snapshot' Warhead WH-701 through WH-706, adds a 1-6% increase to all missile damage

• Thus, missile implants are now categorized as follows:
- Slot 6: CPU Efficiency, Light Missiles, Rockets
- Slot 7: Heavy Missiles, Heavy Assault Missiles, Cruise Missiles, Torpedoes
- Slot 8: Missile Bombardment, Guided Missile Precision, Defender Missiles
- Slot 9: Missile Projection, Target Navigation Prediction, FOF Explosion Radius
- Slot 10: Ballistic Smartlink, Rapid Launch, Warhead

• Reintroduction of Faction FOF (auto-targeting) missiles for FW (only) LP redemption.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Spugg Galdon
Last Rites.
#1031 - 2015-08-12 06:57:41 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
These modules are officially useless.



I find the range bonuses they give to be pretty spectacular.

They're essentially just like tracking computers. Almost exclusively used to boost range and not really used to boost tracking as they aren't better than a web.

Seems okay. Even though it is a bit "meh"
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1032 - 2015-08-12 07:23:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Spugg Galdon wrote:
I find the range bonuses they give to be pretty spectacular.

They're essentially just like tracking computers. Almost exclusively used to boost range and not really used to boost tracking as they aren't better than a web. Seems okay. Even though it is a bit "meh"

How do you figure exactly? A T2 hydraulic rig will basically get you the same range increase as a scripted MCG II. Passively. The rig is actually worth more since as it's fully applied to missile velocity. On anything larger than a cruiser you don't need to boost the range, most missile-based cruisers already have decent range and I can't see a MGC replacing a mid or low slot on a frigate or destroyer. Unless I'm missing something?

The only place I can see these modules being of any (limited) benefit are on Phoenix dreadnoughts and Leviathan titans since they're going to be far cheaper than rigor or flare rigs.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Spugg Galdon
Last Rites.
#1033 - 2015-08-12 07:50:20 UTC
The same can be said about turret rigs and tracking computers.

Missile Tracking computers are balanced to give similar results to turret tracking computers. Maybe both need a buff to be more viable.
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1034 - 2015-08-12 13:04:22 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
That being said, it should also be pointed out that T2 launchers do not benefit in the same manner with respect to specialization that T2 guns do (T2 gunnery specialization augments Faction ammunition, but T2 missile specialization has no effect on Faction ammunition).

Can you elaborate on that? Unless I'm reading it wrong, specialization skills affect rate of fire of T2 launchers regardless of charge used.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1035 - 2015-08-12 14:42:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
Can you elaborate on that? Unless I'm reading it wrong, specialization skills affect rate of fire of T2 launchers regardless of charge used.

Yes they do, but unlike T2 guns - T2 launchers are still slower than Faction launchers (even with specialization V). There's also the difference in ammunition capacity, so utilizing Faction ammunition in Faction launchers will still deliver more overall damage. With T2 guns, you have an identical rate of fire and identical ammunition capacity to Faction guns - so the T2 guns apply more overall damage utilizing Faction ammunition.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1036 - 2015-08-12 15:01:44 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
The same can be said about turret rigs and tracking computers.

Missile Tracking computers are balanced to give similar results to turret tracking computers. Maybe both need a buff to be more viable.


Problem is that is like comparing apples and deckchairs.

Missile damage is consistent irrespective of range, turret is not. To try and balance the mods based on their percentages is futile at best, stupid at worst.

Not that it matters, we're talking to an empty chair at this point.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1037 - 2015-08-12 16:42:48 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
These modules are officially useless.



I find the range bonuses they give to be pretty spectacular.

They're essentially just like tracking computers. Almost exclusively used to boost range and not really used to boost tracking as they aren't better than a web.

Seems okay. Even though it is a bit "meh"


See, here's the problem with the web argument.
Everyone says that the one true benefit of missiles is the application across all effective ranges.

The fact that a web outperforms isn't a problem, but the fact that a web outperforms by a significant amount IS the problem.
To the point where you're better off getting within 10km and webbing than you are at range.

This negates the reason for using long range missiles.
If you're going to be within 10km anyway, might as well fit close range weapons, which makes long range missiles virtually useless outside of the alliance tournament.

Also, the fact that TPs are generally more effective inside 100kms negates the point of using these modules at all, as you basically never see a missile boat being used outside that range, not to mention that TPs have less fitting costs and less cap usage.


The other problem is that more than one MGC is always stacking penalized, since it applies dual script bonuses.
If you could put a exp radius and exp velocity script, or flight time and velocity script, then these modules might actually be useful.
As it sits now,'you're better off fitting the rigs and using TPs, as you'll be able to get either range AND application in some short range missile cases, or application with more application for things like long range missiles or brawling short range fits.

The only situation where an MGC is a better choice is with FoF missiles.
It might also be noted that the MGE is useless in virtually ALL situations and might as well be removed.
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#1038 - 2015-08-12 16:45:37 UTC
Just as an update I am still working to get traction on this. Trying to grab the right people, been a little difficult. Wont let this fall off the radar.

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

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1039 - 2015-08-12 17:32:10 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
If you could put a exp radius and exp velocity script, or flight time and velocity script, then these modules might actually be useful.

Except explosion radius always trumps explosion velocity, so given a choice the answer is obvious. The primary reason to fit flare rigs is that you lack the calibration for a third rigor rig. With the new stacking penalties, a T1 flare will almost always provide more benefit than a T1 rigor (this was not the case previously).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1040 - 2015-08-12 17:49:23 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
If you could put a exp radius and exp velocity script, or flight time and velocity script, then these modules might actually be useful.

Except explosion radius always trumps explosion velocity, so given a choice the answer is obvious. The primary reason to fit flare rigs is that you lack the calibration for a third rigor rig. With the new stacking penalties, a T1 flare will almost always provide more benefit than a T1 rigor (this was not the case previously).



Yes, but I'm speaking more specifically of scripts for the MGC.
With something like heavy missiles, dual exp radius scripts may suit it better, despite the stacking penalty.
However, Torps and cruise missiles might benefit better from fitting exp radius and exp velocity scripts, as their overall effectiveness would be increased more without the stacking penalties.

In either case, I still don't see the MGCs competing with rigs and TPs/webs in any scenario.
They've got to outshine TPs up to a certain stacking penalty in order to justify use within 100km.
And they've got to have enough bonus to justify range usage as an option compared to close range and webs.

Honestly, I say just get rid of the things and rework rigs and TPs.