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) |
MIrple
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
113
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:12:00 -
[1711] - 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? |
Lili Lu
449
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:15:00 -
[1712] - 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. We all know that tracking mechanics allow a turret to alpha a small ship at range. Conversely at some closer range depending on circumstances and ships/guns involved those turrets won't ever hit. You said it yourself. The weapons are different. Fozzie knows this.
But you apparently missed that precisions will be getting buffed. Also, balancing all this strictly based on medium weapon system v interceptor is not going to happen. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
729
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:17:00 -
[1713] - Quote
Marcus Harikari wrote:patrick elektros wrote:this is about CCP making more money, by making people train other skills and this nerfs people making in game money, in effect making it harder for people to pay for plex with in game isk. in effect hoping that people will in turn have to pay real money to play the game. ccp has been about making money, ad not about working with the players on some level fora while now. and this is aNERF on tengus and drakes, the 2 biggest ratting boats in the game.
you got an issue with this, let ccp know, make them rollback the nerf, but keep in mind walmart only rolls back items it's raise prices on first.
the moderate change would have been 7.5% reduction in missile damage and 5% in range. this wasnt against goons or anybody else, it was against all of us to pay more to play (notice plex prices at an all time high) and since the plex sellers are lookin to sell higher price plex and the plex buyers wont be able to make the money, maybe plexes will drop, but i doubt it.
CCP keep in mind we will find better fits for better ships, no matter what you do you need to remember that nerfing pvp/pve ships and buffering industrials is the first step to being like wow, and your sandbox will get sludge in it. THIS Did you even read the post you quoted? http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Bloutok
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:18:00 -
[1714] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:Bloutok wrote: reposting other's whines and stuff You know, you are late to this. And the discussion has really moved past the "just delete Caldari" exagerated angry unthinking replies. You should read more and focus on the rational discussion that is starting to occur. You may have something valuable to contribute to that. But your emotional reaction to the proposed (and subject to much tweeking in itself) change is not really helping the thread at this time. Commiserate with people on voice comms or something (assuming they will all think as you presently do). Then come back to post your valuable thoughts and suggestions concerning the mechanics and stats of this change, after you have cleared that from your system. edit - nice post Zarnack
One more nice empty posting. Do you really think everyone reads everything everyday on the forums ?
I do not. This topic got my attention now.
Edit: And i never posted the quote on this tread. So, you are making stuff up. Or found it in some older treads, but i am sure i never said that. |
HELLBOUNDMAN
The Proletarii
60
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:19:00 -
[1715] - Quote
CCP
read
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=155540&find=unread
for a better balancing solution, or at least part of a better balancing solution. |
Bloutok
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:22:00 -
[1716] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Bloutok wrote:Onictus wrote:Bloutok wrote:DJCouGaR wrote:What is it with you guys and nerfing Caldari to be honest take missiles out of the game and make everyone use guns Caldari would be better of , and by the way can I have all the skills back i trained on missiles because they are useless now Yeah, entirely remove the Caldari race. No, i am not joking. One of the problem is that CCP is not giving us the entire picture. What will be done with all the cruiser sized ships ? BCs, BSs ..... Titans ? We have to decide if it's good with only a few pieces of the puzzle in place. If they nerf the ECM again. There will truly be nothing left....... So you missed the attack and support cruiser threads completely to come in here and say remove Caldari? Seriously? Nice empty posting, i will reply with a nice empty posting. empty posting. Since you can't be bothered to check the threads STICKIED IN THIS FORUM Don't let the door hit you in the ass.
More empty posting. I hope some ISD is going to come around at some point. |
Grombutz
Treasures Collectors Solar Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:24:00 -
[1717] - Quote
Wow, it's actually true.
Nerfing HM - damage by 20% (WTF?) seems quite hard. I just hope someone will notice that caldari is officialy useless once this hits TQ :D
About the fury missiles in general - > Their damage application gets even worse? Anyone considered that it's quite hard to hit a BS - sized target for max damage with furys CM's/Rage torps allready? This will be even worse now... While the buff to precisions and the removal of drawbacks is good, making furys even more worse than they are now is quite, unnecessary. Drake is nerfed enough with plain 20% damage reduce, making it even worse through nerfing all fury missiles aswell is hilarious.
Is there really a need to nerf all missiles, just because HM's are OP?
In addition - with the TD changes, missiles will find even less use, especially because you can't really affect damage application like turrets can. Is this considered aswell?
If you are going to nerf missiles to 7th Hell, I would also like to see missile SP reimburse... |
Sycotic Deninard
Polaris Breach Corp
20
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:24:00 -
[1718] - Quote
Well, if the heavy missiles get a damage and a range nerf as well as become effected by TD's, it will be the end of that weapon platform and possibly a lot of Caldari ships that use it. Period. End of story. The biggest complaint in game is the travel time of the missiles to reach its target. I dont see any real improvements in that direction. I'm also unclear how the proposed changes will effect faction missiles. Are they getting nerfed as well? |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2246
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:27:00 -
[1719] - 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.
Going 400m/s you better warp the **** out.
-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
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
179
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:28:00 -
[1720] - Quote
Bloutok wrote:
More empty posting. I hope some ISD is going to come around at some point.
Amusing response, you haven't biomassed yet? |
|
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
313
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:28:00 -
[1721] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: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. Going 400m/s you better warp the **** out. -Liang
Clearly I fly an HML stiletto (screenshot was from a drake I think) |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2246
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:28:00 -
[1722] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:Page 85. Wow. Well hopefully CCP Fozzie is still reading this. I'm concerned about Tracking Disruptors. Faction Warfare is frigate heavy. We've seen the use of alot of the new frigates there. And many if not most are using tracking disruptors. A condor with light missiles, long point, and two TD is common. An arty slasher set up the same way is too. Even Atrons and Executioners will fit a TD rather then a web. Now I've held my peace as I can build destroyers that lock farther and shoot farther then these small, frail frigates. I also know in the background that missile boats were very capable against them as they were immune to TD. But if that's not the case I can guarantee you that everyone and their mom will be fitting a TD. Some ideas:
- Increase the fittings on the TD. Increase the fitting grid on specialized boats.
- Take the TD for missiles one step further and seperate them for use via race/weapon type. I.E. - create a TD for hybrids, projectiles, lasers, missiles, and a weak general purpose one.
- Nerf the TD and boost the specialized boats.
Hee hee. I think Heretics pioneered that 2 TD Condor fit. We've moved on for the most part.
-Liang
Ed: Thanks Hahbs. :) 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
|
Bloutok
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
13
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:29:00 -
[1723] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Bloutok wrote:
More empty posting. I hope some ISD is going to come around at some point.
Amusing response, you haven't biomassed yet?
No. You ? |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
200
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:33:00 -
[1724] - Quote
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. Well ok, those numbers seem pretty well balanced . . . but the problem is that the guns can switch to close range ammo to do more damage; they need to make shorter range higher damage missiles . . .
oh wait . . .
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tech Two Missiles -At the moment Fury missiles at Light and Heavy sizes have a faster explosion velocity than precision missiles, we'll be fixing this defect as part of the changes. -Remove ship penalties from tech two missiles (ship velocity and signature radius) Precision: Improve bonuses to explosion velocity and explosion radius, increase damage to match T1 missiles, reduce flight time slightly Fury: Increase damage, increase the severity of penalties to explosion radius and velocity Javelin: Just remove ship penalties Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
179
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:35:00 -
[1725] - 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.
Do I need to point out yellow boxes and no ranges?
Several hundred heavies at 20km, you would be on to something, at 65ish (assuming a lateral path and boosted properly) the missiles won't get there without a very specific build Drake.
That being said I could barely tank a SINGLE HAM II with a Dramiel in 1200m/s orbit and a 44m sig , four volleys pushed me to half shields, and a single..as in one....HAM launcher on a Loki, I was starting to get nervous when the cavalry got there.
Sigras wrote:
Well ok, those numbers seem pretty well balanced . . . but the problem is that the guns can switch to close range ammo to do more damage; they need to make shorter range higher damage missiles . . .
While true, you can't "get under" a missile. |
Senarrius
Big Monkey Corp Final Admonition
35
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:36:00 -
[1726] - Quote
I would like to know how TD's are going to affect non tracking missiles, considering that they do not "track" in the same way normal missiles do.
It makes little sense to me. |
Comy 1
Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.
122
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:38:00 -
[1727] - Quote
Are you people seriously complaining about TDs becomming overpowered?
I mean, sure they do affect turrets already and we do have the common rage about "BECAUSE OF CURSE"...or wait, it was Falcon...
Why would you after the change bring ships with TDs when you might aswell keep jamming everything like you always did. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
296
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:43:00 -
[1728] - Quote
Sigras 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. Well ok, those numbers seem pretty well balanced . . . but the problem is that the guns can switch to close range ammo to do more damage; they need to make shorter range higher damage missiles . . . oh wait . . . CCP Fozzie wrote:Tech Two Missiles -At the moment Fury missiles at Light and Heavy sizes have a faster explosion velocity than precision missiles, we'll be fixing this defect as part of the changes. -Remove ship penalties from tech two missiles (ship velocity and signature radius) Precision: Improve bonuses to explosion velocity and explosion radius, increase damage to match T1 missiles, reduce flight time slightly Fury: Increase damage, increase the severity of penalties to explosion radius and velocity Javelin: Just remove ship penalties Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly The only issue there is the significant time investment needed to use those options and the limit to T2 versions where all medium turrets have that option as soon as they can be used. |
Monite Harajem
Crimson Bounty Hunters
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:46:00 -
[1729] - Quote
So then with those changes could the heavy bays then hold more ammo? I mean everyone wants to compair numbers of Damage per second. Why not expand the fight time and see that Every other weapon of the BC class hold more rounds and have more ammo space. Meaning less down time to reload and start firing again.
So crystals get off what? over 500shoots Arts over 100 rounds Rails over 100 round Heavys 40missiles...
So With that said, theres at least a 30second down time for heavies compared to other bays With this graph http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/1209/lrc.gif
When the drakes down reloading harbs get off 1870 more dmg brutix 1780 and so on...
Well seeing as theres going to be more down times for the drake, the damage levels out a bit. And Large fleet battles are not a few seconds long, they are a few minutes to hours long so, expand the blood combate graphs and do the real math on over all damage...
DPS is only good for a second :) 30seconds down time compared to the next weapon is a LARGE gap |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
848
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:49:00 -
[1730] - Quote
If tracking computers affect missiles now, what happens if I switch the scripts while the missile is mid-flight? Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
|
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
313
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:50:00 -
[1731] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Sigras 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. Well ok, those numbers seem pretty well balanced . . . but the problem is that the guns can switch to close range ammo to do more damage; they need to make shorter range higher damage missiles . . . oh wait . . . CCP Fozzie wrote:Tech Two Missiles -At the moment Fury missiles at Light and Heavy sizes have a faster explosion velocity than precision missiles, we'll be fixing this defect as part of the changes. -Remove ship penalties from tech two missiles (ship velocity and signature radius) Precision: Improve bonuses to explosion velocity and explosion radius, increase damage to match T1 missiles, reduce flight time slightly Fury: Increase damage, increase the severity of penalties to explosion radius and velocity Javelin: Just remove ship penalties Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly The only issue there is the significant time investment needed to use those options and the limit to T2 versions where all medium turrets have that option as soon as they can be used.
Also all medium turrets have the option to load close range ammo for HUGE increases in tracking and damage.
|
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
70
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:52:00 -
[1732] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:If tracking computers affect missiles now, what happens if I switch the scripts while the missile is mid-flight?
I'm guessing it only affects missiles fired after the switch. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
179
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:54:00 -
[1733] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: Rage: Reduce range, increase damage slightly
[/quote] The only issue there is the significant time investment needed to use those options and the limit to T2 versions where all medium turrets have that option as soon as they can be used.[/quote]
Those are all T2 numbers, and all you also have to understand that all of the T2 ammo comes with a tacking penalty.
Sure you can switch down, but a 250mm Railgun II (biggest medium) rail with anti matter is 16km+13km sans bonuses or tracking enhancers, and tracks pretty terribly at 0.0277rad/sec....with Motion prediction V. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
848
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:54:00 -
[1734] - Quote
Here's my own take on heavy missiles:
Reduce effective range by ~20% Reduce HM damage by ~10%, increase HAM damage by ~10% Swap the powergrid requirements of heavy launchers and heavy assault launchers. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
729
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:57:00 -
[1735] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Also all medium turrets have the option to load close range ammo for HUGE increases in tracking and damage.
This is the BIGGEST reason why HMLs shouldn't be nerfed as bad as the nerf proponents and CCP Fozzie seem to think they are.
Scatim Helicon has the right idea. 20% range nerf, 10% damage nerf, switch fitting requirements with HAMs, buff HAM damage slightly.
(Actually instead of buffing HAM damage I'd be for buffing HAM explosion velocity and radius, but other than that they're fine). http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Lili Lu
450
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:58:00 -
[1736] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote: Also all medium turrets have the option to load close range ammo for HUGE increases in tracking and damage.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1944512#post1944512
already mentioned and addressed this. suffice to say it's not as "HUGE" as you would hope. |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
667
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 22:06:00 -
[1737] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:If tracking computers affect missiles now, what happens if I switch the scripts while the missile is mid-flight?
**** gets real.
(Probably nothing, but testing will reveal all. Once the changes reach the test server, of course.) |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
729
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 22:06:00 -
[1738] - Quote
Yes, but it's one of several things that aren't, in aggregate, taken into account. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2248
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 22:08:00 -
[1739] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Also all medium turrets have the option to load close range ammo for HUGE increases in tracking and damage.
This is the BIGGEST reason why HMLs shouldn't be nerfed as bad as the nerf proponents and CCP Fozzie seem to think they are. Scatim Helicon has the right idea. 20% range nerf, 10% damage nerf, switch fitting requirements with HAMs, buff HAM damage slightly. (Actually instead of buffing HAM damage I'd be for buffing HAM explosion velocity and radius, but other than that they're fine).
I feel like that's part of the trade off between not having close range damage and not being weak up close. Bring on the 20%! ;-)
-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
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
296
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 22:11:00 -
[1740] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:
The only issue there is the significant time investment needed to use those options and the limit to T2 versions where all medium turrets have that option as soon as they can be used.
Those are all T2 numbers, and all you also have to understand that all of the T2 ammo comes with a tacking penalty. Sure you can switch down, but a 250mm Railgun II (biggest medium) rail with anti matter is 16km+13km sans bonuses or tracking enhancers, and tracks pretty terribly at 0.0277rad/sec....with Motion prediction V. My comment was in response to:
Sigras wrote:Well ok, those numbers seem pretty well balanced . . . but the problem is that the guns can switch to close range ammo to do more damage; they need to make shorter range higher damage missiles . . . (list of T2 ammo changes)
Which I find to be an issue with the fact that while T1 ammo has the option for turrets, HML's do not. |
|
|
|
|
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 |