EVE Search - correct rocket explosion speed

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

correct rocket explosion speed

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 19 post(s)
onetoke overtheline	Posted - 2010.05.06 11:02:00 - [601] this forums over a year old, get over it
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.05.06 11:28:00 - [602] Originally by: onetoke overtheline this forums over a year old, get over it Troll elsewhere please. _________________________________ Originally by: Dodgy Past Can't see the Caldari approving of free love though.
S'qarpium D'igil	Posted - 2010.05.06 16:04:00 - [603] Where is the rockets hotfix?
Krennel Darius Caldari Nova Security Systems	Posted - 2010.05.06 22:20:00 - [604] Quote: Vengeance 78dps. Jaguar (3x 150mm) 117dps.Harpy (4x electron blaster - dunno what harpies use) 134 dps. Against jag thats 35% difference. Against harpy 42%. So again - in its own ship class (and i cant call it "tackle AF" this time) rockets are waaay behind. So even excluding fix to explo velocity/DRM/whatever rockets need plain DPS boost. The 20% i proposed would give veng 94dps. Still behind but falling only 20% short of jag. Diction 72dps... thats still lagging way behind. Dunno - this + 10% damage boost on diction instead of 5%? Anyways wanted only to show that missiles in their own ship classes work ok. Except rockets which are far behind. I'm not sure what kind of fits you've got running, but the damage difference is much worse than that. As far as damage on my Af's go, I've got my Vengeance pushed to 107 dps, Jag does 165, a blaster Harpy does 190, and my Enyo does 220(with a rocket launcher btw). Right off the bat you'll notice that the Enyo does 100% more dps, the Harpy does 80% more, and the Jaguar does 60% more against the Vengeance. And thats not counting the fact that the explosion velocity of rockets makes it so they cant even hit their AF counterparts for full damage unless they are dual webbed and target painted. As far as the other AF's that aren't listed, they all beat the Vengeance by at least 60% if not greater. Except for the Hawk, because the Hawk uses rockets. I'm not particularly sure, but either all of the other AF's are extremely overpowered, or rockets are extremely broken. _________________________________________________ If at first you don't succeed, you're not Chuck Norris
Deva Blackfire Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON	Posted - 2010.05.06 23:43:00 - [605] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 06/05/2010 23:43:20 It was stated in my post: clear setups with only guns/launchers (no damage mods) and no drones. Only to compare gun/launcher damage ability. If i were to use some stupid numbers i could compare veng to blaster ishkur (300+? cant remember) or maled to blaster ranis + drones + stuff (also 250+dps).
Xyfu Minmatar Shadow's of Ezra On the Rocks	Posted - 2010.05.07 10:51:00 - [606] Originally by: RoCkEt X rocket speed? i'm pretty damn fast tbh Took you 20 pages to get here. =P _____ ^ That is a sig line. It should be there without me having to put one in.
Oram Nyx Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2010.05.07 12:09:00 - [607] /I support this
Mallariah	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:24:00 - [608] were rockets fixed yet?
yani dumyat Minmatar The 23rd Sense	Posted - 2010.05.07 19:28:00 - [609] I've done some in game testing to provide data on the damage reduction against orbiting ships, the spreadsheet can be downloaded at http://www.4shared.com/file/4eFV-YTR/rockets_again.html (can't linkify it because the forum censors the address ) Originally by: Notes I found Stafen's modifier to be slightly out so changed it from 0.9175 to 0.215, this brought the spreadsheet in line with the results of in game testing, the original modifier is noted at the top of the spreadsheet in case you want to change it back. Minmatar ships were used because my toon with lvl 5 navigation skills only flys matari ships. You can alter the damage comparison chart by entering a new number in the "% change" column, the top number will alter rocket damage and the bottom number will alter turret damage. I've suspected for a while that people have been taking Stafen's original spreadsheet then checking EFT to get the velocity and sig radius of a frigate and dropping it in to the spreadsheet. This tends to produce unrealistic numbers because orbit speeds are much lower than straight line speeds. EG: Webbed AB rifter in a straight line gets 37% damage reduction Webbed AB rifter orbiting at 7,500m gets 37% damage reduction Webbed AB rifter orbiting at 500m gets 20% damage reduction This has significant implications when trying to work out the stats rockets should have. If the rifter in the above example wants to get the full 37% damage reduction it will have to sit out at 7,500m with barrage and will be doing roughly 50% less damage in game than it's EFT damage with RF EMP loaded. A quick analysis of my damage logs shows that when flying rifters with RF EMP I lose about 20% of my potential DPS to tracking and falloff, that is in no way a scientific number and was only tested for 3 fights plus I've not got perfect gunnery skills so comments from other turret users would be appreciated. For now I'm working on the premise that to compare rockets with turrets I need to reduce the EFT damage of turret ships by 20% to compensate for tracking and falloff. After playing with the spreadsheet for a while I've come to the conclusion the way to make rockets competitive but not overpowered would be: Increase base damage by 45%* Increase Ev to 120 m/s Decrease DRF to 1.5 *The 45% number was based on reducing the EFT damage of turret ships by 20% so if I'm wrong on that estimate the 45% figure will be wrong too. Try putting those numbers in the spreadsheet and see what you think, It means rocket AFs will still have slightly lower applied DPS than turret ones, which is as it should be because rocket AFs get a tanking bonus. Afterburners are still effective tanking modules but webbed AB frigates will be hit for full damage if they orbit at 500m and get a slight damage reduction if they go in a straight line. _______ "Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth."
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.05.07 22:39:00 - [610] Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 07/05/2010 22:40:32 That actually seems pretty reasonable to me. On the Kestrel thing: Personally I think just knock it down to 5% damage all round and have a second bonus to shield. Better still give it a 4th mid and finally give the middle finger to the stupid tier system. _________________________________ Originally by: Dodgy Past Can't see the Caldari approving of free love though.

Beronarr	Posted - 2010.05.08 11:31:00 - [611] Did they fix the rockets already?
Maeve Kell	Posted - 2010.05.08 13:41:00 - [612] Edited by: Maeve Kell on 08/05/2010 13:42:18 isnt a weapon system that can hit while you fly like 15 km/s imba? isnt it good that it does no reasonable damage.. i dont want my cruisers to be ****ed by crows. kthxbye the one thing i learned in eve in all the years is: eft numbers dont tell anything, the damage that hits the target is important
Deva Blackfire Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON	Posted - 2010.05.08 14:47:00 - [613] Originally by: Maeve Kell Edited by: Maeve Kell on 08/05/2010 13:42:18 isnt a weapon system that can hit while you fly like 15 km/s imba? isnt it good that it does no reasonable damage.. i dont want my cruisers to be ****ed by crows. kthxbye the one thing i learned in eve in all the years is: eft numbers dont tell anything, the damage that hits the target is important Clueless troll warning. Dont read it can cause brain damage.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.05.08 14:55:00 - [614] Originally by: Maeve Kell the one thing i learned in eve in all the years is: eft numbers dont tell anything, the damage that hits the target is important er right, okay
yani dumyat Minmatar The 23rd Sense	Posted - 2010.05.08 15:50:00 - [615] Originally by: Maeve Kell isnt a weapon system that can hit while you fly like 15 km/s imba? I wholeheartedly agree, as a solution to this nano ships should be made fast enough to outrun all turret ammunition. Due to turret damage being instantaneous this may result in dramiels traveling backwards in time. _______ "Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth."
Great Artista Caldari Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2010.05.09 08:33:00 - [616] Bamp. ____ Rockets need a boost. CCP status: [_] Told. [x] Not told. ◕◡◕
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.05.09 21:07:00 - [617] bump. _________________________________ Originally by: Dodgy Past Can't see the Caldari approving of free love though.
Braitai Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.05.10 00:07:00 - [618] I heard a rumour that rockets were still broken, C/D? Without order nothing can exist. Without chaos nothing can evolve.
yani dumyat Minmatar The 23rd Sense	Posted - 2010.05.10 10:45:00 - [619] Originally by: Braitai I heard a rumour that rockets were still broken, C/D? C In recent testing it was shown that a eunuch could shoot further than rage rockets. _______ "Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth."
PinkGirl	Posted - 2010.05.10 11:49:00 - [620] Originally by: Dreed Roberts Originally by: Deva Blackfire Here you go then all 5 v's all 5 AB cyanabal (110m, 380m/s) v's Kessie (no damage mods cause they wont change the ratio) max damage per rocket, 51.56 damage no prop, 51.56 damage AB (1075m/s), 39.15 or 76% If someone need to calculate missiles damage reduction - use MDRC (MissilesDamageRedusingCalculator) For example MDRC show 75,93342% You can download MDRC here http://forum.eve-ru.com/index.php?showtopic=44722&hl=

Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.05.10 22:05:00 - [621] Bump. _________________________________ Originally by: Dodgy Past Can't see the Caldari approving of free love though.
Allen Ramses Caldari Zombicidal Mania Reckoning.	Posted - 2010.05.10 22:57:00 - [622] Originally by: yani dumyat snip Holy Christ! Someone is finally looking at more than raw stats! Apocalypse is nigh, C/D? Quote: Increase base damage by 45%* Increase Ev to 120 m/s Decrease DRF to 1.5 The actual base damage increase is 50% (for light missiles, as well). The EV becomes somewhat redundant after DRF comes into play, and we don't want to achieve 100% damage so easily. Ceptors should be very hard to hit, but ABing ships should not. The only way I would see any way of making this less of a problem is to attach a 30% signature bloom to ABs. It was foolish of CCP not to consider this during the nano nerf. Also, don't forget the velocity issue. Rockets also suck because many ships can outrun them. ____________ I'd make a forum signature that didn't suck, but I'm restricted by a character limit that does.
Braitai Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.05.11 03:12:00 - [623] Originally by: Allen Ramses Also, don't forget the velocity issue. Rockets also suck because many ships can outrun them. This is probably the only useful thing you've said. 50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well. 30% sig bloom when an AB is active? Maybe if they give them 30% more speed as well, otherwise no. AB's are used to tank cruisers, which is already hard enough. Without order nothing can exist. Without chaos nothing can evolve.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.05.11 08:43:00 - [624] Originally by: Braitai 50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well. That's straightforward enough to do simply by fiddling with AML/SML RoF.
Braitai Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.05.11 08:53:00 - [625] Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: Braitai 50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well. That's straightforward enough to do simply by fiddling with AML/SML RoF. true enough I guess but that would mean SML's have a higher ROF than AML's. Fiddling with lights will be problematic. Getting even close to the theoretical damage/range of lights using beams/arty/rails requires t2 ammo that messes with your tracking, so it's not as if other long range weapons are clearly out in front of lights. Without order nothing can exist. Without chaos nothing can evolve.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.05.11 11:05:00 - [626] Originally by: Braitai true enough I guess but that would mean SML's have a higher ROF than AML's. Fiddling with lights will be problematic. Getting even close to the theoretical damage/range of lights using beams/arty/rails requires t2 ammo that messes with your tracking, so it's not as if other long range weapons are clearly out in front of lights. Oh, I've just noticed that this was in response to Allen's insane OCD MUST MAEK PRITTY PATTURNS OF NUMBERS balancing proposals. I'm fairly ambivalent on SMLs atm, their damage against an ABing target isn't too good but their range is so great that I'm not sure we should expect it to be. If SML changes were to be made, I'd be looking more at the PG/CPU of SMLs themselves, really - they're really a pain to fit. But you could argue that this is just a ship problem (e.g., Hawk).
yani dumyat Minmatar The 23rd Sense	Posted - 2010.05.11 11:50:00 - [627] Originally by: Allen Ramses Originally by: yani dumyat snip Holy Christ! Someone is finally looking at more than raw stats! Apocalypse is nigh, C/D? C, I will be the hookbill of the apocalypse riding along side ECM, Nano and Nerfbat. Originally by: Allen Ramses The actual base damage increase is 50% (for light missiles, as well). The EV becomes somewhat redundant after DRF comes into play, and we don't want to achieve 100% damage so easily. Ceptors should be very hard to hit, but ABing ships should not. AB was intended as a tanking mod during the QR changes and has a lot of drawbacks for ships that only have 3 mids and need to tackle stuff. These screenshots show what would happen if the numbers were altered as I suggested: rifter.jpg claw.jpg damage chart.jpg Ev is certainly not redundant even with a DRF of 1.5, I think the % of damage reduction is about right in those pics but I'm not greatly confident about damage reduction of turrets so 45% base damage increase to rockets may be wrong. _______ "Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth."
yani dumyat Minmatar The 23rd Sense	Posted - 2010.05.11 12:04:00 - [628] Originally by: Braitai Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: Braitai 50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well. That's straightforward enough to do simply by fiddling with AML/SML RoF. true enough I guess but that would mean SML's have a higher ROF than AML's. Fiddling with lights will be problematic. Getting even close to the theoretical damage/range of lights using beams/arty/rails requires t2 ammo that messes with your tracking, so it's not as if other long range weapons are clearly out in front of lights. The problem isn't AML's it's destroyer class ships - flycatcher with 50% more damage on light missiles . If you've ever tried to put arties on a rifter or claw you'll know that LM ships are in a different league when it comes to ranged frigates, on the other hand if you boosted small arties to the point where an arty claw was viable then there'd be some absurd thrasher fits going about. I'd love to see more viable ranged frigates than just the crow, harpy (and to some extent ishkur) but it would need a complete reworking of the destroyer class so we're getting a bit off topic. _______ "Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth."
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.05.11 12:33:00 - [629] Quote: just a ship problem Maybe if it was just the Hawk, but can you think of any ship that has an easy time fitting a full set of standards? I don't really see much harm in knocking the grid reqs down to 6 (before skills), especially as the T2 versions in particular are really CPU hungry on top of that. _________________________________ Originally by: Dodgy Past Can't see the Caldari approving of free love though.
Braitai Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.05.11 12:46:00 - [630] Originally by: Gypsio III Oh, I've just noticed that this was in response to Allen's insane OCD MUST MAEK PRITTY PATTURNS OF NUMBERS balancing proposals. I lol'ed Without order nothing can exist. Without chaos nothing can evolve.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 41 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.