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) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
226
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:53:00 -
[211] - 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 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.
At which point do you factor in the fact that missiles (unlike beams and projectiles) have travel times and that missiles (unlike beams and projectiles) can be destroyed by smart bombs.
Unless beams and projectiles are suddenly modified to be somehow "deflected" by smart bombs, HMLs will become 100% useless in fleet sized warfare.
|
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
292
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:55:00 -
[212] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:Ravcharas wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Also making TDs affect missiles is goddamn ********. Now there is literally NO situation in which you dont want TDs fitted and there is NO counter to someone using TDs (apart from blobbing them....see a theme?) Fit a tracking enhancer, fit a tracking computer, fit a web, fit a painter, fit neuts, use appropriate ammo, or use ecm. On my shield tanking ship with 2 slots left over for ewar, one of them is a disruptor, the other one is a web...yeah, i can fit all of those! There is a reason missile ships werent supposed to be affected by TDs and it's because as mostly shield tanks, they don't have ROOM to fit stuff that can fight back, whereas armor ships have 3,4 slots for ewar defence! As well, if you are a turret boat, if you are getting your tracking disrupted, you can just minimize transversal to hit for your full DPS. With missiles, you cant ever do anything to fix your explosion radius/velocity, except use a TP. It's basically like "You can't do your maximum DPS anymore if I TD you". That's stupid, specific piloting should be able to combat ewar (Getting close up/minimizing transversal) People are saying "oh, just fit a TC and then you nullify the effect of the TD on you!" Yeah, because my shield tanking missile ship needs another mid slot ewar defence as it is! I already can't fit ECCM, Painters, TDs, or anything else, because I need a slot for a disruptor, web, and MWD! That means the minimum of 6 slots to fit a 3-slot tank and 3 slot ewar is not enough to combat ewar or fight back in any way. Adding TCs to that makes combating ewar on a missile boat even more of a pain!
m8 you just need to bring more ships than they have tracking disruptors. Eveiseasy |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
143
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:55:00 -
[213] - Quote
now in a more serious note...
Quote: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. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm.
I should be able to fit turrents 720 without having to be max skilled in power and use implants. I understand the nerf need, but maybe you can use this nerf to review the medium artillery PW needs ?????
Quote: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.
this aplies to all types: t1, t2 and faction?
why a damage reduction of 20% and not 10% or 15%, what was your main line of though and calculations that lead to this final number? Allow us to change characters of the same account without the need to logout and put the password again. |
Ravcharas
GREY COUNCIL Nulli Secunda
181
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:55:00 -
[214] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Ravcharas wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Also making TDs affect missiles is goddamn ********. Now there is literally NO situation in which you dont want TDs fitted and there is NO counter to someone using TDs (apart from blobbing them....see a theme?) Fit a tracking enhancer, fit a tracking computer, fit a web, fit a painter, fit neuts, use appropriate ammo, or use ecm. Do you really think that a tracking computer counters a tracking disruptor? PS. Show me the shield cane fit with a tracking computer and a web. It sure mitigates it.
Another counter could be to bring a friend with tracking links. Hue hue. |
Sellendis
Masters of Zen Circle-Of-Two
156
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:56:00 -
[215] - Quote
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:Sellendis wrote:One working weapon system nerfed with range and dmg? Ok, what do we get in return? Can we get 20% DPS and range buff for minmatar ACs? It would only be fair. You might have a future at CCP. You should put in an application.
Well, some buff to most under-used race in PvP would be nice. Did anyone even see a minmatar BC or Comm. ship in the AT X? They need some love, and no, i am not just saying this couse i have AC trained to hell.
I dont think Heavys need a nerf this strong, nerf range...ok. Nerf dmg by 20% is WTF? How is that balancing when blasters were almost useless and a minor buff of 5% makes them ok, but this deserves range and dmg nerf of 20% each....i dont see the logic here. |
baltec1
Bat Country
2143
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:56:00 -
[216] - Quote
Doddy wrote:What does ccp have against the nighthawk is the real question, 2 hml bonuses lol. Such an awesome looking ship too ...... shame.
They havent reached t2 BC yet |
baltec1
Bat Country
2143
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:57:00 -
[217] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
why a damage reduction of 20% and not 10% or 15%, what was your main line of though and calculations that lead to this final number?
Ahem. |
Lord MuffloN
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
15
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:58:00 -
[218] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Making TD's work against missiles is a major mistake too btw. I like the idea of having a TD-ish mechanic work against missiles, that is not a bad thing per se. But when you make missiles affected by TD then you have a nobrainer to fit TD on every ship that has midslots to spare.
Now picture this; which race has the most mids to spare? Gallente. They also happen to be short range (blaster and drones). when TD will affect all weapontypes, Gallente will just force people to go up close or run. It's a bit too early to paint doomsday scenarios, but this could very well rupture the whole game in the nationality balance. I don't mind flying drone boats myself, my Gallente skills are top notch, but it's worrying overall if the devs just don't even think about this on such an early state of development process, to be honest. Make a new module, TD-ish, that counters missiles, and you got my love, that's a whole different story.
You and I seem to have very, very different versions of Gallente ships, sure, it'll be a boon to the drone boats (and you can't seriously say they don't deserve it), but the blaster hulls all already have required mids, scram, web, injector and mwd, now tell me, how many blaster hulls have more than 4 mids? Not many, Myrmidon, Dominix and the Hyperion I believe, and out of them the only pure blaster boat is the hyperion, which in turn have a lot of other issues, that said, my Dominix just became a ultra voilent psycopathic murderer instead of a voilent psycopathic murderer, if I choose to skip the ECCM or other, oh god, I'll have to make choices, no more cookie cutter builds, my god, it's almost interesting again! |
Vicar2008
Mindstar Technology Fatal Ascension
58
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:58:00 -
[219] - Quote
Yeah come to think of it, the majority of the Caldari Cruiser, and Battlecruisers team ahave been benched according to CCP. The Naga and Rokh are the only two decent ships Caldari have left, the majority of their frigates suck also, apart from the Merlin, its still a brawler :D |
Kriorth
Deadspace Knights
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:59:00 -
[220] - Quote
This is the sort of idiocy that makes me wonder why people bother to play this game.
My character was never trained for missiles... I looked into the options and decided it was worth spending MONTHS training the skills because it was worth it. Now CCP decides to make them worthless....
I have no problem with them tweaking the game when they need to in order to balance things, but Now that they took away the reason to train missiles skills they should be required to refund my training time.
|
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
226
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 15:59:00 -
[221] - Quote
Terrorina wrote:Seriously nerfing HML's as a whole is way too excessive. What about us null-sec ratters who have come to rely on the Tengu because it is the only somewhat effective ship to make money while the low-high sec guys get to play FW and incursions for big isks.
I agree Drakes have become too OP for a BC ship and they should have their bonus's reduced or changed accordingly but nerfing HML's entirely is like chopping off an arm because of a broken finger.
If you're going to change them anyway, at least for the love of god give us null-sec grunts a way to make some decent money. You've already nerfed tech, which is fine.. but you didn't replace it with a bottom up way for us grunts to make money (and please don't say sigs, i'm not flying around for hours in the hopes to find a decent site and then hoping a ton of other people haven't found it first in the hopes that I have a slim chance of getting a module that is worth something if I can survive hauling it to Jita).
It's not just null sec ratters who will feel the pinch, CCP has been talking about reducing NPC bounties for a while to. Lots of people (like me) kill rats with heavy missles, this will affect EVERY caldari HML using PVE player (namely mission runners)
Maybe eve to the point where Mission ad anomaly running Tengus might just get replaced by Tracking Computer +Tracking Speed scripted + tracking enhancer + target paineter Cruise Navy Ravens.
As SOON as these changes go live on the test server I'm buying ever single Tracking Computer in jita :)
|
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance
110
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:00:00 -
[222] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:At which point do you factor in the fact that missiles (unlike beams and projectiles) have travel times and that missiles (unlike beams and projectiles) can be destroyed by smart bombs.
Have you ever seen that actually done? "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom." |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
38
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:00:00 -
[223] - 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:>Needs buff, medium rails are the most useless thing in the game currently. DPS: 20 Alpha: 92 Optimal: 65 km Falloff: 15 km Cap/sec: -1.1 PG: 187.2 CPU: 31.5 Time to hit: instant
Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora:>Needs buff, probably will get one cause they suck DPS: 21 Alpha: 91 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 10 km Cap/sec: -3.8 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 27.8 Time to hit: instant
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 Time to hit: instant
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 Time to hit: 10 seconds
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.
fixed |
Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
111
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:00:00 -
[224] - Quote
huuu wait both a range AND a damage reduction for heavy missiles ? isn't that a bit too much at the same time ? and 20% o_O
I hope the damage increase on fury will mitigate that a lot... cause this seems like too big a nerf. i'm okay will losing some range, cause honestly they have too much, but losing range and damage at the same time, and for this much... that's too much :/ |
Lord MuffloN
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
15
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:01:00 -
[225] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote: 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.
Your analysis doesnt include that HMLs dont do full damage to frigates and cruisers (or particularly fast BCs even), regardless of how you pilot.
Because medium railguns, arties or beams always do full damage to frigs and cruisers right? There isn't any random element to it eit... oh... |
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
196
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:01:00 -
[226] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Doddy wrote:What does ccp have against the nighthawk is the real question, 2 hml bonuses lol. Such an awesome looking ship too ...... shame. They havent reached t2 BC yet
Nighthawk is already horribly underpowered compared to drake/tengu, 6 months waiting for a t2 bc balancing expansion will kill it off entirely.
|
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:01:00 -
[227] - Quote
Have to agree here, if that HM nerv is going live ships like the Nighthawk are going from so-so to terribad.
For me right now the HM vs. HAM PVE(!)-question is nonexistent because of range and that little skill called guided missle precision that gives me at least "some" dmg on small-sig targets. I don't PvP much with missles, therefor won't comment on it.
Melina Lin wrote:... Weren't these of all missiles the ones with the absolute shortest range? I hope they still make it out the launch tubes without a tracking mod.
I am smirking right now, need to wait if I need to cry because it was "too" true...
cu |
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:02:00 -
[228] - Quote
Sellendis wrote:Vladimir Norkoff wrote:Sellendis wrote:One working weapon system nerfed with range and dmg? Ok, what do we get in return? Can we get 20% DPS and range buff for minmatar ACs? It would only be fair. You might have a future at CCP. You should put in an application. Well, some buff to most under-used race in PvP would be nice. Did anyone even see a minmatar BC or Comm. ship in the AT X? They need some love, and no, i am not just saying this couse i have AC trained to hell. I dont think Heavys need a nerf this strong, nerf range...ok. Nerf dmg by 20% is WTF? How is that balancing when blasters were almost useless and a minor buff of 5% makes them ok, but this deserves range and dmg nerf of 20% each....i dont see the logic here.
I don't think what you watched was the Alliance Tournament...
Were there like robots with a moving red light in the place of eyes? Or maybe lightsabers? |
Sirane Elrek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
140
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:02:00 -
[229] - Quote
Sellendis wrote:Did anyone even see a minmatar BC or Comm. ship in the AT X? Uh. Sleipnir, Cyclone. Almost 300 fielded ships, that's basically NONE~ |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
38
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:02:00 -
[230] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:
m8 you just need to bring more ships than they have tracking disruptors. Eveiseasy
Yes, because every fight is not a solo fight |
|
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
196
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:03:00 -
[231] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: As SOON as these changes go live on the test server I'm buying ever single Tracking Computer in jita :)
lolitwillbewaytolatethen
|
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
195
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:03:00 -
[232] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:As well, if you are a turret boat, if you are getting your tracking disrupted, you can just minimize transversal to hit for your full DPS. With missiles, you cant ever do anything to fix your explosion radius/velocity, except use a TP. It's basically like "You can't do your maximum DPS anymore if I TD you". That's stupid, specific piloting should be able to combat ewar (Getting close up/minimizing transversal)
People are saying "oh, just fit a TC and then you nullify the effect of the TD on you!" Yeah, because my shield tanking missile ship needs another mid slot ewar defence as it is! I already can't fit ECCM, Painters, TDs, or anything else, because I need a slot for a disruptor, web, and MWD! That means the minimum of 6 slots to fit a 3-slot tank and 3 slot ewar is not enough to combat ewar or fight back in any way. Adding TCs to that makes combating ewar on a missile boat even more of a pain! So what you're saying is, the guy who fitted a TD might not really be able to get effective use from that slot vs a turret ship, but you shouldn't have to also fit 1 module to counter theirs? Even if it would almost always help your dps? Also, TEs in lows, keep your shield tank. |
Gary Goat
XDC-UK
22
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:03:00 -
[233] - 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.
Not empty quoting.
All the people comparing HMLs to blasters and ACs seem to be missing the point completely. |
xVKx
High Venture Team Red Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:04:00 -
[234] - Quote
yep... allright CCP... lets nerf everything in EVE...
(btw what are u smoking there? 20% DMG and 25% flightrange nerf at once... huh...) |
Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:04:00 -
[235] - Quote
The nighthawk already has lower dps than all the other field command ships, and this change to heavy missiles is going to make it even worse. Why would anyone fly a nighthawk after these changes? CCP could come back and say that command ships will be rebalanced as well, but I would bet that will happen well after the missile changes are put in place. That leaves the nighthawk very much out in the cold.
|
Redd Dredd
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:05:00 -
[236] - Quote
My poor Damnation. Now with even less damage. :( |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
560
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:06:00 -
[237] - Quote
DeBingJos wrote:Ok, the cane got a nerf and it deserved it.
But why does the Drake get a buff? (less shields, more gank)
Drakes will be even more op than now...
/me is sad
it gets a reduced range... so if you want to project your weapons further out you will need to fit a te or tracking comp... so this is really a nerf to hml drakes and a boost to hamm drakes... Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point? -áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
JEFFRAIDER
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:07:00 -
[238] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAAHA another nerf first where supers... then titans... then lets kill otec and nerf tec... now lets kill the drake blob, the welpcanes blob and all tengus blob (what a coincidence, all ship doctrines the CFC uses in mass, lol, pure coincidence of course, no tinfoil teories here) This just make my work day Can't you see we are like the Borg, we will just adapt and tomorrow we will just use "put here the best low cost ship name vs dps ratio here" to blob all our enemies again and again and again!...and 6 months from now we all be here again, nerfing the ship(s) and/or weapon system(s) we will be using at that time... You can try, but you can't stop the blob !Fake edit: I can see all carriers beeing nerfed next.... "no sentry drones for you"
JFYI champion but the CFC were the ones most happy at the super nerf
o7 |
Steelshine
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
83
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:07:00 -
[239] - Quote
MisterNick wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:At which point do you factor in the fact that missiles (unlike beams and projectiles) have travel times and that missiles (unlike beams and projectiles) can be destroyed by smart bombs. Have you ever seen that actually done?
Every day.
Some people actually fight other players. |
Kriorth
Deadspace Knights
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:07:00 -
[240] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz 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:>Needs buff, medium rails are the most useless thing in the game currently. DPS: 20 Alpha: 92 Optimal: 65 km Falloff: 15 km Cap/sec: -1.1 PG: 187.2 CPU: 31.5 Time to hit: instant
Heavy Beam Laser II with Aurora:>Needs buff, probably will get one cause they suck DPS: 21 Alpha: 91 Optimal: 54 km Falloff: 10 km Cap/sec: -3.8 PG: 223.2 (previously 248.5) CPU: 27.8 Time to hit: instant
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 Time to hit: instant
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 Time to hit: 10 seconds
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. fixed
Except that missiles shouldn't be doing maximum damage against moving targets. There isn't a reduction in damage to a moving target from a railgun is there?
|
|
|
|
|
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 |