EVE Search - The projectile fix

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The projectile fix

» 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 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 09:42:00 - [1] Edited by: Lord Anubis on 24/12/2004 09:56:59 Ok since we have some how lost our sticky in the general discussion I am reposting the change here in hopes of providing more feed back to the devs. Originally by: CCP Hammer By the way, I just gave auto cannons 20% better tracking, artilleries 15% more damage and optimal range and howitzers 15% more damage on the test server. Ya mon, let's see if this fixes projectiles. Ok to start this off 1400`s The 15% extra dam does not seem to fix these guns I still miss anything thatÆs going in any other direction other than towards or away from me (this includes buildings) so this is happing whether the target is moving or not. Yes 1400 do need a damage incresment to be on par with other weapons dot but we also need to hit thus we need some kind of tracking improvement. One suggestion ive seen on this is to add half the difference between the tracking of mega beams and 1400 on to the 1400. But I will leave the incensement to some one who is better at the maths than me. Also we need a opt range increases or maybe swap it for the falloff as due to the tracking of 1400 higher damaging ammo is next to useless unless you fill out with tech 2 tracking comps. instead of increasing the 1400 damage maybe the devs should either increases our ammo damage to be on par with the other races or decreases our ROF and increases our ammo Cap O PS: Dont cry nerf in this thread its just to imporve proj wepons not to nerf missiles or lasers thanks in advanced You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 09:42:00 - [2] Edited by: Lord Anubis on 24/12/2004 09:56:59 Ok since we have some how lost our sticky in the general discussion I am reposting the change here in hopes of providing more feed back to the devs. Originally by: CCP Hammer By the way, I just gave auto cannons 20% better tracking, artilleries 15% more damage and optimal range and howitzers 15% more damage on the test server. Ya mon, let's see if this fixes projectiles. Ok to start this off 1400`s The 15% extra dam does not seem to fix these guns I still miss anything thatÆs going in any other direction other than towards or away from me (this includes buildings) so this is happing whether the target is moving or not. Yes 1400 do need a damage incresment to be on par with other weapons dot but we also need to hit thus we need some kind of tracking improvement. One suggestion ive seen on this is to add half the difference between the tracking of mega beams and 1400 on to the 1400. But I will leave the incensement to some one who is better at the maths than me. Also we need a opt range increases or maybe swap it for the falloff as due to the tracking of 1400 higher damaging ammo is next to useless unless you fill out with tech 2 tracking comps. instead of increasing the 1400 damage maybe the devs should either increases our ammo damage to be on par with the other races or decreases our ROF and increases our ammo Cap O PS: Dont cry nerf in this thread its just to imporve proj wepons not to nerf missiles or lasers thanks in advanced You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:20:00 - [3] Originally by: Lord Anubis One suggestion ive seen on this is to add half the difference between the tracking of mega beams and 1400 on to the 1400. That would make 1400mm track better than a 350mm railgun. Not a bad idea in itself, but I think railguns could use a little more love, too. About the DoT of projectiles, I think they also need a boost, but must stay clearly inferior to hybrid or lasers, because they don't use much cap. And making them too powerfull would be nasty with the two bonuses of the Tempest.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:20:00 - [4] Originally by: Lord Anubis One suggestion ive seen on this is to add half the difference between the tracking of mega beams and 1400 on to the 1400. That would make 1400mm track better than a 350mm railgun. Not a bad idea in itself, but I think railguns could use a little more love, too. About the DoT of projectiles, I think they also need a boost, but must stay clearly inferior to hybrid or lasers, because they don't use much cap. And making them too powerfull would be nasty with the two bonuses of the Tempest.
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:24:00 - [5] agreed but my belive on the dot is it should be higher due to the fact that min ships are less of a tank when compaired to the other races. Ie the big gun with an engine attached You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:24:00 - [6] agreed but my belive on the dot is it should be higher due to the fact that min ships are less of a tank when compaired to the other races. Ie the big gun with an engine attached You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Hakera	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:30:00 - [7] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Lord Anubis One suggestion ive seen on this is to add half the difference between the tracking of mega beams and 1400 on to the 1400. About the DoT of projectiles, I think they also need a boost, but must stay clearly inferior to hybrid or lasers, because they don't use much cap. And making them too powerfull would be nasty with the two bonuses of the Tempest. apoc - run all lasers and 2 large armour reps constantly with good skills. Where Cap use & DoT balance is bad because cap use can be negated by current Amarr bonuses meaning laser > missile > hybrid >>>>>> projectiles minnie ships are the weakest tanks, but have the poorest DoT as well. In a galaxy where tracking is king the laser or missile win. A dmg bonus does nothing to the ability to make you hit better, even if you did throw of the gyro II and add a tracking enhancer II. Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Hakera	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:30:00 - [8] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Lord Anubis One suggestion ive seen on this is to add half the difference between the tracking of mega beams and 1400 on to the 1400. About the DoT of projectiles, I think they also need a boost, but must stay clearly inferior to hybrid or lasers, because they don't use much cap. And making them too powerfull would be nasty with the two bonuses of the Tempest. apoc - run all lasers and 2 large armour reps constantly with good skills. Where Cap use & DoT balance is bad because cap use can be negated by current Amarr bonuses meaning laser > missile > hybrid >>>>>> projectiles minnie ships are the weakest tanks, but have the poorest DoT as well. In a galaxy where tracking is king the laser or missile win. A dmg bonus does nothing to the ability to make you hit better, even if you did throw of the gyro II and add a tracking enhancer II. Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:38:00 - [9] again i dont want this to turn into the thread and a row breack out about lasersbeing overpowered (unless your proving a point) what i would like to hear is about the other large proj as i only use 1400 i cant really tell you if the 800 or 1200 have gotten better You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:38:00 - [10] again i dont want this to turn into the thread and a row breack out about lasersbeing overpowered (unless your proving a point) what i would like to hear is about the other large proj as i only use 1400 i cant really tell you if the 800 or 1200 have gotten better You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Estios	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:42:00 - [11] Edited by: Estios on 24/12/2004 10:44:27 Adding too much tracking to 1400's would make them too uber again. I have Large Artillery specialisation etc so I guess I too should try and get them made uber but it wouldnt be fair. Adding dmg gives them a role still, when you shoot another BS with them they will be the most damaging guns bar none which is how it should be. They should track like a 425 or Tachyon as they are its counterpart. I dont have access to stats here at work but your idea would make them too uber, they should NOT track like a 350 as thats not the same weapon 'level' HOWEVER, the 1200mm's need loving A LOT. They are CRAP !!! They have nothing whatsoever going for them. If they added tracking to them or reduced the ROF it would give them a niche . The 1400 should be the Tachyon and 425 of projectiles and the 1200 should be the 350 and Megabeam, currently the 1200 is WELL below par with its peers So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
Estios	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:42:00 - [12] Edited by: Estios on 24/12/2004 10:44:27 Adding too much tracking to 1400's would make them too uber again. I have Large Artillery specialisation etc so I guess I too should try and get them made uber but it wouldnt be fair. Adding dmg gives them a role still, when you shoot another BS with them they will be the most damaging guns bar none which is how it should be. They should track like a 425 or Tachyon as they are its counterpart. I dont have access to stats here at work but your idea would make them too uber, they should NOT track like a 350 as thats not the same weapon 'level' HOWEVER, the 1200mm's need loving A LOT. They are CRAP !!! They have nothing whatsoever going for them. If they added tracking to them or reduced the ROF it would give them a niche . The 1400 should be the Tachyon and 425 of projectiles and the 1200 should be the 350 and Megabeam, currently the 1200 is WELL below par with its peers So HMV consider Andy Williams and Dean Martin to be "easy listening" do they? Tell that to my mate Dave, he's been deaf for 20 years.
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:54:00 - [13] sorry my mistake i ment the differeance between tachon and 1400 ie making the 1400 track at 0.01146025 this would put tracking just above hybrid (they need a bit of tinkering them selfs and below lasers and would make a vast improvemnt You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2004.12.24 10:54:00 - [14] sorry my mistake i ment the differeance between tachon and 1400 ie making the 1400 track at 0.01146025 this would put tracking just above hybrid (they need a bit of tinkering them selfs and below lasers and would make a vast improvemnt You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Amrotis	Posted - 2004.12.24 11:36:00 - [15] I would also like to see an ammo capacity increase for the 1400mm :)
Amrotis	Posted - 2004.12.24 11:36:00 - [16] I would also like to see an ammo capacity increase for the 1400mm :)
Shocky	Posted - 2004.12.24 11:37:00 - [17] The main problem with projectiles in general is tracking so increasing the dmg is just another have assed fix which doesnt help.. The 20% increase to autocannon tracking is very welcome though.
Shocky	Posted - 2004.12.24 11:37:00 - [18] The main problem with projectiles in general is tracking so increasing the dmg is just another have assed fix which doesnt help.. The 20% increase to autocannon tracking is very welcome though.
d'hofren	Posted - 2004.12.24 12:12:00 - [19] Edited by: d'hofren on 24/12/2004 12:15:21 How about some opinions and testing on the medium and small projectiles? You folks are all more experianced players than us cruiser type pilots. Your testing and opinions on how the changes affect these smaller weapons are going to be vital if the projectile family is to become more effective as a whole. IMHO, the tracking gain on autocannons is going to be very nice to newish players. I seem to remember that my small autocannons only started to become as effective once I had motion prediction at level 3. This should put auto's at around that level of tracking to start with. I haven't bothered with cruiser sized auotcannons for a while, only the stabber seem to have the speed to make them worthwhile and when I did try them on a bellicose yonks ago I could hit a thing with them. I wonder if the 20% will fix that? I am a little concerned with the arty bonus. I feel they could do with some tracking love as well, (which seems to be the general concensus with the large gun people). However I am coming from a slightly differant direction here. These things don't hit anything moving without a lot of investment in skills. I can see where the devs are coming from; Arty should be a rough science where misses are frequent and those occasional hits really hurt the target, BUT; Arty almost has hidden skill prerequisites, eng lvl5 to fit a decent rack of guns and motion prediction 4 to score a hit. I would have thought it would be better to approach one of those "issues" before giving it an extra 15% damage. Damage is ok to start with, (when it hits), and we can add to via via the relevant sized projectile turret skill anyhow. I really would suggest that someone "sanity" checks these changes by running a .5mil month old frigate pilot through a few common setups, then a 1mil starter cruiser pilot through a few setups. On re-reading this I note that it could be taken as a moan. It isn't meant to be taken that way. My corp suggested I put some effort into missiles and went caldari while I trained up my gunnery skills ready for mimatar cruisers, after all a BB is a useful ship to be able to fly in pvp and those missile skills are also no waste of time for minmatar ships. It's just a bit wierd that a minmatar pilot has to move to another ships cruisers while he becomes skilled enough to get any milage out of his own races ships. These changes could be a way to redress that issue. To reiterate the request of the original poster " Lets keep this one on topic . Don't dilute our input into an important issue with chats about lasers and rails. We are discussing boosting projectiles not nerfing other weapons.
d'hofren	Posted - 2004.12.24 12:12:00 - [20] Edited by: d'hofren on 24/12/2004 12:15:21 How about some opinions and testing on the medium and small projectiles? You folks are all more experianced players than us cruiser type pilots. Your testing and opinions on how the changes affect these smaller weapons are going to be vital if the projectile family is to become more effective as a whole. IMHO, the tracking gain on autocannons is going to be very nice to newish players. I seem to remember that my small autocannons only started to become as effective once I had motion prediction at level 3. This should put auto's at around that level of tracking to start with. I haven't bothered with cruiser sized auotcannons for a while, only the stabber seem to have the speed to make them worthwhile and when I did try them on a bellicose yonks ago I could hit a thing with them. I wonder if the 20% will fix that? I am a little concerned with the arty bonus. I feel they could do with some tracking love as well, (which seems to be the general concensus with the large gun people). However I am coming from a slightly differant direction here. These things don't hit anything moving without a lot of investment in skills. I can see where the devs are coming from; Arty should be a rough science where misses are frequent and those occasional hits really hurt the target, BUT; Arty almost has hidden skill prerequisites, eng lvl5 to fit a decent rack of guns and motion prediction 4 to score a hit. I would have thought it would be better to approach one of those "issues" before giving it an extra 15% damage. Damage is ok to start with, (when it hits), and we can add to via via the relevant sized projectile turret skill anyhow. I really would suggest that someone "sanity" checks these changes by running a .5mil month old frigate pilot through a few common setups, then a 1mil starter cruiser pilot through a few setups. On re-reading this I note that it could be taken as a moan. It isn't meant to be taken that way. My corp suggested I put some effort into missiles and went caldari while I trained up my gunnery skills ready for mimatar cruisers, after all a BB is a useful ship to be able to fly in pvp and those missile skills are also no waste of time for minmatar ships. It's just a bit wierd that a minmatar pilot has to move to another ships cruisers while he becomes skilled enough to get any milage out of his own races ships. These changes could be a way to redress that issue. To reiterate the request of the original poster " Lets keep this one on topic . Don't dilute our input into an important issue with chats about lasers and rails. We are discussing boosting projectiles not nerfing other weapons.
Zu Lu	Posted - 2004.12.24 13:12:00 - [21] How can you discuss balancing projectiles without talking about the other weapons they need to be balanced against.... The tracking and optimal of arties/howitzers certainly needs looking at because at the end of the day missiles and lasers will still be much easier and more effective to use even with the proposed damage increase. Also the Amarr and Caldari still have excellent defence without sacrificing much at all offensively. Whereas Tempest 1400mm set ups typically consist of a few pdu's and a shield tank hindered by low cpu - low damage + weak defence = bad. I do think that projectiles are the main issue but there is more to it than that. With the proposed changes as they are i still won't jump out of my Raven (unless the missile nerf is overdone as usual and it truly does = Amarr FTW). If that happens then people will be asking for my stuff
Zu Lu	Posted - 2004.12.24 13:12:00 - [22] How can you discuss balancing projectiles without talking about the other weapons they need to be balanced against.... The tracking and optimal of arties/howitzers certainly needs looking at because at the end of the day missiles and lasers will still be much easier and more effective to use even with the proposed damage increase. Also the Amarr and Caldari still have excellent defence without sacrificing much at all offensively. Whereas Tempest 1400mm set ups typically consist of a few pdu's and a shield tank hindered by low cpu - low damage + weak defence = bad. I do think that projectiles are the main issue but there is more to it than that. With the proposed changes as they are i still won't jump out of my Raven (unless the missile nerf is overdone as usual and it truly does = Amarr FTW). If that happens then people will be asking for my stuff
Seraph Demon	Posted - 2004.12.24 13:44:00 - [23] I think I said this before once... I have had no trouble whatsoever hitting stuff with 1400s at around 80-100 km, I can cream frigates with them at that range (and I do believe that was the range they were meant to be used at). That said, the damage is way low, a Maller can tank a rack of 6 1400s at 100km (using Proton ammo) if he just uses enough plating (the DOT is very low even though instantaneous damage is very high). I think Howies could use plenty of damage love, but they don't really need much more in the way of accuracy. 1200s seem totally under-loved though, since they can't hit much under 50km but just to be effective at that range they have to use crappy ammo, which reduces their damage potential significantly...
Seraph Demon	Posted - 2004.12.24 13:44:00 - [24] I think I said this before once... I have had no trouble whatsoever hitting stuff with 1400s at around 80-100 km, I can cream frigates with them at that range (and I do believe that was the range they were meant to be used at). That said, the damage is way low, a Maller can tank a rack of 6 1400s at 100km (using Proton ammo) if he just uses enough plating (the DOT is very low even though instantaneous damage is very high). I think Howies could use plenty of damage love, but they don't really need much more in the way of accuracy. 1200s seem totally under-loved though, since they can't hit much under 50km but just to be effective at that range they have to use crappy ammo, which reduces their damage potential significantly...
mBay	Posted - 2004.12.24 13:56:00 - [25] How come every single tread about minmater is about 1400mm, Who cares if they fix the 1400mm or not, What are u using longrange guns for anyway, what really matters are if the autocannons gonne be fixed or not. Are everybody who writes on this forum gatecampers? cuse thats the only place where longrange guns have an advantage. As long as the ingame mechanisms favors shortrange fighting longrange guns gonne be of a minor intrest, so please ccp dont lissen to the 1400mm club instead balance the minmater vepaons in a way that are actually useful in pvp but also pve merry chrismas
mBay	Posted - 2004.12.24 13:56:00 - [26] How come every single tread about minmater is about 1400mm, Who cares if they fix the 1400mm or not, What are u using longrange guns for anyway, what really matters are if the autocannons gonne be fixed or not. Are everybody who writes on this forum gatecampers? cuse thats the only place where longrange guns have an advantage. As long as the ingame mechanisms favors shortrange fighting longrange guns gonne be of a minor intrest, so please ccp dont lissen to the 1400mm club instead balance the minmater vepaons in a way that are actually useful in pvp but also pve merry chrismas
Neon Genesis	Posted - 2004.12.24 14:36:00 - [27] Originally by: mBay How come every single tread about minmater is about 1400mm, Who cares if they fix the 1400mm or not, What are u using longrange guns for anyway, what really matters are if the autocannons gonne be fixed or not. Are everybody who writes on this forum gatecampers? cuse thats the only place where longrange guns have an advantage. As long as the ingame mechanisms favors shortrange fighting longrange guns gonne be of a minor intrest, so please ccp dont lissen to the 1400mm club instead balance the minmater vepaons in a way that are actually useful in pvp but also pve merry chrismas Fleet,,,, 30-50 engagements? __ There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
Neon Genesis	Posted - 2004.12.24 14:36:00 - [28] Originally by: mBay How come every single tread about minmater is about 1400mm, Who cares if they fix the 1400mm or not, What are u using longrange guns for anyway, what really matters are if the autocannons gonne be fixed or not. Are everybody who writes on this forum gatecampers? cuse thats the only place where longrange guns have an advantage. As long as the ingame mechanisms favors shortrange fighting longrange guns gonne be of a minor intrest, so please ccp dont lissen to the 1400mm club instead balance the minmater vepaons in a way that are actually useful in pvp but also pve merry chrismas Fleet,,,, 30-50 engagements? __ There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
Grimpak	Posted - 2004.12.24 14:51:00 - [29] Edited by: Grimpak on 24/12/2004 14:57:49 gonna quote myself, using what I've posted on the thread: Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: jukriamrr Originally by: Dred 'Morte it would have been better if you had given 15% more dmg to autocannons and 20% more tracking to artillerys yes, maybe that would be a VERY nice solution. ...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys? AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice. Indeed that the artys also need love, but let's not forget the AC's. Atm we have the megapulses' superior tracking (that I hope that they will be balanced on par with the other short range guns), the blaster's great dmg mod, and the AC's have a lower dmg mod while having a marginaly better RoF than the hybrids. As i stated in the quote above, I would give an increase to the RoF, tracking and double the ammo capacity of the guns, that would bring them on par with the rest of the short range class guns, in terms of DoT, by being the gun with the highest RoF ingame. Atm they have the best base RoF, but let's be honest: it's just a marginal difference. As for the artys, small increase of the tracking, better dmg multiplyer, and bigger clip. 1200mm should get more love than 1400 imho, as they are absolute crap atm. EDIT: minor correction ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Grimpak	Posted - 2004.12.24 14:51:00 - [30] Edited by: Grimpak on 24/12/2004 14:57:49 gonna quote myself, using what I've posted on the thread: Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: jukriamrr Originally by: Dred 'Morte it would have been better if you had given 15% more dmg to autocannons and 20% more tracking to artillerys yes, maybe that would be a VERY nice solution. ...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys? AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice. Indeed that the artys also need love, but let's not forget the AC's. Atm we have the megapulses' superior tracking (that I hope that they will be balanced on par with the other short range guns), the blaster's great dmg mod, and the AC's have a lower dmg mod while having a marginaly better RoF than the hybrids. As i stated in the quote above, I would give an increase to the RoF, tracking and double the ammo capacity of the guns, that would bring them on par with the rest of the short range class guns, in terms of DoT, by being the gun with the highest RoF ingame. Atm they have the best base RoF, but let's be honest: it's just a marginal difference. As for the artys, small increase of the tracking, better dmg multiplyer, and bigger clip. 1200mm should get more love than 1400 imho, as they are absolute crap atm. EDIT: minor correction ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: 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.