| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
0
   |
Posted - 2012.09.30 03:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
No opinion on the the changes to all but the Heavy Missiles. As for heavy missiles I think a 20% damage reduction may be a bit much. Missiles in general have a lower DPS than most other weapon types. I do agree that the damage they do in comparison to the Heavy Assault Missiles is a bit on the high side. If I had a choice I would go with a 10% damage reduction on Heavy Missiles and a 5% damage increase on Heavy Assault. A 20% damage reduction would cause the Tengu to no longer be a viable option over a BS in lvl4 missions. I am a dedicated mission runner and my current setup is an Orca w/ a Noctis and Tengu in the ship hanger (and a few extra ships for other purposes packaged in the hangers). With a signifcant damage reduction in Heavy Missiles I would then have to decide weather to take 40+mins on a lvl4 mission with the tengu or a 10min mission in a golem vs the current 15-20min tengu/10min golem ... the reason I don't currently use a golem is because of the time consumed relocating agents hence the use of an Orca.
Also for future balancing of the Tengu's tank please keep in mind that anyone bringing Neuts is going to beat a Tengu. Even mission rats with Neuts are difficult for a Tengu when there are more than 6 BS class. |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 22:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:
Ok, Mr. Onictus - go tell me which Caldari ship (and yes, name ANY) does perform better than a Tengu in regards of mission efficiency? (and no, I dont want Eve to be balanced around PvE!)
I can tell you, its not the dedicated PvE battleship. Nor is it the faction tier 2 BS. Nor the faction tier 1 BS. Nor the tier 3 BS. There is no Caldari BS which can be on par with the Tengu in average missions, and the Tengu is quite a lot behind the best. The Tengu is, admitted, a fair bit better than all other t3s in PvE missions, although in other areas of PvE its not the best.
...
Ok, personal experience having flown almost every caldari ship in missions, raven - sucks compared to tengu, CNR and Golem - better DPS worse tank (they do the missions alot faster), CNS - similar DPS and tank to a Tengu, Rattlesnake - greater DPS and similar tank to a Tengu, Gila - slightly weaker than a Tengu.
Note: These are Hi-Sec MISSION fit ships - NOT for use where you think you might loose them in PvP.
Basically, of the ones I mentioned there are only two that are worse than a tengu, and only one of those shouldn't be. All the rest perform better. Where they lack is in the ability to be fit inside an Orca hanger for mission runners - which is the ONLY reason I fly a tengu for missions. |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.13 22:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sycotic Deninard wrote:Looking at the 2nd proposed changes to HML's that Fozzie has announced makes me laugh. The range nerf is worse and the applied damage to the HML/HAMS is a joke. Yes I know that the missile will get to its target faster and yes I know that the ship penalties have been removed from the Tech II variants but the nerf to the range, explosion radius and missile velocity makes using HML missiles pointless.
It's become abundantly clear that CCP Fozie doesn't entirely understand the missile system nor the impact that it will have for most of the Caldari race. Like I said earlier in this post, this change will have a direct impact on CCP's subscription base and by the looks of it others have expressed the same thing.
so...looking at the changes to HMLs right now. It's NOT that bad...
using EFT with modded data added in looking at my current MISSION tengu.
I'm down to 597dps from 660dps (w/ navy scourge) and I put on a Rigor 2, so that should more than make up for the explosion radius...I'm down from <130km range to <97km range....
that isn't that bad....on paper. I'm pretty sure its not bad at all in practice |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.13 23:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Last I checked Rage were Tech2 Missiles... |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.13 23:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Don't know what if any hull changes are going to happen. I'll assume that was partly directed at me. Pretty much what I'm saying is that the current changes aren't going to ruin a Tengu - atleast as far as missions go. Also, I'm only checking Tengu, I might check a Drake sometime...and I won't check the other heavy missile hulls, because as has been said, they are broken. |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 10:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
You do all realize that the HML system used to be the only medium missile system right? And thats its current "balance" was based on that. It had to fill the role of both long and short range.
Missile systems were originally balanced as long range slow firing small target hitting and short range fast firing large target hitting. With the HML being the only system at the time they put it in the middle and used T2 ammo to change its role between the two. Then they released the HAMLs and made some changes to HML (not enough to change its do all role though)
As for the changes that are listed, I don't think the range nerf or base damage nerf are uncalled for. However, having to equip rigs or implants to make your weapons hit in class is not appropriate (for ANY weapon system).
To balance small target hitting I would scrap the current explosion velocity and explosion radius and create "Missile Tracking" and use a "Missile Sensor Strength". "Missile Tracking" would work similarly to turret tracking, if the small ship is moving around too fast the missile won't be able to hit it. "Missile Sensor Strength" would work similarly to Turret Signature Resolution.
You would end up getting the "crappy" hits, the misses, and you should also get the critical hits.
Yes, this would mean they would work the same, but with flight time. Right now missiles are popular because they have consistent and predictable damage (especially in PvE) and have "some" damage application at any range they can hit at. |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 23:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
And if CCP did all that hundreds if not thousands of subscribes would head over to their offices for some retribution. If ship insurance worked then i could tolerate options 4 and 5. Profitability that isn't already going to be nerfed shouldn't be. All rats having a CHANCE to do those things in #3 would also be acceptable. Option 1 and 2 are ******** though...guns (turrets) aren't that much better than missiles and in some situations are much much worse, and Marauder's aren't overpowered, the bonus brings them to the equivalent of 8 turrets/launchers while being able to fit drone links salvagers and tractors...something they need to do to fulfill their role (reduced to 75% would make them no better than the T1 versions)
Ok, I'm done feeding the troll, you can dynamite that bridge now... |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 02:28:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hey Fozzie, I just had some ideas that might make Auto-Targeting Missiles more favorable.
a) Include in their description target prioritization (e.g. 1 frigates 2 drones 3 cruisers etc )
b) if they don't already, have them target jammers/dampers/pointers then by appropriate size class then by range (meaning with light auto-targeting missiles a scraming frigate at 5km will be targeted over a BC that is simply attacking and with heavy auto targeting missiles a jamming cruiser will be targeted over both of the above)
Both those changes would help quite a bit. Change a) would help people understand how they are going to function, change b) would make it so the missiles don't uselessly attack a frigate at 5km when you need them to attack a scramming interceptor at 8km or attack a mostly harmless cruiser at 5km when you are being jammed by a BS |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 03:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
I like cake...this isn't cake....
Currently I'm not against most of the changes that are in place, the T2 missile changes are a bit harsh on the fury/rage...I would compensate by adding a REALLY long range missile (+50% range) that does crap damage (-30%) and can only hit at size or above, and a long range (+20% range) that does slightly more damage (+5%) and can only hit at size or above. More options is good. |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 09:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
Endo Pryde wrote:serras bang wrote:[quote=Giribaldi]Im going to restate my previose post on page 301...
as for others in this thread missles are a unique system and are more sp inteansive to train them all than another races guns.
In order to train T2 large guns you must first train T2 medium and T2 small of that type, but with missiles you can skip over the lower tiers and train T2 torpedoes or cruise missiles directly. For this reason, missiles are LESS skill point intensive than other weapon systems.
True, but not going into tech2 if you were to train all 5s for projectile including support skills it takes a lot less time to train into hybrid or laser. Also, for missiles, our short range weapons systems and long range weapon systems are separate skill paths. For instance, if I want to have "large" missile skills I need to train both cruise and torp for t1 equivalent, where as with projectiles its just large projectile turrets.
Also note, large turret specializations is a 5x skill, torps/cruise t2 is a 8x skill.... |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 21:12:00 -
[11] - Quote
Yea, yea, don't chew me out, I'm not the one who brought up the topic of skills.
Yes, Heavy Missiles are overpowered compared to other medium long range weapons. Too much dps, too long of a range. And HAMs are underpowered vs smaller ships...you can't shoot frigates for crap without a "specialized" fitting....I think they are right on target for cruiser and up though. By crap I mean that without web/TP AND rigs you are going to use 3x or more the ammo on frigates, without any of those its going to be 10x+. I'm pretty sure HAMs will be fixed with some of the changes.
Overall I think the problem is more the ships using the weapon system than the weapon system itself. Tengu's have ungodly bonuses to missiles...but then again I think it should...T3 cruisers SHOULD compete with battleships (compete, not dominate) On the other hand, Drakes have a silly stupid tank, making it so heavy missiles become useful in PvP despite the delayed damage.
I'm all for the current round of nerfs, and I know from the numbers that this round isn't going to break my PvE setup - not even close. Heck, I might even be able to switch from HMLs to HAMs for effective PvE...it all depends on how much the changes improve HAMs ability to hit frigates. |
Ajunta Pal
Sith Wannabies Annonymous
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.25 06:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
sounds more like sarcasm... |
| |
|