| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Dr Tetrahydrocannabinol
   |
Posted - 2005.10.14 20:59:00 -
[151]
 Originally by: Xune
Originally by: CCP Hammer
enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
And thats YOUR job... so the paying customers have to hand YOU YOUR work ?
im sorry.. but thats......... um well like a Guy who pay a electrician to do nothing while he install the power supply himself.
I think what he means by that is if we want a certain part of the game changed we better provide valid evidence rather than go one the forums screaming "OMGRAVENHAX".
The only thing ill say about that is there have been plenty of constructive threads with numbers for months now, so hopefully something will get done about it.
---------------------------------------------
Signature filesize exceeded. Maximum sig size is 400*120 and 24000 bytes - Teblin - aww come on now :(
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.10.14 21:09:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Xune
Originally by: CCP Hammer
enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
And thats YOUR job... so the paying customers have to hand YOU YOUR work ?
im sorry.. but thats......... um well like a Guy who pay a electrician to do nothing while he install the power supply himself.
Oh for pity's sake.
Read what he said. ALL of what he said
Quote:
And no, a myriad of "waaah you nerfed my Raven" posts aren't enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
The meaning of this is very simple: if YOU THE CUSTOMER want CCP to make a change, you have to demonstrate to them that it's needed. Whining isn't enough.
|
Xune
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 12:19:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Originally by: Xune
Originally by: CCP Hammer
enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
And thats YOUR job... so the paying customers have to hand YOU YOUR work ?
im sorry.. but thats......... um well like a Guy who pay a electrician to do nothing while he install the power supply himself.
Oh for pity's sake.
Read what he said. ALL of what he said
Quote:
And no, a myriad of "waaah you nerfed my Raven" posts aren't enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
The meaning of this is very simple: if YOU THE CUSTOMER want CCP to make a change, you have to demonstrate to them that it's needed. Whining isn't enough.
And its "still" his job to look at the balancing and how the changes perform in the gameplay. It seems they did not at all. Hell i dont even use a Raven but im kind of anoyed by the behavior of the Dev¦s. Its like "lets change things, testing them `? hello no... we let the customers testet them.. and even if they complain we wont repair or look at it again before somone carry us Results on a silver tablet with golden edges.
Its THER job to do the testing.
Its THER job to controll of the whining might be right
Its NOT the customers job to hand them finished results.
|
Ranger 1
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 13:42:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Xune
Edited by: Xune on 15/10/2005 12:24:18
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Originally by: Xune
Originally by: CCP Hammer
enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
And thats YOUR job... so the paying customers have to hand YOU YOUR work ?
im sorry.. but thats......... um well like a Guy who pay a electrician to do nothing while he install the power supply himself.
Oh for pity's sake.
Read what he said. ALL of what he said
Quote:
And no, a myriad of "waaah you nerfed my Raven" posts aren't enough to make us change things. Hard numbers and facts are and that's why this thread was created. I think it's been going well so far and I hope everyone keeps up the constructive trend.
The meaning of this is very simple: if YOU THE CUSTOMER want CCP to make a change, you have to demonstrate to them that it's needed. Whining isn't enough.
And its "still" his job to look at the balancing and how the changes perform in the gameplay. It seems they did not at all. Hell i dont even use a Raven but im kind of anoyed by the behavior of the Dev¦s. Its like "lets change things, testing them `? hello no... we let the customers testet them.. and even if they complain we wont repair or look at it again before somone carry us Results on a silver tablet with golden edges.
Its THER job to do the testing.
Its THER job to controll ther owne work.
Its NOT the customers job to hand them finished results.
I mean... imagine somone come to the hospital and say " my belly hurrts....... can you please look at it `?" and the Doctor answers "no, you have to open your belly, find out what the problem is, look in the books how you can heal it, and then bring me the mony, the informations and clean my car so i have enough time to look at it:
No, your right. Really you are.
It's much better that the Dev's completely ignore the input of the players that bother to discover and document balance issues. 
Balancing a game like this in a test environment is one thing. It's a different animal when you have thousands of players trying thousands of different things on the main server.
The current system works pretty well overall, but needs some tweaking in a couple of area's concerning ceptor's, Hac's (possibly), and the smaller missiles. They know it and are getting our input. Get over it.
If you want to play a game that totally ignores the player base, there are plenty out there.
|
Grey Area
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 15:47:00 -
[155]
Edited by: Grey Area on 15/10/2005 15:49:01
/me picks up Xune's keyboard and shakes it.
Yep, it rattles. I see your problem. There is a nut loose on your keyboard.
Now we've had a good page and a half of "It's not my job to help fix things" - "oh yes it is" - "oh no it isn't" etc etc. Can we please get back on topic? The cynic in me is starting to believe that Xune was planted by the turret users in another attempt to derail a missile post...
=========================================
* I'm ALLOWED to cheat. I'm a STARSHIP. *
========================================= |
Grey Area
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:11:00 -
[156]
Hammer...whilst your looking at missiles...would it be possible to fix the "show info" on the launchers from the HUD whilst in space so that they show;
Ammo loaded
Flight time
Flight velocity
(Range would be nice too)
Damage (updated to include skills AND BCUs (currently BCUs are not included) and any other modules we might get (hint hint)
Explosion Velocity
Explosion radius
All of this sort of information is currently available for turrets by simply clicking "show info" on the turret HUD icon in space. The only way missile users can get the same info is;
Show Info on ship
Select modules tab
Scroll down to ammo (which can be difficult in combat, as it often refreshes itself back to the top)
Choose "Show Info" on ammo
Select "Attributes" tab.
I hope you'll agree this is longwinded by comparison. Hope you can fix it.
=========================================
* I'm ALLOWED to cheat. I'm a STARSHIP. *
========================================= |
The Wizz117
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:11:00 -
[157]
Edited by: The Wizz117 on 15/10/2005 16:16:44
caldari ships are very good:
-worse @ targeting
-to few cargo M3 (missiles)
-shield tanking stupid:
(less efficient less slots, 20% less base resistance less total HP)
-bigest radius
-worst internia of all for "some" reason of all races
-worste mag propulsion of all races
-the raven's 10% toward missile velocity is 10% useles ( cruise have a range of 500KM with good skilz i dont WANT more range)
-there is no ship wih 8 missile launcher HP
-missiels deal less damage then turrets and theyr ROF is 3-4x as slow.
the caldari has all these dis-advantages becouse missiles should be better then turrrets but since the missiles-nerf the turrets are better.
i can't think of a singel advantage of the caldary race .
caldari: no race is worse @ mining it aint good for 0.0 and since the missile nerf it aint good at missions eather.
i do not believe the reason that you nef caldari is that they are overpowerd becouse you know just as good as any other player that that is not treu:
stop nerfing caldari becouse your servers can't handle the load on jita.
|
Grey Area
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:20:00 -
[158]
Wizz, you're not helping.
=========================================
* I'm ALLOWED to cheat. I'm a STARSHIP. *
========================================= |
Rexthor Hammerfists
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:31:00 -
[159]
caldaris have a long lockrange and strong sensoprs 
|
The Wizz117
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:36:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
caldaris have a long lockrange and strong sensoprs
i cheked it and i must say: i never know that.
tough,ofcourse this is 100% useless, i would prefere a huge cap, or more speed or a horde of drones around me or....
|
Xune
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:37:00 -
[161]
Hm duno if im to stupid to explain or some to stupid to understand.... maybe both things.
I did not told they should ignore the player¦s. no i said they DO ignore the player¦s until the players hand them ther results on a silver/gold tablet with a lot of bowing and doing little curtsey¦s.
Xune
|
The Wizz117
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:54:00 -
[162]
i forgot somting:
- the the shield recharges itself is only in the advantage of armour tanking: during a battle those very few HP wont make a damn difrend but armour tankers can recharge it before they go into a new gate: shield tankers would have to dock at station,pay way to much milions of isk to repair theyr armor or fit a armor tank module undock,repair,dock to change fitting again, and go back to the mission wich takes way to much time, tough i usualy do this when i run out of missions and have to get back to station any way.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 16:56:00 -
[163]
...Remote Armour Reps
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
The Wizz117
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 17:00:00 -
[164]
Edited by: The Wizz117 on 15/10/2005 17:03:24
Edited by: The Wizz117 on 15/10/2005 17:02:48
Edited by: The Wizz117 on 15/10/2005 17:01:24
Originally by: Maya Rkell
...Remote Armour Reps
this is not the solution, asking around on the local if sombody would please fit and remote armour rep to repair u will take even more time.
in high-sec nobody fits armour repair systems, and in caldary space i dont think there are much people at all fiting remote armor repair systems/having the skilz for em.
any way lets keep ontopic: aboud the missiles ;)
my point: i think they SHOULD be better then turrets( couse of all the dis-advantages we got for it i named above) but they are worse then turrets now,
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 17:18:00 -
[165]
...This is a MMO.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
The Wizz117
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 17:48:00 -
[166]
Edited by: The Wizz117 on 15/10/2005 17:48:45
Originally by: Maya Rkell
...This is a MMO.
you dont seem to get it
caldary special ability is MISISLES but missils are below average!
|
Kartassio
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 19:30:00 -
[167]
Actualy we have BS>crusers>frigates and is correct
also Frigates>BS becose are faste and smoll and that also is correct
But becose BS are fur more expensive and skill requarment the also have to be in possition to take down frigs if are properly fit to do that and use the rigth tactics.But that is no so accurate to the caldary.
An turret bs have the opportonaty, even with bs class wepons to snipe a frig if the frig is not moving or approce the BS.
The missils in my opinion the have many penaldys with both signaturs and speed. The signaturs penalization have to decrece in all missils tape, so if a indy is steel the can do mats more damage lake turrets ship can.
a particolary attetion is have too give in both ligth and have missils. mayby to reduce a bit the speed factor penaldy, ligts are frig class wepon that have to hit for less damage than rochets but at long range but not with the actualy rediculus DPS. Same discution abut hevys and cruisers class ships. or create a new type of missil
AND why don't create a med mode that can efect the radius and speed penaldys? at the end the BLCs are the corrispod low damage mod. the penaldys for the turret ships are traking so the have med slot traking comp.
And remove tha rediculus mass from the caldary, bring them to line with the other ships, for not say that the rigth is that the caldary have to have the second mass after minimatar ships, the have a enormus sig radius alredy.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 19:38:00 -
[168]
Originally by: The Wizz117
Edited by: The Wizz117 on 15/10/2005 17:48:45
Originally by: Maya Rkell
...This is a MMO.
you dont seem to get it
caldary special ability is MISISLES but missils are below average!
No, you don't get it.
I was refering to remote armour reps.
But as you brought it up,
How are missiles "below average"? (hint: torpedos murder another BS up-close) If you mean turret BS smashing cruisers, that is a long-standing turret BS/cruiser problem, nothing to do with missiles.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
xenorx
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 19:44:00 -
[169]
Well we did have a pretty good and constructive thread going on missiles. I dont think it was a thread on bash the developer or a caldari ships sux thread. For those guys please go someplace else and make your own threads and leave the ppl here who want to actually try and voice their CONSTRUCTIVE thoughts on MISSILES and how to fix them.
|
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 20:47:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
[
How are missiles "below average"? (hint: torpedos murder another BS up-close)
Two things:
Missile damage vs. smaller targets is ridiculously sub-par - a turret battleship will pwn a cruiser, where the raven may not be able to kill it at all. A turret cruiser will pwn a frigate, whereas the caracal will take forever to kill the target with heavies. I'm not saying missiles should do full damage to smaller targets (quite the opposite - they were overpowered before the cold war patch), but they should inflict more than they are currently.
The other problem is not so much missiles as the Caldari ship bonuses. I'll just paste something I said in response to someone in another thread:
"...missiles inflict less dot than hybrids and lasers to start. A lot of turret-users seem to have tunnel-vision where missiles are concerned, where all they can see is the burst damage and somehow equate that to damage over time. They don't realize that lasers and hybrids inflict far more damage per second than missiles, and also don't have flight time. Projectiles inflict roughly the same damage per second as missiles (before ship bonus - and minmatar ships get a ship damage bonus across the board, not just to kinetic), but again don't have flight time to factor in, making them much more effective at medium and long range.
Let me put it this way: medium blasters and rails have more dot than heavy missiles to start. A thorax pilot gets a 5% damage bonus/level on top of this. The caracal, on the other hand, gets a 5% damage bonus, but only to kinetic missiles, nullifying the ability to switch damage types to compensate for lower base DPS.
IIRC, a caracal has about 75% of the DPS of thorax when the caracal is using kinetic missiles. When the caracal is NOT using kinetic missiles, the DPS differential drops to 50%, which means that switching damage types (which is supposed to allow the missile ship to compensate for lower DPS) actually HINDERS its ability to kill its opponent."
This means that the Raven, not being limited by the kinetic-only ship bonus, is the only Caldari missile boat that isn't hamstrung by its own bonus. All the others tend to be significantly weaker than other races' ships of the same class, excepting the kestrel; for the latter, the fourth launcher slot makes up for having a crappy bonus.
-Wrayeth
|
Bottled Brain
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 20:55:00 -
[171]
Edited by: Bottled Brain on 15/10/2005 20:59:00
Numbers for a free world...
A dual 180mm ac with emp m on a rupture can hit a webified crow doing 53.125m/s not using her mwd (90% web, skills lvl5) at 4.15km with 85.37% hitchance for 18.49 armor damage/s and 20.31 shield damage/s (tracking guide).
Let¦s forget about the rupture¦s launchers or drones....
A caracal with scourge missiles using a t2 painter (sig penalty: 27 x 1.3 / 112.5 = 0.312):
206.25 x 1.25 x 0.75 x 0.312 / 13.77 = 4.3811 armor damage/s
206.25 x 1.25 x 0.6 x 0.312 / 13.77 = 3.5049 shield damage/s
And even an increased sig radius due to mwd won¦t help because when using it the velocity penalty kicks in ((750 x 1.5) / 3.851.5625 = 0.29208).
crow:
375 x 1.25 shield hp = 468.75
175 + 600 x 1.25 armor hp = 968.75
rupture needs 6 sec for shields, 13 sec for armor, only using 4 turrets and ignoring the 2 launchers and the drones.
caracal would need...
|
Megadon
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 20:55:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Megadon on 15/10/2005 20:57:09
Edited by: Megadon on 15/10/2005 20:55:41
Originally by: The Wizz117
the caldari have all these disadvantages because missiles should be better then turrrets but since the missiles-nerf the turrets are better.
When taken as a whole this comment is actually correct. Caldari have drawbacks in many other areas to off-set the advantages that missiles USED TO HAVE.
But for some reason, CCP who decided to impliment RACIAL ADVANTAGES IN THE FIRST PLACE. Threw this logic OUT when it came to balancing missile and how the new changes would effect the Caldari race.
...and that is why i think it is a mistake to look at missiles in the vacuum of just comparing them to turrets, because it is a broader issue.
IMO, Heavy missile and Cruises are the most broken because they are the most used missile by larger ships against smaller targets and the signature pentalty they have to overcome is unreasonable and unrealistic.
The idea is a that these larger missile combat cruisers. Well guess what. The damn frigates and inty's have become so overpowered that no one uses cruisers.
Battlecruisers have such a limited role, that they are not used often.
So what you are left with are battleships and frigate sized ships and larger ships have no appropriate missile to combat smaller ships and the answer is not to fit small launchers on a BS.
What this situation is, is an symptom of a larger problem. That problem is that the ship classes in the game are freaking broken due to the fact that the escalation and rise to power of the frigate and inty, have completely un-balanced the overall scheme of things. CCP did this over a long term without looking at the bigger picture.
The missile that is most appropriate to fill this gap and be effective against smaller frigates, cruisers and BS's is the Heavy Missile. It can be used by cruisers, battlecruisers and it is just a goofy thing to fit them on BS's. But Heavy missiles are broken in terms of killing smaller ships. Well, because of this gap and the above imbalance in ship classes created by the uber-ness of the frigate and inty, this situation is magnified a thousand times.
From a 100,000 foot view. Heavy missiles need some attention to fill this gap and be an effective weapon for cruisers to fit to kill friates, because now they are not.
And CCP needs to stop the love-fest with the frigate inty and start focusing a hell of a lot more on the cruiser, the battle cruiser and how the role of these ships (and the missiles they fit and use) are to be effective against ships in their same class and smaller. They also (since they developed the damn thing) need to pay closer attention to the racial bonuses and pentalties or throw them completely out of the window because right now, they are not given weight across the spectrum when looking at these problems.
The symbiotic relationship between Caldari and missiles are a perfect example of this. Ship signature sizes, speed, scanning resolution etc etc play a role in the balance of missile and right now, it's as if CCP has said "hey, let's just throw all this other crap out the window and compare missiles quid pro quo against turrets" and it doesn't work that way.
|
Megadon
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 23:01:00 -
[173]
Bump because i want this to stay on the first page
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 23:14:00 -
[174]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 15/10/2005 23:16:02
Originally by: Wrayeth
Originally by: Maya Rkell
[
How are missiles "below average"? (hint: torpedos murder another BS up-close)
Two things:
Missile damage vs. smaller targets is ridiculously sub-par - a turret battleship will
No.
Turret BS can hit cruisers far too easily. This is a well known, long-standing issue.
I am deliberately not commenting on the damage issue, btw, because I am not convinced either way.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Kenan Waroria
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 23:31:00 -
[175]
I¦ve not read that many threads around. But an idea I¦ve been thinking about would be to have 2 sorts of each missile type. One for close combat and one for long range.
I don¦t have any good numbers but it would balance more when comparing to Turrets that have 2 types (AC/Arty proj, Blaster/rails hybrid and beam/pulse for lasers).
So a long range missile would have doubble speed (compare with optimal range and fall-off on long range turrets) and a close combat with better explosion radius (compare with tracking on close combat turrets).
Lower the original flight time on missiles and the long range will have the same range (but hit faster) and close combat that will hit better.
It could bring missiles more on par with turrets: missiles have less DPS but will on the other hand not miss their target.
A side note: how balanced are the signature radius? Howcome Caldari are so big comparing to all other ships?
|
Tsual
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 23:53:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Kenan Waroria
I don¦t have any good numbers but it would balance more when comparing to Turrets that have 2 types (AC/Arty proj, Blaster/rails hybrid and beam/pulse for lasers).
rockets vs light missiles
torps vs cruise missiles
heavies vs soon(tm)
(Can anyone explain to me why fof have so low damage?)
--------------------------------------
Haanem ulwei, utnazhiram Hal'sha'roh mahiraam Hor'thul.
The Universe is everything, the creation Hal'shah and the destruction Hor'thul.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.10.16 00:50:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Tsual
(Can anyone explain to me why fof have so low damage?)
I suspect it's pre-nerf that's never been un-nerfed because nobody cares about it. They effectively let you damage any hostile within a large sphere around your ship without any countermeasure save for running away or defenders.
|
B0rn2KiLL
|
Posted - 2005.10.16 02:05:00 -
[178]
my issues with missiles hence far:
1. torpedo size, 0.6???
2. overpriced t2/named damamge mods? 80mil-50mil compared to maybe 6mil max ona t2 turret mod
3. fofs tend to favor buildings on npc rats.. o.0
4. defenders.. 80% of all npcs in game fire defenders, i dont see any turret-range disrupting frigates out there, not fiar having to see 3 out of 6 cruise missile be destroyed..
5. takes a torp 40 seconds to cross 100km.. turrets insta-hit you
6*. someting for the turret ppl: as to the 100% hit ratio, can be tweaked so it hit 0 if target's speed surpaces explosion speed + radios = **** damamge.
---
When It Absolutely Positively Has To Be Desotroyed. |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.10.16 02:35:00 -
[179]
Originally by: B0rn2KiLL
my issues with missiles hence far:
1. torpedo size, 0.6???
I'd increase battleship cargo holds a bit instead of making ammo and missiles smaller.
Quote:
2. overpriced t2/named damamge mods? 80mil-50mil compared to maybe 6mil max ona t2 turret mod
Missile stuff is new, it should drop in price after a while, the 40 CPU on the BCU II though is still retarded. :(
Quote:
3. fofs tend to favor buildings on npc rats.. o.0
Oh noes! FOF are teh uber anti-jam weapon! Yeah, they suck.. thier AI is just as broken and crappy as defenders.
Quote:
4. defenders.. 80% of all npcs in game fire defenders, i dont see any turret-range disrupting frigates out there, not fiar having to see 3 out of 6 cruise missile be destroyed..
Well you will see all kinds of jamming, tracking disrupting, energy draining, target jamming NPCs in the (near?) future, supposedly..
Quote:
5. takes a torp 40 seconds to cross 100km.. turrets insta-hit you
Torpedoes are short range weapons.. at least they travel that far to begin with.
------
If Captain James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock embracing one another, in a bath tube, nude, in space, is wrong, I don't want to be right. |
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.10.16 03:18:00 -
[180]
1. Agree. Wouldn't hurt to make them 25% larger or so across the board
2. Agree. 40 CPU is annoying.
3. No, FoF's are potentially useful under 25km, unlike defenders...
(I suspect dropping a can still works)
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |