| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
   |
Posted - 2012.10.04 19:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
I am afraid you did the opposite of a buff to make tech 2 missiles usefull in terms of the rage torpedo. The biggest problem with them was never their sig penalty, or damage potential it lied with their range. as it stands before winter i have to use two tech 2 range extenders and a 5% implant to just barely touch a theoretical 40km. I am an incursion runner primarily these days and from my general knowledge this is an acceptable envelope for pvp but for incs it was never quite satisfactory. the primary target for dps boats like my golem is the ostingles which like to hover between 35 and 45 km on average. with reducing the flight time and not altering the velocity accordingly with an increase you have just pushed the majority of my targets out of reach. The level 4 mission realm as i remember it primarily used the javelines since it required the same number of jav volleys as rage volleys so engaging at max range was more efficient. please revise this for increased velocity in on rage as they were borderline useful before. |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 15:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
you mission runners and being spoiled at killing things at far range :P still wondering why a medium missile system slotted for high damage has more range than a large weapon system slated for damage. |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 15:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
OlRotGut wrote:I've read through every single page on this post, albeit I have skipped some of the arguments between players; however I don't think I've read an answer that explains this:
"All Missiles
Increase missile acceleration so that real range is much closer to the client assumed range of flighttime*speed against a stationary target. This means a slight range buff for all missiles, and missiles will act in a way that is more intuitive to newer players."
What does the bold part mean? (if I missed the explanation, I am sorry.)
i think that new players will have to figure out you need to subtract 5% from your range in order to figure out your "true range" |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 16:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Biggest problem is that a weapons effectiveness is based on 4 fronts. the first three have to do with the weapons system design itself. First here it needs to be balanced against those in the same category versus those that are smaller and larger than itself. then it needs to be balanced in regard to short range high damage vs long range lower damage. Finally it gets balanced against other weapon categories in this case missiles VS guns, vs, lasers, vs hybrids. The last facet is the bonuses from ship specific hulls. This part can not be done first first the weapons system must be balanced against itself and others by their bare bones unaltered unskilled stats. then the ship based balancing can begin which will allow for a lot more fine tuning.
in the abstract consider this, something always need to be better than something else and something always has to be worse, otherwise you are making direct clones of the same thing and you will have no variety and no incentive choose anything over another choice |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 17:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
I will slightly disagree with you though. missiles are good at 2 things PVE, because of swappable damage, low barrier to entry, ease of use and range. and from what i have been reading of the specific pvp application of HM. I agree in the range nerf on the Heavy missile since it goes toward addressing the disparity between Cruise missiles and Heavy Missiles. the damage decrease i don't agree with, at least for this large a percentage.
only thing i am terribly concerned about is that as a torpedo user i do not compare against large autocannons in a meaningful way. I would trade all these buffs to them for comparable range without having to give my golem two tech 2 range rigs |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 18:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
MotorBoatMe WithYourFace wrote:ORCACommander wrote:I will slightly disagree with you though. missiles are good at 2 things PVE, because of swappable damage, low barrier to entry, ease of use and range. and from what i have been reading of the specific pvp application of HM. I agree in the range nerf on the Heavy missile since it goes toward addressing the disparity between Cruise missiles and Heavy Missiles. the damage decrease i don't agree with, at least for this large a percentage.
only thing i am terribly concerned about is that as a torpedo user i do not compare against large autocannons in a meaningful way. I would trade all these buffs to them for comparable range without having to give my golem two tech 2 range rigs Torps are going to be affected by Guided Missile Precision, giving a pretty good buff to applied damage. I agree, though, that an increase to velocity on torps is necessary to bring things into line for torps. Stealth bombers get a buff by this as well......
that skill was never a problem for me really. most hq incursion fleets have the 2 webs i need to bring a frigate down to below ex0losion velocity |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 19:53:00 -
[7] - Quote
ehhh i don't really want to see those changes and have the turret ewar mods completely screw over missiles however i would love a 30% velocity increase on every missile and a 30% decrease on flight time to keep ranges as they are but reduce the dps lag. |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
11
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 20:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
trust me i want a range buff on my torps i was merely making that as a statement to repair the gap between instant damage of turret systems and missile delayed damage |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
11
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 20:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
I'm Down wrote:If anyone even did a small bit of research on eve history, you'd realize that the only reason drakes became popular was b/c of the speed nerf when HMLs actually lost their main counter.
Maybe Fozzie should do his research and realize that the reason they have been buffed to **** up til now is b/c they were so horrible before. If he'd just fix the damn ships that were the problem, he would see how much better the platform would be w/o doing more than a range nerf... but that would require playing the game, and actually knowing anything about it.
Maybe you guys should pull back a bit on the whole speed nerf thing that oh yeah, got a massive rage thread too b/c it was so heavy handed and has crushed almost any speed design left in game besides high dollar oversized AB/Agility fits.
Yet, I don't hear fozzie saying, oh yeah, maybe we should nerf webs a bit, or oh yeah, maybe we shoud rethink the MWD killing scrams, or the slow as **** AB on almost any ship but a T3 and limited hac fits.
Doing anything but a range nerf to start is just bad and it's tragic that the devs can't see this.
By thier own admission [the 2 ships that are causing the problem] should be reason 1 why doing any more changes to HML's w/o fixing the ships first is a tragic error in judgement.
I've never said this should make missiles immune to more nerfs or changes, but **** sake, learn how to do things properly.... start small and make moves as necessary.
if you are going to rebuild the entire system, by this i mean their entire tiericide plan and what looks to be a comprehensive overhaul of missiles as well then historical patterns will be worthless to look at as in the new environment you are now at base 0. Current fleet and player trends will be meaningless because they are based off the old model and the effect of the changes can not be measured until you see how the player base adapted themselves to the new situation. small changes right now can not work because of the massive redesign. small changes only work if you are tweaking an existing system not writing a new one. Honestly i think the entire tiereicide and weapons overhauls should of been sorted out as a single expansion and watch the entire player base sink and swim but that would ruin ccp's time loved expansion schedule since. |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
12
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 22:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
serras you can't balance the ships until the weapons themselves have a base balance because of all the bonuses the hulls get are built around the weapons systems and defense systems |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 16:34:00 -
[11] - Quote
All this rhetoric makes me sad. |
| |
|