| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
LtTrog
five finger death punch
0
   |
Posted - 2012.09.21 20:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ok so Ill admit I'm a drake pilot skilling toward a tengu so I feel strongly about this.
After reading this very long thread I agree with a lot of the points already made e.g.;
the dps nerf is too much. I would rather not see dps dropped at all
the range nerf is acceptable and understandable
if HML dps is dropped I would like to see new bonuses on the ships that use them to compensate
If TD are to work on missiles it should be a new mod or script similar to the way racial ECM works
HAMs need to be better and easier to fit . Making all missiles guided would be a good start.
If HML dps is nerfed HAMs should be bosted with a similar dps ratio to cruise/torps
TDs will need careful nerfing on non bonused ships to stop them being the win button like ECM was before their change
on a more whiny note please keep the drake as an excellent mission running ship. Not for myself as I'm skilling to bigger and better things, but for the sake of new players. The reason its so common is not because its the best pvp ship but because it's relatively cheap in terms of both isk and skill points and it how most players will start doing lvl4 missions.
Please keep the tengu's dps ability but yes cut its range I dont think its dps is op given how much it costs to hit 800dps in that ship but being able to do that damage at over 100km+ is op.
|
LtTrog
five finger death punch
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 11:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Please remember one and only area that Caldari really excel in is in pve as selecting damage type is useful the dps drop of 20% will will destroy that.
Its only recently Caldari have been more accepted into pvp. Yes the kiting drake and tengu are a problem and should be looked at. A massive dps drop is not the way to do it |
LtTrog
five finger death punch
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 07:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:
When it comes to heavy missiles being imbalanced, this is only a problem for the drake and tengu.
Rarely do you ever see another ship besides a drake and tengu even fitting heavy missiles in pvp.
Hell, rarely do you ever see a missile boat besides a tengu or drake in pvp combat.
All these nerfs need to be focused specifically on the ships themselves.
Drake
Kill the drake targetting range. This will force them to choose between more targetting range or tank/dps/utility/props.
Odds are the drake will get a pretty big EHP nerf, so we have that coming as well.
Take away the kinetic missile bonus.
Tengu
Reduce targetting range of dissolution sequencer.
Reduce cpu/pg in order to take away the ability to fit 100mn afterburners, even if it's a small amount.
Remove range bonus from accelerated ejection bay.
(plus possible others)
I honestly have never seen a ship using hml in pvp that felt OP apart from the drake and tengu. (though the drake not as much)
So, why are we going to nerf the hell out of a weapon system that (though it may be OP) has never been a problem at all apart from these two ships.
Just nerf the ships and leave the missiles alone
This !
|
LtTrog
five finger death punch
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 13:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Drew Li wrote:If the missile boats gain an additional low slot I think this nerf makes a lot of sense. You can choose between roughly the same DPS or same range and ability to hit faster/smaller targets. HAMs were useless because there were no effective ways to increase their range. If you didn't need to load up on reactor controls to fit them and instead add a TE for added range and more explosion velocity/radius they would be really powerful. The only way to get the added range now is to change rigs or ships which generally compromises your tank significantly.
This also brings up torpedoes and how effective they might be. A bomber with a TE and TCs would probably put out a ton of damage on most targets. It might actually make a raven usable as well. Now if only the rats couldn't outrun my citadel torpedoes.
I wholeheartedly agree with this if you do go ahead and nerf HMLs this severely a low slot would give the ships some more options while not letting it have ALL the options at once which is, I believe the aim of the nerf.
Aslo please look at HAMs and Torps, making them guided would help as would having TE/TC work on them.
It would give the Golem some needed love too..
see this thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=65340
As is HAMs and Torps with out using a lot of tp (3 in the case of Torps) can't hit the same sized class of ship for full damage but do ok hitting one class bigger. A problem in pvp but not so bad.
As for pve (the main role of a golem) there is no class bigger.
For clarification im asking for better Torps and HAMs not npc capital ships. though that would be cool maybe in another expansion eh?
|
LtTrog
five finger death punch
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.27 01:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:Lallante wrote:
If Drakes were balanced they wouldn't be used 6 x more often than Harbingers.
That repetition of the Harbinger argument .. lol. The Harbinger is indeed not exactly as strong as Drake and Cane. Its very common in lowsec though, and due to its dronebay far from being weak. Apart from that, Amarr have plenty of other ships they can use, which are just better performing, esp. in comparison to their Caldari counterparts. There are not more Drakes in lowsec than Canes, and there are next to no Ravens in lowsec, but tons of Amarr, Winmatar and Gallente BS. So figure, why do people use the Drake? Because they have to. Not because its OP, because it is NOT.
This is very true the drake is so ubiquitous as it's only real option for caldari kill mails other than the tengu which is very expensive how many raven kill mails do you see?
|
LtTrog
five finger death punch
2
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 06:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
I was ok with the 25% range nerf to HML untill I saw the range on T2 ammo thats nearly 66% reduction. and we are not getting the missile tracting mods? come on that is ridiculous. |
LtTrog
five finger death punch
2
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 08:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
And your making torps even worse? Giving cruise a slight dps/application buff in exchange for cutting their range nearly in half?
Hams hams are getting the same treatment as torps slight dps buff but less range and will find it harder to aply that dps so overall worse too
I'm trying to resist going all emo here but really what do you have against caldari ships?
Torps are only viable on one very expensive ship (in terms of Isk and sp), now they are going to need 3 painters to even hit a BS for full dps and will have even less range. please tell me thats not your full plan for the system.
I'm disregarding stealth bombers as they are a very specialised ship and from what I know work quite well
My plan was to adapt or die by skilling into larger hulls but not sure thats going to be worth it now, Ill just have to bight the bullet and cross train.
..... ok came back to this post after I calmed down a bit. Cruise, hmm well no one ever uses the range of cruise anyway so ok cut the range but hits harder ok I get it...
but hams and torps getting less range? come on its madness that a BS class weapon has cruiser range any way and they are both getting cut? Can you please tell us why you think that is a good idea? Also has it been decided yet if HAMs are going to be kinder on grid? in line with other short range systems |
LtTrog
five finger death punch
3
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 03:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
IDGAD wrote:This has most likely been said a million times already but......
If you take heavy missiles down to the range, and damage of other long range medium guns, they will become the worst weapon of that class hands down (even with moderate bonuses). The core problem with missiles is actually their very existence. The idea of missiles is that you got increased range, and damage for the annoyances of their difficulty in hitting smaller targets that guns could, and of course THE TIME IT TAKES TO HIT . The largest factor in the new nerfed missiles will be that they will be like the others, but have nothing but major downfalls like damage infliction delays due to travel time.
A good point and Ill quote it in the hope that if its said often enough it will be herd.
Please let missiles have one clear advantage over other systems to balance flight time and dont tell me damage selection as that is only of any use in pve and on ships that dont favour one damage type.
(would be nice to see those bonuses change to omni, hell even RoF would be ok but makes counting vollies harder and running costs higher)
At this point I dont care what that advantage is but please let it have one
I would prefer dps but range would be ok
massive alpha would be another option
|
LtTrog
five finger death punch
3
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 04:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
rodyas wrote:^ Would you be satisfied with missiles being better then blasters or rail guns? Or are you talking about a real weapon system?
well my idea of balance would be one weapon system be it lasors hybrids missiles or whatever has one clear advantage and disadvantage in each size small/med/large/cap these dont need to be unified across the whole system but need to be there.
e.g. lasors - cap hungry + rapid ammo selection/ low ammo costs
missiles - flight time ? after changes I dont know
(and dont give me no tracking as the exp velocity/size more than compensates for that)
I dont want better than anything. I want best for X worst for Y for every system.
For example; I want best alpha for medium weapons, ah ok that would be weapon system A
I want best damage application in large weapons, ok you should use weapon system B
|
LtTrog
five finger death punch
3
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 04:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
What can any honestly say missiles are best for in any size after the proposed changes? |
| |
|