Edward Olmops
Sirius Fleet
25
   |
Posted - 2012.09.20 15:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
My 2 cents:
On the HM changes:
Currently, HMs are way overpowered, no doubt. In general, I do support the changes proposed by CCP Fozzie.
But although Fozzie may be right and it really required a -25% range AND -20% dmg nerf to bring them in line with other weapon systems, I am a bit sceptical about these drastic changes.
Maybe he did the number crunching right, BUT there is a ton of additional factors that separate missiles from turrets and the way damage is applied in the end. With one dramatic change to these parameters, I see a risk of over-nerfing due to unforseeable sandbox side effects.
If you say range ist the biggest problem, why not give them -25% range, only -10% dmg and take some time to evaluate the changes?
If after 3 months Drakes and Tengus still overshadow any other ship hull and continue to be seen in swarms of hundreds, then you just swing the nerf bat again for another -10% dmg...
Evolution instead of revolution.
If you still want to stick with the -20% dmg, then at least switch the Drake/Tengu damage bonus to kinetic damage to a flat +5% to all damages.
That would be good in 2 different ways:
a) Drake pilots would have to start thinking even more :-D AND a clever choice of ammunition could in some cases make up for the loss of dps through the HM nerf.
b) one could not simply assume that Drakes fire Scourge, which would make Drakes a bit less predictable and boring for opponents.
On Tracking/Tracking Disruption changes:
a) Missiles are affected - that is a good one imo. Now Drake / Tengu pilots need to consider whether they really need the range and sacrifice a slot or 2.
I do see the problem that TD is getting overpowered like some others.
To cure this, I like Fozzies suggestion of different disruption mods best. Missile Disruptor + Tracking Disruptor.
-more items are always nice
-you have to take a meaningful decision when fitting the ship (am I expecting missile boats or turrets?)
b) The overall effectiveness of TD is another issue though. I am a great fan of E-War which is why I know by heart that with all proposed winter changes revealed so you could create TD monsters with near 95% Optimal Range Disruption.
Yes this is very difficult, you would need Storyline TDs, Rigs, full ship boni, a booster Proteus with perfect skills & Mindlink... but I am pretty sure that I would see this everywhere after some time if it makes people win.
The problem here are not the missiles, but the proposed higher ship boni on E-War on cruisers an frigates of 7,5% per level.
If on the other hand the base strength of TDs would be lowered, I think I would not like it.
Why, everyone is crying for specialized hulls with determined roles - I don't! I don't like it to be reduced to choose between only 2-3 hulls if I want a special effect.
For E-War this is especially dramatic, because the effects are race-specific.
Also I don't it if the complete tactics of a fleet can be seen on D-Scan already.
Oh, there is an arbitrator, they CERTAINLY have tracking disruption.
Therefore I do support the idea to make the new E-War cruisers EW/combat hybrids, but I would rather like them to keep their old 5% bonus. Same for frigates.
I you want to buff tracking disruption, why not instead improve the effectiveness of the appropriate rig or the Information Warfare Gang Link? |