Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 04:51:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Incantare on 11/03/2009 04:45:25 Smartbombs may no longer cause immunity to citadels but they are anything but fine. Their explosion velocity while in siege is atrociously low at about 3.25 m/s.
Using the missile damage formula I obtained the dps against various capital ships at different speeds, see for yourselves:
Phoenix damage to carriers
Phoenix damage to motherships
If the images aren't working for you, hit refresh and they should appear.
All stats are without implants nor rigs, in a max skilled char flying a phoenix with three BCU IIs and do not include drone DPS. Keep in mind no matter how many BCUs are fitted, the damage reduction percentage is the same. I used the Phoenix as an example but the problem is with citadels and affects the Nag as well, to a lesser extent.
Shockingly, the damage of citadels is so poor against moving targets a Phoenix deals more dps out of siege to a Chimera or Thanatos moving at max speed than in siege mode, and barely more against an Archon or Nidhoggur.
That's for theory - I am aware that in practice between other capitals blocking the way, the long time it takes them to accelerate and of course webs - carriers don't move at max speed for the most part, but this extreme example reveals the underlying problem: citadels' explosion velocity being far, far too low in siege mode. In fact if a carrier is flying at ~45 m/s or above, a rage siege Raven outdamages it. Even if the targeted capital is triple webbed, the phoenix still loses about a quarter of its damage due to low explosion velocity.
Even against supercaps Phoenix still loses a significant chunk of its damage, up to 64% against a moving Hel and up to 31% against a Leviathan - the ship with the single largest sig radius and tied for slowest.
I realize capital turrets have to deal with tracking but they are not penalized anywhere near the extent citadels are against other capitals short of shooting one at extreme close range. If you disagree back up your claim with some facts and not just "well turrets miss missiles always hit".
There was a time when citadels weren't just useful against caps, they could also be used effectively against battleships and some BCs but doing so either required a gimped setup or specific support and there was no flood of whine threads about how imba they were. Today this is impossible, but it's not important. What is important is that citadel torpedoes as an anti-capital weapon are massively underpowered. Aside from their (very) delayed damage and being destroyable they are crippled by their explosion velocity.
It feels as if the devs tossed out a random number for citadel explosion velocity and went with it without testing, consequences be damned. Citadels don't need a token boost, what they need is a significant increase in explosion velocity to allow missile dreads to fulfill their role in anti-capital warfare. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 11:46:00 -
[2]
The numbers are correct. I don't have the experience to properly interpret them in terms of capital fights, but they look horrific.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 14:49:00 -
[3]
I just get a 404 for the pictures. ---------------------------------------------
Originally by: Neth'Rae Military experts are calling this a troll.
|
Zenethalos
Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 16:26:00 -
[4]
My numbers pretty muched matched yours. As a nag pilot this is pretty concerning. Supporting a boost.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 18:14:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Incantare on 11/03/2009 18:14:11 I've changed host for the pics, they should be working without issues now.
Also: supporting my own thread.
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 20:32:00 -
[6]
i so plan too run the test again so i can fraps it. just as more proof.
the test ran on Sisi was 2 part. First we use 5 phoenix and 1 thanatos
all phoenix enter siege and starting firing on the thanatos as it enter grid. at a range of around 30KM by the time the first volley reach the target it had reach the speed of 50m/s, for the next 10 mins of the cycle for siege the thanatos was easily able too deal with the dmg from the phoenix crew. it took them nearly 25% of there cycle too simple down the shields.
the next test used a mix of Revs(2) and Moros(3) dreads.
Now with them in siege and the same thanatos pilot upon entering grid he lost shields and some armor before gaining speed. even at the max of 90m/s the use of the armor rep was more then sparing. around 75% in too the cycle for siege the carrier was cycle both armor reps at times too deal with the dps output. Something is broken here
|
Ryan Powers
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 20:40:00 -
[7]
Good luck Incantare!
|
Blane Xero
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.03.11 22:11:00 -
[8]
As someone who has flown both with and against Citadels, i can safely say that without a doubt this needs to be looked at. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 00:02:00 -
[9]
I've done this personally in a thanatos vs nagfail and pheonix. I cant attest to the skill levels of the pilots. However ya. Pretty much anything moving at any speed can speed tank citadels. It is a fact.
Should this be fixed? Certainly not.
At the same time I'm doing this. The nagfail's projectiles cant track at all.
The problem consists entirely in allowing the carrier to move. It should have 5 webs on the thing. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 00:04:00 -
[10]
What I do support though is Tech 2 ammo and guns for dreads.
Citadels get the uber dmg, short range type. Also the high precision who can hit the faster moving things.
also equivalent for the rest of the dreads. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
|
Flaming Lemming
Puppeteer Press
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 00:19:00 -
[11]
Thumbs up in support
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 00:20:00 -
[12]
Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
|
Molock Saronen
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 01:10:00 -
[13]
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 01:42:00 -
[14]
|
Sovereign533
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 02:18:00 -
[15]
*Your signature file has been removed for the inclusion of inappropriate language. -- Fallout 3 |
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 03:14:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Jason Edwards I've done this personally in a thanatos vs nagfail and pheonix. I cant attest to the skill levels of the pilots. However ya. Pretty much anything moving at any speed can speed tank citadels. It is a fact.
Should this be fixed? Certainly not.
At the same time I'm doing this. The nagfail's projectiles cant track at all.
The problem consists entirely in allowing the carrier to move. It should have 5 webs on the thing.
the Nagfail suffers from the cid effect too. on top of that i am talking about a cap battle. more then 1 vs 1 here. and not only just vs caps. a moros can fight sub-cap ships and kill something. it guns might miss a lot but if it lands a hit it Counts for something, on the other hand. you can fire cids all day. but if you only deal 80 dmg with all 3 then your not going too kill anything.
telling pheonix pilots too fire webs and such too make there cids worth while like amarr ships too use projectiles weapons as there cap issues with lasers.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 18:29:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Incantare on 12/03/2009 18:34:05
Originally by: Jason Edwards I've done this personally in a thanatos vs nagfail and pheonix. I cant attest to the skill levels of the pilots. However ya. Pretty much anything moving at any speed can speed tank citadels. It is a fact.
Should this be fixed? Certainly not.
At the same time I'm doing this. The nagfail's projectiles cant track at all.
This is simply not true outside of very close range as I said in my opening post. But rather than ask you to take my word for it again take a look at these graphs of various dreads firing at a full speed Thanatos.
With 50% of speed contributing to transveral.
With 100% of speed contributing to transversal.
All have one T2 damage mod except for the Phoenix which has three; closest range faction ammo was used in all cases. Drone damage and the Nag's citadel damage were not included in the graphs.
The curve corresponding to each weapon is as follows: Blasters - Pink ACs - Green Pulse - Teal Beams - Yellow Rails - Blue Citadels - Red
I'll be posting more data with long range ammo as well as my conclusions later tonight, but from a single glance it should be obvious that there is something very wrong with citadels as they are.
|
Ignition SemperFi
The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 20:31:00 -
[18]
Not to mention that while gun dreads have the ability to add tracking mods if needed, the phoenix has no such option. Supercaps are immune to Ewar and a painter wont work. But not even looking at the gun:missile comparision.... your data is about spot on with what I had been experiencing
I tried to bring this up earlier in the old boost Citadel thread.
Good luck, and supported. |
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 21:06:00 -
[19]
The waiting game is something everyone gets too play.
but long as we keep this going maybe we can at least get a reply from CCP on the issue.
do they think it's right. or will they changed it like they changed the whole smartbomb issue.
how long will Stealth bombers be broken, how long till a phoenix is not LoL at in local channel trying too fight anything that can move.
|
EdFromHumanResources
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.12 22:26:00 -
[20]
As a wyvern pilot I can say your numbers are innacurate. They may be accurate for a completely untanked ship but I was recently being attacked by four dreads(All Phoenix) and simply moving reduced their missile damage to 800 per salvo. Now my normal untriaged tank should not be able to speed tank 4 sieged dreads regardless of the race, but it was pretty hilarious.
Supporting this ------------------------------------------------- Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
|
Alexej
HUN Corp. HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2009.03.13 00:39:00 -
[21]
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.03.13 01:45:00 -
[22]
Quote: the Nagfail suffers from the cid effect too. on top of that i am talking about a cap battle. more then 1 vs 1 here. and not only just vs caps. a moros can fight sub-cap ships and kill something. it guns might miss a lot but if it lands a hit it Counts for something, on the other hand. you can fire cids all day. but if you only deal 80 dmg with all 3 then your not going too kill anything.
cap vs cap. all the dreads are fine.
dread vs subcap? Honestly? You think pheonix needs to be boosted to allow killing subcaps? The hell? The only reason moros does so well is the drones. Even then... hotdrop the stupid moros who is killing subcaps and destroy it. Problem solved.
Quote: telling pheonix pilots too fire webs and such too make there cids worth while like amarr ships too use projectiles weapons as there cap issues with lasers.
I have that recent vid with the moros doing piracy. He had to use faction scrams(2) and web just to get those hits. Not to mention blasters. So yes... if the pheonix wants the same performance... he better fit a web or have someone with a web. Might I suggest a marauder?
Quote: This is simply not true outside of very close range as I said in my opening post. But rather than ask you to take my word for it again take a look at these graphs of various dreads firing at a full speed Thanatos.
Obviously. I was at about 11km or so. Meaning he could overload and get me. However by the time he burns out. I have only taken a fair bit of dmg, but i go back to tanking.
Quote: With 50% of speed contributing to transveral. With 100% of speed contributing to transversal.
Oh no doubt. If I wasnt in the sweet zone. I'dve been smoked lol. |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.13 01:53:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Jason Edwards
Quote: the Nagfail suffers from the cid effect too. on top of that i am talking about a cap battle. more then 1 vs 1 here. and not only just vs caps. a moros can fight sub-cap ships and kill something. it guns might miss a lot but if it lands a hit it Counts for something, on the other hand. you can fire cids all day. but if you only deal 80 dmg with all 3 then your not going too kill anything.
cap vs cap. all the dreads are fine.
dread vs subcap? Honestly? You think pheonix needs to be boosted to allow killing subcaps? The hell? The only reason moros does so well is the drones. Even then... hotdrop the stupid moros who is killing subcaps and destroy it. Problem solved.
Quote: telling pheonix pilots too fire webs and such too make there cids worth while like amarr ships too use projectiles weapons as there cap issues with lasers.
I have that recent vid with the moros doing piracy. He had to use faction scrams(2) and web just to get those hits. Not to mention blasters. So yes... if the pheonix wants the same performance... he better fit a web or have someone with a web. Might I suggest a marauder?
Quote: This is simply not true outside of very close range as I said in my opening post. But rather than ask you to take my word for it again take a look at these graphs of various dreads firing at a full speed Thanatos.
Obviously. I was at about 11km or so. Meaning he could overload and get me. However by the time he burns out. I have only taken a fair bit of dmg, but i go back to tanking.
Quote: With 50% of speed contributing to transveral. With 100% of speed contributing to transversal.
Oh no doubt. If I wasnt in the sweet zone. I'dve been smoked lol.
So if cap vs cap all of them are fine why can I speed tank a group of phoenix in a wyvern? |
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 19:55:00 -
[24]
I be happy if the phoenix could again battle with sub-cap ships and do some real dmg too them.
but i be happy if they just fix the issue where a moving target the size of a titan can speed tank a group of phoenix dreads. it's just silly.
i looking at number here. if i had a group of 10 phoenix dreads attacked by 15 battleships the phoenix crew would be Whole sale screwed.
while on the other hand any other dread in a group of 10 could at least pose a danger too the enemy.
same issue when you scale up too caps.
no group of ships of any type or race should be useless simply as your target is moving.
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 07:31:00 -
[25]
Bump!
and what way should we go. Buff the missile it self or add a bonus too the ships that use it?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 16:30:00 -
[26]
Dreads arent supposed to be bigger, better BS. They are anti cap and tower ships. They dont need scaling for sub bs. You're supposed to deploy them with support ------------------------------------------------- Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
Haid Arcan
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 18:38:00 -
[27]
|
TimGascoigne
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 19:02:00 -
[28]
I agree that the explosion velocity is crippling. The problem is that all the other capital weapons systems have a long-range lower DPS and short range higher DPS version but not for missiles. A citadel cruise missile launcher is needed and damage done needs to be based more on signature radius and less on speed. This will mean that as long as you're not using an MWD on your BS you should not get wtf ganked. Plus the Phoenix would be useful at shooting other capital ships.
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.16 20:56:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 16/03/2009 20:56:54 It should be noted that objects one can siege are supposed to be immobile. If your target is mobile, you shouldn't be in siege mode. I thought that was obvious.
|
iudex
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2009.03.17 04:25:00 -
[30]
A titan speed-tanking citadel torps - that's just ridiculous.
Faction Standings: Serpentis +7.81 // Angel Cartel +7.60 // Minmatar Republic -8.68 // Gallente Federation -9.88 |
|
Dasfry
Demio's Corporation 101010 Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.17 06:14:00 -
[31]
lol its silly and one of the main reasons i'm avoiding ever using a phoenix.
Not only that but if you compare DPS's of each potential dread, the phoenix numbers are out done by the others according to EFT even if the target is a POS... *********** Dasfry, Director Demio's Corporation
Military Tactics |
aevistyne
Solarflare Heavy Industries Doctrine.
|
Posted - 2009.03.17 11:42:00 -
[32]
phwoar, go the minmatar speed tank, who said minnie caps were broken, but seriously, thats pretty ridiculous, unless something is sieged or a POS you're pretty much ****ed at the moment, def needs to be changed
------- EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER |
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.18 08:37:00 -
[33]
most people here can agree that a siege phoenix should not be made Null in effect by speed of other cap ships
at this point 20 phoenix dreads in siege would be unable too deal with a group of 5 carriers
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.03.18 12:32:00 -
[34]
Bump. This needs fixing.
|
Kusum Fawn
|
Posted - 2009.03.18 21:15:00 -
[35]
Does anyone else think that its funny that you can speed tank a dread? at all? Really if ther is one thing that a dread can hit it should be another dread,
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.18 22:37:00 -
[36]
the issue not dread vs dread. issue dread vs anything that moves and can fight.
while the gun dreads will miss a lot. they can land a hit every now and then and deal a nice bit of dmg too a target. while the phoenix can land every hit with it's weapons what good is it when a raven, hell i say a caracal does more DPS then you do.
|
PirceHat
|
Posted - 2009.03.18 22:39:00 -
[37]
|
Larkonis Trassler
Neo Spartans
|
Posted - 2009.03.18 23:49:00 -
[38]
Lolphoenix.
This does need looking at. Dreads of all sorts should still do loldamage vs a moving bs with good transversal however the numbers need to be adjusted for capital ships.
|
Yakia TovilToba
Halliburton Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.20 10:57:00 -
[39]
The dev responsible for this flagrant imbalance should receive a disciplinary action imho.
|
Vall Kor
Minmatar ZipZoom Kaboom
|
Posted - 2009.03.20 20:58:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Yakia TovilToba The dev responsible for this flagrant imbalance should receive a disciplinary action imho.
Blame those that complained about missiles.
|
|
darkmancer
|
Posted - 2009.03.20 22:34:00 -
[41]
Citadels are appalling.
They suffer all the disadvantages of missiles while not really befitting from any of the advantages. They need a massive explosion velocity & a raw velocity boost. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong |
Amberle Vale
|
Posted - 2009.03.21 09:29:00 -
[42]
/signed
Missiles need to be revisited.
|
Elhina Novae
Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.03.21 14:06:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Amberle Vale /signed
Missiles need to be revisited.
No not really.
Missiles are fine as they are for all Frig/Cruiser/BS.
But Capitals needs a look at, haven't been in one myself but numbers speak for themself. A Carrier/Mothership/Titan shouldn't be able to SPEEDTANK missiles thats just ridicolous and stupid <.< ------------
Originally by: Boz Well
Originally by: SurrenderMonkey ... There's an Amarr problem?
Nothing that can't be solved by more Minmatar nerfs.
|
Amberle Vale
|
Posted - 2009.03.21 19:44:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Elhina Novae
Originally by: Amberle Vale /signed
Missiles need to be revisited.
No not really.
Missiles are fine as they are for all Frig/Cruiser/BS.
But Capitals needs a look at, haven't been in one myself but numbers speak for themself. A Carrier/Mothership/Titan shouldn't be able to SPEEDTANK missiles thats just ridicolous and stupid <.<
I watched a battleship speed tank cruise missiles on sisi when the QR changes were first implemented. That is just as ridiculous as the above, missiles should be hitting the targets they were designed to kill for full damage.
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.21 19:49:00 -
[45]
Stop the caldari Hate. give missiles some love.
while your at it give the stealth bombers a kiss
|
Hobgoblin ll
|
Posted - 2009.03.22 09:54:00 -
[46]
Don't forget to check the support box
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.03.28 00:28:00 -
[47]
O might support box. don't let this issue Die. make CCP hear us
|
SupaKudoRio
|
Posted - 2009.03.28 08:25:00 -
[48]
Sad situation, yeah, but I doubt anyone at CCP will give a flying f*** about it.
|
Chuck Skull
b.b.k Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2009.03.29 00:32:00 -
[49]
Needs looking at. Explosion velocity is ridiculous. ---
Also available in 'sober' |
UnseenChaos
b.b.k Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2009.03.29 00:32:00 -
[50]
definatly supported, the numbers say it all and cit torps are just pathetic currently...
|
|
Vitrael
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.03.29 02:04:00 -
[51]
So I trained a Phoenix a few months ago. The moment it was ready I hopped on Sisi and started pew pewing and realized that the missiles go about 1km/s and can't hit anything that moves for any damage at all. The ship is so laughably bad that I sold the character.
Citadel torps need a big boost for both the Phoenix and Naglfar's sake. It's really pretty sad how awful those dreads are compared to the others.
-----
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.04.11 18:41:00 -
[52]
Toss this in with the stealth bomber changes. give us something good too make up for something bad
|
Cyprus Black
Elitist Jerks Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 15:39:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Incantare Smartbombs may no longer cause immunity to citadels but they are anything but fine. Their explosion velocity while in siege is atrociously low at about 3.25 m/s.
To put it in perspective, I could go outside and run faster than that.
/supported ______________ Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn. |
urkaz Luna
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 06:32:00 -
[54]
Things fall faster then that.
we really need something done.
right now i take a CCP stand point. what do they think. busted. or OK?
|
CrestoftheStars
Eternum Pariah
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 10:46:00 -
[55]
supported.
but missile in general should have a much higher dmg to make up for the very hard job it is to get the perfect hit.
so that their base dmg is normal again and their perfect hit would be like when turrets hit perfectly. ___________________________________________ Whoever appeals to the law against his fellow man is either a fool or a coward. Whoever cannot take care of himself without that law is both. For a wounded |
Cyrdax
Provehito In Altum
|
Posted - 2009.04.16 23:30:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires It should be noted that objects one can siege are supposed to be immobile. If your target is mobile, you shouldn't be in siege mode. I thought that was obvious.
supercaps can't be webbed :welp:
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 02:48:00 -
[57]
So, this thread is just about Phoenix pilots whining that they can't blow a frigate up with Citadel Torps.
Blasters miss, missiles do reduced damage regardless of whether they're hitting a Cruiser or a Titan. It has always been like this, end of story. If this is going to be changed then I demand Blasters have a much better tracking while in siege too but then the Phoenix pilots will whine that my Dread outdamages theirs
One of the very few intelligent posts in this thread.
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 16/03/2009 20:56:54 It should be noted that objects one can siege are supposed to be immobile. If your target is mobile, you shouldn't be in siege mode. I thought that was obvious.
|
Doomed Predator
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 11:07:00 -
[58]
Clearly minmatar caps need a nerf cause they can speed tank.
Seriously, give all missiles a boost in pvp and just mess with npc sig radius's and speeds next time if you want to kick PvE running ravens in the nuts(which is fine by me) The 'Fendahlian Collective' strikes again |
Zakru Anul
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 13:33:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Super Whopper So, this thread is just about Phoenix pilots whining that they can't blow a frigate up with Citadel Torps.
Blasters miss, missiles do reduced damage regardless of whether they're hitting a Cruiser or a Titan. It has always been like this, end of story. If this is going to be changed then I demand Blasters have a much better tracking while in siege too but then the Phoenix pilots will whine that my Dread outdamages theirs
One of the very few intelligent posts in this thread.
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 16/03/2009 20:56:54 It should be noted that objects one can siege are supposed to be immobile. If your target is mobile, you shouldn't be in siege mode. I thought that was obvious.
Naglfar and phoenix use too be able too deal great dmg too a battleship, the Citadel Torp would hit them hard and could nearly take them out in a shot.
was this broken, maybe. but it also gave theses two ships something over there counterparts. the Slow speed of a Citadel and delayed dmg too anything at range ( even 15KM or more) really hurts the two ships.
now we get the missile changes and they have lost that one small perk and gained.... nothing!
where they could fight a battleships gang. they now can't even fight a single carrier. the dmg cut form a titan moving at 20M/s is just out right sick. don't even bother trying too hit a battleship they can passive tank you.
I am not asking for the Phoenix and Naglfar too WTF own everything on the field. but i would at least like too feel useful in a Cap battle. Too point out one issue I seen. I was in a cap fight and the range was about 60KM. the enemy cap fleet would die too other caps before ANY of my missile made it over there. I even aimed away from the prime targets and yet they would never make it in time.
Too top it off. if your Phoenix died too there fleet Any cid in flight was Useless, would deal no dmg. adding a Bit of Kick too the already uselessness you might feel.
SO if you think the Naglfar and phoenix are OK as they are you need too try using one and come back and see us.
|
Triest
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:50:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Kusum Fawn Does anyone else think that its funny that you can speed tank a dread? at all? Really if ther is one thing that a dread can hit it should be another dread,
No, I don't think it's funny, nor is it a bad thing, in my view. Dreadnoughts already are almost uncounterable for capital ship warfare, in that you dump them down, siege, and need no support aside from interdictors to kill any type of hostile capitals since you're immune to anything other than getting popped. If you need a couple webbing ships to boost damage, so be it. Not supported.
|
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.19 23:47:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Super Whopper So, this thread is just about Phoenix pilots whining that they can't blow a frigate up with Citadel Torps.
Blasters miss, missiles do reduced damage regardless of whether they're hitting a Cruiser or a Titan. It has always been like this, end of story. If this is going to be changed then I demand Blasters have a much better tracking while in siege too but then the Phoenix pilots will whine that my Dread outdamages theirs
One of the very few intelligent posts in this thread.
Obvious troll but I'll bite. This thread is about citadels doing pathetic damage to moving capitals. I used the phoenix as an example but the nag is also affected.
I'm not going to bother re-explaining why "guns miss" doesn't cut it. Read the thread, understand the figures, look at the graph.
And grats on quoting the second stupidest post in this thread (yours wins first prize).
Let's ignore carriers for a second, this post:
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 16/03/2009 20:56:54 It should be noted that objects one can siege are supposed to be immobile. If your target is mobile, you shouldn't be in siege mode. I thought that was obvious.
is stupid because:
Supercaps. Cannot. Be. Webbed.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.19 23:52:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Triest
No, I don't think it's funny, nor is it a bad thing, in my view. Dreadnoughts already are almost uncounterable for capital ship warfare, in that you dump them down, siege, and need no support aside from interdictors to kill any type of hostile capitals since you're immune to anything other than getting popped. If you need a couple webbing ships to boost damage, so be it. Not supported.
This thread is about a balance issue, but what you're talking about is game design. The problem here is that two dreads need that extra webbing support against carriers (see bold above for supercaps) while two do not.
|
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2009.04.20 15:31:00 -
[63]
Hey CCP if we can't get you too change the weapon how about the target. Nerf bat the Cap ship speed. make them slower. carrier 25m/s Dread 20m/s Mothership 15m/s titan 10m/s
thou the issue still show up maybe they could out DPS a raven
|
Vincent Gaines
Dirt Nap Squad
|
Posted - 2009.04.20 15:39:00 -
[64]
A titan speedtanking a missile is just stupid.
|
SickSeven
The Undead Righteous Knights
|
Posted - 2009.04.21 02:00:00 -
[65]
Edited by: SickSeven on 21/04/2009 01:59:52 Wow, how the hell does CCP justify this one? Are we going to have to have another speed nerf just so Phoenixs and Nags can hit something? lol
That is quite pathetic that any cap ship can speed tank another cap ship.
|
Relatyve Mynd
|
Posted - 2009.04.21 07:01:00 -
[66]
|
CrestoftheStars
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.04.21 11:15:00 -
[67]
after the missile calculation change, all missiles ****ed up :& not much more to say... change it back... a stupid move to change it like they did in the first place. and why again should ab be a "95% tank against missile" ? not like they work anything like this on turrets. you already have mwd's which is against missiles as long range and ab which worked better against turret at close range, while turret have no problem hitting stuff at longer range missiles still have the same problem as if they where 1km from them, actually bigger problems since they can move faster at long range..
anyway long in short, change the missile calculation back to be signature as main calculation and tweak it ___________________________________________ Whoever appeals to the law against his fellow man is either a fool or a coward. Whoever cannot take care of himself without that law is both. For a wounded |
Hexor V
I.M.M Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 06:51:00 -
[68]
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 07:12:00 -
[69]
Originally by: CrestoftheStars after the missile calculation change, all missiles ****ed up :& not much more to say... change it back... a stupid move to change it like they did in the first place. and why again should ab be a "95% tank against missile" ? not like they work anything like this on turrets. you already have mwd's which is against missiles as long range and ab which worked better against turret at close range, while turret have no problem hitting stuff at longer range missiles still have the same problem as if they where 1km from them, actually bigger problems since they can move faster at long range..
anyway long in short, change the missile calculation back to be signature as main calculation and tweak it
Pretty much this. ALL the missiles are screwed since the nano nerf. The formula changes were a DISASTER and need new rethinking
________________ God is my Wingman |
Mean McCrabby
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 07:13:00 -
[70]
Bump. This is totally ridiculous CCP. I was shooting a Carrier with my Phoenix today and doing less damage than if I wouldve just got a raven out instead.
The idea that a carrier can speed tank a citadel torp blows my mind. You need to fix this immediately. In the short term a boost to explosion velocity would probably do the trick for the citadels. Please unfork my ship and torps that I trained a long time and spent a lot of my friends isk on.
Thanks.
|
|
Asekudar
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 08:11:00 -
[71]
|
India99
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 12:17:00 -
[72]
Edited by: India99 on 23/04/2009 12:18:09 Pheonix does the weakest dps of all dreads and even these DPS are screwed massivly by the missile nerf. In fact, even a BS Like Megathron is a better DPS dealer against caps unless the cap is webbed by 4-5 ppl. So what is the meaning of the phoenix then?
Suggestion: All kinds of capital weapons has two different types of ranges(in case of the Moros Rails/blasters ---> Phoenix doesn¦t, just the long range one So why dont introduce a capital Missile launcher for short range, but with better dps/ explo velocity? maybe something like capital assault missile launchers... |
Mean McCrabby
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 14:28:00 -
[73]
India99, the problem is CCPs stupid missile damage formula, not that we need to introduce YET ANOTHER capital missile to train and equip. They simply need to fix the formula so you cant speed tank citadels with simply by moving your ship.
Its utterly ridiculous and whoever allowed this to go through at CCP FAILED to do their job. I cant imagine it would be hard to fix this, and until they do fix it my 2 billion isk ship is SEVERELY gimped.
|
steave435
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 16:37:00 -
[74]
|
Gluefire
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 18:51:00 -
[75]
|
VoiceInTheDesert
Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 20:59:00 -
[76]
Two things
1. This needs to be looked at. Citadels need to be able to hit other capitals. I don't approve of them alpha-striking BS (that's bull****), but something should be done so that they can hit a flying city (titan, mom). Super caps cannot be webbed, so something needs to be done to make sure they are hittable. Other dreads/carriers shouldn't be able to shrug off half the dps at a mere 20/ms.
2. I don't think all the people who say "phoenix dps is the lowest of all the dreads" have ever shot a pos. Every pos shoot I am at, the Phoenix walks away with the highest damage done. Why? You can choose your damage type. That's a huge advantage and don't pretend it's not.
tl;dr The dps numbers on a phoenix are fine, the citadel torps need to be able to hit other caps for much higher % of damage when the target is moving.
|
India99
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 22:23:00 -
[77]
maybe, but its a fact that the phoenix does the lowest DPS (pure numbers) of all dreads in addition to the explo velocity speed main issue. that means even with the a better missile calc. the phoenix is the weakest dread at all. Sure, u can choose the damage type, but if we talk about DPS, the only DPS u can deal in compareable numbers is kinetic.
So why dont give the phoenix a short range Anti-Ship weapon like EVERY other ship has since ever?
|
Twenty Five
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 23:56:00 -
[78]
wat - Totally not a miner alt. |
Mean McCrabby
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 01:38:00 -
[79]
India99, What is the point in introducing a new short range weapon for the phoenix when the problem is the damage formula? Why should a siege phoenix do less damage than an unsieged phoenix when shooting at a ship the size of a small city?
Its ridiculous atm and needs a formula tweak and not a whole new weapon system to be thrown in on top of an already broken formula. So simply increase explosion velocity on the Citadels, or maybe just include an explosion velocity bonus against caps (if thats possible)
I dont know exactly what the best comprehensive solution to this problem is, but CCP will hopefully think of one, it is their job to do this sort of stuff after all.
|
Little K
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 03:52:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Little K on 24/04/2009 03:52:16 The Phoenix is widely regarded as cannon fodder, in other words if a dread dies in a cap fleet odds are its the caldari one.
This is just another shiny example of one of the many things that need to change in regards to capitals.
|
|
India99
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 07:03:00 -
[81]
like I said, these short range missles should have a better explo velocity than the citadels. So u have the citadels for sniping/pos bashing and the other ones for killing caps/super caps.
tank of the phoenix very ok, I would say.I see there no point to complain about it atm. |
Niskin
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc. Balance of Judgment
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 16:00:00 -
[82]
Originally by: India99 like I said, these short range missles should have a better explo velocity than the citadels. So u have the citadels for sniping/pos bashing and the other ones for killing caps/super caps.
tank of the phoenix very ok, I would say.I see there no point to complain about it atm.
Citadels Torpedos ARE the short range missile, there just aren't any Citadel Cruise Missiles to serve as the long range missile. That isn't really the issue here though. Giving Citadel Torps a 20-25m/s explosion velocity while in seige mode would probably solve this while still allowing BS's and smaller to speed tank them effectively. ------------- I am the n00b that time forgot. |
Alexander Knott
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 18:10:00 -
[83]
Supported.
|
India99
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 18:33:00 -
[84]
150 km range = short range? Dont get confused just baout the name" torpedo" its the cruise missile in siege |
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 21:52:00 -
[85]
Because there's only one capital missile you can argue back and forth all day wether they are short or long range weapons, but beyond the name their lack of a bonus from guided missile precision follows the pattern of the close range missiles. Remember when torps were changed from not so useful midrange to close range heavy dps dealers, well a similar change for citadels coupled with the introduction of capital cruise missiles for longer range fights would be great.
That said, this topic is about a specific issue. If you want to continue discussing the lack of a second capital missile system you can do so in another thread.
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 00:16:00 -
[86]
Not supported, you are wrong.
Why?
1) Dread In Siege Mode
Dreads in Siege mode are supposed to be anti POS/Dread weapons. If you want to hard hit a moving target while in siege mode, you have to use some tricks. Sieged dreads shall not be able to do it out-of-the-box. There are two tools for that: Target Painter and Webber.
While the webber cannot be used on supercaps, but it still works on carriers and unsieged dreads. The only point is, ship fited webbers are too weak to give you enough dmg boost alone. The only webbers that have good effect are the faction webber arrays, but these are expensive and only avaiable if you are in range of a pos which is equipped with them, and if you manually direct them to web your target you want to kill. These pre nerf aera like 97.5% faction webber arrays are able to web a bs down to a speed where you can alpha strike it with your citadels (when used together with painting). Go and buy such babies, if not, do not complain about fast moving targets.
The second tool, the target painter, helps to hit moving capital targets with citadel torpedoes harder. The small explosion radius of 1000m for a citadel torp compared to the much larger sig radius of a cap is your friend! While it was limiting damage during speed tanking before the nano-nerf, it does not any more after the nerf. Excessive sig radius painting of speed tanking targets can be used to overcompensate lack of explosion velocity. This was designed to give afterburners better speed tanking capabilities over microwarps, which allow faster speeds while blowing up the sig radius. So if you want see your citadels hit hard, use excessive painting by skilled pilots in ships with painter bonus, and not by your five TP-900 drones. The formular on the page you referenced is correct, redo the math with painting applied.
Something similar applies to small pos structures. While they are not moving arround, they still have too less (less than 1000m, the ex radius of the citadel is limiting damage here) sig radius to take the full punch of your citadels. To compensate this, you need painting.
On not moving targets with larger sig radius than 1000m you dont need any painting. This aplies to siege mode dreads, to the pos forcefield and to capitals with active cyno generators.
Everything is fine here, nothing is broken, and nothing needs to be boosted/nerfed. Just the description of the Siege Module should be clarified.
2) Dread Out Of Siege Mode
You can hit moving caps with full damage, isn't it? You also can move your dread arround, speedtanking other dreads who try to gank you from siege mode. And they can try to web/paint you to compensate. So everything fine here too.
Conclusion
Nothing is broken, nothing is bugged, nothing needs to be boosted/fixed/nerfed. Ok, maybe gun fitted sieged dreads should be nerfed to not to be able to hard hit moving targets any more, not even the large ones... but that's another story.
All tools are in game to help with damage while in siege mode. You just need to use them. The need to use them is not epic failure, it's fun. Dreads allready are one trick ponies... ok, maybe two trick ponies, you need to turn on trick 1a (Siege Mode) before you can use trick 1b (lots of volley dmg). It would be boring if a dread could deal full siege mode dmg without any support by webber/painter mates/equipment.
Dont Panic, everything is fine.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 02:46:00 -
[87]
Let me start with a simple assertion: if citadel torpedoes are fine now, they must've been overpowered before the patch.
They weren't.
The patch has made them significantly less effective against moving targets.
Therefore they are underpowered now.
QED
I could leave it at that, but since you've taken the time to write a well structured post I will answer you fully and point out your numerous misconceptions and your tendency to mistakenly apply your personal ideas on game design.
Your first misconception:
Quote: Dreads in Siege mode are supposed to be anti POS/Dread weapons.
Why this is wrong: dreads are anti POS and anti-cap ship weapons. If the devs didn't want dreads to be used against carriers / supercaps they would have made all dreads innefective against those targets, not one "and a half" of them and even then only since the missile formula change. If they weren't carriers would have no same sized counter. That is poor design and thankfully that's not the direction the devs took with dreads, no matter how hard you wish it were.
Let's assume you may be right for a second, it would mean every alliance that has ever deployed dreads to kill a carrier or supercap lacks your in depth understanding of how the game was meant to be played and has, in fact, been massively failing. Or you could be wrong. Guess which one is more likely.
The reality is all dreads were effective against caps of all types, more so than any other ship class. Turret dreads still are. Therefore an imbalance that needs to be fixed.
Quote:
If you want to hard hit a moving target while in siege mode, you have to use some tricks. Sieged dreads shall not be able to do it out-of-the-box. There are two tools for that: Target Painter and Webber.
While the webber cannot be used on supercaps, but it still works on carriers and unsieged dreads. The only point is, ship fited webbers are too weak to give you enough dmg boost alone. The only webbers that have good effect are the faction webber arrays, but these are expensive and only avaiable if you are in range of a pos which is equipped with them, and if you manually direct them to web your target you want to kill. These pre nerf aera like 97.5% faction webber arrays are able to web a bs down to a speed where you can alpha strike it with your citadels (when used together with painting). Go and buy such babies, if not, do not complain about fast moving targets.
The second tool, the target painter, helps to hit moving capital targets with citadel torpedoes harder. The small explosion radius of 1000m for a citadel torp compared to the much larger sig radius of a cap is your friend! While it was limiting damage during speed tanking before the nano-nerf, it does not any more after the nerf. Excessive sig radius painting of speed tanking targets can be used to overcompensate lack of explosion velocity. This was designed to give afterburners better speed tanking capabilities over microwarps, which allow faster speeds while blowing up the sig radius. So if you want see your citadels hit hard, use excessive painting by skilled pilots in ships with painter bonus, and not by your five TP-900 drones. The formular on the page you referenced is correct, redo the math with painting applied.
Amazing how you brush off supercaps as they cause all your arguments to break down. They cannot be webbed. They cannot be painted. They are there and cannot be ignored if you expect to be taken seriously.
Once again for emphasis: YOU CANNOT IGNORE SUPERCAPS.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 02:47:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Incantare on 25/04/2009 02:56:45
Anyway:
Ship webs and painters are band aids, citadel explosion velocity is a throat wound. Yes they work on carriers - 3 60% webs and a TP gives full damage to a Thanatos. But with that kind of support you'd expect to start doing damage to lower ship classes as is the case for every other ship class in eve. So let's take a look at what would happen if you used those three webs and a painter on a battleship, the Megathron for example.
How about three webs / three painters.
Keep in mind these are worst case scenarios with max transversal, and that the phoenix is fitting two additional damage mod.
The question is why use citadels when you could use a gun dread and kill not only same sized ships, but do serious damage to battleships and some BCs as well with that same support. The answer should be obvious.
Your mention of POS webs fails for two reasons: not all cap fights happen at POS. Most do, but you cannot pretend fights don't happen at stations, gates, or elsewhere. Feel free to look up battle reports if in doubt.
The second reason is that major cap battles at POS happen when the POS exits reinforced. See that CPU use on the webs? It means they are offline when reinforced. You really should know this.
Quote:
Something similar applies to small pos structures. While they are not moving arround, they still have too less (less than 1000m, the ex radius of the citadel is limiting damage here) sig radius to take the full punch of your citadels. To compensate this, you need painting.
Gun dreads do full damage with no painters, doesn't seem balanced at all but this thread is about explosion velocity and you're off topic.
Quote:
You can hit moving caps with full damage, isn't it? You also can move your dread arround, speedtanking other dreads who try to gank you from siege mode. And they can try to web/paint you to compensate. So everything fine here too.
If you're shooting another cap out of siege mode and you're not flying a Moros, you're doing it wrong. The reason is simple: you'd be more useful in a carrier or battleship.
Quote:
Nothing is broken, nothing is bugged, nothing needs to be boosted/fixed/nerfed. Ok, maybe gun fitted sieged dreads should be nerfed to not to be able to hard hit moving targets any more, not even the large ones... but that's another story.
No, it's not. Either citadel explosion velocity is broken, or gun dreads are way too good at hitting carriers and smaller targets and have been since their introduction, with nothing concrete to support the latter.
Quoting this again:
Quote: Sieged dreads shall not be able to do it out-of-the-box.
Quote:
All tools are in game to help with damage while in siege mode. You just need to use them. The need to use them is not epic failure, it's fun. Dreads allready are one trick ponies... ok, maybe two trick ponies, you need to turn on trick 1a (Siege Mode) before you can use trick 1b (lots of volley dmg). It would be boring if a dread could deal full siege mode dmg without any support by webber/painter mates/equipment.
This is where you fail the most. Dreads already need support to be effective. Wanting them to need more support isn't stupid per se, but one weapon type needing that extra support to hit same sized targets while three do not is massively broken. Stop writing about how EVE is in terms of how you want it to be in a thread about a balance issue.
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 23:48:00 -
[89]
Sorry if i've upset you with my answer, it was not my intention.
I dont want "to apply my ideas of game design", and i dont want "writing about how EVE is in terms of how i want it to be". If this was your imression, then i'm sorry. English is not my natural language - i do my best to get into words what i think and i know, sorry if i fail trying. What i've written is what i've learned all the years in eve. But back to topic ("Balancing or not balancing citadels").
Originally by: Ausser Dreads in Siege mode are supposed to be anti POS/Dread weapons.
That's fact. Allow me to cite for proof:
Originally by: CCP Oveur Dreadnought BFS which uses X-Large turrets and is intended for an Anti-Battleship and Anti-Station/Starbase role. It will most likely feature Jumpdrive propulsion as most of the huge size ships.
(from "new ship classes planned for this year", devblog #229)
Sieged dreads are inteded for Anti-Battleship role? Really? No, in a later devblog Oveur gets more concrete:
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Then we have the new Capital ships. One of them, the Dreadnought, features the Jumpdrive. Yes, the jumpdrive. It's probably going to be far overpowered and all that, so expect it to be heavily pre-nerfed. This only leads to more joyful occasions where we are able to un-nerf it later on :)
It's main special capability is the siege mode to attack structures of any kind. In this mode it won't be useful for anything else than shooting structures - and I mean not for anything else. When not in siege mode it serves as quite an adequate anti-battleship machine, having the firepower of a couple itself and the defenses a bit more than a couple. Oh, we do have a nice picture of the new Amarr Dreadnought available. It's ... brutal looking isn't it? (Click on it)
(from "sneak peaks part iii - needful things?" - devblog #247, original emphasis)
So it is not my idea to have sieged dreads as weapons against immobile targets, ok?
You can hit slow targets with a sieged dread. That's not a problem at all. It is not a problem even with ganking something like the megathron in your example above. You show 900 dps there. Not much for a spider tanking mega. But does dps really care for phoenix ganking a bs? How much volley dmg is it? It's 22k+ per volley per phoenix. Bring four friends with more sieged phoenix dreads, and the poor guy in the mega gets 110k within a timeframe of one second between the first impact and the last one. No chance to spidertank that, if the buffer is not large enough. So what's wrong with that? Nothing, you need coordination and support to get such kills, it's a fun challenge. Or do you really want such kills shall be possible solo? I suppose not. So if you ask for rebalancing citadels towards more dps, then you also ask for much less volley dmg to compensate. It's a bad idea to provoke the nerfbat here, it's nice as it is, and nerfbats are known to hit where noone expects.
Next point, the 'hitting supercaps with full damage'. Can you hit a supercap with full damage? Yes you can: wait till he activates triage, clone vat bay or cyno. Maybe he will never do it. Then you still can hit him with reduced, but good damage, even if you cannot paint/web him. Why do you think you should be able to hit him with full damage while he is moving? Eve is a stone-paper-scissor game, nothing is perfect here. I've digged arround and found this cite for you:
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 23:54:00 -
[90]
Originally by: CCP Fendahl When scanning for a ship the signal strength is based on the signature radius to sensor strength ratio for the target. Generally there is a 2x increase in this ratio between major ship classes (making larger ships easier to find), but capital ships have very high sensor strengths, making the ratio is less than for battleships. To address this issue the signature radius of capital ships has been significantly increased to fit the progression between frigates, cruisers and battleships. This change naturally also affects tracking, so Dreadnoughts will have an easier time hitting other capital ships while in siege mode, making them better suited as anti-capital ships as originally intended.
(from "more balancing changes for revelations 2.2" - devblog #494)
Hmm... so originally not intended to siege caps, but no problem when they get better suited as a side effect on balancing of the scanning system. But still no words about dreads to be the ideal suited anti-moving-supercap-weapon. I've digged arround and found it nowhere. Maybe because it simply isnt intended to be one, like absolutley nothing in eve is inteded to be perfect. Because perfect is boring.
But CCP Fendahl shows a much better way for rebalancing than to mess up with explosion velocity: Maybe you should just ask to increase sig radius and sensor strength of the supercaps a little? Would 10% be enough for you? However, i still dont think it's neccecary:
Maybe gun based dreads can deal in special situations more damage to moving supercaps than missile based (the minmatar dread is another story). The difference is, missile dreads do not need to take movement of the target into account. The fc can cyno them anywhere on the battlefield, they jump in, siege, lock and start fire. The target cannot reduce the damage by manuvering into another direction. For gun based dreads the fc must do his homework to get them positioned well, so they can deal ideal dmg. Both concepts have an advantage/disadvantage, it's balanced.
Ask yourself, is it really a 'must have' for you to deal 100% dmg into a moving supercap, in all situations? Or arent the 2k-2.5k dps enough? It's not perfect, but more than a bs or carrier could deliver. So even the phoenix is, as it is now, a good suited anti cap ship, no matter if the supercap is moving or not.
Another reason why i would not try to force the devs to look closer on this topic is, when they start to do, they will take a look on the gun based dreads... maybe with the result of a nerf of them if they sometimes hit bs too easy.
Explosion velocity is the verry wrong screw to use for rebalancing this issue (if it is an issue at all).
|
|
Jita Jenn
|
Posted - 2009.04.26 03:44:00 -
[91]
I'm not really an expert on dreads but I think it's safe to say that the people who design them are...
Dreadnoughts: Capital ships created for extended sieges of stationary installations.
Seems to me that you're bringing a trebuchet to a gunfight. =\
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.28 17:43:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Incantare on 28/04/2009 17:45:38
Ausser, I appreciate your posts even even though they go against my proposition because it is now clear you are genuinely concerned about this issue. And so am I.
I will attempt to be as clear as possible in giving you my reasons for posting this thread.
But first let's take a look at the dev posts you brought up. The posts by Oveur are contradictory (dreads being anti-battleship then only anti-POS) but aside from that I do not give them much weight because they precede their release and the concept of dreads was still being changed.
However Fendahl:
Quote: so Dreadnoughts will have an easier time hitting other capital ships while in siege mode, making them better suited as anti-capital ships as originally intended.
confirms what I was saying, dreads were "originally intended" as anti-capital ships. That's the concept they decided to go with in the end, rather than "anti-battleship/cap/POS" or just anti-POS/sieged dread.
Why I brought up the dread vs battleship example: every ship class can be effective against a lower sized one with proper (web/painter) support. There's nothing wrong there since it requires teamwork, coordination. I do not want the Phoenix to be an anti-battleship platform. That's not the point of this thread.
The point was why go with a phoenix which requires support to deal similar damage to a gun dreads firing at a carrier when you could use that same support and a gun dread to be effective against not only capitals, but also some sub caps.
I do not want citadels to be effective anti-battleship weapons. I do not want them to have more raw dps.
What I'm asking for is for more effective dps when firing at moving capitals of all types, so that their effectiveness is similar to that of gun based weapon systems as it was before the missile formula change.
The graph I posted on page one gives a good picture of the problem: if you're firing at a moving capital there's a very small window where citadels are better (extreme short range), at any other range guns are far, far better.
You're right in that missiles and guns have different advantages and that against a missile dread you can't maneuver to reduce damage. But when you're taking damage from multiple gun dreads you cannot maneuver to keep at short range / high transveral from all of them. On the other hand the disadvantage of citadels isn't reduced by engagement size.
The problem isn't that citadel damage is calculated differently, that's perfectly fine. The problem is how much damage they lose compared to guns against moving capitals without any sufficient compensating advantage. Overall different weapons systems should be roughly as effective, currently this is not the case at all.
I don't know where you picked up that I wanted citadels to deal 100% damage to moving supercaps. I don't. Only that they be about as effective as guns and currently they are not.
Let's put it this way: given a choice between two weapon systems, both of which are effective against POS and sieged dreads, but only one of which is effective against moving caps of all sizes. Which would you train?
Why explosion velocity is "the right screw" for this problem: it's the explosion velocity that causes the large damage difference, not the raw damage nor the explosion radius. However a simple way of making citadels effective against moving caps while keeping their effectiveness against battleships the same would be to:
1) Increase the explosion velocity.
2) Increase the explosion radius.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.04.29 19:54:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Incantare on 29/04/2009 19:55:55 Citadels velocity is getting a boost. No change in explosion velocity though.
|
Ignition SemperFi
The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 16:17:00 -
[94]
ahahah citadel velocity gets boosted, flight time shortened.... endstate goal: you still probably should shoot the secondary in a capital fight
and your explosion velocity on any cap moving over 20m/s is still terribad. woohooo for CCP fixing citadel torps and breaking them in the same patch (QR)
then boosting them for the sake of the naglfar w/o any real boost except a reduction on time to impact ---- People Say Im paranoid because I have a gun, I say I dont have to be paranoid because I have a gun.
Space Vikings |
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.04.30 16:24:00 -
[95]
|
Naomi Knight
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 00:25:00 -
[96]
I need a reason to start learning caldari dread skill , pls make phoenix an usefull ship. Currently you are better off in a torp raven wich will do much more dps than this huge crap, during any op, even if it is pos shooting.
|
Incantare
|
Posted - 2009.05.10 21:11:00 -
[97]
Some good news from CCP:
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships
We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at.
While we still don't know when this will be fixed, this is a great first step towards balanced capital missiles.
|
Tom Hanks
Raype Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.11 06:38:00 -
[98]
This needs immediate attention. CCP just needs to change one number around and the problem will be solved, or at least have a great band aid on until a more comprehensive change could be made.
Citadels need to be able to do damage approaching that as their other dread cousins, against a moving mothership or other moving capital ship.
As it stands, Citadels are a pathetic joke against carriers/MS.
Caldari Racial Purity
|
Tom Hanks
Raype Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 17:04:00 -
[99]
CCP is about to release the new patch to change citadel torpedoes but they arent changing explosion velocity.
THE THING THAT ACTUALLY NEEDS TO BE FIXED IS BEING IGNORED
CCP stop being ridiculous and fix explosion velocity on citadels, or at least tell us what your reasoning is for not fixing them now. It only requires you to change 1 number....CMON!!
End the speed tanking motherships
Caldari Racial Purity
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 23:02:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Incantare Let's put it this way: given a choice between two weapon systems, both of which are effective against POS and sieged dreads, but only one of which is effective against moving caps of all sizes. Which would you train?
Phoenix. I love the alpha capability, even if it is nearly impossible to play out this card in a large battle. Revelation is just my second choice. I'm long enough in the game to seen lots of things nerfed/boosted. Even if my favorite toy is not the best one, i can enjoy to play with it. They will change it 10 times either.
Originally by: Incantare Why explosion velocity is "the right screw" for this problem: it's the explosion velocity that causes the large damage difference, not the raw damage nor the explosion radius. However a simple way of making citadels effective against moving caps while keeping their effectiveness against battleships the same would be to:
1) Increase the explosion velocity.
2) Increase the explosion radius.
This. Two screws look better than one.
The drawback is, you get reduced dmg on structures like neuts. It would make a lot of ppl unhappy. So it would have to be an additional ammo type, which is not a good idea too. Defenders of a pos dont need to carry both ammo types, so the uphill fight gets worse for the attackers.
What about a script for the siege module? To carry 1m¦ more does not hurt. It has the nice itchiness to only be swappable when out of siege, which would force us to 'think first' and to plan which one to use in which phase in battle.
Even with both screws, i'm not sure if that is enough. How does the dmg on moving carriers/dreads/rorquals looks like? It would not be that good if they now get anihilated too easy whith an anti-supercap-weapon. Webbing/painting should still be worth the effort there. Did you have tried modified numbers in your tables? I think we will have to use the third screw 'supercap signature size/sensor strength' too.
The use of scripts would also allow to balance the diffrent dread weapons. Give each weapon type it's own script with specific attributes.
N.b.: If we turn just one screw at once, we end up with odd side effects, like the last change to citadel speed. Take a look at this thread in Game Development.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |