Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Atomeon
The Scope Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 00:11:12 -
[91] - Quote
Since smartbombs are became too powerful they need a "stop sign" on how they damaging things.
You can change these numbers on what you thing normal or balanced.
a. Small smartbomb i: Deals 50dmg and maximum 2500dmg total on surrounded targets per cycle (hits 50 targets and then does not apply more damage if target in radius are more than 50). b. medium smartbomb i: Deals 100dmg and maximum 5000dmg total on surrounded targets per cycle (hits 50 targets and then does not apply more damage if target in radius are more than 50). c. Large smartbomb i: Deals 250dmg and maximum 12500dmg total on surrounded targets per cycle (hits 50 targets and then does not apply more damage if target in radius are more than 50).
So it gonna take more than 2 abbadon to clear an entire fleets missiles with just 16 Large smartbombs. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6719
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 03:31:23 -
[92] - Quote
Atomeon wrote:Since smartbombs are became too powerful they need a "stop sign" on how they damaging things.
You can change these numbers on what you thing normal or balanced.
a. Small smartbomb i: Deals 50dmg and maximum 2500dmg total on surrounded targets per cycle (hits 50 targets and then does not apply more damage if target in radius are more than 50). b. medium smartbomb i: Deals 100dmg and maximum 5000dmg total on surrounded targets per cycle (hits 50 targets and then does not apply more damage if target in radius are more than 50). c. Large smartbomb i: Deals 250dmg and maximum 12500dmg total on surrounded targets per cycle (hits 50 targets and then does not apply more damage if target in radius are more than 50).
So it gonna take more than 2 abbadon to clear an entire fleets missiles with just 16 Large smartbombs. Hilariously a fleet would be too busy damaging itsemf by hitting everyone around to even damage the missiles, heh
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
712
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 14:49:57 -
[93] - Quote
Firewalling is pretty stupid when you think about it.
I'm wondering, can a missile based fleet, say a fleet of Ravens, firewall against a fleet of Typhoons (and vice versa) or do they end up just blowing up all of their own missiles as they leave the tubes.
CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
|
Atomeon
The Scope Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 23:57:50 -
[94] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence.
Pretty stupid. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1199
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 02:25:40 -
[95] - Quote
Atomeon wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence. Pretty stupid.
No, those ships just have to make "meaningful choices."
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2477
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 04:07:19 -
[96] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:This would mean that for instance two T2 small smartbombs or one medium T2 would be required to take down a Heavy Missile So my non-ECM-fit Blackbird with cap rechargers and no tank can solo a Drake, using only one smartbomb?
Multiply the HP of missiles by five and I'll consider it.
And while you're at it, multiply citadel missile HP by about 25.
.
|
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
714
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 07:18:35 -
[97] - Quote
Atomeon wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence. Pretty stupid.
or the other option "B" which is to completely rework defender missiles simply into a point defense module not a launcher slot.
from my earlier post:
The racial Point Defense System (PDS) would then have three different ammo types: Anti Missile Anti Drone Anti Bomb
These ammo types would all deal a "special" type of damage. For arguments sake, we'll call it "Snowflake". Snowflake is a special damage type that is "invisible" to the player. All items other than missiles, drones and bombs have a 100% resistance to it.
This will prevent PDS being used as an offensive weapon.
Now, the PDS is activated on a target ship, just like defender missiles work now. If you are using anti missile ammo, that ship will require to be launching missiles for it to activate. Same for drones. The PDS will then shoot down missiles or drones effectively. If Anti Bomb ammo is loaded, it will work exactly how FoF/Auto Targeting missiles work now with the caveat that their only valid target are bombs. This will allow the ship to effectively defend against bombers without having to target the bombs/bombers themselves.
Ammo reload takes 30 seconds which can give windows of opportunity.
TL;DR
A simple high slot module that is loaded with "special to type" ammo to shoot down either missiles, drones or bombs.
It is activated on a ship like defender missiles are currently.
Can't damage ships, only missiles/bombs/drones. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2482
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 14:16:15 -
[98] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:These ammo types would all deal a "special" type of damage. For arguments sake, we'll call it "Snowflake". Snowflake is a special damage type that is "invisible" to the player. All items other than missiles, drones and bombs have a 100% resistance to it. The whole post is a good idea and I support it.
Also, in before "we don't want a weapon that deals ice damage, this isn't WoW".
Give me a top hat.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1492
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 14:20:32 -
[99] - Quote
Only if it gets "special" faction ammo. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2764
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 21:59:34 -
[100] - Quote
Man look at all these people talking about firewalls without the first idea of how and if they work.
Seriously you should be proud, there's more wrong in the first 5 pages of this thread than I've ever seen in an EVE discussion not held on TEST forums.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
|
Atomeon
The Scope Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 00:40:13 -
[101] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Atomeon wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence. Pretty stupid. No, those ships just have to make "meaningful choices."
Make TDs high slot, then i have no problem with "meaningful choices."
Still everyone can use them. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2483
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 03:17:38 -
[102] - Quote
Atomeon wrote:Make TDs high slot, then i have no problem with "meaningful choices." Still everyone can use them. That would solve nothing. Disruption EWAR goes in mid slots. It makes more sense to make a mid-slot defender launcher.
Give me a top hat.
http://i.imgur.com/Boi9sA8.jpg
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2765
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 22:20:55 -
[103] - Quote
Atomeon wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Atomeon wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence. Pretty stupid. No, those ships just have to make "meaningful choices." Make TDs high slot, then i have no problem with "meaningful choices." Still everyone can use them.
Sure, as long as jams, damps and painters also go into high slots.
Enjoy all the brick tanked falcons you just created.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
715
|
Posted - 2015.07.02 08:12:32 -
[104] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Atomeon wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Atomeon wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence. Pretty stupid. No, those ships just have to make "meaningful choices." Make TDs high slot, then i have no problem with "meaningful choices." Still everyone can use them. Sure, as long as jams, damps and painters also go into high slots. Enjoy all the brick tanked falcons you just created.
To be totally honest, moving all EWAR (except tackle) into high slots would probably make sense anyway. It would stop us having stupid number of mid slots on armour tanked ships. It would also allow shield focused ships to actually fit a tank and also their EWAR. However this is a subject for another topic. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2487
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 23:23:58 -
[105] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:To be totally honest, moving all EWAR (except tackle) into high slots would probably make sense anyway. It would stop us having stupid number of mid slots on armour tanked ships. It would also allow shield focused ships to actually fit a tank and also their EWAR. However this is a subject for another topic. You can fit a shield tank plus EWAR, you just have to not be dazzled by all the mid slots. If you choose to fit 7 ECM jammers to your Rook, that's on you. You could fit a prop mod, shield extender, 2 shield hardeners, and 3 jammers and have very strong jams along with decent tank. Or you can fit 5 tank modules and 1 jammer. Caldari EWAR ships have the best fitting flexibility out of all of them, and if you can't fit them properly that's your own failing, not anything on the part of the ship's design.
It's not like industrials for which there is no stacking penalty on cargo expansion and those last 2 low slots make a world of difference.
Give me a top hat.
http://i.imgur.com/Boi9sA8.jpg
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
115
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 08:12:54 -
[106] - Quote
Give all T2 missiles more HP and T2 resists (like hacs) so people have an option of all-round good damage range and application with lower HP (FACTION/pure T1) Deeps/Application (Rage/Precession) And Massive HP tanks but with there limited ranges (T2)
You also need to buff Capital missiles because dam, they die in a fire in any real fight. #SHIELDFLEET |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1150
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:32:02 -
[107] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tarsas Phage wrote:Please clarify the case of missiles being launched from grouped launchers.
If I had, for example, eight launchers grouped, will the singular "missile" that is spawned when they fire be HP*8, or is there a stacking penalty involved? Or is it just the same HP as 1 missile? That mechanic isn't changing. The combined entity that flies through space has 8x the HP of one missile, but whenever it loses 1/8 of its HP it loses 1/8 of its damage. Missile grouping was implemented quite well back in the day.
what you're saying isn't wrong, but the implication that a lot of people are under (a 20 hp buff is actually a 160 hp buff for 8 missiles for example) is incorrect
although the entity that flies through space does indeed have 8* the hp of a single missile, it also takes 8* damage from everything so effectively it does not matter whether it is grouped or not (as intended)
for example, a Notos smartbomb's damage is 300
15:24:48Combat700 to Torpedo[WOMYN](Caldari Navy Nova Torpedo) - Large 'Notos' Explosive Charge I - Hits 15:24:48Combat700 to Torpedo[WOMYN](Caldari Navy Nova Torpedo) - Large 'Notos' Explosive Charge I - Hits 15:24:40Combat700 to Torpedo[WOMYN](Caldari Navy Nova Torpedo) - Large 'Notos' Explosive Charge I - Hits 15:24:31Combat700 to Torpedo[WOMYN](Caldari Navy Nova Torpedo) - Large 'Notos' Explosive Charge I - Hits 15:24:23Combat700 to Torpedo[WOMYN](Caldari Navy Nova Torpedo) - Large 'Notos' Explosive Charge I - Hits
as you can see it hits a group of 3 torpedos for 700 [and destroys them] if they were launched individually it would not hit as hard but have 3 entries in the log and destroy them as well
mechanically whether a stack of launchers is grouped or not has 0 effect on how hard they are to bomb/smartbomb obviously this is a good thing but i think missile hp should be much higher than even the buffed versions suggested, a single smartbomb will still destroy infinite heavy missiles for example which makes them very unrealistic for fleet warfare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
906
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 19:02:36 -
[108] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:That would solve nothing. Disruption EWAR goes in mid slots. It makes more sense to make a mid-slot defender launcher. Another idea is to make sure you can mount defender launchers on ships that are valuable for their mids rather than damage dealing. Maybe make defender launchers into dedicated module and allow them to be installed without using up launcher hardpoint. Some issues may arise with modelling such a ship though. |
Vailen Sere
The Oasis Group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 22:51:42 -
[109] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Atomeon wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Atomeon wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:CCP. You really need to fix defenders. Defenders ARE the missile disruption system. Not some funky EWAR in the form of a tracking disruptor.
IF defenders are missile ewar then each ship must have at least 1 or 2 missile slots, the ones having 7 or 8 turret slots then they cant have a missile defence. Pretty stupid. No, those ships just have to make "meaningful choices." Make TDs high slot, then i have no problem with "meaningful choices." Still everyone can use them. Sure, as long as jams, damps and painters also go into high slots. Enjoy all the brick tanked falcons you just created. I fully support this idea! |
davet517
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
97
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 12:39:50 -
[110] - Quote
Jesus. I can see that the stupidity is coming to a middle. Missiles should sig tank a smart bomb. Smart bombs shouldn't be effective against them. Take a look at my skill sheet. There's a skill there that I trained in, I dunno, 2004? called "defender missiles", and it's languished there on my skill sheet for years. Defender missiles should defend against, you guessed it, missiles. Make them work a little better than they do. Problem solved.
The problem with "firewalling" is its ability to intercept an UNLIMITED amount of incoming missile damage. Give missiles more HP, and all you've done is require a few more smart bombers to continue to intercept an UNLIMITED amount of incoming missile damage. Defender missiles don't have that problem. In order to stop more, you have to use more. |
|
Crynsos Cealion
Facta.Non.Verba The Obsidian Front
26
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 14:06:05 -
[111] - Quote
As a small cosmetic improvement, it would be nice to display the new missile resistances in the same way as already done with ship resists in their show info window for more compactness. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2508
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:26:23 -
[112] - Quote
Capqu wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:That mechanic isn't changing. The combined entity that flies through space has 8x the HP of one missile, but whenever it loses 1/8 of its HP it loses 1/8 of its damage. Missile grouping was implemented quite well back in the day. as you can see it hits a group of 3 torpedos for 700 [and destroys them] if they were launched individually it would not hit as hard but have 3 entries in the log and destroy them as well mechanically whether a stack of launchers is grouped or not has 0 effect on how hard they are to bomb/smartbomb Tested and confirmed.
I believe it would be great for 1 smartbomb to destroy 1 missile out of the whole volley, were that the case. But it is not the case.
One small smartbomb (damage: 60) dealt, in one cycle, 300 damage to a group of 5 light missiles with 60 HP each. Every time I successfully hit the volley (which was particularly difficult to time), the entire volley was destroyed.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
911
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 05:27:14 -
[113] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Capqu wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:That mechanic isn't changing. The combined entity that flies through space has 8x the HP of one missile, but whenever it loses 1/8 of its HP it loses 1/8 of its damage. Missile grouping was implemented quite well back in the day. as you can see it hits a group of 3 torpedos for 700 [and destroys them] if they were launched individually it would not hit as hard but have 3 entries in the log and destroy them as well mechanically whether a stack of launchers is grouped or not has 0 effect on how hard they are to bomb/smartbomb Tested and confirmed. I believe it would be great for 1 smartbomb to destroy 1 missile out of the whole volley, were that the case. But it is not the case. One small smartbomb (damage: 60) dealt, in one cycle, 300 damage to a group of 5 light missiles with 60 HP each. Every time I successfully hit the volley (which was particularly difficult to time), the entire volley was destroyed. Quoted entire conversation for importance. Apparently mech doesn't work the way it's supposed to work. |
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
170
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 00:39:14 -
[114] - Quote
Or how about you do the intelligent thing, and remove hitpoints from missiles entirely, and only allow them to be shot down by defenders.
Nothing wrong with a sizable group of people unhappy with content letting their sub lapse for a week to demonstrate this. I think it is in everyone's interest to send a message, rather than let enough straws build up to break the camel for good.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2519
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 04:22:23 -
[115] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:Or how about you do the intelligent thing, and remove hitpoints from missiles entirely, and only allow them to be shot down by defenders. Maybe after defenders are fixed, but I don't see what's wrong with having two ways of shooting them down. If defender missiles are to be the primary method (and I think it should be), then not only do they need a huge buff to be on par with tracking disruption, but firewalling missiles will need to be nerfed just far enough to make it less preferred in the majority of situations. Also, defender missiles should shoot drones.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3339
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 04:49:56 -
[116] - Quote
someone told me recently that if you group your launchers the resulting missile will have the EHP of all missiles together.
I believe this is a very unusual way to implement it. Just think what would happen when you ungroup the launchers but fire all at once. This would spawn individual low EHP missiles flying in a group. There is no reason why the first should behave differently to the other. Firewalls and missile hp should be balanced for individual missiles - doesn't matter if grouped to a super missile or not. Why should a 7 launcher ship have an easier time to shoot through a firewall than a 3 launcher ship?
It would make a little more sense if for example a 8 missile group would reduced to 4 missiles if 50% of the ehp of the super missile is destroyed. But as it looks like its a binary decision if the super missile makes it through the firewall or not.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2519
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 05:55:57 -
[117] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:It would make a little more sense if for example a 8 missile group would reduced to 4 missiles if 50% of the ehp of the super missile is destroyed. But as it looks like its a binary decision if the super missile makes it through the firewall or not. It isn't supposed to be, it's supposed to work as you described, however as the HP get lumped together, the damage gets lumped together also and a super missile containing 7 missiles will always take 7 hits from any single area attack.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3342
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 04:41:27 -
[118] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Bienator II wrote:It would make a little more sense if for example a 8 missile group would reduced to 4 missiles if 50% of the ehp of the super missile is destroyed. But as it looks like its a binary decision if the super missile makes it through the firewall or not. It isn't supposed to be, it's supposed to work as you described, however as the HP get lumped together, the damage gets lumped together also and a super missile containing 7 missiles will always take 7 hits from any single area attack.
ah. this detail was missing. So a super missile has the EHP of all missiles combined but it also takes N times more damage from AOE weapons if you have a group of N launchers. All good then, this makes sense now.
this would mean that fireing a launcher group would behave just like fireing a single missile. If the single missile would have been destroyed by a smartbomb hits the same would happen to the grouped missile under the same conditions.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2521
|
Posted - 2015.07.17 08:17:14 -
[119] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:this would mean that fireing a launcher group would behave just like fireing a single missile. If the single missile would have been destroyed by a smartbomb hits the same would happen to the grouped missile under the same conditions. Correct.
I and others think this is a bad thing because it allows a single smartbomb to destroy all missiles within its radius. Sure, if a weaker smartbomb is used, a group of missiles may lose some warheads while ungrouped missiles will not, but when there is enough smartbomb power, the missiles are all destroyed. In most cases it will be a binary function: either all missiles are destroyed or no missiles are destroyed (usually because of failure to time the smartbomb just right).
If the grouped missiles took a single smartbomb hit, it would take more smartbombs to destroy a large group of missiles, making it more difficult for a firewall to have 100% effectiveness. This would also allow ships with more launcher hardpoints to break through a firewall more easily. I don't see any issue with that. It basically means that more missiles = harder to firewall.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 19:51:06 -
[120] - Quote
No CCP response yet if the hitpoint increase helped or not yet... :/ |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |