Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Ana Fox
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:51:00 -
[421] - Quote
So now one med slot MUST be TD ?Did we just get new form of ECM ?
HML range was to much ,who says it was not is realistic.But damage nerf is too much .Drake and Tengu are not only ship that use HML ,point is you dont use lazy approach to fix two ships.Tengu fix was easy ,just reduce range and oversized AB ,and also give him some dps nerf. Now what with all other ships ?Why they hell you would now train to max out Gila if you can do that with Ishtar in half less time.What is Nighthawk role now?Cereberus and all other HML ships.
Saying that HMLs were on line is wrong ,but this much no way.
It is not problem to train something else ,but this for me will mostly affect new players.Most of Caldari new players that got a chance to fly proper Drake after 6 months training will now be like wtf I need to do now ?
Two ships was problem and mostly cause of blob warfare.You dont need to kill whole ship line cause of two ships that have ability not to commit to fight and sick kite option.
|
Lord Ryan
True Xero
602
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:51:00 -
[422] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:Lord Ryan wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:HMLs still have the highest sustained damage, second highest range and second highest volley of all the systems. Sure, missiles take a while to reach a target, but when they do, they are more consistent in applying the damage to targets of equal or higher size, as it should be for all weapon systems.
You look at the massive nerf percentages, but you fail to perceive how strong they were compared to other weapon systems. Stop whining, you really have no basis to stand on. Sounds like a case of make it suck as bad as everything else. 425's will still work good but You'll have to fit them to BS if you want any tank at all. Wait, what? Battleship-sized weapons will have to be fitted to battleships to have a decent tank against comparable weapons?!
The other 425's. The ones that are relevant to this thread. Do not assume-áanything above this line-áwas typed by me. Nerf the Truth, it's inconvenient. Nerf it cause I can't fly it. I want to fly a badass Mon Calamari stlye-ácruiser painted to match my Tron clothes. |
ZeroeZ Redshift
SPEAR CORPORATION
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:51:00 -
[423] - Quote
Alright,
I can honestly say that this is an ill-conceived plan. If this goes through it will cause a whole chain of problems down the line. I get that it's easy to see a fraction of the picture and make a decision based upon that, but that is a total fallacy. See, the issue runs much deeper that just nerfing the Drake.
There are other ships besides the Drake that rely on HMLs that will get totally blind sided by this. The Caracal/Cerberus and the Niighthawk come to mind. These ships already have to deal with the mediocre damage that are inherent to HMLs, the flight-time delay and the explosion velocity dramas.
I do concur that these changes will bring the drake back into line, there's no doubt. In doing so, however, other ships will pay an extremely heavy price. For one, Command ships are already broken - It takes longer to train up for a command ship than it does a Strategic Cruiser, yet Strategic Cruisers do more damage, tank better and are much more versatile. I do realise that there is a certain amount of risk like subsystem skill losses, but the difference in training time totally outstrips that.
Implementing this nerf as it currently stands will totally unbalance Caldari Command Ships even more than they currently are. Eventually this will have to be rectified and who the heck wants to suffer through all that?
Once again, I agree HML range is too far. But seriously, if the issue is HAM usage, BUFF THE HAMS, DON'T BREAK OTHER STUFF.
In conclusion, I think the range nerf is totally fine. The damage nerfis way too much, way too quickly.
|
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
72
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:52:00 -
[424] - Quote
Etheoma wrote:HERE COMES THE NERF BATE AGAIN; AND OH NOOOOOO! THEY TOOK A SWING AT THE HEAVY MISSILES!
20% damage decrease wtf I get the range decrease and would have been disappointed but also would have seen why if they left it at that BUT NO they had to f*** with the already mediocre damage of heavy missiles... great... And I don't even use heavy missiles that much. Well I'm going to be switching to a loki for doing PVE.
Unless there going to increase the damage on heavy fury's and decrease the range to really bring it into line with other weapon systems and add Long medium and short range to the standard and faction ammo then this will kill missiles.
Actually, when you look at effective (as opposed to theoretical) DPS against 200 m/sec moving targets of equal (cruiser) size, the numbers still come out with an advantage to HMLs even after the nerf, and thats before any damage reduction as a result of transversal is factored in. I'd say that HMLs still will deliver twice the effective DPS as a 250mm rail/spike combo for example. |
D3vastator
Fight With Gusto
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:52:00 -
[425] - Quote
I've played off & on since 2004 & am up to just over 24m Skill Points. Here's a chart that shows what this change does to almost 15% of my skill points.
As you can see, I've trained specifically to sling Heavy Missiles from a Tengu so that I can run level 4 missions. This really really screws over players like me who couldn't give two craps about what goes on out in drama-sec. If you want to nerf the Drakespam, nerf Drakes...not an entire weapon system. EVE is already at a point, PvE-wise, where my buddy's Ishkur already outdoes my Tengu in both tank & gank for L4 missions. This change will just make PvE even more lopsided away from Caldari. |
Reticle
Sight Picture
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:54:00 -
[426] - Quote
One mission tengu for sale
One tengu pilot for sale |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1329
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:55:00 -
[427] - Quote
CCP Fozzie is now my most favorite dev.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Lelob
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:55:00 -
[428] - Quote
It also occured to me:
Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and increases explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time
What about tracking links? |
Inggroth
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
19
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:55:00 -
[429] - Quote
Do a 1000dps 50k range HAM Tengu then |
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
721
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:55:00 -
[430] - Quote
Aside from the Hurricane changes, I just think that nerfing Heavy Missiles THREE DIFFERENT WAYS (25% range, 20% DPS, and TD susceptibility) is too, too much.
Remember when they nerfed Incursions 2 different ways and everything went to ****? I think this could be a repeat of that. Consider taking it a little slower please, CCP. Lobbying for your right to delete your signature |
|
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
207
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:57:00 -
[431] - Quote
Lord Ryan wrote:Daneel Trevize wrote:Lord Ryan wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:HMLs still have the highest sustained damage, second highest range and second highest volley of all the systems. Sure, missiles take a while to reach a target, but when they do, they are more consistent in applying the damage to targets of equal or higher size, as it should be for all weapon systems.
You look at the massive nerf percentages, but you fail to perceive how strong they were compared to other weapon systems. Stop whining, you really have no basis to stand on. Sounds like a case of make it suck as bad as everything else. 425's will still work good but You'll have to fit them to BS if you want any tank at all. Wait, what? Battleship-sized weapons will have to be fitted to battleships to have a decent tank against comparable weapons?! The other 425's. The ones that are relevant to this thread. I assumed you hadn't gone full ****** so to suggest putting unbonused medium weapons on a battleship. My bad. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
230
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:59:00 -
[432] - Quote
Inggroth wrote:Do a 1000dps 50k range HAM Tengu then Problem solved ISK to Inggroth
People will, along with TCs/TEs on Caldari/Guristas Cruise Missle Battleships, people will adapt. That's not the point, you don't over-nerf one thing (heavy missles) when another thing (Drakes and Tengus) are the problem, you just end up screwing other ships.
Now, if they want to talk about buffs to caracals, Cerbs (damn it, i want to fly my Cerb again) and nighthawks, nerf HMLs away. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
96
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:59:00 -
[433] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:
Actually, when you look at effective (as opposed to theoretical) DPS against 200 m/sec moving targets of equal (cruiser) size, the numbers still come out with an advantage to HMLs even after the nerf, and thats before any damage reduction as a result of transversal is factored in. I'd say that HMLs still will deliver twice the effective DPS as a 250mm rail/spike combo for example.
"If you'll see here, the effective damage that missiles will output compared to railguns is approximately double." >Missiles will output compared to railguns >compared to railguns >railguns
Don't compare things to railguns. Everything will be better than railguns. This is objective fact. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
858
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:00:00 -
[434] - Quote
Light Missiles
I like.
Heavy Missiles -In total, base range reduced by ~25% -Damage decreased by 20% (rounded to closest digit)
I like this, especially when combined with tracking enhancers below.
Tech Two Missiles -Remove ship penalties from tech two missiles (ship velocity and signature radius)
I always hated and thought the penalties were beyond stupid. It's not actually the penalty ITSELF that was a problem it was that it was STACKING PENALTIES OVER AND OVER AND OVER for each launcher. THAT was stupid stupid stupid.
Either way, just get rid of them and adjust accordingly as you have done so. Much approved, thank you.
Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and increases explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time[/quote]
I like this a lot, very cool. I think this is a great balance to the above changes and will force missile users to think a bit more about their setups! I dig it. Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:00:00 -
[435] - Quote
Honestly, I liked seeing Tengus because usually for those of us in W-space, they meant an easy kill. Once in a while you'd have a 100mn Tengu that was flown competently, but even that was rewarding to catch and pop. But in general, unless it was hero tackle or armour-ECM Tengus or you were in a Pulsar, you wouldn't see them in w-space PvP. Drakes in w-space are amusing :)
Since the main complaint seems to center around full damage projection at max range, which no other weapon type can do -- at least once the bug with Magnetars was eliminated -- why not address that directly instead of stomp these ships into the ground? Missiles were already lower DPS than other weapons; bringing the damage projection in line is all that's needed now.
I've already heard one great example of how to make this happen. Document/declare that part of the long-range missile's damage potential is relative to the remaining fuel it carries with it, so beyond a certain range the damage decreases to some minimum value. This could be compared to "falloff" damage. I'm sure there are other very sensible and logical ways to explain this.
Even with the proposed changes, you will still have issues with Drake blobs in large groups. Maybe you'll need some more Drakes, and maybe you'll need to move in a little closer, but it's still full damage projection at max range, which was the main concern. Cheap, disposable ships that you can fit your noobs into. You don't need to train them how to fly effectively in PvP. You just teach them how to push a button at the right time, and to keep pushing that button until they're destroyed.
A "falloff" type damage reduction combined with tracking nerf is sufficient. Without that, nothing you do will be sufficient, and only puts the problem off for another day. In the meanwhile, you have the potential to render a few ships nearly useless in their other roles.
|
Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:00:00 -
[436] - Quote
They haven't even gotten to T2/T3 cruisers and Command Ships yet. Hold your ******* horses, these dev blogs are far from over.
Quote:Missiles were already lower DPS than other weapons; bringing the damage projection in line is all that's needed now.
A little bit of a correction: HMLs, even with the damage nerf, will still be the highest sustained damage platform of all the cruiser sized long range weapons. So stop spouting nonsense. |
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
51
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:01:00 -
[437] - Quote
The HML nerf was necessary to properly balance all those ships. After it is done, I'm sure we'll see buffs to the other HML ships like the cerberus, navy caracal, nighthawk and Gila. So this is not really an argument against this change.
And btw every ship is affected by target painters or ECM. But we don't fit target painters and ECM to all our ships, do we ? |
Aaron Greil
Royal Imperial Navy Reserves
28
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:01:00 -
[438] - Quote
D3vastator wrote:I've played off & on since 2004 & am up to just over 24m Skill Points. Here's a chart that shows what this change does to almost 15% of my skill points.As you can see, I've trained specifically to sling Heavy Missiles from a Tengu so that I can run level 4 missions. This really really screws over players like me who couldn't give two craps about what goes on out in drama-sec. If you want to nerf the Drakespam, nerf Drakes...not an entire weapon system. EVE is already at a point, PvE-wise, where my buddy's Ishkur already outdoes my Tengu in both tank & gank for L4 missions. This change will just make PvE even more lopsided away from Caldari.
Please post the fits where an ishkur out dps and out tanks a tengu.
Then we'll laugh at how failfit your tengu must be to be outclassed by an assault frig.
Level 4s are meant to require battleships. Tengus were never supposed to replace BSs. Fly a CNR like everyone else. This is as much a buff to torps as it is a nerf to HMLs. Now torp navy scorps will rock. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
59
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:02:00 -
[439] - Quote
Ok this is all very nice..
Now can you buff rails? |
Kiru SnaKe
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:03:00 -
[440] - Quote
Dear CCP,
If HML's are to be nerfed at that level of sh*t please at least reimburse my skill points... |
|
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
207
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:03:00 -
[441] - Quote
D3vastator wrote:I've played off & on since 2004 & am up to just over 24m Skill Points. Here's a chart that shows what this change does to almost 15% of my skill points.As you can see, I've trained specifically to sling Heavy Missiles from a Tengu so that I can run level 4 missions. This really really screws over players like me who couldn't give two craps about what goes on out in drama-sec. If you want to nerf the Drakespam, nerf Drakes...not an entire weapon system. EVE is already at a point, PvE-wise, where my buddy's Ishkur already outdoes my Tengu in both tank & gank for L4 missions. This change will just make PvE even more lopsided away from Caldari. Assuming you meant Ishtar, you're saying a HAC, dedicated DPS boat that takes longer to train to max skills, does better what is a mostly dps-based activity than a supposedly jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none tech3?
\o/ Balance, we have it people!!!
If you meant Ishkur... how's he tanking?
Also no one cares about your ability to just run lvl4s like they're their own little bubble universe, instead we care only how quickly you can produce isk, LP and ingame items from them to manage inflation throughout the whole economy & game. If you ran lvl4s in twice the time but everything dropped to half the price while we got more balanced weapond & ships, so be it. |
OlRotGut
28
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:03:00 -
[442] - Quote
Well, we'll just blob in another ship that isn't nerfed until they decide to nerf that ship. I mean really, the only real nerf to Goons is to nerf the fleet size limiter. lol.
The missile changes I can't really speculate on without seeing the DPS graphs of other systems in comparison first. At first read it appears to be too heavy handed, but I'd like to see the graphs. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2170
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:04:00 -
[443] - Quote
The Bazzalisk wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:The Bazzalisk wrote:I also can't understand this obsession with swinging the nerfhammer around like some bloodthirsty viking. Why not retrieve the significantly underused buffhammer from its dusty shelf instead? ... We have a dozen threads in this forum that's showcasing the use of the buffhammer. It boggles my mind that you don't notice unless it's affecting whatever ship you're flying today. -Liang Yes, buffing the T1 frigates so a majority become redundant and useless and the T1 cruisers in a way which doesn't actually solve the problem of why they're never used. Meanwhile, the staples of my ship hangar - Drake, Hurricane and Tengu - get their skulls cracked by the nerfhammer.
Those ships are getting their skulls cracked by the nerfhammer in order to make room for other ships to be flown. It really is necessary, and your response is a perfect example of how individual players never have a game's long term interests at heart. They only have their own short term interests in mind, even if it kills the game in the process.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Thalen Draganos
Thunderwaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:04:00 -
[444] - Quote
It's true that Transversal angles have no bearing on missiles but that is a part of the nature of a missile. It's basically a rocket powered bomb. Make more sense now? On the other side of the coin, if you speed up you escape more and more of the damage that a missile can do the faster you go. That's something that EFT may not be able to tell you. It's certainly something that only PVP and PVE experience can tell you if you pay attention. As an example: A missile boat sitting still in an anomaly will get the full damage of the NPC missiles but if you orbit something and kick in an after burner you will be able to tank it better because you are avoiding some of the damage due to the rate of explosion velocity. That's probably why that whole part of a missiles stat is in there. Instead of nerfing the range or damage output, how about the explosion velocity some how. It would be a lot better I think than making the whole line of heavy missile using missile boats suffer. |
Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:04:00 -
[445] - Quote
Kiru SnaKe wrote:Dear CCP,
If HML's are to be nerfed at that level of sh*t please at least reimburse my skill points...
You had your flavor of the month, get on with the next. |
D3vastator
Fight With Gusto
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:04:00 -
[446] - Quote
Aaron Greil wrote:Please post the fits where an ishkur out dps and out tanks a tengu.
Then we'll laugh at how failfit your tengu must be to be outclassed by an assault frig.
Level 4s are meant to require battleships. Tengus were never supposed to replace BSs. Fly a CNR like everyone else. This is as much a buff to torps as it is a nerf to HMLs. Now torp navy scorps will rock.
Ah, my bad. IshTAR :P |
Catabolistic
Higg's Zombie Fusion
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:05:00 -
[447] - Quote
CCP needs to understand that a 20% HML damage reduction will equal a 20% subscriber loss.
Justification: You will have rendered Caldari pilots like myself useless. Between the drake and tengu thats about a years worth training thrown out the window. In your math did you fail to realize that missles do significantly less damage to moving targets as well as targets with a smaller sig radius? Do you really want your new Caldari pilots in a drake taking 15 minutes to kill a single angel viper?
Try this: Buff the other medium long range weapons so that they are actually useful. Quite simply they need a 15% base increase in both tracking and dps. Once that is done, now pilots will have more viable fitting options and noone will ragequit over range tweekings. |
TheSpyInCorp
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:06:00 -
[448] - Quote
hey CCP fozzie why don't you nerf the 400km range of sleepers too so we can actually use TD's against them? as far as im concerned sleepers have infinite range and while they are susceptible to ECM and target painting forms of EWAR, sensor dampeners and TD's so absolutely nothing |
Mourning Souls
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
16
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:07:00 -
[449] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant.
How is that an upshot? From my understanding the word "upshot" is supposed to be a good thing.
Full rack of 720's with a MWD and LSE right now only requires a ACR, needing a RCU2 as well isn't an upshot. |
Ensign X
246
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:07:00 -
[450] - Quote
Laura Dexx wrote:Kiru SnaKe wrote:Dear CCP,
If HML's are to be nerfed at that level of sh*t please at least reimburse my skill points... You had your flavor of the month, get on with the next.
HMLs were never FOTM. 2 of the ships that use them were FOTM. Try not to be so intentionally obtuse. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |