|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 13:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Foozie you are getting some major love with this bomb you dropped on EVE yesterday. While I don't agree with all your proposed changes for the HM system I like the general ideas behind it. As to the people that are saying this DEV has no prior knowledge of the game you are sorely misinformed. I think until these are put on the test server to properly test we can only speculate on how they will preform. Keep up the good work on all the rebalancing you guys are doing and be prepared for more love mail from the unwashed masses.
People have adapted to many changes in EVE and there has never been a SP reimbursement. This Change will not make any skill you trained unusable only changes how items work. If you need further reference please ask all the Nano pilots if they got there skill points back when they nerfed that.
Thanks |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 13:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:MIrple wrote:
People have adapted to many changes in EVE and there has never been a SP reimbursement. This Change will not make any skill you trained unusable only changes how items work. If you need further reference please ask all the Nano pilots if they got there skill points back when they nerfed that.
Because it takes as long as it does to train all missiles (or even just heavy missiles and the respective damage/range modifier skills) to V to train for T2 nanos (which you can get 2 hours into starting a new character)
Will your skills still allow you to use missiles and the only Missile that is getting nerfed is the HM so yes its a pretty even skill train match up. Heavy Missile V High Speed Maneuvering V don't see how this is all that different. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 13:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:MIrple wrote:Warde Guildencrantz wrote:MIrple wrote:
People have adapted to many changes in EVE and there has never been a SP reimbursement. This Change will not make any skill you trained unusable only changes how items work. If you need further reference please ask all the Nano pilots if they got there skill points back when they nerfed that.
Because it takes as long as it does to train all missiles (or even just heavy missiles and the respective damage/range modifier skills) to V to train for T2 nanos (which you can get 2 hours into starting a new character) Will your skills still allow you to use missiles and the only Missile that is getting nerfed is the HM so yes its a pretty even skill train match up. Heavy Missile V High Speed Maneuvering V don't see how this is all that different. No, all missiles are getting nerfed because they instantly have less DPS just from a TD, which isnt the case for TDs on guns.
So firing guns when being TD and hitting in falloff is not less DPS? News to me. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 13:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
[/quote]Yes, but you can fix that by piloting, you can't with missiles. You just do less damage no matter the circumstances. Maybe making them move slower will fix a bit, but you can't really MAKE someone move slower, unless you have the modules to do it. It isn't really fair that one weapon system can pilot their way around an EWAR and the other one has to fit towards it.[/quote]
You cant fix falloff by piloting unless you mean closing range. Hey guess what you can fix missiles the same way then also. Your argument on this is weak as now you suffer the same issues that turret pilots can face out in space. TD are being changed this winter also so hold on the sky is not falling at the moment. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 14:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Arduemont wrote:Alot of people here seem to be justifying the Heavy Missile nerf by saying "They need it drastically, look how OP Drakes and Tengus are", which is stupidity. Drakes are a little OP, more in blobs than in any other format.
So address drakes as an issue, dont break the entire missile boat Caldari line. Nighthawks, Cerberus, Caracal, just three useless ships that are about to become even more useless. If you really have to nerf drakes, then nerf them directly, don't ruin all the other heavy missile platforms. The missiles are fine as they are, in fact I would go so far as to say Heavy Missiles are about perfect, and HAMs need a buff.
CCP, your really not doing yourself any favours nerfing HMs. I could probably get behind a small nerf. The range nerf on its own would be worth some debate, but the 20% damage reduction is lunacy. What happened to rolling out changes "slowly" so that they can be tested and to make sure there are no big reaction? Its been working so far, why stop now?
Somebody wasn't thinking when this nerf was added to the to-do list.
Gypsio III wrote: Current dual-BCS Caracal: 263 DPS kinetic, 210 non-kinetic, with CN to 120 km, 8.4 km/s missiles. Future triple-BCS Caracal: 252 DPS all damage types with CN to 90 km, 9 km/s missiles.
I'm glad to see the Caracal surviving the deserved HML Drake/Tengu nerf fine.
Hams + TE/TC's man..
Thats the way to go!
So how is this a massive nerf to the Caracal?
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 14:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Beezon wrote:Will TE/TD affect cruise missiles/FoF cruises/torps too?
Yes Fozzie said they would. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 14:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Willie Horton wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
Will the TE/TC/TD changes affect unguided missiles like HAMs and Torps?The plan is for them to affect all missiles, yes.
Can you make new module or make this option for missiles affected by other EWAR ,asking cause if it stays like this TD will be no brainer and easy to pick as counter.
I agree that there should be a second mod Missile TD as well. TBH there should be different mods for TE and TC for missiles as well. So Missile pilots don't have to train up gunnery skills to use TE or TC. The down side to this is there are a few ships that would benefit from TE and TC effecting both missiles and turrets. But any way that we can put down Winmatar I am ok with :) |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 14:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:MIrple wrote:Arduemont wrote:Alot of people here seem to be justifying the Heavy Missile nerf by saying "They need it drastically, look how OP Drakes and Tengus are", which is stupidity. Drakes are a little OP, more in blobs than in any other format.
So address drakes as an issue, dont break the entire missile boat Caldari line. Nighthawks, Cerberus, Caracal, just three useless ships that are about to become even more useless. If you really have to nerf drakes, then nerf them directly, don't ruin all the other heavy missile platforms. The missiles are fine as they are, in fact I would go so far as to say Heavy Missiles are about perfect, and HAMs need a buff.
CCP, your really not doing yourself any favours nerfing HMs. I could probably get behind a small nerf. The range nerf on its own would be worth some debate, but the 20% damage reduction is lunacy. What happened to rolling out changes "slowly" so that they can be tested and to make sure there are no big reaction? Its been working so far, why stop now?
Somebody wasn't thinking when this nerf was added to the to-do list. Gypsio III wrote: Current dual-BCS Caracal: 263 DPS kinetic, 210 non-kinetic, with CN to 120 km, 8.4 km/s missiles.Future triple-BCS Caracal: 252 DPS all damage types with CN to 90 km, 9 km/s missiles. I'm glad to see the Caracal surviving the deserved HML Drake/Tengu nerf fine. Hams + TE/TC's man.. Thats the way to go! So how is this a massive nerf to the Caracal? Are you on drugs man? So how is loosing 10dps PLUS 1/4 of your range WHILE using an extra BCU not significant??
Show me any other t1 cruiser that can apply ~250 DPS at 60k + ranges in every damage type |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 14:32:00 -
[9] - Quote
Vilnius Zar wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:"i'm ok with this change so everyone should be!" this, my dear sir is called bigotry. and thank you for pointing out one of the differences between guns and missiles. you may be aware that there are other differences which are not at all as beneficial to the missiles as the one you named.
after reading most of this topic, i have the following to say: everybody in there throwing around random range and dps numbers is an idiot. paper dps do not matter. neither does paper range, neither does EHP or fitting requirements. it's the combination of all these things and a lot lot more that makes a ship balanced, underpowered or overpowered. the fact of the matter is, most heavy missile ships are underpowered where as the drake and tengu are overpowerd in specific situations. nerfing heavy missiles is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and is NOT what needs to be done.
as for the tracking idea: all i have to say is that it's beyond stupid and i am baffled that CCP would even come up with something like that. "I'm not ok with it and so no one should be". HMLs are OP, their range&applied dps is too good, on top of that the Tengu and Drake themselves are also too good. If they weren't the Tengu and drake wouldn't be used as much and in case of the Tengu you'd see people using non-missile fits. The problem is that other missiles are below par (not counting cruise) so one way of solving that (and the best way imo) is to "nerf" HML and then give people the option to fit modules to boost ALL missile performance, which is what's happening. Then have a look at the new proposed Caracal, range and rof bonus meaning all of a sudden HAMS become a more viable option now and when coupled with TE/TC they will really work quite well and HML will have the "if you want THAT much range then you'll have to accept low dps" just like other weapon systems. HAMs will be the new kid on the block and they'll do well. Deal with it.
My only concern with this on the Drake is as currently the Drake should get its kin bonus changes to a ROF bonus or to a blanket missile damage. This would make the changes more balanced. If not guess we will just have to wait till the get the BC's on the board. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 14:43:00 -
[10] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Eli Green wrote:
do those numbers factor in the travel time of the HML though?
Yes.
Also After the first volley travel time it is no longer a factor any longer as all missiles after that hit in there cycle time. |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 15:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kesthely wrote:Quote: 250mm Railgun II with FACTION AMMO!: DPS: 14 Alpha: 66 Optimal: 58 km Falloff: 15 km Cap/sec: -0.8 PG: 187.2 CPU: 31.5
Heavy Beam Laser II with FACTION AMMO!: DPS: 15 Alpha: 65 Optimal: 48 km Falloff: 10 km Cap/sec: -3.2 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 27.8
720mm Artillery II with FACTION AMMO: DPS: 12 Alpha: 174 Optimal: 48 km Falloff: 22 km Cap/sec: 0 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 24
Heavy Missile Launcher II with Caldari Navy Scourge: DPS: 23 (previously 29) Alpha: 189 (previously 237) Range: 63 km (previously 84) Cap/sec: 0 PG: 94.5 CPU: 41.3
The Heavy missile DPS is not correct here You forget its 10 second flight time so its dps DAMAGE PER SECOND needs to be divided by its travel time. By your dps counter, the heavy missile should get its damage upgraded by 600% Heavy Missile Launcher II with Caldari Navy Scourge: DPS: 2.3 (previously 2.9) Alpha: 189 (previously 237) Range: 63 km (previously 84) Cap/sec: 0 PG: 94.5 CPU: 41.3
So after the first volly of missiles then what your back to your ~23 DPS its only the first volly that has flight time after that missiles hit every cycle time. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 16:24:00 -
[12] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:baltec1 wrote:Smabs wrote:Quote:I already use rails over blasters in many situations. Medium rails? Because then you're either trolling or the worst pvp player in Eve. Small med and large. You see, unlike you, I figure out how to use these things rather than spend all my time chasing the FOTM or bad posting on the forums flapping over an OP weapon system getting nerfed into line with everything else. I am already working out the best way to make a HML caracal work for me. You have been given the numbers that show HML will still be a viable weapon after the changes. No doubt when this change hits you will be on the forums decrying the end of EVE while the rest of us are adapting. How do you fit your HML caracal? since with all 5s you have not enough PG/CPU????
Did you take into consideration that the Caracal will be getting a large CPU buff in the winter? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:08:00 -
[13] - Quote
Irregessa wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Random McNally wrote: So far there are 74 pages of people either for or against the changes with various levels of whine. You stated that this post is a forum for people to discuss the "idea" of making HM changes. Are the "Yea's" counted against the "Nay's" with the "Yea's" making the change a "go"?
It's not as simple as a vote. We take all reasoned arguments into account but in the end Eve's balance is CCP's responsibility and we can't shirk that responsibility. Of course. However, one point that has been mentioned several times already without any response has been that this change to HMLs is attempting to rebalance two of the several ships that use them. If the whole point of rebalancing ships is so that all ships have a viable use, isn't it counterproductive to then make ships like the Caracal, Nighthawk and Cerberus again undesirable due to the changes made to their primary weapon system? Heavy Assault missiles are often not an option either due to poor tank (the caracal/cerberus hulled ships) or fitting consideration (can be an issue with any ship, especially since HAMs use more PG than HMLs). If you want to rebalance the drake and tengu, rebalance the drake and tengu. Don't pack all the desired changes in the weapon system.
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:21:00 -
[14] - Quote
I think CCP needs to have a hard look at HAM fittings if they go through with this so if we decide to use the short ranged alternative we can have more PG and CPU to put towards tank or gank. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:41:00 -
[15] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:Hannott Thanos wrote: I was thinking this too. No reason for HAMs to cost more in terms of fitting. Should be brought in line with the formula used on long and short ranged turrets
I think they will address this when they get to the drake itself in the balance pass.
I agree but the fitting of these missile systems should fall more in line of the way turret systems work short range less CPU/PG long range more CPU/PG. If you give the drake more CPU/PG to handle fitting the HAM then you will have even more when you fit HM and this is what some people are voicing there concerns over. I have to say I agree with them HAMS need a CPU/PG reduction. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 18:02:00 -
[16] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:The other ships become much more viable once HML stops dominating the **** out of the entire LR cruiser weapon field.
-Liang I really don't get why people keep saying this. I didn't compare beams or rails to HMLs when I said "these are total ****, why would I ever use them?" On their own they're awful and need a buff or people won't use them any more just because HMs are being nerfed. The only thing that's going to happen now is that long range combat will be solely in the domain of artillery and rare but specific applications of rails (Nagas, Rokhtrine). The range nerf is reasonable, 10% damage nerf would also be reasonable on top of that. Giving missiles comparable DPS ignores their many counters (plus one with this patch).
We cant say that for 100% certainty until we see what all the ship rebalancing have in order have in order. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 18:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
Nyla Hunt wrote:Onictus wrote:Nyla Hunt wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Random McNally wrote: So far there are 74 pages of people either for or against the changes with various levels of whine. You stated that this post is a forum for people to discuss the "idea" of making HM changes. Are the "Yea's" counted against the "Nay's" with the "Yea's" making the change a "go"?
It's not as simple as a vote. We take all reasoned arguments into account but in the end Eve's balance is CCP's responsibility and we can't shirk that responsibility. CCP Fozzie, Lets look at your proposal, well in short dude it sucks. I trained Heavy Missile spec to 5 because that was what I liked. Now if you do these changes I demand my skill points back and oh yeah lets not forget that the only two ships on Caldari that works is a Drake and a Tengu which willl become redundant too with these changes. Dont even let me get started on the Nighthawk. So Me being a Caldari Pilot all the way is forced to buy HAMS because you cant find a place for it - really come on man... - what ever happened to common sense? Seems its a lost art. The only well balanced ship in this game is the Noctis, are you gonna try and break that too? Why not work on the tons of other useless ships in this game instead of trying to get us to vote on these stupid forums for your idea. Dude imho you should just resign and go home, you dont belong here..... Ban me I dont care - you just cost me 3 years of training. Three years for one race and the fastest weapon systems to train? Emo much? Onictus, Stand in the corner over there and play with things in your own paygrade - untill then leave a comment that is worth looking at or play WOW.
Or maybe you can do some thinking for yourself on how you will make these changes work for you instead of standing there with your arms crossed stamping your foot demanding things from CCP. You are not entitled to anything nerfs happen quit acting like a 2 year old or as you so kindly put it WOW is ----> way. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
112
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 19:57:00 -
[18] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:like most i got side tracked by the (IMO) ridicules HML proposal, but other questions pop up.
Are Tracking Computers/Tracking Enhancers going to stack now with Rigor and Flare and missle flight time/speed rigs? And if not, WHY not.
Unstacked TCs/TEs with certain rig combinations could mean some REALLY long ranged HAMs that would simply replace HMLs in mid ranged fights.lol. And since HAMs fire so much faster, that could cause more lag issues in fleet fights, no? I'm going to assume that they stack. I'm super curious what kind of range bonuses and damage application bonuses we'll see though. It'll really be the deciding factor on whether or not this is a nerf to HML or a massive boost to missiles as a whole. It feels like a moderate to large boost to most missile platforms. Consider that a sniping TC Cruise Raven will really smack cruisers in the face if those TCs work out well. -Liang
Cruises need to have there cycle time lengthened and there alpha increased. Then this would be fun. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 20:27:00 -
[19] - Quote
Tanaka Sekigahara wrote:Fowler wrote:I'm curious what will happen to the Nighthawk and Cerberus after theese changes to missiles and especially heavy missiles.
Seems the Nighthawk gets a smack in the face it doesn't deserve. Rook, Cal Navy Caracal, Nighthawk, Cerberus, all basically screwed. why is it guns get damage bonuses, and missiles get rate of fire?guns deal isntant damage, missiles have flight time delay to get to target, now there is no longer any compensation for that, and the ROF as opposed to the damage bonuses make it even less likey the bonused DPS for missiles has an actual effect on thre engagement.They basicall took an entire race and made in non viable. Noone ever uses ravens, cause cruise missiles are ****, now heavies are ****, i mean, other than the frigates, what caldari ships are worth a damn anymore? it's going to become a dea line, a dead race. The supposed "buff" to rails never did result in their re-emergence on the battlefield. EvE is becoming a 3 race game, Caldari is officially dead. Whats the actual DPS , maxed out, per cruiser? Caracal is on the bottom, as always.Add in drones and it's a total joke.I'm real close to being done with this...
Have you looked at the new stats before posting this or is this just another the sky if falling comment. Fit a Caracal with HAMS and see where it fit in with the damage stack. If you want to argue that HAMS and HM need to have there PG/CPU swapped I would agree completely. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 20:34:00 -
[20] - Quote
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote::Edit: I responded to some of the questions raised in this post and copied the responses to the end of this post as well:Heavy Missiles-Base flight time reduced by 30% -Base velocity increased by 6.66% -In total, base range reduced by ~25% -Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit) -Affects all variant Heavy missiles, including FOF. Translation: All lvl 5 drake dps with 2 T2 BCS and T2 HMs: Range: 56.9 (down from 75.9) DPS: 316.8 (down from 396, including reload time) Volley: 2209.6 (down from 2762) CPU used: 291.2 PG used: 661.5 All lvl 5 drake dps with 2 T2 BCS and T2 HAMs: Range: 18.1 DPS: 493 Volley: 1841 CPU used: 262.5 PG used: 793.8 And none of this takes into account speed and sig radius of target ship....which is something anti-drake/tengu people don't consider when it comes to DPS.
So we agree that HM fit in fine now with other medium ranged weapons? HAM need to have there DPS buffed a bit 10% would make them close to ~550 with this set up and that seams to be in range of other current short ranged set ups. |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:06:00 -
[21] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: [list]
The damage per second of heavy missile ships like the Drake seems low, why are you making it even lower?I believe the main source of disagreement here comes from comparisons between Heavy Missiles (a long range weapon platform) and short range weapons like autocannons or blasters. This quite simply isnt true. Its true if you only compare the HML drake to long range long range ammo against same size ships. Artycanes with EMP outdamage drakes at point range. The same goes for rails and beams on the appropriate hulls. Now against smaller, sig tanking things? Go ahead and tell me that a HML drake does more damage than a small railgun hurricane to a mwding stiletto. I have fraps footage of my stiletto taking sustained fire from around 90 drakes. Earlier in the same fight my taranis died to a single autocane. Guns and missiles arent the same, and you cant just compare eft damage numbers.
I highlighted the important part that is a close range weapon system with high tracking. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:12:00 -
[22] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:http://i.imgur.com/m8Aw9.jpg is a screenshot of several hundred heavy missiles flying at my stiletto.
Also, Ive volleyed many an interceptor in my artycane.
I am sure you have but were the intys moving did they have transversal up. Bad piloting should not be a stick to measure if a ship is op or not. Also I though the new speed of HM will now be around 9 km/s can you make your stiletto move that fast? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 22:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
With the changes proposed would giving all missiles a resist to there damage type not be in order? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 14:07:00 -
[24] - Quote
Everyone really needs to wait to see what they are going to change in the T2 missiles before everyone is up in arms over this.
They do need to switch the PG needs of HAMs and HM and give a slight damage increase to HAMS then they will be right on par with other ships.
Now if people want to argue for 2 more versions of each type of missile that is T1 shorter range more damage and a longer range less damage I am ok with this.
If people keep complaining about HM being so underpowered I am going to argue that HM, LM, and Cruise should have a arming period where if the target is under the range they don't get hit as the missile has not armed yet.
Please stop comparing HM with short ranged weapon systems. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 15:17:00 -
[25] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote:King Rothgar wrote:The HM nerf has been much needed for a long time. For all those crying over it, let's put this in perspective:
1) A Harbinger with Heavy beam laser II's using IN MF does 318 dps at 15km + 10km falloff (25km total).
2) A Hurricane with 720mm Howitzer II's using RF PP does 290 dps at 15km + 22km falloff (27km total).
3) A Brutix with 250mm railgun II's using CN antimatter does 302 dps at 18km + 15km falloff (28km total).
4) A drake with HML II's using CN scourge does 250 dps at 84.4km.
Now tell me which one of these isn't even remotely like the rest. All of these numbers are at lvl5 skills without any other mods/drones fitted and without implants. This is just the base damage on a typical damage/RoF bonused ship. Toss in the fitting requirements of these various mods and things skew more heavily in favor of HM's than they do in the above example. They are not supposed to be "like the rest", missiles are a very different system, with advantages and disadvantages over the other types. Assuming your numbers are correct (and they seem about right), lowest (and delayed) DPS for highest range and flexibility is what in most circles is called BALANCE. I could perhaps understand an adjustment, but this proposed heavy triple-nerf seems over the top and I hope gets reconsidered and toned down, before they "balance" away an entire class of ships into obsolescence.
I understand what you are saying here but If you look at the caracal with the new rebalance of that ship and with the changes proposed to HM it works out very well. I think they need to try and push up balancing BC this round if they want this to go through as It will really hamstring the Drake until it can be properly balanced.
Gypsio III wrote: Current dual-BCS Caracal: 263 DPS kinetic, 210 non-kinetic, with CN to 120 km, 8.4 km/s missiles. Future triple-BCS Caracal: 252 DPS all damage types with CN to 90 km, 9 km/s missiles.
I'm glad to see the Caracal surviving the deserved HML Drake/Tengu nerf fine.
See how this works out nicely with the changes.
Thats the way to go! |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
114
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 16:11:00 -
[26] - Quote
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:OlRotGut wrote:If server load is what they are trying to curb then they need to increase the velocity of the missiles more than 6.66%
Of course this would effect range, so change the ammo types of all missiles to fall in line with the turrets.
Change the fitting requirements for the HAMS and HML's (Swap them)
Remove the Fury and Precision T2 ammo ship penalties Increase damage on Fury Increase damage and ability to hit smaller targets on Precision
Fury's range should be reduced, Precisions range increased. Again making it more in line with up close and powerful, longer range and weaker.
Remove the stupid Kinetic buff on the ships.
With the above changes you shouldn't have to muck with the DPS or range, just changing the ammo types alone to fall in line with turrets would fix everything.
actually, increase missile velocity and reduce flight time just enough to give them the same range, but missile boats never have more than one volley in the air at a time, no more waisted volleys for missiles, and missiles don't take forever to reach a distant target anymore, but still longer than instant turrets.
I am in favor for this also let them go faster plus if you do this with HAMS and rockets also it will look more like unguided missiles as they are blazing through the air. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
115
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 18:20:00 -
[27] - Quote
CCP stick with these nerfs the more people keep talking about DPS it just shows they have no concept of DPS at range as they think every other ship can have 400+ DPS out past 50K.
I am beginning to think the louder the cries the better this is for the game. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
115
|
Posted - 2012.09.20 18:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
CCP Please don't balance ships or weapons around LVL 4 PVE There are other ships you can use just because this ship is the best at it atm doesn't mean it isn't unbalanced. All this means is you don't want to lose your high ISK/H. You have time before winter train up HAMS and go run your LVL 4's no one is stopping you. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
116
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:29:00 -
[29] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:CCP Fozzie
Wouldn't it be smarter to make the Tracking enhancers and computers increase the missiles speed instead og flight time?
It's been known for a long time that many missiles in space is lag induceing, so a higher missile velocity would basicly = fewer missiles in space or missiles in space for a shorter time.
I think this would be a better solution as well. Here is my only concern with that idea path. Some ships like interceptors would get hit more often by missiles as they fly faster where as flight time does not change the damage or chance of catching said ships. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:35:00 -
[30] - Quote
I think people need to understand that the ships will be balanced with HM after the patch you just need to look at the new Caracal to see that they did a great job of balancing the ship around the HM nerf. With the other additions you will have more choices of Cal ships to fly. Lets keep an open mind about this. I think if CCP could get to BCs this patch and show that the Drake will come out ok people wouldn't be as up in arms about this.
CCP the new Caracal looks great cant wait to fly it. |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
117
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:38:00 -
[31] - Quote
Hannott Thanos wrote:HELLBOUNDMAN wrote: The drake doesn't have much capabilty to fit TCs if it wants to maintain EHP and still have web and scram.
I can see where this could be problematic.
Ever used turrets and ships with 3 mids?
A Drake also has 4 low slots. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:01:00 -
[32] - Quote
Hannott Thanos wrote:MIrple wrote:Hannott Thanos wrote:HELLBOUNDMAN wrote: The drake doesn't have much capabilty to fit TCs if it wants to maintain EHP and still have web and scram.
I can see where this could be problematic.
Ever used turrets and ships with 3 mids? A Drake also has 4 low slots. Which can all be used for damage mods. Imagine you had 20 km range and had to use lowslots for tank, dps and range mods. People who use Drakes are spoiled and are now brought in line with the rest of us. Welcome to the world of mortals
Sorry my point was the person above was complaining about not being able to fit a TC to a Drake I was pointing out that you can fit a suitcase 2 BCU and TE in the lows. I know how to fit ships sadly so I am not upset about these changes at all I welcome them with open arms. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:04:00 -
[33] - Quote
Shadalana wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote:Here are some raw numbers useful for understanding the proposed HML, beam laser and artillery changes:
250mm Railgun II with Spike: DPS: 20 Alpha: 92 Optimal: 65 km Falloff: 15 km Cap/sec: -1.1 PG: 187.2 CPU: 31.5
Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora: DPS: 21 Alpha: 91 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 10 km Cap/sec: -3.8 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 27.8
720mm Artillery II with Tremor: DPS: 17 Alpha: 242 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 22 km Cap/sec: 0 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 24
Heavy Missile Launcher II with Caldari Navy Scourge: DPS: 23 (previously 29) Alpha: 189 (previously 237) Range: 63 km (previously 84) Cap/sec: 0 PG: 94.5 CPU: 41.3
This is without any ship bonuses. My view on this is that a 25% range and a 20% dps nerf only seem ridiculous if one ignores just how much better HMLs were than other weapon systems. Maybe im blind, but i did the same in eft and i got really different values... o.O all numbers with AllV, without shipbonuses. also I compared only t2 missiles... ('cos no one uses faction-hm ammo in PvE) 250mm Railgun II with Spike: DPS: 20 Alpha: 92 Optimal: 65km Time to hit: instant Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora: DPS: 21 Alpha: 91 Optimal: 54km Time to hit: instant Heavy Missile Launcher II with Scourge Precision: DPS: 21 Alpha: 179 Reichweite: <42km Time to hit: 10 seconds 720mm Howitzer Artillery II with Tremor: DPS: 16 Alpha: 242 Optimal: 54km Time to hit: instant why I do not see any inbalance?
Is this a troll or are you a little slow today put in Fury or Faction ammo. Your using the shortest ranged missile in there. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 17:10:00 -
[34] - Quote
For everyone whining about how this will break missiles. You do know that there are more then 1 type of missile in the game currently correct. If your in a Drake or Tengue switch to HAMS. You have more then enough time to train this to V by Dec so you can use the T2 variety then. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 17:31:00 -
[35] - Quote
Miss Le NerfSxBye wrote:Onictus wrote:[quote=Miss Le NerfSxBye][quote=Lallante][quote=Daniel Plain]
Right about 400 dps, you can still get 2 BCSs with that build.
What build lets a Drake hit at 100k? I missed that one somewhere.
Put a rig on it and you can do this
[Drake, 100K Drake]
Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Capacitor Power Relay II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction EM Ward Field II Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile [Empty High slot]
Medium Hydraulic Bay Thrusters I Medium Rocket Fuel Cache Partition I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
hits out to 108 and can target to 120
~360 Dps 75k tank |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 17:32:00 -
[36] - Quote
Miss Le NerfSxBye wrote:MIrple wrote:For everyone whining about how this will break missiles. You do know that there are more then 1 type of missile in the game currently correct. If your in a Drake or Tengue switch to HAMS. You have more then enough time to train this to V by Dec so you can use the T2 variety then. LOL HAMS maybe if they let guided missile precision work on unguided missiles they would be useful. I remember my main being ripped a new one by a Ninja (Rifter) while flying a heavy fit Caracal. When they have a skill that gives you the chance to do more damage with one weapon system over nix on another which weapon system would you use?
This will be where TE or TC come into play. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
119
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 18:10:00 -
[37] - Quote
Miss Le NerfSxBye wrote:@ Bluotok and @Mirple.
Thanks for that fit, I seem to be having some issues quoting here. I'd never considered rigs other than extenders or em/therm (brainwashed into more tank, more tank). I could see how these would be annoying.
@Mirple But my point is I've always preferred HML over HAM because of the guided missile precision skill. HAM's being not that good against frigs etc I'd assume other people would have this perception as well and would this not be adding to the imbalance between HAM and HML use?
Yes, I agree that the close ranged weapon system should be better at hitting smaller faster targets. I hope with all the posts the DEVS take a look at this and adjust as needed either by changing the missiles themselves or allowing the skills and rigs to effect both types of missile systems. You also do realize that after these changes that the TE and TC will also give you a bonus to your explosion radius/explosion velocity so this will help the unguided missile greatly.
I have said this before until we can get actual numbers on the other changes that will also go along with the HML nerf we cannot give solid accurate feedback on the entire idea.
I do feel that there should be a change to the fitting of HAMS and HML so it goes more in line with the rest of the weapon systems and there should also be a change in how Rage and Precision Missiles work. Also a slight buff to HAM damage would also not be that far out of line.
With these small changes I think that after people get out of the brainwashed mindset of HML are the only launches I can fit to a Drake or Tengue. This will be a great balancing undertaking. If you want to see proof of this just look at the new Caracal and see how well it works with the changes. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
120
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 18:39:00 -
[38] - Quote
Soon Shin wrote:Also we must make two different modules for weapon disruptors.
One for Turrets.
Another for Missiles.
This will ensure that players will have to think and choose.
Akin to having Racial ECM.
This will ensure that TD will not become overpowered and a module that everyone uses as a GOD module that affects all dps ships with a change of a script.
Could we take this further and say make 4 TD they would essentially be tracking, optimal, falloff, flight time and then have an omni one that does all of this at a reduced amount. This would make it more like ECM and this could be a good thing as more thought is always better in a game. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
121
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 17:23:00 -
[39] - Quote
TriadSte wrote:All im gonna say is this:
Agreeing with an above poster when he states you should rebalance battlecruisers before you rebalance missiles.
If you rebalance HMLs BEFORE battlecruisers, the Drake will be capable of about 200 DPS..Lets open EFT
490 DPS Drake [all lvl5 skills no implants]
4xT2 BCU 7xT2 HML launcher w/Scourge Fury
If we take off the proposed 25% DPS we go down to 367.5 DPS; Bear in mind this is with Scourge Fury, it's BONUSED for this damage type missile. Yeah nobody uses kinetic missiles really, I would guess that EM are used most? So lets bang some T2 Mjol Fury and see the DPS..
As it is now it would pump 392 DPS minus the proposed 25% DPS nerf and that gives us a staggering 294 DPS will all lvl5 skills..
ALL LVL5 SKILLS WITH 7 PERFECTLY SKILLED HML LAUNCHERS ----- 294 DPS
CCP - seriously? your going to do this?
Good Job at trying to make this look as bad as possible with the numbers you have given. Also it is 20% nerf not 25%. Next point HML are long range attack weapons. If you want to post how about putting hams on there and fight close range like the rest of the races have to or are you like the rest of the people and think that only HML can be fit to medium sized ships.
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
121
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 17:40:00 -
[40] - Quote
TriadSte wrote:MIrple wrote:TriadSte wrote:All im gonna say is this:
Agreeing with an above poster when he states you should rebalance battlecruisers before you rebalance missiles.
If you rebalance HMLs BEFORE battlecruisers, the Drake will be capable of about 200 DPS..Lets open EFT
490 DPS Drake [all lvl5 skills no implants]
4xT2 BCU 7xT2 HML launcher w/Scourge Fury
If we take off the proposed 25% DPS we go down to 367.5 DPS; Bear in mind this is with Scourge Fury, it's BONUSED for this damage type missile. Yeah nobody uses kinetic missiles really, I would guess that EM are used most? So lets bang some T2 Mjol Fury and see the DPS..
As it is now it would pump 392 DPS minus the proposed 25% DPS nerf and that gives us a staggering 294 DPS will all lvl5 skills..
ALL LVL5 SKILLS WITH 7 PERFECTLY SKILLED HML LAUNCHERS ----- 294 DPS
CCP - seriously? your going to do this?
Good Job at trying to make this look as bad as possible with the numbers you have given. Also it is 20% nerf not 25%. Next point HML are long range attack weapons. If you want to post how about putting hams on there and fight close range like the rest of the races have to or are you like the rest of the people and think that only HML can be fit to medium sized ships.
No I am quite simply taking what CCP du*ba*s said and ripping it to shreds. The argument is that the nerf is to bring HMLs in line with all other long range weapons. That argument is flawed and utter BS because an Oracle can get 650 DPS easily at 75km A Tornado can easily get 650 DPS at 75km Yes I realise I'm using BS weapons but its valid because these ships are the same ship class as a Drake. The argument is for long range weapons so again I'm quite valid to argue the HML nerf will be a large death knoll for many players. Numbers do not lie and even if it is a 20% nerf and not the 25% I thought in my previous post another 5% isnt going to make HMLs a valid weapon for ANYBODY. alot of players don't have lvl5 skills so those numbers are going to be even worse.
And the Naga can get 750 at 86k so should we nerf it cause it gets 100 more dps at 10k longer? |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
121
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 17:49:00 -
[41] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:If you're going to have TE and TC affect missiles ala turrets then why not go Full Monty and have short range ammo and long range ammo like the turrets as well?
I think this will happen when they change the precision and fury missiles. If you are asking for T1 I would be ok with that also. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
122
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 19:25:00 -
[42] - Quote
Miss Le NerfSxBye wrote:Zarnak Wulf wrote:If you're going to have TE and TC affect missiles ala turrets then why not go Full Monty and have short range ammo and long range ammo like the turrets as well? ^This, why not have tech 1 short range high damage and long range low damage versions of missiles?
The only thing I can see why this wouldn't work is because you don't have windows where your missiles will not hit. If you are using long range ammo in a gun you can get under there tracking and not take any damage. With missiles you can not do this. I really think people just need to be patient for the changes to be updated or for solid numbers to be giving on all the changes that are going to happen with missiles. We are still 2 months out and they already got cruisers into the mix. Maybe they will get battle cruisers in as well as they are seeing that they cannot properly fix the weapon systems without changing the hulls. Lets wait and see I am fully behind the ideas 100% and cant wait to see what all comes about from this. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 19:48:00 -
[43] - Quote
CCP Foozie I understand you guys are taking on a huge project already, but with the changes coming is there any chance you might get around to BC this patch. I think that would make most of the arguments in this thread stop. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.24 20:48:00 -
[44] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:MIrple wrote:CCP Foozie I understand you guys are taking on a huge project already, but with the changes coming is there any chance you might get around to BC this patch. I think that would make most of the arguments in this thread stop. I would absolutely love to, but there's no way we'd be able to get them done for this release. Out of curiosity what exactly are you guys hoping you'd see from a BC balance pass that would change your opinion of this missile proposal? The Drake has a fine set of bonuses so once heavy missiles are balanced I don't expect I'd want to change it very drastically. If I was to find the time by some miracle to skip ahead and fix another few ships along with this pass it would be the Nighthawk and Cerb, not the Drake.
I agree that if you find time those should be fixed ahead of the drake. I think changing the Kin bonus to a ROF bonus or Damage bonus would be better for the drake. As this seams to be the line of thinking with the changes to the Caldari line.
Another thing that has been brought up is the fact that HAMS are harder to fit then HML has there been any talk about swapping this or reducing the PG/CPU of the HAMS? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 14:32:00 -
[45] - Quote
CCP Foozie,
You had asked about Ideas for changes I think for the NH if you give it a 7th launcher and the PG to fit it. With the numbers I just came up with it would do 438 DPS at 55K plus what ever the TE give it with HML. I would change the kinetic bonus to a 5% damage bonus and 5% bonus to heavy missile and heavy assault missile explosion velocity per level. With this fitting you lose 32 DPS over the old fitting but when you change to HAMS and this is where this ship should shine as it would do 616 DPS at about 24k with TE I think this would bring it inline with other command ships although this thing can have a godly tank EFT ~118k. Below is the fitting for you to look at.
[Nighthawk, Fleet NH]
Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Tracking Enhancer II Reactor Control Unit II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II EM Ward Field II Warp Disruptor II Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Warrior II x5
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 14:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:[quote=DR BiCarbonate]*looks at eve-kill stats*
Pirate - 1 Caldari - 3 Amarr - 3 Gallente - 2
Hurricane, Tornado, Maelstrom, Loki, Thrasher, Hound, Rifter, Huginn, Scimitar, Stabber Fleet Issue, Sabre....yeah...Drakes need a nerf. Lol
Its a good think nothing on the drake has changed only the HML has changed so not sure how you are saying the drake has changed in any way. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 16:49:00 -
[47] - Quote
Terik Deatharbingr wrote:MIrple wrote:Terik Deatharbingr wrote:[quote=DR BiCarbonate]*looks at eve-kill stats*
Pirate - 1 Caldari - 3 Amarr - 3 Gallente - 2
Hurricane, Tornado, Maelstrom, Loki, Thrasher, Hound, Rifter, Huginn, Scimitar, Stabber Fleet Issue, Sabre....yeah...Drakes need a nerf. Lol
Its a good think nothing on the drake has changed only the HML has changed so not sure how you are saying the drake has changed in any way. Oh wow....let's grab your hand....The HML will affect 2 ships more than anything....the Drake and the Tengu, 66% of caldari PVP ships in this list here....If you were to alter projectile turrets...are you not changing the ships that fit them? Here's why I don't understand...if, in fact, the drake is so OP, why, as an Amarr/Caldari pilot, am I wishing I was minmatar instead?? Why don't these guys crying it's so OP fly drakes instead?? Why is the HML, drake and tengu so op, when 11 of the top 20 ships on this kill board are, in fact, Minmatar? To truly "balance" this....would a nerf to the Volley of arty's and increasing it's RoF be just as much a work toward's the "balance" they so desire?
Guess what I fly Drakes and I am for this change. If you cant figure out that HAMS are the short ranged versions I cant help you either. If you want to argue that HAMS need to have there fitting requirements changed to make them easier to fit to be more in line with other weapon systems I am for that. To say that a ship is now worthless because of a change to HML is just silly. Yes more people are flying Matari at the moment but there can be more factors into this then just there guns. It comes more down to the fact that they are to easier to fit then other races. Cane is getting a change. Hound and Huginn are missile ships also Scimi doesn't shoot anything. So while yes there are a few missile ships its not Projectiles that are the issue. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 20:28:00 -
[48] - Quote
Athina Alarei wrote:Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine? (Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability)
Train now for HAMS and you will be probably better then you were before. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 20:41:00 -
[49] - Quote
Athina Alarei wrote:MIrple wrote:Athina Alarei wrote:Are you saying my newly acquired Tengu mission beasting machine is no longer going to be a mission beasting machine? (Legitimate question, I'm wondering how hard this is going to hit the Tengu lvl 4 mission capability) Train now for HAMS and you will be probably better then you were before. I literally JUST finished HM spec lvl 3 :( lol
This will not come out till Mid December so you have plenty of time to train for HAMS if/when you need to. Think it is only 15 day train for level 5. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
123
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 13:31:00 -
[50] - Quote
Lallante wrote:Rel'k Bloodlor wrote:Well I think the nerf to HML damage is to high, because it then leaves the other med weapons in line with it one the're for the most part bad. HML down 10% and rails, arty, and beams up 10% would be better. This is a good point. Lets see what the changes to the various rail/arty/beam platforms do and then consider raising all med long range weapons across the board however. Its not obvious that a drake with 20% less dps will be a bad ship, especially if it uses tracking enhancers to get range back and hit smaller ships harder. Quote: And well your at it have a look at hams I like them but it already takes a scram and two webs to make them work (this being the other thing that makes as is HML the favored) I would like to use them more but most ships don't have enuff slots to make them work(well and have any tank at all)
Same answer - Tracking Enhancers will be a MASSIVE HAM boost. Lets see how big before we call for more boost. There is a reasonable argument for a reduction in HAM powergrid however. Quote: As for TD's it will have to be 2 mods or it will be busted, like if ECM was just a script for type weapon busted. Come on it's only fair, ECM is typed, warp disruption is typed, cap war is typed, the only ones that are not are TP's and webb's the the two that stack on each other to nerf defense.
Possibly a reasonable argument, but only if the specialised TD platforms get an extra midslot because at the moment its hard to fit more than 1 TD, let alone also another mod.
In my opinion adding an extra mid is a bad idea. As this would make the Curse or Pilgram a nasty shield tanked ship. I would be more in favor of moving ECM, TD, SD and TP to High slots. But I am not sure this would work either. |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
124
|
Posted - 2012.09.27 14:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
Man I thought miners were bad when they were calling for a buff to Exhumers. Then I thought the gankers were bad when they were all up in arms about the buff the mining ships were getting.
If you mess with HML the people come out of the wood work to proclaim the end of an entire race. This is good stuff.
Sorry I just had to say it. :)
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
127
|
Posted - 2012.09.27 18:49:00 -
[52] - Quote
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Missiles aren't the only weapon system in game. It's not even the only weapon system for pure Caldari pilots.
Around 50% of Caldari ships use hybrid turrets.
And of all those ships only good combat ones are Merlin, Harpy, Rokh and Naga, latter 2 unsuble in PvE and work only in specific formats in 0.0 blobs.
My PVE Naga would like to have a word about being unusable. Just because you cant use it doesn't mean it can not be used. I dont use it but I would be the Rohk would be a pretty good lvl 4 boat with the hybrid buff esp when it is able to project null out to ~60k. Here let me EFT a quick fit that would work in missions. Now no it is not cap stable but I never run cap stable in shield fits as I can pulse the booster.
[Rokh, lvl 4 mission]
Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II
Thermic Dissipation Field II Thermic Dissipation Field II Kinetic Deflection Field II X-Large Shield Booster II Shield Boost Amplifier II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Null L
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
127
|
Posted - 2012.09.27 19:10:00 -
[53] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:[quote=MIrple][quote=Sinigr Shadowsong][quote=Jorma Morkkis]
A mission fit with 25km optimal with longest range ammo and no prop mod? I see what you did there ..
I never fit a prop mod on my lvl 4 runners
And yet 25k optimal 28k fall off ask Mimitar pilots if they ever fight in optimal or always in fall off. Hell even the Kronos always fights in fall off its not at bad as you think. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
127
|
Posted - 2012.09.27 19:19:00 -
[54] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:A mission fit with 25km optimal with longest range ammo and no prop mod? I see what you did there ..
Mach has 4,23km optimal but it is one of the best L4 mission ships...
I think because it disproves their point it does not work or isn't relevant. Caldari have 2 weapon systems just like the other races Missiles and Hybrids. Because people chose not to train for one side they believe that Caldari are only a missile based race. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 13:30:00 -
[55] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Hannott Thanos wrote:I think you have to note what turrets "simply do better". Turrets instant alpha better, but they have less versatility in forms of damage types. They hit small targets better, but only if they are at sufficient range and not moving too fast. Oh yes. But what I don't understand is why when the problem is HML/two hulls and those are already being fixed (albeit in a bit of a cack handed manner) why then we lump a nerf on other missile hulls. I don't think there's much argument that, other than drake/tengu, missile hulls are pretty much bottom of the heap in PvP. Whilst SNI owners will jump for joy at TC/TE helping them apply PvE damage, the PvP implications of this change are a) Significant and b) Just not needed at this stage (unless I'm missing something?). Fair enough, later apply equality and have the ships affected by it and add slots to allow counters thus remaining 'neutral' but now? Before the already sub-par boats are balanced? I genuinely don't understand it.
What are the other Hulls that as you feel are being nerfed by this change. The Caracal after the patch will do more DPS with the other 3 missile types then in currently can. The others from my understanding have not been balanced yet and CCP Foozie said he would look into fixing the Cerb and NH if he has time this patch. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 14:04:00 -
[56] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:MIrple wrote: What are the other Hulls that as you feel are being nerfed by this change. The Caracal after the patch will do more DPS with the other 3 missile types then in currently can. The others from my understanding have not been balanced yet and CCP Foozie said he would look into fixing the Cerb and NH if he has time this patch.
Every. Single. Missile. Hull. Ever. They're going to HAVE to fit a TC/TE or lose DPS. If they fit TC/TE, they WILL lose EHP. The introduction of TD affecting all missiles (even going to far as to affect unguided when the rigs dont work on them) is a direct and immediate reduction in combat effectiveness to ALL missile hulls. As for the caracal, it'll have to use its two bonus slots to keep at/just under todays DPS, which last I checked isn't blowing anyone's minds.
If you looked the Caracal got a CPU buff and 2 additional low slots on it to add the BCU to bring it back to the current lvl of DPS and the other to add a TE. So yes they are infact balancing missile ships around the proposed nerf. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 14:16:00 -
[57] - Quote
Bloutok wrote:MIrple wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:MIrple wrote: What are the other Hulls that as you feel are being nerfed by this change. The Caracal after the patch will do more DPS with the other 3 missile types then in currently can. The others from my understanding have not been balanced yet and CCP Foozie said he would look into fixing the Cerb and NH if he has time this patch.
Every. Single. Missile. Hull. Ever. They're going to HAVE to fit a TC/TE or lose DPS. If they fit TC/TE, they WILL lose EHP. The introduction of TD affecting all missiles (even going to far as to affect unguided when the rigs dont work on them) is a direct and immediate reduction in combat effectiveness to ALL missile hulls. As for the caracal, it'll have to use its two bonus slots to keep at/just under todays DPS, which last I checked isn't blowing anyone's minds. If you looked the Caracal got a CPU buff and 2 additional low slots on it to add the BCU to bring it back to the current lvl of DPS and the other to add a TE. So yes they are infact balancing missile ships around the proposed nerf. Yes, the Caracal is going from bad to bad....... Is the Caracal the only cruiser getting a buff ?
If you look at the 4 attack cruisers the Caracal and the Thorax will be the 2 ships that shine after the changes. The stabber will likely be a heavy tackler and the omen is still up in the air.
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 14:50:00 -
[58] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:Doddy wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:
oh btw: the SNIs damage is about half of what a pimped machariel can bring and no amount of tracking will get it even to comparable levels.
Why would it have comparable levels of dps to a double damage bonused pirate faction ship? Do you even know what you are saying? because most other faction battleships do.
Stop comparing Faction BS to Pirate BS for one. Show me a Faction BS that gets a double damage bonus.
Edit: The Navy Tempest does get a Double Damage bonus but the other to the typhoon and the domi have a split damage bonus. So I will agree that the Tempest does have it but the others do not. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 15:09:00 -
[59] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:MIrple wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Doddy wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:
oh btw: the SNIs damage is about half of what a pimped machariel can bring and no amount of tracking will get it even to comparable levels.
Why would it have comparable levels of dps to a double damage bonused pirate faction ship? Do you even know what you are saying? because most other faction battleships do. Stop comparing Faction BS to Pirate BS for one. Show me a Faction BS that gets a double damage bonus. Edit: The Navy Tempest does get a Double Damage bonus but the other to the typhoon and the domi have a split damage bonus. So I will agree that the Tempest does have it but the others do not. why would i stop comparing them? they are often used for the same tasks, so comparing them is perfectly reasonable. also, i couldn't care less which ship has which bonus. the fact of the matter is that most faction battleships can be fit to run decent dps whereas the scorpion can't. and tracking enhancers won't do anything to change that.
Possibly because Pirate BS are meant to be better then Faction BS. CCP has stated this. So this is the reason you should not be comparing the two types. I can fit out a SNI to deal around 980 DPS and this inst enough for you. What is your definition of decent DPS? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 15:33:00 -
[60] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:Doddy wrote:I don't see why you can't understand how you need to balance the weapon systems before the ships that use them. Its the weapon that is broken. If you just nerf the drake everyone will just use something else.
i don't see why you would need to 'balance' HML damage when they are not in direct competition with other weapon systems. no one ever has the choice between fitting HMLs and turrets on the same hull (except maybe some weird loki fits), so there is no reason to change the weapon system at all. just take the ships that fly with HMLs and balance them against the ships that don't. it's even easier than changing both sides of the equation at the same time. and on top of that, tell me one good reason to nerf all HML platforms, even the weaker ones and then leave them in that sorry state for months or years, before fixing them eventually. i also strongly disagree with your claim that people would just step down to other HML ships. without the awesome properties of the drakegu, there is hardly any reason to pick missiles over turrets, at least in pvp. the arty sleipnir DESTROYS the nighthawk, and all other hulls are outclassed by the other races' counterparts.
The Huginn, Lachesis, New Stabber, would like to say differently about not having missile/gun set ups |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
129
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 15:41:00 -
[61] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:MIrple wrote: Possibly because Pirate BS are meant to be better then Faction BS. CCP has stated this. So this is the reason you should not be comparing the two types. I can fit out a SNI to deal around 980 DPS and this inst enough for you. What is your definition of decent DPS?
well no **** sherlock. just because one is better than the other does not mean i can't compare them. also you conveniently skipped my point: most other faction battleships can come close to the mach's dps whereas the scorpion can't, unless you are an EFT warrior and fit something no one would ever use (which apparently you did).
If one ship is better then the other you can compare them just don't be surprised that they weaker ship is still weaker. Now if you compare the Rattlesnake to the Mach I am sure the damage is much closer and this uses missile and drones. If you want to argue that there is a need of a Pirate missile ship I will agree but I don't agree with comparing a Faction battle ship T1 also to a Pirate one that some might say is OP. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
132
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 18:11:00 -
[62] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:Also, does this essentially make guided missiles longer range short range weapons now.
I mean, I'm a little lost on this.
There's no buff to precision range, but a massive nerf to fury range putting it less than precision, which means that guided missiles will be doing less that 65km with both precision and fury.
Or again, did I miss something? please make us a pretty picture that shows the changes maybe with different colours and lines going up and down please :P
I think what you are asking for is a graph. :) Everyone in EVE loves graphs please post one if you can. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
132
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 18:27:00 -
[63] - Quote
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:Are we trying to make precision the long range ammo, or are we trying to make t1/navy long range ammo with fury in last and precision in 3rd I guess is what I'm asking
I agree I think more people would be happier if they just got rid of Fury and Precision and had Rage and Javelin. It would keep things more uniform and that way all missile launchers would have a short ranged hi damage, mid range mid damage, and long range low damage. Yes people will say you are dumbing down EVE but this would make people happy and very easy to understand. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
132
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 18:30:00 -
[64] - Quote
Leskit wrote:After reading the first 10 pages of this "thread", here are the common complaints and possible fixes: 20% damage reduction is too much, start with 10%. many complaints about the TD/TC/TE affects, but just as many like the new range/'tracking' bonus. Possible solutions: Switch the cpu/PG requirements for HAMs and HM's...so the long range weapons have the higher pg cost. THAT might be a better fix than anything else. Fitting a 6 HAM tengu requires fitting mods and/or a gimped tank, same for a Cerberus. either hams w/ tank, no tackle, or hams+tackle, no tank (though only a little experience in that realm). However, the nightwawk will definitly need a large PG boost, and the cerb will probably need a smallish-medium ish pg boost as well. I think swapping the PG/CPU fitting for HAMs and HM's would be just as controversial, but more in-line with other weapon systems. Also, target painters help out missile and turret ships, that's probably why CCP is applying the TD/TC/TE to missiles now. Thinking about it that way makes sense game-wise, if not common-sense wise. I think the prevalent use of the drake+tengu is much more a problem of the Caldari race: they don't have any battlehips that are as good as a tengu. When cruise missiles and torps aren't just blatantly laughed at, then Caldari pilots will have more to rely on than just a tengu and drake Also, 5% reduction in HM damage, 5-7% boost to HAM damage, possibly bonus to explosion velocity (better tracking, like close-range guns). Might actually see the sacrelige more than once a year that way. TL;DR: swap PG/CPU req's for Hams and HM's, it might be a better way than just nerf-hammering a single weapon system. Not an end-all, be-all, but might work better than the large headache that's threatening to show up in December.
You are 2 weeks behind. Please reread the OP changes have been made. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
132
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 18:32:00 -
[65] - Quote
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:Also, as far as the removal of tc/te/td working for missiles.
Even though this is a good and bad thing for missile pilots, I'd like to see this remain this patch so we can get used to them.
what I mean by this is, should I be replacing my target painters with tcs, or what
I would also like to keep TC/TE in this patch. Its better to just rip the band aid off then pull it slowly. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
132
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 19:51:00 -
[66] - Quote
With the changes put forward I think just changing the command skills from
Command Ships Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to heavy missile Kinetic damage and 5% bonus to heavy missile explosion velocity per level
To
Command Ships Skill Bonus: 10% Missile Velocity and 5% bonus to explosion velocity per level to all medium sized missiles. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
142
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 18:33:00 -
[67] - Quote
MotorBoatMe WithYourFace wrote:To Fozzie:
Is there any way we could get just a small adjustment to Torpedo range during this pass? I think a buff to flight time or velocity to make them around 15%-25% longer range is in order.
I would also suggest a nerf to Cruise range. Out of the box they seem a tad too long and may start having some of the same problems as Heavies did. -20ish percent drop should be good.
You do realize that Short ranged weapons means short ranged right? I would say Pulses need there range reduce a little but other then that all other ships are similar with there based ranged ammo.
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
150
|
Posted - 2012.10.17 19:48:00 -
[68] - Quote
Ellen Stavinski wrote:I was loving this game...but I am not happy with the way that you are doing the nerf...
Nerfing heavy missiles instead of ships is bad approach imo...
I am saying that since I am a quite new player who has picked up Caldari, shield tanking and heavy missiles as primary...
Finally after 6 months of training ships tree, shields, missiles I have reach my Nighthawk !...
DPS in this ship is good but not so good enough like in others...basically I am trying to say that if you going to nerf HM there are no option for me = cant jump quickly to anything else, and donGÇÖt want to pickup anything where I will spend another few months of training...
I will give a try...Heavy assault ?!
before you make any changes please consider
I can see that upcoming changes in HM are most welcome, But I am sure there will be lots unhappy like I am...
If nerf will affected me to much going to cancel subscription....
You need to fix the weapon before you can balance ships around it. Look at the Caracal for proof. I know it sucks to finally get into a ship and then see it nerfed. I bet CCP Foozie fixes the NH this time around but if not train for HAM and wait for the next round of balancing. It will all work out in the end. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
150
|
Posted - 2012.10.17 20:43:00 -
[69] - Quote
Crazy Nymphora wrote:
How long do you think it would take them to actually balance ships after screwing up their weapon system? I'm quite new to this game so I don't know, but my friend said it usually takes CCP 6 years to actually "fix" things they broke. I don't think many people are happy to wait that long for their beloved stuff to get fixed.
What if we ask for a bit of Drake/Tengu/Nighthawk buff on DPS/Range to balance it because the nerf was too much? Obviously CCP won't listen and trolls will troll.
That's what we get, Ellen Stavinski. If you don't like it, I'd honestly recommend you to quit, don't listen to those trolls, they will say something like "don't cry, quit already, no one cares", they only are trying to hold you back from quitting so you can feed them more.
Don't pay for something you don't enjoy and don't feed the trolls.
The old CCP would take 6 years to fix this. The new CCP I would say by the next expansion. You do not need a DPS/Range buff on the Drake/Tengue/Nighthawk you need to understand that HM are a long range weapon system and need to be treated as such. There have been countless post about how with the changes they are now inline with other medium long range weapon systems. Switch to HAMS on the Drake and Tengue if you want higher Damage. The Nighthawk needs some love the Cerb does to but that is known and on the radar. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:15:00 -
[70] - Quote
Apteko wrote:Quote:With guns it's a different story: To use T2 large autocannons you have to train T2 small autocannons and T2 medium autocannons. To use T2 large artillery you have to train T2 small artillery and T2 medium artillery. Yeah. It's done, cuz there is just a few ships using torps as main wep, ofc. Else it will be just waste of skillpoints. There is nothing "imbalance" or even "good" in it: you gain less variety of ships for less points spend. And skills, that have any influence on your weapon system effectiveness, are totally the same.
Torps can be used on Stealth bombs, Battleships. so 4 SB plus Typhoon, Widow, Raven, Scorp NI, Rattlesnake so That is 11 Ships right there so how is this just a few? |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:20:00 -
[71] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:MIrple wrote:Apteko wrote:Quote:With guns it's a different story: To use T2 large autocannons you have to train T2 small autocannons and T2 medium autocannons. To use T2 large artillery you have to train T2 small artillery and T2 medium artillery. Yeah. It's done, cuz there is just a few ships using torps as main wep, ofc. Else it will be just waste of skillpoints. There is nothing "imbalance" or even "good" in it: you gain less variety of ships for less points spend. And skills, that have any influence on your weapon system effectiveness, are totally the same. Torps can be used on Stealth bombs, Battleships. so 4 SB plus Typhoon, Widow, Raven, Scorp NI, Rattlesnake so That is 11 Ships right there so how is this just a few? The SBs use torps, indeed. Most of them dont seem to use t2 launchers though, according to eve-kill .. And the Phoon is in this list the only really viable PvP combat BS. Its not Caldari, ofc ... Scorp is not there for its Torps, nor is Widow.
I didnt put Scorp on the list be you could add that as well as I only posted the CN Scorp. While I agree they are not there to use these they are still there main weapon system as they do have a bonus to them. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 17:23:00 -
[72] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:MIrple wrote:Apteko wrote:Quote:With guns it's a different story: To use T2 large autocannons you have to train T2 small autocannons and T2 medium autocannons. To use T2 large artillery you have to train T2 small artillery and T2 medium artillery. Yeah. It's done, cuz there is just a few ships using torps as main wep, ofc. Else it will be just waste of skillpoints. There is nothing "imbalance" or even "good" in it: you gain less variety of ships for less points spend. And skills, that have any influence on your weapon system effectiveness, are totally the same. Torps can be used on Stealth bombs, Battleships. so 4 SB plus Typhoon, Widow, Raven, Scorp NI, Rattlesnake so That is 11 Ships right there so how is this just a few? The SBs use torps, indeed. Most of them dont seem to use t2 launchers though, according to eve-kill .. And the Phoon is in this list the only really viable PvP combat BS. Its not Caldari, ofc ... Scorp is not there for its Torps, nor is Widow. SB's don't have enough cpu for T2 torps beside some manticore fits really depends what you sacrifice
While I agree with the fact that SB are limited on their CPU they still fit torp launchers and I was responding to someone who stated that torps are not used on many ships.
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 18:53:00 -
[73] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:and I fail to see the gallente Cruise Missile, Heavy Missile and HAM ships That you do indeed. Lachesis - Gallente T2 cruiser, combat recon
You might as well argue politics or religion with Niom she has dug her feet in and no matter what points you provide she will not budge from her sky is falling soap box stance. Rockets, HAMS and Torp are getting buffed after the patch that is plain as day as a whole skill will now apply to them. How she will not admit that this will help them I don't know. Just talk to the others in this thread that have a good head about them. All will be fine |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 18:56:00 -
[74] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:and I fail to see the gallente Cruise Missile, Heavy Missile and HAM ships That you do indeed. Lachesis - Gallente T2 cruiser, combat recon You should 1) learn to quote, 2) post your combat alt, 3) show how the Lachesis is of any significance for this matter here. I really hope you dont come back before you did that all. for 1) a little helper: Noemi Nagano wrote: and I fail to see the gallente Cruise Missile, Heavy Missile and HAM ships which play a big role in PvP ;)
and yes, that was edited. But way before you posted ..
Please post your combat alt as well as Eve Kill does not have any stats on you |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:17:00 -
[75] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:
I did way before in this thread. I wont do all the work for you if you join late and dont do the job :) I posted one, although that one was more of a Winmatar toon. I already mentioned I am not personally affected by this missile thing, my other toon which I used for a while in lowsec PvP with mostly Drakes is inactive, found Winmatar to be much more fun. I can just switch. Still this is not good for a game IMO, if balance is one OP race and all others have to see what they can do .. and a signature weapon system like missiles should be represented in PvP. Atm it is, due to HML in Drakes. I feel like this will change, and I dont see it will for the better.
Btw, I never said GMP applying to Torps, HAMs and Rockets is bad. I said they will IMO need more than that to actually perform well in the ships Caldari have. Besides some soft stats received a NERF in those plans, for example explosion velo and radius and range ... you should study the spreadsheet and understand what those numbers mean.
Please don't insult me I does nothing for making your case it only makes you look little and petty. I have looked at the numbers. Yet the Rage are getting a change to Exp radius and velocity. Sorry I have not read every post in this thread I have read most of it though.
When the changes hit the test server we can take a look at how these changes will effect the game as that will be the best data not spreadsheets. If you have read this whole thread naught you would have seen countless people debunk the EFT warriors.
So please be civil in her and wait for the changes to hit SISI |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:22:00 -
[76] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:Lili Lu wrote:But Noemi, what exactly is your definition of "working"? No turret in the game can be used universally to kill any size ship at any distance within it's max range. That is what people were doing or at least trying to do with HMs, especially in pve.
Turret users quickly get used to knowing that their guns won't be able to do this mo matter what size, range, or tracking they have. They know they have to rely on neuts, drones, smartbombs, or some ew to try to fill in gaps and even then there will be some situations where they are without a counter.
Meanwhile I think HM users got spoiled. If it's a big ship hit it with Fury. If it's a small ship hit it with precision. And when neither of those are doing enough then try faction HMs. It seems from many posts I read on S&M too many people complain about their missiles not doing enough damage to small or fast targets, and forget they have a dronebay which is for that. Or forget they can fit a neut in a high (and that almost always demands some fitting adjustments usually for grid no matter what the ship, except for ac hurricanes which is being addressed in the op, lol). Or forget they could fit a smarty if they concerned about drone attacks. Or maybe I should fit a web or TD or such in a mid that will aide the ability of my missiles to hit something they can't take out very fast or at least keep the target from doing much harm to me.
Working is relative term. If the definition of working for you is to have something operate like HMs have been, forget it. That won't happen, or at least shouldn't happen again in the game. I said that before, but will repeat again. Is, in your opinion, using HAMs, Torps (in BS) and Cruises atm a viable way if you want to be competitive in PvP? If you answer with yes (which I really doubt you will), then please name which ships, fittings and environments you have in mind. We could go into detail there then. And I am pretty sure it will be easy to find gunnery ships, which will do the job much better, and apart from that also do other jobs. With "working" I mean "being competitive, if you chose to fit this system". Nothing more, but also nothing less. It has been pointed out before (and numerous times!) how the Drake can hardly be gamebreaking OP, because else everyone in lowsec would fly it (which is not happening). The HML/Drake is working in a role. And, agreed, no other medium gunnery ship is as good as the Drake in this role. But - there are tons of roles in this game, and looking just at medium and large ships and leaving ECM out I see no Caldari missile ship as top in any of them. Caldari rule with ECM, they are good in frigfights nowadays (was different for very long) and they dont completely suck in PvE, although others are better for quite a while now. And they have the Drake for medium/long range battles. Thats it for those who want to use missiles and Caldari. Dont you see the difference to other races yourself?
As most Caldari have not trained up gunnery skills they are missing out on 2 fine ships at the moment the Naga and the Rohk. These ships will start to appear more and more in the tops ships as people get the required skills to use them. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:27:00 -
[77] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:Is, in your opinion, using HAMs, Torps (in BS) and Cruises atm a viable way if you want to be competitive in PvP? HAM Tengu HAM Legion Sacrilege SBs Typhoon
To be fair to Noemi
I have never seen a Sac gang. Does this happen in low-sec? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 19:51:00 -
[78] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:
To be fair, I said before the only viable Torp BS atm is the Phoon, although I dont think its actually great because of the Torps, but because the rest is so good even with Torps it does not suck. But ok, I can accept the Phoon answer. As will everyone hopefully accept the fact the Phoon is not exactly a Caldari ship.
In my posting I furthermore asked for "Torps (in BS)" which somehow makes "SBs" not a really smart answer. HAM t3s might be ok, didnt see them rolling too much though, and for sure not in real numbers. They also have a price-tag. Sacrilege I never saw owning when I spent most of my time in lowsec. In one week I have a bit more time and might be more active, so will report if I see any changes. Apart from that, the Sacrilege is also a bit un-caldari in my opinion ...
So we end up with 1 Caldari t3, 1 Winmatar BS, and 2 Amarr ships (t2 and t3) which are viable missile PvP ships in the opinion of some. Which does not really seem to object my first statement .. :)
How would you fix Torps/Cruise. In my mind they should be similar to how Artys work slow cycle time Very High Alpha. Cruise missiles need to have there flight speed increased and there flight time nerfed.
I think one other point that needs to be made is although Cadari do have missile ships they have an even slit that favors hybrids over missile based ships. This could have changes with the new patch though. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
153
|
Posted - 2012.10.19 20:16:00 -
[79] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:MIrple wrote: How would you fix Torps/Cruise. In my mind they should be similar to how Artys work slow cycle time Very High Alpha. Cruise missiles need to have there flight speed increased and there flight time nerfed.
Agreed on that, although I fear it will not be enough to make them actually work .. but would be a first approach maybe. MIrple wrote: I think one other point that needs to be made is although Cadari do have missile ships they have an even slit that favors hybrids over missile based ships. This could have changes with the new patch though.
I dont exactly understand what you mean by that, could you explain? The Rokh and the Naga are good ships in their roles, didnt say anything other. Still many Caldari would love them to be missile ships and have a similar good role as missile ships ... The Moa sucks a bit, but will even fall back more after the proposed changes.
If you go ship by ship through the Caldari lineup you will see that it is an almost even split between Hybrid ships and Missile ships with hybrid having a few more.
I have tried the new stats on the Moa it isn't as bad as people are saying. I will agree it is hard to fit for any sort of solo work but it is not a fail ship. This will have to wait until after the new combat cruiser stats come out to argue though.
I think the problem is for Caldari they think all the ships should be missile and cant wrap their heads around the idea of training for hybrids. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
153
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 16:12:00 -
[80] - Quote
Darak Tar wrote:Aglais wrote:And then everyone again forgot the HAM buff which will keep Drakes in the game at shorter ranges and also produce actually effective Caracals. And also Sacrilege buff. I am looking forward to my Sacrilege being useful again! I'm actually not sure how this will effect my Tengu though. 510 DPS at 99KM Range currently.. I'm guessing that will drop to something like 300DPS and 50KM range?
Its a 10% reduction in damage and 25% range reduction so more like 459 DPS at 75k |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
153
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 16:27:00 -
[81] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:Darak Tar wrote: I am looking forward to my Sacrilege being useful again!
I'm actually not sure how this will effect my Tengu though.
510 DPS at 99KM Range currently.. I'm guessing that will drop to something like 300DPS and 50KM range? iirc, as this thread is now sooooo looooong, the nerf on HMs is 25% range and 10% damage. So with your baseline example, wouldn't that be something like 74km and 460 dps if fittings remained the same? edit - damn was i really that distracted that it took me more than 4 minutes to post this and get beaten to the punch by MIrple
Indeed. Also I guess simple math is hard for missile chuckers they have gotten to used to press F1 receive bacon. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
153
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 16:51:00 -
[82] - Quote
Noemi,
I just got some numbers thought I would share them.
From an EFT that had the revelation proposed stats ported over
HML - CN Scourge - Drake Maxed skilled - 2x BCU
Explosion velocity 121 Explosion radius 105 Velocity - 6450 DPS - 332 @ 62.9K
HAM - CN Scourge - Drake Maxed skilled - 2x BCU
Explosion velocity 151 Explosion radius 93 Velocity - 3375 DPS - 462 @ 20.3K
The numbers look good to me the only thing I would say needs to be changed IMO is the speed of HAMS increased and the flight time decreased.
I can post the new Raven Torp Numbers as well if you like
Mirple |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
153
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 17:15:00 -
[83] - Quote
The numbers I posted were without drones. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
153
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 17:24:00 -
[84] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:MIrple wrote:The numbers I posted were without drones.
Also please post a fit in a battle cruiser that can do 462 dps with guns only at ~24k range and not in fall off. 24k range? I thought 20.3k? And how will you maintain that exact range with a ship which is not the fastest in its class? And yes, without Drones, thats what I meant: Caldari have the smallest bay, remember? A Harbinger can do a lot more Drone DPS than a Drake for example .. or shut it down a LOT with 5 med ECMs ...
Sorry 20 is correct. We are not talking drones in this only the turrert or missile DPS/projection. BC's still need to be balanced remember. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
154
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 18:08:00 -
[85] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:MIrple wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:MIrple wrote:The numbers I posted were without drones.
Also please post a fit in a battle cruiser that can do 462 dps with guns only at ~24k range and not in fall off. 24k range? I thought 20.3k? And how will you maintain that exact range with a ship which is not the fastest in its class? And yes, without Drones, thats what I meant: Caldari have the smallest bay, remember? A Harbinger can do a lot more Drone DPS than a Drake for example .. or shut it down a LOT with 5 med ECMs ... Sorry 20 is correct. We are not talking drones in this only the turrert or missile DPS/projection. BC's still need to be balanced remember. I am talking about either actual stuff happening in Eve (which makes sense) or just numbers. If you take just numbers, then no, this Drake doesnt look hot to me. For sure no contender for No.1 in close combat. And for the "real" thing it looks even worse. Thanks for you effort though.
So I comes down to you said show me the numbers but when the numbers are shown its now ships when the ship is shown its the numbers again. I give up as its just a matter of your right about this and everyone including CCP is wrong. Got it I am not going to post in here till the ships are live on SiSi. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
154
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 18:35:00 -
[86] - Quote
Question? Could we have the skills on the NH band-aid changed for the patch.
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to assault missile launcher, heavy assault missile launcher and heavy missile launcher rate of fire and 5% bonus to all shield resistances per level
Command Ships Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to missile Kinetic damage and 5% bonus to heavy missile explosion velocity per level
Role Bonus: 99% reduction in Warfare Link module CPU need
Changed to
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to assault missile launcher, heavy assault missile launcher and heavy missile launcher rate of fire and 5% bonus to all shield resistances per level
Command Ships Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to missile Kinetic damage and 5% bonus to heavy missile, heavy assault missile, and standard missile explosion velocity per level
Role Bonus: 99% reduction in Warfare Link module CPU need
2nd Option
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to assault missile launcher, heavy assault missile launcher and heavy missile launcher rate of fire and 5% bonus to all shield resistances per level
Command Ships Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to missile Kinetic damage and 5% bonus to assault missile launcher, heavy assault missile launcher and heavy missile launcher missile velocity velocity per level
Role Bonus: 99% reduction in Warfare Link module CPU need
This would be a temp fix until it can be looked at properly. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
154
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 13:54:00 -
[87] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:Cazador 64 wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:1 Heavy Missile Launcher II 51143 2 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II 32683 3 425mm AutoCannon II 28691 4 Heavy Pulse Laser II 21287 5 Mega Pulse Laser II 21179 6 425mm Railgun II 206867 200mm AutoCannon II 19103 8 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II 17453 9 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II 14913 10 150mm Light AutoCannon II 14410 11 Prototype 'Arbalest' Torpedo Launcher 1253712 720mm Howitzer Artillery II 12433 13 Heavy Neutron Blaster II 11547 14 Light Neutron Blaster II 10947 15 Neutron Blaster Cannon II 1057616 1400mm Prototype Siege Cannon 9095 17 425mm Prototype Gauss Gun 840618 1400mm 'Scout' Artillery I 7825 19 800mm Repeating Artillery II 7257 20 Dual 180mm AutoCannon II 7169 Projectile total171032 Hybrid total62162 Laser total42466 Missile total63680 Speaking of something is "out of line" and "needs balance" ... And remember please, 12k of the missiles are not Caldari ships mostly, but Bombers which are pretty ok balanced over all 4 races. And this was my point. We have ONE missile system to represent the entire top 20 of all weapons system. I think it is pretty fair for it to be on top as missiles as a whole is way under represented when you total everything out. It is simply amazing how you can throw cold hard facts right in peoples face and they will deny it to the very end. Reminds me of the stubborn mule from family guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqs9DYisSsgEveryone wanted to throw the we can't balance around PVE in my face so I come up with some PVP numbers and yet people do not recognize how much missiles are out of whack and way under powered and under used. I submitted to the whole we can't judge on PVE and yet I still see no rational explanation for this clearly blatant neglect for the Caldari pilot and no suggestions other then retraining has been given. I said it once before it's total bullshit and no one is willing to step up to the plate swallow some pride and admit it. Morrigan LeSante wrote: Eh?
RankWeapons Kills 1 Heavy Missile Launcher II 51107 2 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II32665
And how many other medium weapons get a look in?
Ok fair enough but how many Caldari large systems "get a look in" ?? Oh thats right basically NONE. This is exactly what I mean how in your right mind are you going to try to make this a valid argument? We have one med weapon system and basically basically zero large (as stated those torps are not all Caldari) So if we remove HML from the top 20 by nerfing it into the ground then putting a bullet in its head for good measure Caldari missile ships have nothing at all Caldari gets zero "look ins" as you called it. Let me ask you this how many of you are training into cruise or torp for caldari because of this so called buff? It will not even make a dent in these numbers and they will not even break the top 20. That's more melodrama than I can take at this time in the morning. If 10% is game breaking for you, I respectfully suggest you're doing it wrong.
I highlighted the Caldari Large Weapon systems. there are 4 in the top 20 or 20% of them yeah thats total crap. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
154
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 16:05:00 -
[88] - Quote
Bodega Cat wrote:MIrple wrote:
I highlighted the Caldari Large Weapon systems. there are 4 in the top 20 or 20% of them yeah thats total crap.
Missile systems are the important part, not hybrids. Hybrids requires cross training. The original point was to look at missile representation out of the list, and it is without a doubt compelling to note the only thing really on there besides torps is HML. I would also think its fair for everyone to agree that torps are only on there due to the stipulation that bombers leverage them, and bombers come in all race/flavors. I won't go so far as to say we can eliminate them, but their context is certainly worth an *asterisk in the above argument due to those facts. They're kind of a niche thing.
So should we discount projectile as well as they are fitted on non mimmy hulls. I understand what you are saying but Hybrids are Caldari weapons no matter how much you want to argue against. If this is the case Drones are the Gallente weapon and I do not see sentry or heavy drones on the list. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
156
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 18:13:00 -
[89] - Quote
I would say that Projectile weapons are not to blame but Tracking Enhancers. The 30% bonus to falloff is to much. If these are fixed I think that Projectiles will fall back into the correct position.
As to the 4 weapon systems that Caldari BS can fit. Yes some are fit to BC and to Gallente Hulls. What I am trying to point out is Caldari do have great ships that can support hybrid guns. Try playing Gallente as only a drone race with no gunnery skills. It doesn't work. Caldari pilots need to train up their other weapon system that is a fact.
Fact the Scorp and the Rohk are great ships. Raven needs some work but having 2 working battle ships is not bad. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
156
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 18:21:00 -
[90] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:OT Smithers wrote:In any case, this is a done deal. CCP is going to do their thing, and their thing has ALWAYS been to **** Caldari players every chance they get. Yeah, ALWAYS, like with the Merlin, the condor, and the Rokh, and ECM... Oh wait ! And loot at the future Caracal and Moa... The Rokh was not really hot until hybrids have been buffed. It is decent now, but the crosstrain issues with missiles to turrets have been mentioned often enough now that even you should have understood this problem. And the new Moa? You must be kidding, again. Or your understanding of this game is even worse than I thought it is. The Moa is hardly a reason to go for Caldari.
The Hybrid buff happened a year ago. How long must we keep saying well they were **** until they got buffed its not like it just happened. |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
157
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 19:49:00 -
[91] - Quote
OT Smithers wrote:MIrple wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:OT Smithers wrote:In any case, this is a done deal. CCP is going to do their thing, and their thing has ALWAYS been to **** Caldari players every chance they get. Yeah, ALWAYS, like with the Merlin, the condor, and the Rokh, and ECM... Oh wait ! And loot at the future Caracal and Moa... The Rokh was not really hot until hybrids have been buffed. It is decent now, but the crosstrain issues with missiles to turrets have been mentioned often enough now that even you should have understood this problem. And the new Moa? You must be kidding, again. Or your understanding of this game is even worse than I thought it is. The Moa is hardly a reason to go for Caldari. The Hybrid buff happened a year ago. How long must we keep saying well they were **** until they got buffed its not like it just happened. And a Caldari pilot who began training to use them ten months ago when they were fixed, would have only barely finished large hybrids a months ago now. He would now, ten months later, finally get to use the Gallente Naga. In any case, even with the improvement to Hybrids, a Caldari pilot who switches to gunnery would be a fool to stick with Caldari. The Caldari Hybrid frigates are wicked, the rest of the lineup is less than impressive. Given the choice between a complete working lineup of ships, and training for a year to own a fleet of hangar queens, which would YOU select? You want a Vagabond or a Cerberus? You want a Zealot or an Eagle? Would you rather have the choice of one marginal BS, or three great ones? I faced that choice years ago. Should I abandon Caldari and all the training I had invested, or switch races and fly non-broken ships. I considered sticking with it. I thought surely CCP would fix them. I figured there was no way in hell they would leave them that broken. Fortunately my wife convinced me to switch. Had she not done so, had I stuck with Caldari and continued spending my time and perfecting my skills... I would STILL be waiting! Years later, I would be waiting. And while I waited, I would have gotten to watch CCP devote patch after patch towards making the already good PvP races better. Hell, I would still be waiting for them to remove the T2 ammo penalties that everyone else saw eliminated years ago. Even something that simple, I'd be waiting. And PvP? The only reason I bother with this game? Up until last year I wouldn't have even had a frigate to use. I would have had the Drake, and every time the name Caldari even popped up on the forums a thousand people flooding the thread saying " Caldari are the PvE race! You have the Drake! Because of Falcon!" But I didn't have to deal with that. I switched to one of the PvP races. I went with Minmatar, the flavor of the month, only it turned out to be the flavor of the decade. And I have never regretted the decision. As a Minmatar pilot I might not have the best ship in every class, but it is ALWAYS better than anything the Caldari pilot is stuck with. I don't have one marginal battleship, I have three exceptional ones. My worst Battleship is better than the best the poor patiently waiting Caldari pilot has available. As a Minmatar pilot I have two great HACs, had I stayed with Caldari I wouldn't have any. I have the best cruisers and battlecruisers (and by god I have two of them), the best destroyer, great frigates, AFs, bombers, interceptors, my command ships are epic and my recons are the bane of Strategic cruisers.There are literally no holes in my ship lineup. I have got it made baby! Hell, last year when CCP handed out T3 BCs I actually got one, unlike those poor patient Caldari missile pilots. And all because I didn't wait for CCP to fix the Caldari. So why should I care about those poor fools who trusted CCP and stuck with Caldari? CCP could delete them from the game and my hangar would look about the same. But I care because I like this game, and I think that there is a limit to how patient even Caldari players will be. I think continuing to #$% with a hundred thousand paying customers is insane.
To max out your skill maybe 10 months but I dont think it takes 10 Months to get T2 large guns. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
157
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 20:10:00 -
[92] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:
I did some days ago, didnt seem like the Moa would be hot. If they changed something since my last visit I will check this later.
Moa: Cruiser skill bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 5% bonus to shield resistances Slot layout: 5 H (-1), 5 M (+1), 4 L, 5 turrets, 2 launchers Fittings: 850 PWG (+70), 380 CPU (+20) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2300(+425) / 1000(-329) / 1600(+76) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1500(+125) / 475s(-16.25s) / 3.15 (+0.35) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 190(+26) / 0.52 (-0.02) / 12220000 (+500000) / 5.9s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15 / 15 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 260(+7) / 7 Sensor strength: 17 Gravimetric (+1) Signature radius: 135 Cargo capacity: 450 (+200)
FYI |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.10.26 20:14:00 -
[93] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Cazador 64 wrote:right because everyone in EVE plays with one account. I play with a single account generally as my computer starts to hate me with more than one logged in. I have every single gunnery and missile skill you can have and their relative specs trained up. I pvp in every ship in the game at one point or another, and I diversified my portfolio to make me relatively nerf proof for that exact reason: If you put all of your eggs in one basket eventually CCP changes the basket. You didn't play before the tengu, you don't remember when people used to use other ships besides the Tengu to do plexes in, you don't rembmer the time when there was torp ravens (also as to your other snide comments I own a fairly well fit torp Golem thats sitting mothballed since Heavy Missiles outclass every single other missile system in game). The thing you fail to realize is that there arre gradients to the other guns, some guns perform better in some situations than other guns, you need to make choices. Missiles aren't like that, there is only ever ONE missile system you ever need train and that is simply Heavy Missiles. That fact alone stands to reason that the heavies need an adjustment. Why? Are other missile systems so much trash that they don't work as some of you would have us believe? No, not really, not at all. Rockets are in a pretty good place right now, Standards could use SOME love but largely function as intended, HAMS are getting an adjustment they desperately need and Torps, which already function just fine will benefit greatly from the change too. That just leaves cruise, which actually function without much problem, but are stifled by a game environment that has seen the death of the sniper of the years, its not that the missile system doesn't work, precision cruise work just fine at killing even small targets, its that the game doesn't leave room for those kind of boat. So tell me more about why you don't use a different system than heavies (even though all the other systems work) and how that somehow doesn't validate them as needing adjustment..
I laughed pretty hard when they said you didn't know anything about game mechanics. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 17:28:00 -
[94] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Update to the plan everyone. Gonna call this version 2.1 since the change is a bit less significant than the last. After consideration we agree that the range reduction to Fury missiles was too severe in the earlier versions so we are re-adjusting them to 75% of the flight time of T1. This means they will still have a shorter range than their current stats on TQ but that reduction will be much more moderate. The OP and spreadsheet have both been updated. The new stats should get ported into our next testing release on Duality which we expect to happen in the near future. Thanks as always to everyone helping us refine these changes.
Is this just to Fury and not to Rage? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 17:56:00 -
[95] - Quote
So the range on a T2 Fury Missile from a drake will be around 40k I dont see this as being game breaking. That IMO seems pretty fair to me. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 18:34:00 -
[96] - Quote
Looking at what was posted above me I don't know how to get a handle on the drake. 80K EHP is to high for a BC that is only half trying to fit a tank it should come in somewhere between the 55k ~75K when max tanked. Maybe reduce the PG on it but then HAMS will be tough to fit Maybe up the PG/ CPU on HML? I don't know it will be interesting to see what comes out after the BC round. But with missiles as they are now I think the tank just needs a slight adjustment on the drake. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 19:49:00 -
[97] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:At this rate all the nerfs will eventually disappear... This change does not affect the other heavy missiles, just the Fury variants of each long range missile. The general range nerf to HMs still applies and the 75% number is in relation to the post-patch T1 heavies. Fozzie, I appreciate the response, and I think you guys are doing great work with tiericide. I wonder, though, how you intend to balance HMLs when you reintroduce the idea for TC/TEs to affect them. Part of your original "sale" for the nerfs was essentially that HMLs would be nerfed, but you could choose less tank/gank to increase the range/tracking to what you had before, and part of that cost would be increased susceptibility to TDs. That, to me, seemed balanced. As balanced as the choice is for every other pilot in the game that uses turrets for their damage application. By continuing to whittle away at the nerfs--and I'm not saying there didn't need to be some adjustment--how can you look ahead and think that the introduction of TC/TEs won't break or overbuff HMLs and create much of the same problems that existed before these nerfs?
I agree with what you said. I like where the missile balance is atm but if/when they introduce TE/TC it will break the balance that was created. One way I can see it working is if TE/TC would effect exp velocity/radius and if it could make it so missiles flew faster but for a shorter time so as not to drastically increase the range of HML. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.10.31 19:50:00 -
[98] - Quote
serras bang wrote:OMFG what a way to kill missles what is the ******* point of them now remove caldari ships from the game
The numbers you posted are incorrect check them again. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.11.01 13:16:00 -
[99] - Quote
1. caldari ships are slow and bulky
2. as he already said for pvp he inteands us to use faction ammo (witch with range and dmg reduction and dmg aplication nerf is probably what will happen).
3. hml fury take both a base dmg nerf and that explosive radius need 2 missle rigs to get into criuser sig radius
4. thel fury although 75% velocity of t1 probably works out closer to about a 30% range nerf[/quote]
Yes a explosion radius of 180 is so much larger then a cruiser. Esp if its running its MWD
Smallest cruiser sig is 108 and that is the scythe most are 120 and larger and if its a shield boat it will get even larger with LSE and rigs |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 14:02:00 -
[100] - Quote
Connall Tara wrote:Major Killz wrote:The change is NOT going to hurt the autocannon-shield-Hurricane, but artillery WILL be MUCH more difficult to fit. despite of course the across the board reduction in arty fitting \o/
You will need rigs or a RCU in the lows plus downgrading your LSE to make 720's fit with no other mods in the highs. |
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.11.02 16:10:00 -
[101] - Quote
RankShips Kills Weapon Used 1 Hurricane 4909 425 AC or 720 2 Drake 4790 HML or HAM 3 Rokh 4734 425 R or Neutron 4 Huginn 1977 425 AC and HML 5 Naga 1843 425 R or Neutron 6 Tornado 1810 800's or 1400's 7 Sabre 1529 Small AC 8 Cynabal 1529 425 AC 9 Hound 1370 Trops 10 Thrasher 1319 Small AC or Arty 11 Oracle 1295 Large Pulse or Beams 12 Talos 1048 425 R or Neutron 13 Nyx 983 Fighter Bomber 14 Stabber FI 970 425 AC ? 15 Maelstrom 967 1400's 16 Rapier 842 425 AC and HML? 17 Zealot 830 Med Pulse or Beam 18 Tengu 819 HML or HAM 19 Jaguar 778 Small AC 20 Merlin 742 Small Rail or Blaster
I put this here to make a little more sense of the whole aguement. While after 3 days 425's are on top a few more ships use these weapons then HML but with fewer ships the HML is still second. Not making any assumptions just putting the info out there. I think after the TE changes it will make the numbers more congruent. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
158
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 18:44:00 -
[102] - Quote
OT Smithers wrote:Vemi Valentino wrote:I'm a new player, just subbed yesterday. So I have my doubts that I will be able to make a strong statement, that will sway 3 different races + some of my own. But I can say that in my opinion, I'm already feeling like there is very little love for the Caldari.
In personal experience I can say it doesn't make sense to hype missiles for a racial spec, and then only give us second lvl ships for it. Example, Ferox (turrets) Drake (missiles) Naga (turrets). This jumps out at me as odd, since turrets are 2 of 3 ships, including our highest tier and first tier.
If 66% of our ships (give or take) are turret ships, then why should we bother with missiles. But wait, lets nerf that 33%.
When I ask about Caldari pvp, what is the one thing I get told. "Caldari are great for ECM" While I'm sure this is true, what is the other indisputable fact about fleet warfare, that even a noob as I has picked up. ECM/Jamming ships, are targeted first. So we are expected to die first, and be support characters in PVP.
So to sum up my 15 day experience. 1. Limited ships that have missiles as an option, with bias towards turrets. 2. Caldari are expected to be ECM players and get targeted/die first 3. Despite nerfs/imbalance, I still really like this game. 4. If I have to start training Minmitar ships to do dmg, I will.
Like I said, I am new so my opinion is different than people with extensive pvp experience, but I think it's important to add a new players view to the mix. No one expects Caldari pilots to fly ECM -- and CCP is nerfing the crap out of ECM in this update anyway. The only thing you, as a Caldari player, will be shoehorned into is the Drake. The Drake will be your main combat ship because it is your only combat ship. This might change down the road, but for now that's how it is. Post update, it will be the "kinder, gentler" pastel Drake. It won't suck, but if it ever was the king of the BC's (and I think that title belongs to the Cane myself) it certainly won't be after this. The Cane has always been Steak and Lobster; the Drake Oatmeal with brown sugar and cream. CCP is taking away the brown sugar and cream, replacing it with aspartame and skim milk, and telling you it's still just as good as steak. Sure it is CCP. But that's what you will have. In any case, nerf or not, I would advise ANY new player to drop missiles immediately and switch to gunnery -- and consider another race altogether. Not because of this nerf -- these changes are a net improvement for missile users -- but because of the return on investment. The other races have complete lineups of exceptional ships and weapons. The Caldari simply do not. Nor should you wait for CCP to fix them. That would be foolish. CCP isn't even bothering to fix all of the missiles in this missile update. How incredible is that? Caldari players have been waiting for years for this, and CCP couldn't even finish the job with missiles with all the Caldari nerfs they had planned.
Please point out how the gallente line has such a complete line up. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
159
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 18:10:00 -
[103] - Quote
OT Smithers wrote:Little Dragon Khamez wrote:I've been for a spin on the test server and if anything the rebalancing seems incomplete. Caracals now output almost 90% of the dps of a Drake if you fit them right and have a longer range whilst being cheaper. It's true that they have no real tank, but hey cheap snipers shouldn't really have any tank.
That's the trade off in eve. The more dps you need to output brings you closer and closer to your opponent. Whilst the carcal has been nicely rebalanced I would have liked to have seen the same rof and velocity bonus applied to the drake to compensate for the missile nerf.
The Caldari have a ranged combat fighting style as per the eve back story and are also shield tankers. so it makes sense that their weapons of choice should be long ranged and their ships should have solid shield tanking abilities (the Drake fits the bill perfectly for this). Balancing them to the point that their weapons perform to the same degree as other races weapon systems makes your choice of weapon utterly pointless. It might be called a missile, an autocannon or a laser but if it has similar range and outputs similar dps to your opponents then what's the point? Where can you get an edge? In eve we all live and die by whatever edge we can get yet the endless rebalancing mitigates the effects of fighting styles and tactics. We might as well all equip our ships with fuzzy, buck rogers style energy beams and fire them all day. Whilst we're at it we might as well assign every frigate and every cruiser the same stats as any other one. The end result will be the same.
Anyhow I am not convinced that that this rebalancing is being done to any sort of mathematical algorithm which could prove that all ships and weapons are balanced. The case in point being how the original damage nerf was 20% and after much postin on the forum by opponents of this it's now 10%. If the rebalancing was being done to a formula that outputted a value of 20% changing it to 10% would still result in an unbalanced game. This suggests that the rebalancing is done by feel not by simulation or mathematical analysis. In which case the developers only stop working when the game feels right to them. This would further suggest that eve will never, ever, ever be a balanced game.... Shhhh! Don't tell everyone! But yeah, that's why I find this whole crusade to nerf the Drake so silly.
I to can list all the ships of a race and say they are good. If you look at fleets though most of the ships you listed are lacking. AF and frigs might be around but in fleet warfare how often do you see a Gall boat. I see from the 20 most used ships.
Kills 1 Drake 25800 2 Hurricane 18242 3 Tornado 11986 4 Rokh 9386 5 Rifter 8934 6 Naga 8765 7 Capsule 8014 8 Nyx 7209 9 Oracle 6689 10 Sabre 6511 11 Huginn 5768 12 Tengu 5560 13 Talos 5544 14 Thrasher 5527 15 Cynabal 5471 16 Abaddon 4578 17 Incursus 4569 18 Manticore 4232 19 Hound 4104 20 Loki 4101
We have 3 ships there but yes keep telling me that Gallente are great ships now cause they are used so often. Caldari have 5 Amarr have 2 Mimmy have 8 and then there is 1 pirate and pods. So when Caldari have 5 ships in the top 5 and gall have 3 how then is gall so far superior? |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
163
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 21:29:00 -
[104] - Quote
serras bang wrote: as you have said a minor kin hole witch is 40% i bilieve why then bassed on what you have said dont minmatar then have a completely 0% resists to kinetic if they never have to worry about it ? my point being is that certian thing like this dont add up i get that fact that t2 ships are wieghted to there faction rivals so then in turn minmatar should have a 0% kinetic resist ?
and im sure ccp will think og that and possibly give a blanket 40% resist to gall ships on the whole when they get to tech 2 however i would like them to readress the ships resists so that they all add up to the same
I think it works on the idea that you get a 75% bonus to your idea resist so in Mimmys case 75% EM I understand what you are saying with this as Caldari and Gall have the larges holes but Amar also have a pretty even spread on their HAC as well. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
163
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 21:31:00 -
[105] - Quote
TKL HUN wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:TKL HUN wrote:Dear CCP,
I trained 2 alts to fly a tengu, for mission and complex/anom running.
Half a year on both accs - cruiser lvl5, subsystems lvl5, missile skills + the other skills needed.
I would like to ask only 1 question:
Will you let me reallocate these skill points which are WASTED with the coming missile nerf?
I really hope so...
Thanks! Nope. The SP isn't wasted unless you choose to waste it by not using it, in which case that isn't CCP's fault. HML's and the tengu are still very usable. Really? Did you try it on the test server? 1. -10% damage 2. 10-20% exposion velocity nerf 3. 12% explosion radius nerf 4. 15% velocity nerf etc etc... All in one 30% damage nerf for cruiser sized and more damage nerf for frig sized targets. Just do the math with the radiuses and the target speeds, sig radiuses etc etc.... We tried it, and well.... No comment
So your ship is now on par with the other 3 races T3 sounds pretty right to me. |
|
|
|