Lili Lu
721
   |
Posted - 2013.03.31 14:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
Goldiiee wrote:Perhaps this will help make sense of it:#
falloff /Tracking speed/ Optimal
TC 15% / 15% / 7.5%
TC 30% / 15% / 0.0% (falloff script)
TC 0.0% / 30% / 0.0% (Tracking Script)
TE 30% / 10% / 15%
I would think that the OP of this module is very evident when you add it take less than half as much CPU and no PG.
I personally hate (Not emphatic enough; Abhor, Despise, Screaming with rage), the new proposed bonuses to the TE. But putting aside how I personally feel about the changes, and how they affect me, I am looking at why they needed changed in relation to the Balancing of ships and their respective abilities. I would hope that Fozzie reconsiders the 33% and goes for a 20% but I'm not holding my breath.
I think your grid is a little off. The one you have labeled TC with Falloff script should be 30/00/15. But still your point is well illustrated.
However, you could hold your breath. They did partially cave to the player response in the HM damage nerf. They did recognize some problems and sent back for internal testing the proposed TC/TE/TD changes affecting missiles. Notice these were adjustments and reevaluations of the extent of the change they have determined is in the game's best interest, not a total abandonment of their plans. So there was a HM damage nerf. The "tracking" mod changes for missiles are still coming. And here I could easily see a 30%, 25%, or even 20% change on the range nerfs to TE optimal and falloff instead of the initially presented 33% nerf to range effects.
On eve-kill Minmatar ships for March (and we are at the end of the month) currently occupy 11.5 of the top 20. Some of that is missile minny ships. And, some of those minny turret ships are often fit with arty for the alpha and not autos for the kiting. But even there the TE is sitting behind both providing a method of getting mobility and range.
Basically there need to be some buffs to range for ships that armor tank. If you are a brick you need a range option to combat mobility endowed ships. Thus Amarr appears to be urged through lack of midslots into brick armor tanking. Of course it is difficult to fit beams and an armor tank due to grid. This is partially why of all the short range guns pulse lasers have to longest optimal. This is also another reason why CCP needs to be very careful with the tracking mod changes for missiles. HAMs and Torps, and to a lesser extent rockets could end up with great range and with the typical shield tanks once again provide an obvious and excellent kiting platform that currently ac/minny ships provide.
So, yes to TE nerf. Maybe toned down from the current proposal.
Yes to tracking mod effects on missiles. But only if base range on short range missiles get a nerf, and if the effects on range are more moderate with missiles than they are with turrets. Also, base effects on turrets of TDs needs a simultaneous nerf, while the specialized ships need a slight buff. And to finish with tracking mods there needs to be an examination of whether these effects should all be contained in one module or a pair of modules. This is so especially in the case of TDs once they start to affect all turrets and launchers, lest they become a new multispec ecm of doom module.
Simultaneously, CCP needs to think about the turrets themselves. Beams need a slight optimal buff, maybe. They have the same optimals as arty, but nowhere near the falloff. One could even reduce the damage on them if Tachyons were to become the next fotm. And I still think the alpha on arty was slightly overdone. Imo they could gain a little cycle speed and dps in exchange for losing a little of their current volley damage.
edit - Dana v Naomi. Battle of the posting alts. |