Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
General Ric
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:38:00 -
[1]
Let me first preface this by saying that I fly a CNR using cruise missiles on Lvl 4 missions, since I'm sure some carebears are going to lynch me after this next paragraph.
I think that after the nerf my CNR is much better balanced than it used to be, using a target painter, a Warhead Rigor Catalyst rig and decent skills in Guided Missile Precision and Target Navigation Prediction I hit Battleships for full damage, and I can still kill most cruisers in two or three volleys of missiles, while my drones still tear apart frigates just as easily as they used to. I actually completed a mission today using fewer missiles than I did pre-patch, though I did have to warp out a few times due to my reduced tank. I had to make some sacrifices to keep up my DPS, but the point is I can still do Level 4 missions effectively, though they are definitely not the cakewalk that they used to be.
However I would like to point out that newer players fighting in cruisers and frigates don't have the luxury of expensive rigs and spending lots of skill points and fitting slots just to make their weapons hit. Light and heavy missiles have ridiculously slow explosion velocities compared to the class of ship that they are supposed to be used against, and they are extremely gimped in comparison to using turrets.
As an example of why the scaling doesn't make sense, I will compare a 125mm Carbide Railgun to a 350mm Carbide Railgun, which were selected for the simple reason that they were the handiest equivalent parallel currently in my inventory at the station I was docked at when I made this post. One is a mid-range frigate railgun, the other is a mid-range battleship railgun, and both are the same meta-level.
125mm Carbide Tracking: 0.085 rad/sec Signature Resolution: 40 m
350mm Carbide Tracking: 0.01167 rad/sec Signature Resolution: 400 m
Doing the math, that is roughly 7x the tracking and 10x the radius, which should translate roughly to the ratio you would expect to find in explosion velocity and explosion radius respectively for an equivalent missile comparison. That missile comparison would of course be between a light missile and a cruise missile, so lets test it out to see what numbers we can come up with.
Light Missile Explosion Radius: 50 m Explosion Velocity: 170 m/s
Cruise Missile Explosion Radius: 300 m Explosion Velocity: 69 m/s
This translates into 2.5x the explosion velocity, and 6x the explosion radius. What this means, in layman's terms, is that missiles apparently are not scaling at the same rate that you would expect to find in other weapons. A slight discrepancy would be understandable, but these numbers are off by a significant margin - roughly 4.5x to be exact. Based on this information, I put forward the hypothesis that if one class of missiles is in fact balanced, the others are not. Given my previous statement that I believe that cruise missiles are balanced as is, I will further expand on this to say that light missiles (and I presume heavy missiles) are currently underpowered.
|
Nifan
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:41:00 -
[2]
Nice post, will help most of the missile complains out there.
But tbh is not just about how to be able to "do it good" with the missiles. It's about how easy was to do missions with caldari, the only good thing (pve) apart from ECM that Caldari had.
|
Kransthow
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:44:00 -
[3]
Originally by: General Ric Let me first preface this by saying that I fly a CNR using cruise missiles on Lvl 4 missions
stopped reading there
|
Lady Karma
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:44:00 -
[4]
Why is it that all the missile whines start by talking about a level 4?
Obviously Cruise Ravens were the de facto method of farming missions, this needed to change so that there would be a diversity of ships used.
Sound familiar?
Adapt or whine.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:48:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Lady Karma Obviously Cruise Ravens were the de facto method of farming missions, this needed to change so that there would be a diversity of ships used.
Don't bring the nano-whine into this. CCP handled that one just as poorly as they did with missiles.
BTW, the de facto method of farming was the CNR with torps and range rigs. ____________________ Pimped out Raven to run level 4 missions quickly: 210 Mil ISK. Realizing your 120 Mil ISK Drake gets the job done faster: Priceless. Made a reality by speed and missile nerf. |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:49:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Lady Karma Why is it that all the missile whines start by talking about a level 4?
Obviously Cruise Ravens were the de facto method of farming missions, this needed to change so that there would be a diversity of ships used.
Sound familiar?
Adapt or whine.
No. If you have high SP the cruise Raven is nearly the same as it was before.
If you think corp is different than a guild or clan you have some insecurity issues.
|
General Ric
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:51:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Lady Karma Why is it that all the missile whines start by talking about a level 4?
Try reading the post before replying next time.
|
Lady Karma
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:53:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Lady Karma on 14/11/2008 02:56:38
Originally by: General Ric
Originally by: Lady Karma Why is it that all the missile whines start by talking about a level 4?
Try reading the post before replying next time.
Originally by: General Ric Let me first preface this by saying that I fly a CNR using cruise missiles on Lvl 4 missions
Are you trying to say it's not a whine about missiles or that you didn't mention level 4's?
Edit: I got it now, it's a subtle post about how all other BS were **** at running missions previously, and now they don't seem so bad because ravens were brought in line.
Not to mention that you don't need to learn medium specialization before you can learn large like with every other type of gun...
And to finish, your mission running habits are irrelevant to me, try playing eve, its quite good
|
Vikarion
Caldari White Rose Society
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:56:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Lady Karma Are you trying to say it's not a whine about missiles or that you didn't mention level 4's?
He actually said cruise are fine...which you would know if you had taken the time to read his post.
|
Lady Karma
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 02:58:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Vikarion
Originally by: Lady Karma Are you trying to say it's not a whine about missiles or that you didn't mention level 4's?
He actually said cruise are fine...which you would know if you had taken the time to read his post.
So heavies and lights are not missiles. kk
|
|
General Ric
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:01:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Lady Karma Are you trying to say it's not a whine about missiles or that you didn't mention level 4's?
It wasn't a whine post, a whine post would be something along the lines of "WAAAHH MY CNR GOT NERFED, CCP PLZ FIX!?!?!"
Instead I used numbers and facts to illustrate a problem with whatever balance formulas CCP was using (or not using) to come up with the new missile stats. What they want to do about it, if anything, is up to them.
|
Faife
Noctiscion
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:07:00 -
[12]
good lord you people. try reading the OP at least a paragraph in before copying pasting your wisdom into every thread... --
Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal |
Kransthow
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:11:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Faife good lord you people. try reading the OP at least a paragraph in before copying pasting your wisdom into every thread...
Thats not fun though
|
Hotice
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:13:00 -
[14]
Problem is this. With 1400mm arti, you can pop ceptors/spider drones at 28km+ range in two-four shots with maelstorm (two guns on each target). Cannot hit anything small target at sub 14km range at all. However, with missile, it is ineffective from any range. Large guns have no problem tracking bc/bs at 300m/s at close or long range. However missiles cannot do the same. Thus, ccp over "balanced" missile with this whole "speed" change.
|
Weirda
Minmatar Queens of the Stone Age Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:23:00 -
[15]
Weirda no math expert - but there is missile skill that make explosion velocity bigger and 'precision' better. gun you can only affect tracking.
tracking boost per skill level = 5%
explosion velocity per skill level = 10% explosion radius per skill level = -5%
you can see that you can make with tracking 1.25x change missile is 1.5x change combine with .75x change.
that probably push you number pretty close there, and missile can choose to do 'exact' perfect damage for target. __ weirda |
General Ric
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:33:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Weirda Weirda no math expert - but there is missile skill that make explosion velocity bigger and 'precision' better. gun you can only affect tracking.
There are also low and mid slot items that affect tracking speed, but no equivalent to explosion velocity for missiles. For obvious reasons the comparisons can't be completely analogous.
In any case, +50% explosion velocity from Target Navigation Prediction 5 certainly doesn't compensate for a 350% difference in base stats.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:34:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Weirda Weirda no math expert - but there is missile skill that make explosion velocity bigger and 'precision' better. gun you can only affect tracking.
tracking boost per skill level = 5%
explosion velocity per skill level = 10% explosion radius per skill level = -5%
you can see that you can make with tracking 1.25x change missile is 1.5x change combine with .75x change.
that probably push you number pretty close there, and missile can choose to do 'exact' perfect damage for target.
This only applies to cruise missiles, a mechanic which has been broken for a long time. Also, those two skills are there to reduce static damage reduction. Plus, as it's used now, these skills affect the 1/x relation with the partner 1/x number, so they're only 66% as good now.
Because of this, unguided missiles are hit VERY hard. ____________________ Pimped out Raven to run level 4 missions quickly: 210 Mil ISK. Realizing your 120 Mil ISK Drake gets the job done faster: Priceless. Made a reality by speed and missile nerf. |
Weirda
Minmatar Queens of the Stone Age Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:43:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Weirda on 14/11/2008 03:44:59
Originally by: General Ric
Originally by: Weirda Weirda no math expert - but there is missile skill that make explosion velocity bigger and 'precision' better. gun you can only affect tracking.
There are also low and mid slot items that affect tracking speed, but no equivalent to explosion velocity for missiles. For obvious reasons the comparisons can't be completely analogous.
In any case, +50% explosion velocity from Target Navigation Prediction 5 certainly doesn't compensate for a 350% difference in base stats.
when it used to divide into number that have been reduce it can. end of day these thing are apple and orange. Weirda could say that you could hit with EM missile against 0% resist vs Cerberus shield while Deimos would be force to do primary dmg vs 80/70% resist... a 450% difference in base damage.
module for Turret only affect Weaker of 2 numbers to affect...
point is, Weirda glad they not same. __ weirda |
hedgeer
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:52:00 -
[19]
I guess everyone has to redo the battleclinic loadouts
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 03:57:00 -
[20]
I don't think the missile formula is exactly the same as the tracking formula so ratios aren't going to be exactly the same. Also, skills. --
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
|
|
Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 04:03:00 -
[21]
It's a pretty decent post; however, you unfortunately left out the effects of damage reduction factor, which basically acts as a combo of sig radius and explosion velocity falloff for missiles _____________________
My opinions plus a tablespoon of water may be substituted for your own. |
Mikhale Romanov
Black Hats Delta
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 04:10:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Lady Karma Why is it that all the missile whines start by talking about a level 4?
Obviously Cruise Ravens were the de facto method of farming missions, this needed to change so that there would be a diversity of ships used.
Sound familiar?
Adapt or whine.
Cruise missiles were the slow way to mission~ torps FTW (and still FTW). ZOMG Communism! |
General Ric
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 04:10:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Weirda point is, Weirda glad they not same.
I would agree that it is good that they are not the same, but I am making a comparison purely on the upgrade ratio from frigate to battleship here, and it is fairly safe to assume that all other things relating to the situational use of a particular weapon type should be equal and balanced while upgrading. For example, the difference of available damage types between different weapons applies equally to frigates and battleships, so scaling up from a frigate to a battleship you don't suddenly lose the ability to do EM damage with missiles.
However, if for example a large artillery turret did the same amount of damage as a large railgun, but the small artillery did 5x the damage of a small railgun, I would be asking serious questions about the balance there as well.
Perhaps missiles are balanced perfectly, and maybe railguns are just completely out of whack. There could also be other factors that CCP has taken into account on their calculations that I am unaware of. I also haven't run the numbers for other weapon types, however I felt that railguns would be the best equivalents as those are the other type of weapon that Caldari specialize in, and of all the turrets, they have the most similar range effectiveness to guided missiles. However, I still believe that there is a valid question of game balance here, and that CCP should at least take a second look at the numbers to make sure that they didn't make a mistake.
|
General Ric
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 04:22:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Chaos Incarnate It's a pretty decent post; however, you unfortunately left out the effects of damage reduction factor, which basically acts as a combo of sig radius and explosion velocity falloff for missiles
Unfortunately I don't have enough information about how the damage reduction factor works to make an educated guess as to how it affects the calculations. I'm operating under the assumption that a DRF of 2.8 on Light Missiles compared to a DRF of 4.5 on Cruise Missiles doesn't make a sufficiently large impact to undermine the otherwise huge discrepancy that we can see on the stats that can be directly compared between Railguns and Missiles.
Anyways, in personal experience I have had no difficulty whatsoever killing frigates with railguns, while attempting to do so with light missiles after the patch isn't exactly a productive activity.
|
Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 04:53:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Chaos Incarnate on 14/11/2008 04:55:53
Originally by: General Ric Unfortunately I don't have enough information about how the damage reduction factor works to make an educated guess as to how it affects the calculations. I'm operating under the assumption that a DRF of 2.8 on Light Missiles compared to a DRF of 4.5 on Cruise Missiles doesn't make a sufficiently large impact to undermine the otherwise huge discrepancy that we can see on the stats that can be directly compared between Railguns and Missiles.
Anyways, in personal experience I have had no difficulty whatsoever killing frigates with railguns, while attempting to do so with light missiles after the patch isn't exactly a productive activity.
I need to check this further in a spreadsheet, but:
With a drf of 2.8 a light missile should lose 5.6% damage per 10% target velocity increase or explosion radius increase, and gains 5.9% damage per 10% increase in target sig or explosion velocity (up to a max of 1), outside of optimal conditions
For cruises, it loses 8.2% per 10% increase in the first two and gains 8.7% per 10% in the second two. It's also important to note that these are technically multiplied together, so a doubling in velocity should reduce damage by 53.6% _____________________
My opinions plus a tablespoon of water may be substituted for your own. |
Disco Flint
The Flaming Sideburn's
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 05:52:00 -
[26]
A thought out post about the missile rebalance that doesn't end in a whine but instead offers a nice thought from a different perspective? Why, I am shocked and surprised!
Honestly though, I've noticed myself that standard missiles and especially rockets seem to have gotten hit too hard. I rarely ever fly rocket boats, so I can't speak from experience there. However, while I can make Cruise Missiles and Torps work with some adapting, to some degree even better than before sometimes, I look at the stats for the frigate missiles and can't help but think "wtf".
Do rockets now really get reduced damage against targets faster than 127.5 m/s (assuming target nav prediction V) while torps get reduced damage for anything faster than 106 m(s (assuming the same)? That would make little sense, either torps can "track" way too good, which I wouldn't say, as any BS goes faster than that, and then there's the huge sig, where rockets have a nifty 20m sig torps get 450m, so that's fine. Or, rockets "track" way too slow, which seems more reasonable, since any and all frigs can go a lot lot faster than 127m/s. I know the issue there was probably to prevent frig sized missiles to wtfpwn small and fast stuff...
Erm... anyway, what I really ask myself, and what I would like to have answered from someone with actual experience with these frig sized missiles, how do they fare now in PvP and PvE? Is it only numbers looking odd and ugly, but in combat the formula saves them from being useless? Or is it as I fear, that the bat swung in their direction too hard?
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |