| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
124
   |
Posted - 2013.06.21 21:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote: Heavy Missiles got a huge nerf stick over them, far too high as nerf while still being in the same dps range and application than other weapon systems at one exception: dmg is not instant and thus deserve a buff to that one or ships using them a rof bonus.
 That the top two ships on eve-kill are HM ships argues otherwise. You are though correct about the range advantages. Notice that the ships sitting on top have 10% missile range bonuses.
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote: Light Missiles: unless you're using a Navy Caracal with Rapid lights or Navy Drake those suck, jesus they suck ass so hard I can't even explain it.
Rockets: they got a little bit better, actually they do decent dmg but they still lack of something I can't put my finger on maybe because I don't use them much over other weapon systems, that's it.
Yes, this is why Talwars are not in the top-20. Noone wants to use light missiles. Or tech I light missiles for that matter. And of course no one is using rockets. Again the 10% per level range bonuses are way too weak. |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
124
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 22:29:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sal Landry wrote:Deacon Abox wrote:That the top two ships on eve-kill are HM ships argues otherwise. Breaking news, CFC tengus and caracals run HAMs.
Which accounts for all the Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II here. http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20
Oh hell where did it go? What is that, Heavy Missile Launcher II? How did it get there? |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
124
|
Posted - 2013.06.22 00:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Deacon Abox wrote:Yes, this is why Talwars are not in the top-20. Noone wants to use light missiles. Or tech I light missiles for that matter. And of course no one is using rockets. Again the 10% per level range bonuses are way too weak. If you have ever played around with the Talwars, you'll notice they have nearly the range of max skilled Tengu and are fast as **** they are actually awesome little hulls, missiles or no.
thus my sarcasm  please detect it |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
126
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 20:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
Jeann Valjean wrote:
- Armor is no longer inferior to shields like it used to be due to changes around Retribution. Shield fleets are no longer the rule in PvP, and armor fits have gained much in popularity. I'm not saying armor is better or shields aren't good- I'm just saying the dramatic imbalance has lessened.
For us in small gang gal/cal FW armor is not inferior. However, even here the kiting with range tactics win more often than the close up smash mouth tactics. Regardless, this is only one small slice of eve combat.
The unfortunate truth is that range and mobility, which shield and Cal/Min ships afford, combined with missiles being capless and having selectable damage are still, even after the Drake/HM nerfs, ruling eve combat in the larger view.
http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20 The top 4 ships at this date are Caldari. The top two are missile boats. They all have range bonuses on missiles or guns, and they all shield tank. Further down the top 20, the fact that you can even have Talwars sitting in that list at number 8 tells you a lot about the strengths of missiles and shield (which affords mobility).
Jeann Valjean wrote:- The old racial bonuses are totally gone. As a few people pointed out, Jita became the main market hub in part due to many people rolling Caldari pilots. This no longer holds true. Which is why I said originally that just because it remains the major hub doesn't mean Caldari is still the most popular race.
One would have to hear from CCP what the latest breakdown on race rolled is for new characters. Judging by the top four ships on eve-kill I would bet it is still Caldari. No longer is there a horde of 3 charisma Achura poncing around. But the ease of training into the top 4 ships if you start as Caldari can't be overlooked. This situation does not bode well for the continued health of the game. |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos
128
|
Posted - 2013.06.27 16:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote: The real elephant in the room when discussing missiles-v-turrets is tracking disruptors.
Nearly everyone seems to be fitting TDs these days, and why not as they are in my opinion somewhat OP. Fitting missiles or rockets is the only way to counter TDs.
Yes. I argued in the previous initial and followup threads in F&I concerning the tech I ewar frigs that these ships should have been given the large bonus ecm boat treatment, and the ewar modules themselves a nerf in base strength.
As long as turrets have a working (and very well working) dedicated counter module and missiles have none this game favors missiles and is imbalanced. I'm talking specifically about solo and small gang. Against a missile boat you simply have to tank or using piloting to mitigate damage. Against turrets you can do both as well and in addition you could have a module fit that specifically fubars your opponents' turrets.
Defenders are broken crap, and require a ship to have a launcher as well which many ships so not have. Smarties are not effective in a solo and small gang skirmish against missiles and are in fact more harmful to drones.
In a large null sec fleet engagement a smartie firewall can be used as an attempt to mitigate massed missile damage. However the continued success of missile boats, as demonstrated by their supremacy on the eve-kill top twenty, indicate that such is apparently not effective enough to deter the heavy use of missiles.
If either a script or sister module to the TD was introduced to the game to alter the range or explosion stats on enemy missiles it would do a lot to balance the weapons. Additionally, as you say, the balancing team should review the strength of non-ecm ewar on non-dedicated ships. TDs, Damps, and Painters could use a reduction in base strength and the dedicated ships an increase in ship bonus for those ewar modules to compensate. |
| |
|