EVE Search - T2 Missiles- The Imbalance

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

T2 Missiles- The Imbalance

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Patri Andari Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer	Posted - 2010.12.02 02:32:00 - [1] With the new expansion CCP decided to remove the ship drawbacks of T2 turret ammunition. At the same time they buffed T2 turret ammo to perhaps make it more useful than faction ammo if only in certain situations. Balance be damned! Meanwhile T2 missile ammunition was untouched insofar as the ship drawbacks. What this means is that T2 missiles are the ONLY ammunition that by loading it makes you more likely to die in a fire. I have listed below the current bonuses/penalties T2 missiles have in comparison to T1 missiles along with a few suggestions. I open the floor for debate and discussion. T2 Fury PROS: More damage CONS: Signature bloom. (your ship is bigger thus easier to hit and takes more damage) Higher explosion radius. SUGGESTIONS: Remove signature bloom (no other ammo has it now) Increase explosion radius T2 Precision PROS: Smaller explosion radius CONS: Ship velocity penalty (your ship goes slower thus easier to hit and takes more damage) Range reduction Damage reduction SUGGESTIONS: Remove ship velocity penalty (no other ammo has it now) Decrease range Increase explosion velocity (make it not only good vs. smaller but also faster ships) Decrease explosion radius (it is currently not significantly more beneficial than faction) T2 Javelin PROS: Increased range CONS: Ship velocity penalty (your ship goes slower thus easier to hit and takes more damage) Range reduction Damage reduction SUGGESTIONS: Remove ship velocity penalty (no other ammo has it now) Decrease range and/or Decrease explosion velocity and/or Increase explosion radius I feel it is imbalance to have only one weapon system in game that has a ship drawback. It is poor game design and will lead to no one choosing these ship if left as is. With the exception of precision missiles, which suck, the tracking and damage of T2 missiles seems to be balanced with regard to faction missiles and T2 turret ammo. Making them a bit more dependent on tackle should be enough to justify getting rid of the ship drawbacks. What say you? Patri I'll Roshambo You For That Titan!
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.12.02 03:41:00 - [2] I agree that it's silly they're removing ship-based drawbacks from turret ammo and not missiles.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.02 04:10:00 - [3] I've never been a fan of ship penalties, and as such would be +1 to removing them outright. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2010.12.02 04:54:00 - [4] yes lets make the unprobable tengu even better!
BabyEating Dingo	Posted - 2010.12.02 05:26:00 - [5] Quote: It is poor game design and will lead to no one choosing these ship if left as is. So you're saying if they don't change T2 missiles, people will ragequit from their Drakes? -1 to you good sir!
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.02 06:34:00 - [6] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton yes lets make the unprobable tengu even better! Being unprobeable doesn't really matter. Nobody is going to catch you anyway. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Hauling Hal	Posted - 2010.12.02 08:27:00 - [7] Originally by: Patri Andari T2 Precision PROS: SUGGESTIONS: Decrease range
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.12.02 09:36:00 - [8] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton yes lets make the unprobable tengu even better! Also alot good a unprobable Tengu does for its only useful use Lvl 5`s, they will just probe down all the group of wrecks anyways if they are halfway smart/Competent. It is BS that Turret Ammo is getting Buff and Not Missiles, besides Drake Missile Boats already get the worst Drawback of all, Flight Time, Also with Hams or Torps that need Web/Painter this is really gonna set them back. -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Spc One Gallente	Posted - 2010.12.02 09:45:00 - [9] Well if you look at marauders only golem has "no bonuses". Paladin: 25% to damage Vargur: 25% to rof Kronos: 25% to damage Golem: 25% to explosion velocity ?! So golem needs fixing too. Suggestions: 1. 5% to explosion radius reduction per level 2. 5% to damage of cruise and torps ____________________________________________________________________________ Angel 0/A
NoNah	Posted - 2010.12.02 09:52:00 - [10] Originally by: Kail Storm Also alot good a unprobable Tengu does for its only useful use Lvl 5`s, they will just probe down all the group of wrecks anyways if they are halfway smart/Competent. I laughed. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 215773

Vokradacka	Posted - 2010.12.02 10:08:00 - [11] Originally by: Patri Andari T2 Precision (it is currently not significantly more beneficial than faction) Actually CN missiles doing more dmg in 95% of situations(we tested it for ATs)... => its trash with drawback :D funny as always.
Boinz Caldari Muffin Munchers	Posted - 2010.12.02 10:16:00 - [12] Originally by: Spc One Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 09:56:54 Well if you look at marauders only golem has "no bonuses". Paladin: 25% to damage Vargur: 25% to rof Kronos: 25% to damage Golem: 25% to explosion velocity ?! So golem needs fixing too. Suggestions: 1. 5% to explosion radius reduction per level 2. 5% to damage of cruise and torps 3. 5% to rate of fire of cruise and siege missile launcher. So all marauders have 125% damage or 100% + 25% rof only golem has 100% and that's it. The problem is also that npc rats usually use defender missiles and if one of your cruise missiles dies that's about 25% of the dps of golem while vargur for example doesn't have that drawback. So putting a 25% rof on golem will balance it a little to other marauders. Please tell me how the golem will do with torps after this. Originally by: CCP Oveur Guess what I'm wearing.
1600 RT	Posted - 2010.12.02 10:17:00 - [13] Originally by: Spc One So all marauders have 125% damage or 100% + 25% rof only golem has 100% and that's it. and even then its the marauder that do the most dps of the group Originally by: Spc One The problem is also that npc rats usually use defender missiles and if one of your cruise missiles dies that's about 25% of the dps of golem while vargur for example doesn't have that drawback. So putting a 25% rof on golem will balance it a little to other marauders. if you have problem with defenders probably you are using cruise = you are doing it wrong a 25% rof on the golem would mean a 1800 dps ship a bit OP imho
Spc One Gallente	Posted - 2010.12.02 11:02:00 - [14] Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 11:02:27 Originally by: 1600 RT if you have problem with defenders probably you are using cruise = you are doing it wrong a 25% rof on the golem would mean a 1800 dps ship a bit OP imho Nope, golem is officially made for cruise missiles. Look at certificates for it. ____________________________________________________________________________ Angel 0/A
Shiho Weitong Caldari Koa Mai Hoku	Posted - 2010.12.02 11:28:00 - [15] Originally by: Spc One Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 11:02:27 Originally by: 1600 RT if you have problem with defenders probably you are using cruise = you are doing it wrong a 25% rof on the golem would mean a 1800 dps ship a bit OP imho Nope, golem is officially made for cruise missiles. Look at certificates for it. AHAHAHAHAHA Using certificates for fitting advice is just plain stupid. ----------- Why is it called common sense, when it's clearly very rare. I had a mind once, but alas, I seem to have forgotten where I left it. Originally by: Tchell Dahhn You win, and thank you.
Hathrul	Posted - 2010.12.02 11:31:00 - [16] though i can understand why its odd that missiles is the only groupd with drawbacks, i really dont want your solutions T2 fury even more explosion radius? then itll really be BS only ammo. ill take the sig bloom T2 precision/javelin not sure what the speed diff makes. even on my kiting tengu the speed reduction was never a problem. id hate it a lot more to have less range, or much worse, more explosion radius or lower exp velocity. that would kinda defeat the entire purpose
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2010.12.02 11:35:00 - [17] Originally by: Liang Nuren I've never been a fan of ship penalties, and as such would be +1 to removing them outright. -Liang I agree. However, the OPs changes is horrible and actaully serves to make missiles worse. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2010.12.02 11:38:00 - [18] Originally by: Spc One Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 09:56:54 Well if you look at marauders only golem has "no bonuses". Paladin: 25% to damage Vargur: 25% to rof Kronos: 25% to damage Golem: 25% to explosion velocity ?! So golem needs fixing too. Suggestions: 1. 5% to explosion radius reduction per level 2. 5% to damage of cruise and torps 3. 5% to rate of fire of cruise and siege missile launcher. So all marauders have 125% damage or 100% + 25% rof only golem has 100% and that's it. The problem is also that npc rats usually use defender missiles and if one of your cruise missiles dies that's about 25% of the dps of golem while vargur for example doesn't have that drawback. So putting a 25% rof on golem will balance it a little to other marauders. Actually, the Golem has an equivalent of 8 Siege Launchers, and compared to regular turret boats thats significant since most Torps boats only have 5 or 6 main launchers. Golem, while a bore to fly, is good at what it does, great damage at great ranges, and the velocity bonus makes torps even better combined wiht the painter bonus. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Spc One Gallente	Posted - 2010.12.02 11:52:00 - [19] Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 11:55:26 Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Actually, the Golem has an equivalent of 8 Siege Launchers, and compared to regular turret boats thats significant since most Torps boats only have 5 or 6 main launchers. Well paladin, kronos has an equivalent of 10 turrets which is 2 more than golem. Plus a paladin for example can be cap stable fit with one heatsink which gives more damage, golem can't. ____________________________________________________________________________ Angel 0/A
Patri Andari Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer	Posted - 2010.12.02 12:12:00 - [20] Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Originally by: Liang Nuren I've never been a fan of ship penalties, and as such would be +1 to removing them outright. -Liang I agree. However, the OPs changes is horrible and actaully serves to make missiles worse. Sidius, I am not married to the suggestions I made. In fact the ony one I truly advocate is improving both the explosion velocity and explosion radius of precision missiles. That being said, I doubt CCP will consider removing the drawbacks without some how adjusting the performance of missiles or they simply would have done so in this expansion. (I wish they would have). If you or anyone else has counter suggestions I would ask that you share them. I simply think leaving in ship drawbacks for only one weapon class is a horrible game balance. Patri I'll Roshambo You For That Titan!

Wet Ferret	Posted - 2010.12.02 12:27:00 - [21] I assume since you think missiles deserve to be nerfed if they have their drawbacks removed, then turret ammo was also nerfed when they had their drawbacks removed. Is this the case? Oh yeah, about my sig... you have now read it.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2010.12.02 13:05:00 - [22] Originally by: Vokradacka Originally by: Patri Andari T2 Precision (it is currently not significantly more beneficial than faction) Actually CN missiles doing more dmg in 95% of situations(we tested it for ATs)... => its trash with drawback :D funny as always. Yeah, I found much the same - there's a VERY FEW niches where it does more, but ... they're all when neither weapon is doing significant amounts of damage anyway. The difference between 11 damage per (cruise) missile, and 13... well, precision just isn't going to save you. Javelin suffers similarly - extra range missiles are a nice idea, but slowing you down to do it, just makes them utterly useless. OK, torps aren't so bad (110km stealth bombers!), but javelin rockets are just a sick joke.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.12.02 15:51:00 - [23] Edited by: Ezekiel Sulastin on 02/12/2010 15:52:23 Originally by: Spc One Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 11:55:26 Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Actually, the Golem has an equivalent of 8 Siege Launchers, and compared to regular turret boats thats significant since most Torps boats only have 5 or 6 main launchers. Well paladin, kronos has an equivalent of 10 turrets which is 2 more than golem. The point he was trying to make is that each (effective) siege launcher generally does quite a bit more damage than each (effective) turret, hence CCP giving Golems less total effective turrets to maintain balance with the class. He made this point by comparing the Typhoon and especially the Raven (5 and 6, respectively) to other turret ships (like the Megathron or Hyperion, 7 and 8 turrets respectively).
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.12.02 16:01:00 - [24] The slight problem with your argument here is that fury missiles are actually good. Turret short range ammo isn't, hence the buff. _________________________________ ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS...
Chrysalis D'lilth	Posted - 2010.12.02 16:04:00 - [25] CCP care that much about Caldari & Missile boats, they forgot they even had T2 Ammo to update.....
Lugalzagezi666	Posted - 2010.12.02 16:23:00 - [26] My view on t2 missile ammo : t2 fury - useless on frig level - useful to good on cruiser/bc level - ??? on bs level, cant see any situation where id want to use cruises in pvp, for pve it can have its use t2 precision - 95% of the time its not worth reloading from faction - velocity penalty makes it completely useless on frig level t2 rage - very bad on frig level, ammo thats meant to be used vs bigger ships actually makes you easier to hit by them + there is drone shooting issue, but thats same for hybrid and projectile t2 ammo - good on drake/bcs for fighting other bcs - on bs level its somewhat useful for shooting caps or if you got tps on primary, or if you use crash booster t2 javelin - very bad to useless on frig level, velocity penalty means death for frig, id love to know how would rifter pilots feel with velocity penalty on barrage - on cruiser/bc level only useful as last defence vs kiter - same for bs hulls, but useful for bombers
Typherian Minmatar Legio Invicta Black Skull Legion.	Posted - 2010.12.02 16:38:00 - [27] personally I think its completely balanced to keep the penalties on missiles. You missile users had a huge advantage for a while. No tracking no need for a second set of damage mods. Give them a tracking enhancer equivalent and it will be fair to remove the penalties.
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.12.02 16:59:00 - [28] Originally by: NoNah Originally by: Kail Storm Also alot good a unprobable Tengu does for its only useful use Lvl 5`s, they will just probe down all the group of wrecks anyways if they are halfway smart/Competent. I laughed. Im glad you laughed but in reality please tell me a situation where you need a Unprobable Tengu in PVP where a Cov Ops isnt far superior? Next please explain to me, how in your Plex/Lvl 5 the enemy wont probe out the plex or the Wrecks? -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.12.02 17:02:00 - [29] Edited by: Kail Storm on 02/12/2010 17:04:11 Originally by: Typherian personally I think its completely balanced to keep the penalties on missiles. You missile users had a huge advantage for a while. No tracking no need for a second set of damage mods. Give them a tracking enhancer equivalent and it will be fair to remove the penalties. Are you serious? 1 Great Fleet ship and only great because its cheap and easy to replace, and all the sudden missiles were such Pwners its there time to suck? lol How did we have a huge advantage? Using the cruise missiles, the Rockets? Or the roaming packs of Ravens we always saw? If you dont understand the diff in Expl Vel/Radius and having no tracking then dont post. Turrets natural Setback is tracking Disruptors but they do insta DMg from any range which is massive advantage, Missiles arent Disrupted but have to wait 8-10 Secs to hit from 70km away. -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Typherian Minmatar Legio Invicta Black Skull Legion.	Posted - 2010.12.02 17:05:00 - [30] Edited by: Typherian on 02/12/2010 17:06:26 Heh you had it better than the gallente. They had lackluster performance from their weapons and had to use a two different damage mods. Also you can't consider a drake a minority of OMG WE ONLY HAVE ONE GOOD SHIP because half of Eve uses that one ship. EDIT and I'm not saying its their time to suck. I just think that they should have some negatives to balance out the tracking disruptor immunity and lack of a second required mod.

debbie harrio	Posted - 2010.12.02 17:33:00 - [31] Originally by: Kail Storm Originally by: NoNah Originally by: Kail Storm Also alot good a unprobable Tengu does for its only useful use Lvl 5`s, they will just probe down all the group of wrecks anyways if they are halfway smart/Competent. I laughed. Im glad you laughed but in reality please tell me a situation where you need a Unprobable Tengu in PVP where a Cov Ops isnt far superior? Next please explain to me, how in your Plex/Lvl 5 the enemy wont probe out the plex or the Wrecks? You can't scan wrecks for starter and most plexes have multiple acceleration gates.
Ulstan	Posted - 2010.12.02 20:12:00 - [32] There's not much wrong with rage/fury when being used by drakes/raven to shoot something larger than you. Your sig is already big as a moon so the sig increase doesn't really matter that much. It makes using those missiles a terrible idea on smaller ships though, so I think this penalty should be removed. The increased explosion radius is a sufficient drawback to keep it from being overly abused. T2 javelin is bad as long as it has a velocity penalty. That really needs to go. Also the idea of a long range 'kiting' ammo that slows you down is hilarious. T2 precision is just a pile of fail every way you look at it. If it had reduced range in exchange for hitting smaller things harder, it might have its uses, but as it is, you're likely to do as much (or more) damage to small things just by loading CN because of the lower inherent damage. If they fixed that, leaving the speed penalty might be appropriate.
Zyress	Posted - 2010.12.02 20:53:00 - [33] Originally by: Typherian personally I think its completely balanced to keep the penalties on missiles. You missile users had a huge advantage for a while. No tracking no need for a second set of damage mods. Give them a tracking enhancer equivalent and it will be fair to remove the penalties. Yes!!!! I knew there was a reason all those pvp people were dumping there AC boats for missile boats.....
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.12.02 21:33:00 - [34] Is this for real? Didn't CCP announce a change for the t2 missiles? I think that keeping the penalties on missiles and removing them on everything else is more then enough proof that CCP should just remove Caldari and reimburse the SP to people who trained them. I mean, missiles are already NOT used in PvP, with the only exception being the drake (but hey, you're nerfing that), so why have an useless race and an useless weapon type? Lim
Atrus Atreides	Posted - 2010.12.02 22:11:00 - [35] CCP wants to discourage the use of missiles in fleet warfare. As has been previously stated, each missile increases teh load on the server because they have hitpoints and can be destroyed. Leaving the drawbacks helps promote this.
Patri Andari Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer	Posted - 2010.12.02 23:55:00 - [36] Originally by: Wet Ferret I assume since you think missiles deserve to be nerfed if they have their drawbacks removed, then turret ammo was also nerfed when they had their drawbacks removed. Is this the case? Hardly I think that T2 missiles should have no ship drawbacks and their benefits should stay the same with the exception of Precision missiles. They should do more damage to smaller faster targets. I also think CCP does not agree. My proposals are liked to the thought that making T2 missiles worse is not as bad as keeping the ship drawbacks. Patri I'll Roshambo You For That Titan!
Cor Aidan Shore Leave	Posted - 2010.12.03 00:53:00 - [37] Originally by: Liang Nuren I've never been a fan of ship penalties, and as such would be +1 to removing them outright. -Liang I've been considering the idea that ship imbalances arise because ships get bonuses with no drawback as a tradeoff. For instance: faster ships should be lighter, and therefore always have a lower tank. Similarly, higher tank should either be slower (for armor) or lower capacitor or something (shield). Those drawbacks are typically present with modules, but not ship bonuses themselves. Adding a bonus with no tradeoff, I would argue, is mathematically impossible to balance. I think drawbacks associated with T2 ammo and rigs are conceptually correct. However, I would agree that the particular drawbacks are probably not appropriate in all cases.
colera deldios Gallente Entity. Insidious.	Posted - 2010.12.03 01:14:00 - [38] Originally by: Kail Storm Im glad you laughed but in reality please tell me a situation where you need a Unprobable Tengu in PVP where a Cov Ops isnt far superior? Next please explain to me, how in your Plex/Lvl 5 the enemy wont probe out the plex or the Wrecks? Listen to this guy he really knows what he is talking about....
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.12.03 16:49:00 - [39] Originally by: Typherian Edited by: Typherian on 02/12/2010 17:06:26 Heh you had it better than the gallente. They had lackluster performance from their weapons and had to use a two different damage mods. Also you can't consider a drake a minority of OMG WE ONLY HAVE ONE GOOD SHIP because half of Eve uses that one ship. EDIT and I'm not saying its their time to suck. I just think that they should have some negatives to balance out the tracking disruptor immunity and lack of a second required mod. WTF are you talking about a Second DMG mod?, Gal are either Mag STab or Drone Mods not Both unless its some sort of speciality fit. You must be talking about the Phoon needing Gyro and BCS. WHat the F is a second required mod. -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Ulstan	Posted - 2010.12.03 16:56:00 - [40] Originally by: Atrus Atreides CCP wants to discourage the use of missiles in fleet warfare. As has been previously stated, each missile increases teh load on the server because they have hitpoints and can be destroyed. Leaving the drawbacks helps promote this. I think we need to start introducing penalties to drones too!

Trebor Whettam	Posted - 2010.12.03 16:59:00 - [41] Originally by: Kail Storm Originally by: Typherian Edited by: Typherian on 02/12/2010 17:06:26 Heh you had it better than the gallente. They had lackluster performance from their weapons and had to use a two different damage mods. Also you can't consider a drake a minority of OMG WE ONLY HAVE ONE GOOD SHIP because half of Eve uses that one ship. EDIT and I'm not saying its their time to suck. I just think that they should have some negatives to balance out the tracking disruptor immunity and lack of a second required mod. WTF are you talking about a Second DMG mod?, Gal are either Mag STab or Drone Mods not Both unless its some sort of speciality fit. You must be talking about the Phoon needing Gyro and BCS. WHat the F is a second required mod. I assumed that he meant tracking computers.
iKill Giants The David Project	Posted - 2010.12.03 17:03:00 - [42] Originally by: Kail Storm What is a second required mod. I believe he is talking about Tracking Enhancers, which are also very useful on many Minmatar fits. These are typically used to increase the falloff, and thus useful range, of blasters and autocannons. They also of course increase tracking, which most consider one of the larger faults in blasters. --------- I am here to inform, no more, no less.
Cartheron Crust Spais Of The Federation	Posted - 2010.12.03 17:15:00 - [43] Originally by: Kail Storm Originally by: NoNah Originally by: Kail Storm Also alot good a unprobable Tengu does for its only useful use Lvl 5`s, they will just probe down all the group of wrecks anyways if they are halfway smart/Competent. I laughed. Im glad you laughed but in reality please tell me a situation where you need a Unprobable Tengu in PVP where a Cov Ops isnt far superior? Next please explain to me, how in your Plex/Lvl 5 the enemy wont probe out the plex or the Wrecks? Because you cannot probe wrecks.
MarvinJeni	Posted - 2010.12.03 22:51:00 - [44] Edited by: MarvinJeni on 03/12/2010 22:51:36 Originally by: Kail Storm Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton yes lets make the unprobable tengu even better! Also alot good a unprobable Tengu does for its only useful use Lvl 5`s, they will just probe down all the group of wrecks anyways if they are halfway smart/Competent. . your lack of eve knowledge made me re tar ded.
debbie harrio	Posted - 2010.12.04 02:53:00 - [45] Originally by: Kail Storm [ WTF are you talking about a Second DMG mod?, Gal are either Mag STab or Drone Mods not Both unless its some sort of speciality fit. You must be talking about the Phoon needing Gyro and BCS. WHat the F is a second required mod. You really are stupid, pulled up on lack of knowledge once and then tumbles back into ignorance again, learn to play.
Patri Andari Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer	Posted - 2010.12.04 03:21:00 - [46] Guise, please stay on subject. T2 missiles still have ship drawbacks to ship speed and ship signature radius while T2 turret ammo has no ship drawbacks of any kind. If you think this is balanced, state so. If not, state so and offer an option on how to fix it! It's not that hard Patri I'll Roshambo You For That Titan!
Proxyyyy Caldari SniggWaffe GoonSwarm	Posted - 2010.12.04 03:34:00 - [47] Dude, Heavy assualt and Heavy Missile, t2-ammunition is pretty good. Infact; the day i heard about the ammuntion boost i asked someone, "did CCP also boost t2 missiles?". Dude was like "NO". Of course i was like "good". I mean, dudes are *****ing about the drake and now you want to blanket boost the ship, by boosting t2 heavy missiles? Does'nt make alot of sense. -Calm down and play the game
Kalana Eargon	Posted - 2010.12.04 04:17:00 - [48] Originally by: Spc One Edited by: Spc One on 02/12/2010 11:55:26 Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Actually, the Golem has an equivalent of 8 Siege Launchers, and compared to regular turret boats thats significant since most Torps boats only have 5 or 6 main launchers. Well paladin, kronos has an equivalent of 10 turrets which is 2 more than golem. Plus a paladin for example can be cap stable fit with one heatsink which gives more damage, golem can't. What the guy was trying to say is your regular missile battleships have around 6 launchers, while your regular turret battleships have around 8. So doing the math, turret boats have 33% more hardpoints than your missile boat. So now lets look at marauders, the Golem has an equivalent of 8 launchers while the others have an equivalent of 10, so doing the math the other marauders have only 25% more effective hardpoints now and that's without the bonus to damage effectiveness (explosive velocity bonus). With this said, if your 6 launchers battleships can match a 8 turret battleship then a 8 effective launcher marauder w/bonuses surpasses a 10 effective turrets. Now lets compare the Kronos and Golem with level 5 skills. Kronos is going to get 364 dps w/425mm Railguns while a Golem will get 272 dps. This is using T1 ammo, now lets look at range, 36km+30km for railguns compared to 253.1km for the cruise missile. Now lets put the T2 Long Range ammo on the railguns and the T2 short range on the cruise missiles, 243 dps at 130km+30km for the railguns and 349 at 227.8km with the cruise missiles. So turrets can get more dps, but at a MUCH shorter range also at closer ranges turrets, especially 425mm Railguns, have a hard time tracking while missiles always hit. Not to mention your able to choose ammo types with missile unlike hybrid turrets, energy turrets, and much more greater than projectile turrets. As far as your claim that the Paladin can support 1 heatsink while being cap stable and a Golem can not... I'm pretty damn sure a Golem can support 3-4x BCU easily while remaining cap stable, not to mention launchers dont use capacitor so each RoF bonus from a BCU wont hurt your cap as it would on energy or hybrid guns. Finally you need to stop relying on EFT to judge it, there are so many factors that apply into balancing and which is better in which situation the dps given from EFT simply doesn't show you much at all. p.s. use torpedoes on your Golem =)
fkingfurious	Posted - 2010.12.04 11:26:00 - [49] Tech 2 ammo is now (mostly) balanced with tech 2 missiles. Well, some of them. Tech 2 ammo was revistied because it gave NO ADVANTAGE AT ALL over faction. It didn't even do significantly more DPS (about 1.5%). Tech 2 misisles on the other hand DID have advantages. Fury/Rage is awesome and always has been WHEN ENGAGING LARGER/WELL TACKLED TARGETS. It gives an appreciable boost in damage over faction and can be efffectivly applied in the right scenarios. In point of fact Rage HAM's give the Drake a massive advantage when engaging other BC's as Rage stats are such that they have no issue hitting BC's. Javelin/Quake/Gleam are still pointless even after the removel of the ship penalties.They still have heavier penalties than faction and still don't do anymore damage. Hail/Conflag/Void are now analogous to Rage. They will do higher DPS to larger/well tackled targets. Fury is still unique in being the only ammo type that can give an appreciable damage increase with long range guns regardless of how hard it is to apply.(standards,heavies,cruise). As pointed out the turret equivalents are pointless as they have massive (weapon) penalties and don't do anymore damage anyway. Precisions ARE ** but they are also a fundamentally flawed concept. Making a wepon system more effective against smaller targets without requiring the pilot to do anything more than switch ammo type is basically impossible to balance. If precisions worked than eesentially launchers would be able to project effective damage (obviously to qualify as working precisions need to do usefull damage against small targets) against basically any target. This kinda flies in the face of balance and again there is no comparision with turrets. There is no ammo type for an turret system designed to give an immediate boost against smaller targets without requiring outside intervention (scrams, webs,painters). So what have we got? Rage and Hail/Conflag/Void are now roughly equivalent so there is a prtty strong argument for ditching the ship penalties on Rage missiiles. They certainly DO NOT need anymore bufe than that. Javelin missiles fill the same function as Barrage/Scorch/Null BUT while they have ship penalties they have NO penalties to accuracy/precision. They have reduced damage but so do the turret ammos. The turret ammo also has a tracking penalty. If you want to remove the ship penalty from Javelin missiles some kind of precision penalty will need to be applied instead, though it clearly wouldn't need to be a big one. Fury IS NOT equal to Gleam/Quake/Javelin. The tech 2 turret ammo is utterly worthless, ship penalties or not. If Fury's have any advantages at all over faction (which they do, however slight) they're already better than the turret equivalents. Precision are *** but they also have no turret equivalent and as a result attempting to balance them against turret ammo is impossible.
Billy Kidd	Posted - 2010.12.04 12:07:00 - [50] Originally by: fkingfurious Tech 2 ammo is now (mostly) balanced with tech 2 missiles. Well, some of them. Tech 2 ammo was revistied because it gave NO ADVANTAGE AT ALL over faction. It didn't even do significantly more DPS (about 1.5%). Tech 2 misisles on the other hand DID have advantages. Fury/Rage is awesome and always has been WHEN ENGAGING LARGER/WELL TACKLED TARGETS. It gives an appreciable boost in damage over faction and can be efffectivly applied in the right scenarios. In point of fact Rage HAM's give the Drake a massive advantage when engaging other BC's as Rage stats are such that they have no issue hitting BC's. Javelin/Quake/Gleam are still pointless even after the removel of the ship penalties.They still have heavier penalties than faction and still don't do anymore damage. Hail/Conflag/Void are now analogous to Rage. They will do higher DPS to larger/well tackled targets. Fury is still unique in being the only ammo type that can give an appreciable damage increase with long range guns regardless of how hard it is to apply.(standards,heavies,cruise). As pointed out the turret equivalents are pointless as they have massive (weapon) penalties and don't do anymore damage anyway. Precisions ARE ** but they are also a fundamentally flawed concept. Making a wepon system more effective against smaller targets without requiring the pilot to do anything more than switch ammo type is basically impossible to balance. If precisions worked than eesentially launchers would be able to project effective damage (obviously to qualify as working precisions need to do usefull damage against small targets) against basically any target. This kinda flies in the face of balance and again there is no comparision with turrets. There is no ammo type for an turret system designed to give an immediate boost against smaller targets without requiring outside intervention (scrams, webs,painters). So what have we got? Rage and Hail/Conflag/Void are now roughly equivalent so there is a prtty strong argument for ditching the ship penalties on Rage missiiles. They certainly DO NOT need anymore bufe than that. Javelin missiles fill the same function as Barrage/Scorch/Null BUT while they have ship penalties they have NO penalties to accuracy/precision. They have reduced damage but so do the turret ammos. The turret ammo also has a tracking penalty. If you want to remove the ship penalty from Javelin missiles some kind of precision penalty will need to be applied instead, though it clearly wouldn't need to be a big one. Fury IS NOT equal to Gleam/Quake/Javelin. The tech 2 turret ammo is utterly worthless, ship penalties or not. If Fury's have any advantages at all over faction (which they do, however slight) they're already better than the turret equivalents. Precision are *** but they also have no turret equivalent and as a result attempting to balance them against turret ammo is impossible. Totally right. I'll take a speed penalty over an accuracy penalty any day for Javelin ammo. Precision missiles are just screwed to begin with. Making them useful will make them inherently imbalanced. They need to fill a different role altogether. Maybe something like sniper ammo? 1000% bonus to missile velocity, but 75% overall range and 75% damage compared to t1 and 75% ship speed? You can get rigs to compensate for the range drawback too. That would be useful at extreme ranges where you can't afford to wait for your missiles to hit.

Lugalzagezi666	Posted - 2010.12.04 12:12:00 - [51] Originally by: Billy Kidd Totally right. I'll take a speed penalty over an accuracy penalty any day for Javelin ammo. Then you are dumb. Also javelins shouldnt get any accuracy penalty, simply because you cant increase your hit quality at range as you can do with turrets.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.12.04 13:02:00 - [52] Edited by: Gypsio III on 04/12/2010 13:02:12 Originally by: Billy Kidd Originally by: fkingfurious Precisions ARE **** but they are also a fundamentally flawed concept. Making a wepon system more effective against smaller targets without requiring the pilot to do anything more than switch ammo type is basically impossible to balance. If precisions worked than eesentially launchers would be able to project effective damage (obviously to qualify as working precisions need to do usefull damage against small targets) against basically any target. This kinda flies in the face of balance and again there is no comparision with turrets. There is no ammo type for an turret system designed to give an immediate boost against smaller targets without requiring outside intervention (scrams, webs,painters). Precision missiles are just screwed to begin with. Making them useful will make them inherently imbalanced. They need to fill a different role altogether. Maybe something like sniper ammo? 1000% bonus to missile velocity, but 75% overall range and 75% damage compared to t1 and 75% ship speed? You can get rigs to compensate for the range drawback too. That would be useful at extreme ranges where you can't afford to wait for your missiles to hit. Some very good points, although I ought to point out that the midrange projectile ammos have a tracking bonus that makes them more effective against small stuff. Frankly, Precisions are a bad idea. A high-speed missile instead is an interesting idea - 1000% velocity is silly, but 100% more would be sensible, at a cost of raw damage and missile "tracking", I expect.
Cearain Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION	Posted - 2010.12.04 14:04:00 - [53] CCP did a good job balancing the t2 non-launcher ammo they can do the same for missiles. IÆm not sure op's suggestions are good but he is right they could use a buff. Currently the signature bloom and speed disadvantage makes no sense. Why if I carrry long range missiles in my cargo can I go faster than if I load them in a launcher? Note I do not even have to be shooting the missiles to get the speed nerf. Immersion aside, the reason you would use most long range ammo is so that you can kite people. Just like vagabonds, cynabals, rifters and slicers do with their long range ammo. Ask the pilots of these ships how they would like it if barrage and scorch gimped their speed again and again for each and every turret they loaded that ammo in. The tracking penalty doesnÆt really effect scorch or barrage much because you should have some distance on your opponent when you are using it. Although I admit I havenÆt flown a slicer so IÆm not 100% sure on this for that ship. Ok and before everyone whines about the drake, its only one ship. If it needs a nerf that should be looked at separately. Right now t2 missiles at least for pvp suck and could use a buff like the turret t2 ammo got. -Cearain Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906
PureMurder	Posted - 2010.12.04 14:47:00 - [54] Just a thought... if you had 3 bays and loaded them with 3 different types of T2 missiles, would you suffer all three drawbacks?
Soon Shin	Posted - 2010.12.05 09:39:00 - [55] Edited by: Soon Shin on 05/12/2010 09:39:59 You know the golem would be made better if they changed some of the bonus, instead of having bonus for both cruise and torpedoes it should be just torpedoes. We already have the Raven Navy issue for cruise. This: Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo velocity and 5% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level to this: 10% bonus to torpedo explosion velocity and flight time per level 20% bonus to torpedo velocity per level
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2010.12.05 10:49:00 - [56] Originally by: PureMurder Just a thought... if you had 3 bays and loaded them with 3 different types of T2 missiles, would you suffer all three drawbacks? Yes. Worse than that, the drawback is cumulative - each launcher you have loaded with javelin ammo, slows you down a bit more. Anyway, T2 missiles: Rage/Fury are ok. I don't think losing their signature penalty would hurt though. Javelins are mediocre, because range ammo that slows you down is worthless. 50% more range, when you're slower and will spend 10s swapping ammo is not worth it. Lose the speed penalty, and it'll be ok. Precisions suck, and are never worth using over faction. The only time they do more damage than faction, is when the damage of both is already negligable. But being able to trash smaller ships isn't necessarily a good thing. I'd suggest instead - put their explosion radius up, and their explosion velocity up more. And their damage to sensible levels, for shooting 'normal' targets. So they do a credible amount of damage to fast moving targets, but not necessarily smaller ships. Or just scrap the concept entirely, and do something else with 'precision'.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.