EVE Search - I have an idea for Missiles that won't cause everyone to ragequit

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

I have an idea for Missiles that won't cause everyone to ragequit

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
John Caligan Caldari Provisions Caldari State 13	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:11:00 - [1] - Quote So I've been reading the same threads you all probably have, about qq's and ragequitting over the upcoming Heavy Missile nerfs in the upcomming Winter expansion. But that got me thinking: It's obvious that on some ships cough TENGU!!!! cough Heavy Missiles may be a tad bit more effective than most people would like. However, the upcoming changes are much too draconian and will effect more than just the problem ships, and could well make anything that previously used a heavy missile fit unviable for use in any scenario. So that got me thinking: How do we change Missiles without causing them to be unviable? So here's what I came up with: Rule #1: Missiles will have accuracy falloff: Yes, I think that it's very possible that a missile could miss it's target through some form or another. Tracking could be disrupted in flight. A lucky laser shot could knock it off course. Even against slow-moving targets, missiles should have a chance to miss, like all other weapons. Rule #2: Missiles should have a damage falloff: Again, I believe that this just makes sense. As the missile travels over time, eventually the force propelling it runs out, i.e., the missile runs out of propellant. Part of the damage the missile does is the force with which it hits, not just the pluming fireball. Though inertia will help to maintain the missile's strength, even in deep space, things are always effected by some sort of gravitational field. Over time that would slow the missile down, reducing it's effectiveness at range. Consequently, this could also mean that Missiles could get a buff at close range. Not to the level of Blasters, mind you, but it would mean that at close range, Caldari ships wouldn't be condemned to be swiss cheese on a Megathorn's blasters. So for example: Distance: 70-80 KM Damage: 1/4 Normal Damage Distance: 69-50 KM Damage: 1/2 Normal Damage Distance: 49-15 KM Damage: Normal Damage Distance: 14-6 KM Damage: 2x Normal Damage Distance: <6 KM Damage: 4x Normal Damage So, tell me if you guys thing these would be good alternative changes, and feel free to add-subtract anything. Discuss:
Karn Dulake Sad Flutes 880	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:13:00 - [2] - Quote It would not matter if you had solved the existance of God in your post, you are still pissing in the wind when you think about how much change this thread will make I dont normally troll, but when i do i do it on General Discussion.
Jim Era 3997	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:14:00 - [3] - Quote wat
TAHKEP TAHKEP Inc. 1	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:15:00 - [4] - Quote My own solution to negate the nerf to heavy missiles would be to add a 5% damage to all missile damage types, and not just kinetic. This being only for those ships that get kinetic bonuses of course.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet 2715	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:20:00 - [5] - Quote So your plan is to make them more like guns, but still with delayed damage, so they would be much worse at long ranges while being ridiculously OP at short ranges. Or alternatively somewhat balanced at close range and totally useless at long range because of the non-existant damage. How exactly would this be in any way better and balanced compared to the CCP proposed system?
Lin-Young Borovskova Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 768	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:21:00 - [6] - Quote Jim Era wrote: wat What he said. brb
0wl Pocket Pirates 16	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:23:00 - [7] - Quote The changes are fine, any decent Eve player will tell you it's about time this happened anyway.
Roll Sizzle Beef Space Mutiny 1110	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:25:00 - [8] - Quote OP... you seem to not notice that missiles already have a short and long range version... which all the complainers seem to not realize either. Long range missiles will no longer be compared to short range damage.
BearJews Secure Arms Trade Coalition Secure Arms Trade Coalitions 54	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:31:00 - [9] - Quote The issue is blobs and pve where HMLs shine, slightly. Overall it's a bunch of whining when clearly turrets are still better in almost every aspect BUT Blobbing and PVE.. If anything they should get rid of the 10 second reload (make it 5), reduce the range, improve the speed, and take away the 2nd penalty that comes with the missiles.. Ships that use missile systems aren't even designed for these proposed TE and TC buffs.
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp 2477	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:43:00 - [10] - Quote Perhaps instead you could stop complaining about the inbound missile buffs and try a bit harder to actually understand them. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base.

Karl Hobb Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium 672	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:46:00 - [11] - Quote Would prefer it if whining missile users would just rage quit. Nothing Found
Mina Sebiestar Mactabilis Simplex Cursus 96	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:48:00 - [12] - Quote F1 "it put ore down in can or it gets the hose again"
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1520	Posted - 2012.10.02 21:55:00 - [13] - Quote BearJews wrote: Ships that use missile systems aren't even designed for these proposed TE and TC buffs. Oh well, I guess it's all for the best ~ Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm
Ginger Barbarella State War Academy Caldari State 156	Posted - 2012.10.02 22:31:00 - [14] - Quote Jim Era wrote: wat Wow, such originality...
Kairos Antilles Cerulean Eagles Li3 Federation 27	Posted - 2012.10.02 22:48:00 - [15] - Quote Give missiles a damage falloff? They already have one - it's called Max Flight Range. The damage falls off to ZERO outside that range.
EI Digin Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 280	Posted - 2012.10.02 22:59:00 - [16] - Quote I'm going to ragequit because you didn't nerf missiles.
Brooks Puuntai Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 819	Posted - 2012.10.02 23:04:00 - [17] - Quote I still don't see the issue with the changes.
Roll Sizzle Beef Space Mutiny 1113	Posted - 2012.10.02 23:09:00 - [18] - Quote Brooks Puuntai wrote: I still don't see the issue with the changes. Because there isn't one.
Brisco County The Shadow Plague Fidelas Constans 72	Posted - 2012.10.02 23:15:00 - [19] - Quote I think we're better off just completely homogenizing the weapon systems.
Grumpymunky Super Monkey Tribe of Danger 587	Posted - 2012.10.02 23:44:00 - [20] - Quote Brooks Puuntai wrote: I still don't see the issue with the changes. I still haven't even seen the changes. Post with your monkey. CCP Gargant: Thread locked due to lack of pants.

Akirei Scytale Test Alliance Please Ignore 2472	Posted - 2012.10.02 23:46:00 - [21] - Quote The funny part is you think most people are against the change. TEST Alliance BEST Alliance
Frostys Virpio Caldari Provisions Caldari State 30	Posted - 2012.10.02 23:56:00 - [22] - Quote John Caligan wrote: So for example: Distance: 70-80 KM Damage: 1/4 Normal Damage Distance: 69-50 KM Damage: 1/2 Normal Damage Distance: 49-15 KM Damage: Normal Damage Distance: 14-6 KM Damage: 2x Normal Damage Distance: <6 KM Damage: 4x Normal Damage So at raelly short range, you get to be a one shot wonder of alpha?
Akirei Scytale Test Alliance Please Ignore 2472	Posted - 2012.10.03 00:01:00 - [23] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: John Caligan wrote: So for example: Distance: 70-80 KM Damage: 1/4 Normal Damage Distance: 69-50 KM Damage: 1/2 Normal Damage Distance: 49-15 KM Damage: Normal Damage Distance: 14-6 KM Damage: 2x Normal Damage Distance: <6 KM Damage: 4x Normal Damage So at raelly short range, you get to be a one shot wonder of alpha? He just wants to use rails and blasters with the same weapon module. Totally balanced and logical. Obviously, missiles use their warheads as fuel. TEST Alliance BEST Alliance
Frostys Virpio Caldari Provisions Caldari State 31	Posted - 2012.10.03 00:18:00 - [24] - Quote Akirei Scytale wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: So at raelly short range, you get to be a one shot wonder of alpha? He just wants to use rails and blasters with the same weapon module. Totally balanced and logical. Obviously, missiles use their warheads as fuel. Well technically, they could modify kinetic missile to ahve a little bit of extra range with lower damage since the missile should technically not stop existing when it run out fo fuel. Lower the speed gradually past the max flight tiem and the kinetic damage of the missile too. But more importantly, could we fit a torpedo boat with full damage mods + MWD and open fire at ramming range for crazy gank power?
SmilingVagrant GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 627	Posted - 2012.10.03 00:21:00 - [25] - Quote Strangely it's the changes to drones that upset me more. They are going to become pretty much useless in PVE, and in PVP they were already kinda situational.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1520	Posted - 2012.10.03 00:32:00 - [26] - Quote SmilingVagrant wrote: Strangely it's the changes to drones that upset me more. They are going to become pretty much useless in PVE, and in PVP they were already kinda situational. Nerfs for everyone ~ Buffs for miners and rats. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm
Lord Ryan True Xero 683	Posted - 2012.10.03 00:35:00 - [27] - Quote what leave e alone? 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.
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp 2477	Posted - 2012.10.03 02:02:00 - [28] - Quote SmilingVagrant wrote: Strangely it's the changes to drones that upset me more. They are going to become pretty much useless in PVE, and in PVP they were already kinda situational. Egad, apparently I've missed something... Link? To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base.
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 319	Posted - 2012.10.03 02:05:00 - [29] - Quote Ranger 1 wrote: SmilingVagrant wrote: Strangely it's the changes to drones that upset me more. They are going to become pretty much useless in PVE, and in PVP they were already kinda situational. Egad, apparently I've missed something... Link? I'm guessing changes to non sleeper/incursion NPC AI?
Anya Ohaya School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 170	Posted - 2012.10.03 06:55:00 - [30] - Quote Or just fit HAMs instead. God forbid you should have to use a short range weapon to deal high DPS.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.