EVE Search - Projectile Weapons and Latest Dev Chat

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Projectile Weapons and Latest Dev Chat

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gariuys	Posted - 2004.09.16 06:54:00 - [31] Originally by: Imhotep Khem No we dont even need to think up any solutions. CCP already had the solution. In stead of increasing the artillery falloff, they mistakenly reduced it. If they simply fix their error... I have been completely baffled at how they could admit the mistake, but continue to create patches that do not address this incredibly simple patch. Nor do they state that they state what the deal is with why they wont fix it!! CCP, if you changed yoru mine on the projectiles, just say so. Drop the mistake charade and admit to hosing the minmatar. It was reduced cause of the chance to the falloff formula, it used to be 0% at optimal+falloff with a very sharp drop off starting at optimal. It now is a different curve that ends at 50% at optimal+falloff. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Gariuys	Posted - 2004.09.16 06:54:00 - [32] Originally by: Imhotep Khem No we dont even need to think up any solutions. CCP already had the solution. In stead of increasing the artillery falloff, they mistakenly reduced it. If they simply fix their error... I have been completely baffled at how they could admit the mistake, but continue to create patches that do not address this incredibly simple patch. Nor do they state that they state what the deal is with why they wont fix it!! CCP, if you changed yoru mine on the projectiles, just say so. Drop the mistake charade and admit to hosing the minmatar. It was reduced cause of the chance to the falloff formula, it used to be 0% at optimal+falloff with a very sharp drop off starting at optimal. It now is a different curve that ends at 50% at optimal+falloff. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Nomispanco	Posted - 2004.09.16 10:43:00 - [33] Edited by: Nomispanco on 23/12/2004 12:09:27 Originally by: http://www.eve-i.com/home/dancer/page/page_fullnews.php?id=1805 Hakera> Lord_Anubis> hi in the last dev chat we were told that projectiles were getting looked at have any ideas come of this since and if so when will it be applied ie post shiva? Hammerhead> Yes this is a post shiva thing. There is so much stuff to balance that's in shiva that any tweaking we do to projectiles is going to have to wait until then. Hammerhead> One thing I some some players might not know is that some of the projectiles like the 1400mm work better past their optimal range. Hammerhead> Due to the way that tracking works. Hammerhead> So your answer is no they haven't been looked at yet but as soon as there is time we will dig into that more. Hammerhead> * that line above should have read "One thing I think some..." So i hope CCP will give me back the money for the xxx months i can't really play with my favorite ship / weapons until they fix it.
Nomispanco	Posted - 2004.09.16 10:43:00 - [34] Edited by: Nomispanco on 23/12/2004 12:09:27 Originally by: http://www.eve-i.com/home/dancer/page/page_fullnews.php?id=1805 Hakera> Lord_Anubis> hi in the last dev chat we were told that projectiles were getting looked at have any ideas come of this since and if so when will it be applied ie post shiva? Hammerhead> Yes this is a post shiva thing. There is so much stuff to balance that's in shiva that any tweaking we do to projectiles is going to have to wait until then. Hammerhead> One thing I some some players might not know is that some of the projectiles like the 1400mm work better past their optimal range. Hammerhead> Due to the way that tracking works. Hammerhead> So your answer is no they haven't been looked at yet but as soon as there is time we will dig into that more. Hammerhead> * that line above should have read "One thing I think some..." So i hope CCP will give me back the money for the xxx months i can't really play with my favorite ship / weapons until they fix it.
Jan Ors	Posted - 2004.09.16 11:07:00 - [35] CCP's attitude to balancing issues can be surmised thusly: 'We know it's broken, but we're busy.' ________ My chosen sig won't fit. Fah.
Jan Ors	Posted - 2004.09.16 11:07:00 - [36] CCP's attitude to balancing issues can be surmised thusly: 'We know it's broken, but we're busy.' ________ My chosen sig won't fit. Fah.
Raven Dru	Posted - 2004.09.16 11:42:00 - [37] Well its nice to know that i can now cross off minmitar ships as the way forwards. Shame seeing as im a minmatar but i'll now be focussing on one of the other races.
Raven Dru	Posted - 2004.09.16 11:42:00 - [38] Well its nice to know that i can now cross off minmitar ships as the way forwards. Shame seeing as im a minmatar but i'll now be focussing on one of the other races.
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 12:21:00 - [39] Originally by: Gariuys Originally by: Imhotep Khem No we dont even need to think up any solutions. CCP already had the solution. In stead of increasing the artillery falloff, they mistakenly reduced it. If they simply fix their error... I have been completely baffled at how they could admit the mistake, but continue to create patches that do not address this incredibly simple patch. Nor do they state that they state what the deal is with why they wont fix it!! CCP, if you changed yoru mine on the projectiles, just say so. Drop the mistake charade and admit to hosing the minmatar. It was reduced cause of the chance to the falloff formula, it used to be 0% at optimal+falloff with a very sharp drop off starting at optimal. It now is a different curve that ends at 50% at optimal+falloff. This means that Projictiles work only on optimal+Falloff range and do 50% damage of what it was intendet? GRATE! - So now i got 1400mm pea shooter -.- -------------------------------------------
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 12:21:00 - [40] Originally by: Gariuys Originally by: Imhotep Khem No we dont even need to think up any solutions. CCP already had the solution. In stead of increasing the artillery falloff, they mistakenly reduced it. If they simply fix their error... I have been completely baffled at how they could admit the mistake, but continue to create patches that do not address this incredibly simple patch. Nor do they state that they state what the deal is with why they wont fix it!! CCP, if you changed yoru mine on the projectiles, just say so. Drop the mistake charade and admit to hosing the minmatar. It was reduced cause of the chance to the falloff formula, it used to be 0% at optimal+falloff with a very sharp drop off starting at optimal. It now is a different curve that ends at 50% at optimal+falloff. This means that Projictiles work only on optimal+Falloff range and do 50% damage of what it was intendet? GRATE! - So now i got 1400mm pea shooter -.- -------------------------------------------
Nieda	Posted - 2004.09.16 13:21:00 - [41] Originally by: Siddy ... that Projictiles ... OT: Dude, its not even funny any more. Its not projektiles, not projictiles, its - projectiles. You wrote so many threads and answers on this matter, I'm refusing to understand why you keep writing such a crap. If you want to get dev's attention and things fixed, please, take those 15 sec to correct what you wrote in first place. Helps a lot. On topic: I've been using 720 arts at optimal+falloff with great success. Nearing optimal gave me another boost in accuracy, but then again at "almost optimal" the bad tracking kicks in. I'd say optimal + 50% falloff is artys optimal range. --------------------------------------------- 2004.08.12 14:50:32combatYour 720mm Carbine Howitzer I perfectly strikes Guristas Destructor, wrecking for 543.9 damage.
Nieda	Posted - 2004.09.16 13:21:00 - [42] Originally by: Siddy ... that Projictiles ... OT: Dude, its not even funny any more. Its not projektiles, not projictiles, its - projectiles. You wrote so many threads and answers on this matter, I'm refusing to understand why you keep writing such a crap. If you want to get dev's attention and things fixed, please, take those 15 sec to correct what you wrote in first place. Helps a lot. On topic: I've been using 720 arts at optimal+falloff with great success. Nearing optimal gave me another boost in accuracy, but then again at "almost optimal" the bad tracking kicks in. I'd say optimal + 50% falloff is artys optimal range. --------------------------------------------- 2004.08.12 14:50:32combatYour 720mm Carbine Howitzer I perfectly strikes Guristas Destructor, wrecking for 543.9 damage.
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 13:27:00 - [43] Originally by: Nieda Originally by: Siddy ... that Projictiles ... OT: Dude, its not even funny any more. Its not projektiles, not projictiles, its - projectiles. You wrote so many threads and answers on this matter, I'm refusing to understand why you keep writing such a crap. If you want to get dev's attention and things fixed, please, take those 15 sec to correct what you wrote in first place. Helps a lot. Projectiles? sorry, my ninjafingers -------------------------------------------
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 13:27:00 - [44] Originally by: Nieda Originally by: Siddy ... that Projictiles ... OT: Dude, its not even funny any more. Its not projektiles, not projictiles, its - projectiles. You wrote so many threads and answers on this matter, I'm refusing to understand why you keep writing such a crap. If you want to get dev's attention and things fixed, please, take those 15 sec to correct what you wrote in first place. Helps a lot. Projectiles? sorry, my ninjafingers -------------------------------------------
Teeth	Posted - 2004.09.16 15:51:00 - [45] The main problem is in CCP's current policy of big patches. If they had weekly small patches, tomb could easily give projectiles 15% more damage (or tracking or whatever) one week and then decide whether that was too much or too little based on player response and adjust it the next week. Small tweaks. Wash, rinse, repeat til balanced. Instead what we get is gigantic changes that affect so many systems that there's no way they can be balanced and worse, these stick around for months. Anyways, I have Amarr 4 large energy 4 now :-P I'd still rather use tempests and projectiles though if these were balanced.
Teeth	Posted - 2004.09.16 15:51:00 - [46] The main problem is in CCP's current policy of big patches. If they had weekly small patches, tomb could easily give projectiles 15% more damage (or tracking or whatever) one week and then decide whether that was too much or too little based on player response and adjust it the next week. Small tweaks. Wash, rinse, repeat til balanced. Instead what we get is gigantic changes that affect so many systems that there's no way they can be balanced and worse, these stick around for months. Anyways, I have Amarr 4 large energy 4 now :-P I'd still rather use tempests and projectiles though if these were balanced.
Selim	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:34:00 - [47] Edited by: Selim on 16/09/2004 16:37:07 I dont have a problem with the tracking of artillery. Its the fact that they do such crappy damage over time, its the fact that railguns can shoot farther out at optimal + falloff with longer range ammo, its the fact that they need to reload constantly, its the fact that projectile ammo does less damage than hybrid and laser ammo, and lastly, its the fact that lasers and hybrids use HARDLY ANY!!! capacitor, with the controlled burst skill. This skill does nothing at all for projectiles. Also, does anyone notice that a Radio L crystal does 28!!!!!! damage? The long range laser crystals are completely wrong. They do the wrong damage amount, its unbalanced to extremes. Projectile ammo is supposed to be the long range damage dealer...
Selim	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:34:00 - [48] Edited by: Selim on 16/09/2004 16:37:07 I dont have a problem with the tracking of artillery. Its the fact that they do such crappy damage over time, its the fact that railguns can shoot farther out at optimal + falloff with longer range ammo, its the fact that they need to reload constantly, its the fact that projectile ammo does less damage than hybrid and laser ammo, and lastly, its the fact that lasers and hybrids use HARDLY ANY!!! capacitor, with the controlled burst skill. This skill does nothing at all for projectiles. Also, does anyone notice that a Radio L crystal does 28!!!!!! damage? The long range laser crystals are completely wrong. They do the wrong damage amount, its unbalanced to extremes. Projectile ammo is supposed to be the long range damage dealer...
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:36:00 - [49] Originally by: Sparhawk You just openly admitted to the PVP players you have no talent..good luck. happen to be one for 9 months now its not the wine and chees ... its just that 12m+ spesialization skillpoints are now kinda ... useless? yes.. that was it Now that you had your Brainfarts, why dont you post something to back your statements - or unplug your keyboard kthxby -------------------------------------------
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:36:00 - [50] Originally by: Sparhawk You just openly admitted to the PVP players you have no talent..good luck. happen to be one for 9 months now its not the wine and chees ... its just that 12m+ spesialization skillpoints are now kinda ... useless? yes.. that was it Now that you had your Brainfarts, why dont you post something to back your statements - or unplug your keyboard kthxby -------------------------------------------
Selim	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:43:00 - [51] Edited by: Selim on 16/09/2004 16:51:02 Originally by: Sparhawk I think I speak for alot of experienced players when I say shut up and play. Get over your sorry little crying and get to playing. Waaaa! Thank G-D I'm not in a corp with such cry babies. How embarassing it must be for your other corp mates to have you openly crying about how unfair everything is in Eve. What's the matter..did someone steal your lunch money too? Better yet, maybe you should wait to post until you read the other 15,000 posts full of nerf *****in'? Nobody wants to hear your "I'm owned on a regular basis" ranting. Get your corp to perform as a team and engage the enemy. Stop trying to solo everything in your BS like a maverick and learn a little bit more about the dynamics of "TEAM" play. G-D I hope you come into 0.0 with all your crying. You just openly admitted to the PVP players you have no talent..good luck. I think I speak for the people that have all gunnery skills to 5, when I say that artillery sucks, it sucks, it sucks. It SUCKS. 1400mm artillery is CRAP. It cant outrange a railgun with long range ammo, it cant outdamage any gun, the long range laser crystals do way too much damage. The long range ammo are supposed to do 20 or 22 damage. Radio L does 28! And its all EM, which is great against shields, great against an armor tank, too. Projectiles dont use cap you say? Large ones use 3. So they cant fire with no cap. Not to mention that hybrids and lasers use hardly any cap with controlled burst skill, which does nothing for projectiles. Controlled Bursts needs to give a bonus to PROJECTILES. Autocannons burn through ammo. Artillery needs to reload constantly, reducing its damage over time even more. I dont solo everything in my battleship. Because I cant. Unlike a Raven or Apoc. Artillery sucks. You just dont know because you dont use it. A gun that has both poor tracking and poor damage will NEVER be good. Artillery NEEDS TO DO GREAT DAMAGE AT RANGE!!!!! It needs its damage mod increased so it will be an ok gun. It then needs the controlled bursts skill to give it a bonus. Long range projectile ammo needs to do more damage so artillery can actually perform its intended function -- LONG RANGE, GREAT DAMAGE OVER TIME, POOR TRACKING TO PREVENT MUCH SHORT RANGE. Right now it is only the poor trackng. Long range laser crystals need to do less. Short range projectile ammo needs to do the same as short range hybrid ammo. All artillery needs a 10% boost in optimal range, to outrange a railgun. BALANCE.
Selim	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:43:00 - [52] Edited by: Selim on 16/09/2004 16:51:02 Originally by: Sparhawk I think I speak for alot of experienced players when I say shut up and play. Get over your sorry little crying and get to playing. Waaaa! Thank G-D I'm not in a corp with such cry babies. How embarassing it must be for your other corp mates to have you openly crying about how unfair everything is in Eve. What's the matter..did someone steal your lunch money too? Better yet, maybe you should wait to post until you read the other 15,000 posts full of nerf *****in'? Nobody wants to hear your "I'm owned on a regular basis" ranting. Get your corp to perform as a team and engage the enemy. Stop trying to solo everything in your BS like a maverick and learn a little bit more about the dynamics of "TEAM" play. G-D I hope you come into 0.0 with all your crying. You just openly admitted to the PVP players you have no talent..good luck. I think I speak for the people that have all gunnery skills to 5, when I say that artillery sucks, it sucks, it sucks. It SUCKS. 1400mm artillery is CRAP. It cant outrange a railgun with long range ammo, it cant outdamage any gun, the long range laser crystals do way too much damage. The long range ammo are supposed to do 20 or 22 damage. Radio L does 28! And its all EM, which is great against shields, great against an armor tank, too. Projectiles dont use cap you say? Large ones use 3. So they cant fire with no cap. Not to mention that hybrids and lasers use hardly any cap with controlled burst skill, which does nothing for projectiles. Controlled Bursts needs to give a bonus to PROJECTILES. Autocannons burn through ammo. Artillery needs to reload constantly, reducing its damage over time even more. I dont solo everything in my battleship. Because I cant. Unlike a Raven or Apoc. Artillery sucks. You just dont know because you dont use it. A gun that has both poor tracking and poor damage will NEVER be good. Artillery NEEDS TO DO GREAT DAMAGE AT RANGE!!!!! It needs its damage mod increased so it will be an ok gun. It then needs the controlled bursts skill to give it a bonus. Long range projectile ammo needs to do more damage so artillery can actually perform its intended function -- LONG RANGE, GREAT DAMAGE OVER TIME, POOR TRACKING TO PREVENT MUCH SHORT RANGE. Right now it is only the poor trackng. Long range laser crystals need to do less. Short range projectile ammo needs to do the same as short range hybrid ammo. All artillery needs a 10% boost in optimal range, to outrange a railgun. BALANCE.
Sparhawk	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:55:00 - [53] There is no doubt that your artillery weapons are not as effective as others. However, we have all heard this conversation numerous times before. Your not exactly bringing this issue to light for the first time. If you want to continue to talk about his issue over and over again then perhaps you can make a sticky called "Reasons Artillery is Not Effective" so you can dump the hundreds of various posts relating to the same issue. Yes I do use the weapon being addressed. Along with every other weapon in the game. My point is learn to use the weapons as best you can, and if you can't utilize them efficiently then address the issue and leave it alone until it is fixed. Ranting about the same issue over and over again does nothing constructive. Forums are designed to organize communication. Find the topic as it exists already and make your point. The original post was well stated, but has been addressed numerous times. Stop writing just for the sake of writing.
Sparhawk	Posted - 2004.09.16 16:55:00 - [54] There is no doubt that your artillery weapons are not as effective as others. However, we have all heard this conversation numerous times before. Your not exactly bringing this issue to light for the first time. If you want to continue to talk about his issue over and over again then perhaps you can make a sticky called "Reasons Artillery is Not Effective" so you can dump the hundreds of various posts relating to the same issue. Yes I do use the weapon being addressed. Along with every other weapon in the game. My point is learn to use the weapons as best you can, and if you can't utilize them efficiently then address the issue and leave it alone until it is fixed. Ranting about the same issue over and over again does nothing constructive. Forums are designed to organize communication. Find the topic as it exists already and make your point. The original post was well stated, but has been addressed numerous times. Stop writing just for the sake of writing.
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 17:02:00 - [55] Edited by: Siddy on 16/09/2004 17:08:17 Only utilization i find on 1400mms is gate campping at 155km. Where is importand hit Hard in first volly, cause if you shoot fast ship, there wont be second time. Other than that i cant find any use to them, that Lasers or rails cant do beter. And thats in minmatar ship. -.- And why peoples whine in forums? Well, its one way to vent steam and frustration, get community suport from peoples sharing same fate and Flame pr1ks like you. This is after all - a community forum -------------------------------------------
Siddy	Posted - 2004.09.16 17:02:00 - [56] Edited by: Siddy on 16/09/2004 17:08:17 Only utilization i find on 1400mms is gate campping at 155km. Where is importand hit Hard in first volly, cause if you shoot fast ship, there wont be second time. Other than that i cant find any use to them, that Lasers or rails cant do beter. And thats in minmatar ship. -.- And why peoples whine in forums? Well, its one way to vent steam and frustration, get community suport from peoples sharing same fate and Flame pr1ks like you. This is after all - a community forum -------------------------------------------
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.09.16 19:18:00 - [57] Look i got to say this moaning about it ant helping their gonna change the guns and thats all i needed to know if it is post shiva then so be but at the mo im making proj work for me and if i can do that with an uber nerf gun then think what i can do WHEN it gets fixed You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.09.16 19:18:00 - [58] Look i got to say this moaning about it ant helping their gonna change the guns and thats all i needed to know if it is post shiva then so be but at the mo im making proj work for me and if i can do that with an uber nerf gun then think what i can do WHEN it gets fixed You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Balgore	Posted - 2004.09.16 20:45:00 - [59] I'll have to agree with someone who said at least take away the cap requirements on projectiles. People say that projectiles don't use cap but that's not true. They do use it and if someone uses energy neutralizers or nosferatus on you, you're as good as dead. Please take away the cap requirement.
Balgore	Posted - 2004.09.16 20:45:00 - [60] I'll have to agree with someone who said at least take away the cap requirements on projectiles. People say that projectiles don't use cap but that's not true. They do use it and if someone uses energy neutralizers or nosferatus on you, you're as good as dead. Please take away the cap requirement.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.