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) |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
72
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:08:00 -
[451] - Quote
Aglais wrote: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.
Allright. Compared to beam lasers, the nerfed HMLs will deliver almost twice as much effective DPS. Compared to Artillery, the nerfed HMLs will deliver 3.5 times the effective DPS with 80% of the artillery alpha.
Conclusion: After the nerf, the HMLs will probably still be the best weapon system in the game in effective damage application. Its downside will continue to be the delay of that application, but all in all i'd say we have a better balance now. |
Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
448
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:09:00 -
[452] - Quote
Here are some numbers on HAMs. The maximum range of HAMs with Javelin missiles is 30.4 km.
I'm assuming a bonus of +30% flight time per Tracking Computer loaded with the optimal range script. This gives the following
Javelin max range with no velocity rigs: 1 TC: 39.5 km 2 TC: 47.4 km 3 TC: 52.6 km
Javelin max range with a +15% velocity rig: 1 TC: 45.3 km 2 TC: 54.4 km 3 TC: 60.4 km
Javelin max range with two +15% velocity rigs: 1 TC: 51.3 km 2 TC: 61.6 km 3 TC: 68.4 km
Javelin max range with three +15% velocity rigs: 1 TC: 55.7 km 2 TC: 66.9 km 3 TC: 74.3 km
And for fun, max range with two +20% velocity rigs, one +15% velocity rig, a 5% velocity implant and three tracking computers: 84.5 km.
Disclaimer: we don't actually know how much tracking computers will increase flight time on missiles, the 30% is just my speculation. |
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
207
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:09:00 -
[453] - Quote
D3vastator wrote: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 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1938285#post1938285
Seriously, your more expensive tech3 is meant to be a stepping stone to the superior specialised t2 ship for the particular role. Because you can get isk faster than SP. Tengus are brokenly overpowered, they need nerfs. |
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:11:00 -
[454] - Quote
For the record, hate all the missile changes. If it ain't broke, don't "fix" it. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
859
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:11:00 -
[455] - Quote
On the cane thing. I think 225 might be a bit much.
Maybe like 180 PG? So that means my 1600mm plated Hurricane can just drop 1 neut and still be flown?
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Ensign X
246
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:11:00 -
[456] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:Allright. Compared to beam lasers, the nerfed HMLs will deliver almost twice as much effective DPS. Compared to Artillery, the nerfed HMLs will deliver 3.5 times the effective DPS with 80% of the artillery alpha.
What kind of terrible, Anchorman math is this? Even Ron Burgundy could see through this steaming pile of nonsense. |
Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:12:00 -
[457] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:D3vastator wrote: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 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1938285#post1938285Seriously, your more expensive tech3 is meant to be a stepping stone to the superior specialised t2 ship for the particular role. Because you can get isk faster than SP. Tengus are brokenly overpowered, they need nerfs.
All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live.
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:For the record, hate all the missile changes. If it ain't broke, don't "fix" it.
(they are broken) |
Iogrim
Kaer Industries
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:14:00 -
[458] - Quote
Not sure whether it was posted (23 pages, yay), but will we get TC and TE equivalents for missiles? |
Ensign X
246
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:15:00 -
[459] - Quote
Laura Dexx wrote:All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live.
You said this before, but now I'm wondering what insight you have that suggests CCP will be releasing Dev Blogs about T2 and T3 ship re-balancing in the next couple days? |
D3vastator
Fight With Gusto
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:16:00 -
[460] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote: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!!!
I did mean Ishtar. However, considering the fact that neither Caldari HAC can come close to soloing L4 missions, I'd say that we don't really have balance here. The Tengu outclasses both Caldari HACs by an enormous margin. In fact, this update appears to make the Caracal almost on-par with the Cerberus...
Daneel Trevize wrote: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.
I understand that. I just wanted to point out how badly this will effect those in my situation. Tengu has been the go-to Caldari mission ship for years. I just sold my SNI less than two weeks ago to trade into a Tengu. It looks like I'm going to have to trade back after this update. |
|
Ensign X
246
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:16:00 -
[461] - Quote
Iogrim wrote:Not sure whether it was posted (23 pages, yay), but will we get TC and TE equivalents for missiles?
Dude, it was right in the OP.
Quote: -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script)
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2947
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:16:00 -
[462] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: 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
Not to mention that there's plenty of threads out there where players rightfully express concern about "stat creep" whenever CCP's response to imbalance is solely to buff a statistic. Either way, these kind of changes inevitably cause complaint regardless of merit.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:17:00 -
[463] - Quote
Daneel Trevize wrote:Btw, when are medium rails going to become in any way usable in PvP? Arty clearly is, HMs have been, beams too. Rails are just godawful on Gal or Cal ships.
^^^^This
HM nerf not needed.
Medium Rails buff needed. |
Eradin Amakiir
Duragon Pioneer Group Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:18:00 -
[464] - Quote
Whelp, guess there's no reason to train Caldari ships any more.
I mean, really, Drake and Tengu are too strong, so let's ruin a whole bunch of Caldari ships. Great idea. |
sembur
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:18:00 -
[465] - Quote
Some interesting changes here. Look forward to shaking up the metagame. Buffered armor cane is going to get pinched a bit, but that just means we need to get active armor tanking revisited soon.
CCP Fozzie wrote: 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
Two things:
- I still don't see a clarification: are these changes to explosion velocity and radius ALL missiles or just Guided?
- Tracking speed disruption is the new counter to Target Painters. Amarr ewar counters Minmatar ewar. ISWYDT
I read 20 pages of this drek and didn't see someone else mention the TD vs TP bit.
P.S. Thanks for doing BSB #20. Stay visible, the communication is appreciated, yadda yadda, but plz also geef devblog when changes solidify. Trolling the forums is a terrible experience and makes me listen to emo rock. |
Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:19:00 -
[466] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live. You said this before, but now I'm wondering what insight you have that suggests CCP will be releasing Dev Blogs about T2 and T3 ship re-balancing in the next couple days?
It just has to happen. They are modifying a lot of weapons and base hulls, and T3s have always been too strong. A lot is going to be shifted around before a reasonable measure of balance can be achieved. |
Ensign X
246
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:19:00 -
[467] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:there's plenty of threads out there where players rightfully express concern about "stat creep" whenever CCP's response to imbalance is solely to buff a statistic.
Citation needed. |
Ensign X
246
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:20:00 -
[468] - Quote
Laura Dexx wrote:Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live. You said this before, but now I'm wondering what insight you have that suggests CCP will be releasing Dev Blogs about T2 and T3 ship re-balancing in the next couple days? It just has to happen. They are modifying a lot of weapons and base hulls, and T3s have always been too strong. A lot is going to be shifted around before a reasonable measure of balance can be achieved.
Ohh, so you don't have a reason to proclaim that T2 and T3 re-balancing devblogs are forthcoming? That's cool. Talking out of one's ass can be fun. |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
72
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:21:00 -
[469] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:Allright. Compared to beam lasers, the nerfed HMLs will deliver almost twice as much effective DPS. Compared to Artillery, the nerfed HMLs will deliver 3.5 times the effective DPS with 80% of the artillery alpha. What kind of terrible, Anchorman math is this? Even Ron Burgundy could see through this steaming pile of nonsense.
It is math that take into account gun signature resolution, target signature radius, missile explosion radius and -velocity, moving targets and effective tracking, but excluding transversal velocity because that would permit manipulating numbers in HMLs disfavour. You should try it sometime. |
Haquer
Vorkuta Inc Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:22:00 -
[470] - Quote
B-b-b-but guys myyy drrraaakkkkeee ((((((((( |
|
Laura Dexx
Snuff Box
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:23:00 -
[471] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live. You said this before, but now I'm wondering what insight you have that suggests CCP will be releasing Dev Blogs about T2 and T3 ship re-balancing in the next couple days? It just has to happen. They are modifying a lot of weapons and base hulls, and T3s have always been too strong. A lot is going to be shifted around before a reasonable measure of balance can be achieved. Ohh, so you don't have a reason to proclaim that T2 and T3 re-balancing devblogs are forthcoming? That's cool. Talking out of one's ass can be fun.
I never guaranteed that it is going to happen. I just said that, in order to complete their re-balancing sweep, they will have to visit T2/T3 cruisers and CS. T3s are too strong and versatile, they have in a lot of cases swept T2s under the rug entirely, and some of them have even managed to replace CS (EHP and links are better). |
Athena Themis
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:24:00 -
[472] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:Ensign X wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:Allright. Compared to beam lasers, the nerfed HMLs will deliver almost twice as much effective DPS. Compared to Artillery, the nerfed HMLs will deliver 3.5 times the effective DPS with 80% of the artillery alpha. What kind of terrible, Anchorman math is this? Even Ron Burgundy could see through this steaming pile of nonsense. It is math that take into account gun signature resolution, target signature radius, missile explosion radius and -velocity, moving targets and effective tracking, but excluding transversal velocity because that would permit manipulating numbers in HMLs disfavour. You should try it sometime.
Care to share it? Or was it all made up.... |
Bree Okanata
Romex Inc. Dustm3n
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:25:00 -
[473] - Quote
There seems to be a typo. It says you are decreasing all heavy missile damage by 20%. You going to remove the Drake and Tengu from the game too? |
Athena Themis
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:25:00 -
[474] - Quote
Laura Dexx wrote:Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live. You said this before, but now I'm wondering what insight you have that suggests CCP will be releasing Dev Blogs about T2 and T3 ship re-balancing in the next couple days? It just has to happen. They are modifying a lot of weapons and base hulls, and T3s have always been too strong. A lot is going to be shifted around before a reasonable measure of balance can be achieved. Ohh, so you don't have a reason to proclaim that T2 and T3 re-balancing devblogs are forthcoming? That's cool. Talking out of one's ass can be fun. I never guaranteed that it is going to happen. I just said that, in order to complete their re-balancing sweep, they will have to visit T2/T3 cruisers and CS. T3s are too strong and versatile, they have in a lot of cases swept T2s under the rug entirely, and some of them have even managed to replace CS (EHP and links are better).
Implying ccp always does what they logically should do. |
Ensign X
248
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:25:00 -
[475] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:Ensign X wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:Allright. Compared to beam lasers, the nerfed HMLs will deliver almost twice as much effective DPS. Compared to Artillery, the nerfed HMLs will deliver 3.5 times the effective DPS with 80% of the artillery alpha. What kind of terrible, Anchorman math is this? Even Ron Burgundy could see through this steaming pile of nonsense. It is math that take into account gun signature resolution, target signature radius, missile explosion radius and -velocity, moving targets and effective tracking, but excluding transversal velocity because that would permit manipulating numbers in HMLs disfavour. You should try it sometime.
Try what? Pulling numbers out of my ass without citing the source or the math I used to reach those numbers? I guess I can try that, though I'm unsure what point that will make...
Here, let me try;
99% of all statistics on the internet are 75% exaggerations.
How's that? |
The Bazzalisk
Teshnology Inc. Stealth Wear Inc.
10
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:25:00 -
[476] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: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 I liked the part where you just ignored half of my post. Want to see other battlecruisers more? Give the Brutix more PG and give the Prophecy a bonus which will make it something more than a brick with a metric **** ton of EHP. Want to see cruisers more? Give them more base HP so they don't die to gate guns in like 30 seconds. Nerfing aspects of the game to affect a few ships without considering the knock-on effects to other ships such as the Cerberus and Nighthawk is stupid. |
Korinth Daemenshan
Eclipse Navy Get Off My Lawn
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:26:00 -
[477] - Quote
This seems very premature.
BC rebalance is coming. Let it come and do the job properly, not this half assed nonsense. In the scope of wider changes to the BC class? These changes make sense. Without that scope? It's a half ass, premature, poorly conceived fix to something that was going to be fixed anyways. |
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
51
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:26:00 -
[478] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:Ensign X wrote:Laura Dexx wrote:All T3s do. And they will. Give it a couple of days for those dev blogs to go live. You said this before, but now I'm wondering what insight you have that suggests CCP will be releasing Dev Blogs about T2 and T3 ship re-balancing in the next couple days? It just has to happen. They are modifying a lot of weapons and base hulls, and T3s have always been too strong. A lot is going to be shifted around before a reasonable measure of balance can be achieved. Ohh, so you don't have a reason to proclaim that T2 and T3 re-balancing devblogs are forthcoming? That's cool. Talking out of one's ass can be fun.
You can be sure that they will come. I'd say after cruisers and frigs this winter (and missiles) we will see BCs and BSs finished in spring if not earlier and then T2 frigs and cruisers next summer together with T3s
P.S: This change is the perfect preparation for the BC rebalance |
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. Varangon Tagma
59
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:27:00 -
[479] - Quote
Powergrid and damage nerf to missiles and canes is excessive.
Some more moderate nerf for first iteration would be wiser. Like -10% to damage to heavy missiles and -100 to cane powergrid first. IF that is not enough once you get to proper BC rebalancing you can always apply additional nerfs. But if you do this massive nerf all at the same time you are risking making those ships horribly underpowered. Cane especially with with massive -20% grid is at risk, everyone will simply start using Cyclones instead because you wont be able to fit a decent Cane any more, too much slots will have to go for AC and PG.
Else seems good and reasonable. |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
72
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:27:00 -
[480] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:Ensign X wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:Allright. Compared to beam lasers, the nerfed HMLs will deliver almost twice as much effective DPS. Compared to Artillery, the nerfed HMLs will deliver 3.5 times the effective DPS with 80% of the artillery alpha. What kind of terrible, Anchorman math is this? Even Ron Burgundy could see through this steaming pile of nonsense. It is math that take into account gun signature resolution, target signature radius, missile explosion radius and -velocity, moving targets and effective tracking, but excluding transversal velocity because that would permit manipulating numbers in HMLs disfavour. You should try it sometime. Try what? Pulling numbers out of my ass without citing the source or the math I used to reach those numbers? I guess I can try that, though I'm unsure what point that will make... Here, let me try; 99% of all statistics on the internet are 75% exaggerations. How's that?
I'd say you are exceeding my expectations. Well done. |
|
|
|
|
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 |