Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
stoicfaux
5815
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 20:41:40 -
[61] - Quote
unidenify wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Also, for the sake of completeness, there are Missile Precision Scripts and Missile Range Scripts on sisi. No stats.
Missile Precision make me think as if it will affect explosive radius if so, question would be that, what is ideal combo between Target Painting and said Modules when use on Golem. 2x TP 2x MGE? Depends on the MGC/MGE bonus, and whether the Golem's TP bonus will be extended to include the MGC/MGE.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
unidenify
Plundering Penguins
114
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 20:52:10 -
[62] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:unidenify wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Also, for the sake of completeness, there are Missile Precision Scripts and Missile Range Scripts on sisi. No stats.
Missile Precision make me think as if it will affect explosive radius if so, question would be that, what is ideal combo between Target Painting and said Modules when use on Golem. 2x TP 2x MGE? Depends on the MGC/MGE bonus, and whether the Golem's TP bonus will be extended to include the MGC/MGE.
Not see what you mean?
TP affect target's signature radius, and MGC affect missile explosive radius (that is IF). Not see where it would have conflict as both affect 2 seperate variable in formula. |
Takeshi Kumamato
Blaze Orange Expeditions Absence of Light
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 21:06:19 -
[63] - Quote
The addition of missile TC/TE will probably mean all current ships relying on rigs for damage application will decrease in effectiveness. Why? To make up for the lack of TC/TE for missiles, CCP has made rigs that affect explosion velocity and explosion radius non-stacking penalized. In order for CCP to introduce midslot/lowslot modules, they will need to change the two stats to be stacking penalized or else certain missile ships will be hilariously overpowered.
Currently, two t2 rigors give a 36% reduction in explosion radius. If they were to be stacking penalized, then they would give a 34% reduction instead. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1348
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 22:05:56 -
[64] - Quote
unidenify wrote:stoicfaux wrote:unidenify wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Also, for the sake of completeness, there are Missile Precision Scripts and Missile Range Scripts on sisi. No stats.
Missile Precision make me think as if it will affect explosive radius if so, question would be that, what is ideal combo between Target Painting and said Modules when use on Golem. 2x TP 2x MGE? Depends on the MGC/MGE bonus, and whether the Golem's TP bonus will be extended to include the MGC/MGE. Not see what you mean? TP affect target's signature radius, and MGC affect missile explosive radius (that is IF). Not see where it would have conflict as both affect 2 seperate variable in formula.
Reducing explosion radius is functionally the same as increasing target sig.
By rights, any reduction to Explo radius should be significantly and I mean SIGNIFICANTLY better than TP because the former only benefits one ship, the latter - everyone. |
stoicfaux
5815
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 22:27:20 -
[65] - Quote
unidenify wrote:Not see what you mean?
TP affect target's signature radius, and MGC affect missile explosive radius (that is IF). Not see where it would have conflict as both affect 2 seperate variable in formula. A T2/PWNAGE TP with Skills V provides a 37.5% bonus. If a sig scripted MCG provides less than that, then you'll use TPs over MCGs until the stacking penalty makes an MCG better.
For example: if a TP provides a 37.5% bonus to target sig and a scripted MCG provides a 30% bonus to missile sig then here is the actual stacking penalized bonus value for each module type:
TP MGC 1 100.00% 37.50% 30.00% 2 86.91% 32.59% 26.07% 3 57.06% 21.40% 17.12% 4 28.30% 10.61% 8.49% 5 10.60% 3.97% 3.18% 6 3.00% 1.12% 0.90% 7 0.64% 0.24% 0.19% 8 0.10% 0.04% 0.03% 9 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 10 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
So you would use TP (37.5%), TP (32.59%), MGC (30%), MGC (26.07%), TP (21.4%), MGC (17.12%), TP (10.61%), MGC (8.49%) to maximize your missiles against a target.
The only real variables are whether you are fighting in the TP's falloff and whether you'll need to take advantage of the MGC's range buff.
However, (to actually answer your question) the Golem gets a TP bonus which makes the MGC much less appealing (hence why I would be curious if the Golem also received a buff to MGC,) giving us:
TP MGC 1 100.00% 56.25% 30.00% 2 86.91% 48.89% 26.07% 3 57.06% 32.10% 17.12% 4 28.30% 15.92% 8.49% 5 10.60% 5.96% 3.18% 6 3.00% 1.69% 0.90% 7 0.64% 0.36% 0.19% 8 0.10% 0.06% 0.03% 9 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 10 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
So you would use TP (56.25%), TP (48.89%), TP (32.1%), MGC (30%), MGC (26.07%), MGC (17.12%), TP(15.92%), MCG (8.49%).
If you're the kind of person who currently runs a mission Golem with 4+ TPs (and I do,) then the MGC is very useful by allowing us to swap a 15.92% stacking penalized TP with a 30% MGC (and "very useful" == a tad imbalanced.) If you're intimidated by level 4 NPCs and run with 3 TPs or less, then the MGC isn't useful to you. (And it might actually be harmful if Rigor rigors become stacking penalized.)
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1125
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 22:56:31 -
[66] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:. (And it might actually be harmful if Rigor rigors become stacking penalized.)
or you know....
if missiles get their default expl rad/vel neffed
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
unidenify
Plundering Penguins
114
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 22:57:37 -
[67] - Quote
2 situations I can see where MGC have advantage over TP. Boost Torpedo range, or operate in 120+km range with cruise
2 scripted MGC would push Rage Torp into 70km, assume that Golem also have 2 flight time rig (also if CCP decide to left flight time rig alone with no stack penalty)
Then, for cruise fit Golem can easily reach beyond 200km with fury, 250+ with faction. It is at this point where you said, TP perform poor due to operate in fall off.
however, question is whatever Golem get bonus to MGE/MGC. I somehow doubt it. |
Arla Sarain
482
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 00:03:20 -
[68] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:I hope they'll be midslot equipment inorder to make shield tankers sacrifice dps for tank, as we armor tankers got to.
I too would like tackle and propmods to go into low slots. |
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Affirmative.
413
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 00:15:20 -
[69] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Guys, there are missile modules in both the TE and TC sections, so there will be a mid-slot item: TC - Missile Guidance Computer (Compact, T1, and T2.) TE - Missile Guidance Enhancer (Compact, T1, and T2.) Also here's the description for the Missile TC: "By predicting the trajectory of targets, it helps to boost the precision and range of missiles. This module can be loaded with scripts to increase its effectiveness in certain areas. Penalty: Using more than one type of this module or similar modules that affect the same attribute on the ship will be penalized." and for the Missile TE: "Enhances the range and improves the precision of missiles. Penalty: Using more than one type of this module or similar modules that affect the same attribute on the ship will be penalized" Again, none of them have stats yet. edit: Picture Nice, the MGCs weren't up yet on SiSi when I created the thread(it was one of the things that I went looking for when we found the other) |
Arla Sarain
482
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 00:17:27 -
[70] - Quote
Sooo...
140km LML Coraxs? |
|
stoicfaux
5815
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 01:09:13 -
[71] - Quote
Okay, if we assume a 30% scripted MGC, then a 4TP Golem would go from 356% effective TP to 399% effective TP, which would make it a little easier to pop NPC cruisers with Fury ammo.
More interesting, any non-Golem missile hull that can fit 5 TP/MGCs (362.74% in first column, row 5) would match the effectiveness of the current 4 TP Golem (356.21% in the last column, row 4.) (e.g. Typhoon, Navy Typhoon, Raven, Navy Raven, etc. disregarding any hull bonuses.)
Cumulative Effect Golem Cumulative Effect TP=37.5% MGC=30% TP=56.25% MGC=30% TP+MGC Just TP Just MGC TP+MGC Just TP 1 137.50% 137.50% 130.00% 156.25% 156.25% 2 182.31% 182.31% 163.90% 232.64% 232.64% 3 237.01% 221.32% 191.95% 307.30% 307.30% 4 298.80% 244.81% 208.24% 399.49% 356.21% 5 362.74% 254.54% 214.87% 503.66% 377.45% 6 424.83% 257.40% 216.80% 589.87% 383.82% 7 469.91% 258.02% 217.22% 683.76% 385.20% 8 509.80% 258.12% 217.28% 741.80% 385.43%
TP+MGC is if you mix the optimal number of TPs and MGCs to minimize stacking penalties.
/spreadsheets, why'd it have to be spreadsheets...?
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
724
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 11:41:29 -
[72] - Quote
This will be good.
CCP shall no doubt promptly delete the Rapid L/H Missile launchers any minute now.
Any minute now.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1128
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 11:59:50 -
[73] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:This will be good. CCP shall no doubt promptly delete the Rapid L/H Missile launchers any minute now. Any minute now.
q.q it's all missiles have
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Arla Sarain
484
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 13:12:26 -
[74] - Quote
I'll jump on the paranoia train.
Rocket and Missile ships will become obsolete unless they are Jackdaws.
With the upcoming Missile TEs/TCs, missiles of all kinds will get application nerfs the same way ACs did. You will need 1-2 of the new modules to bring them back to the previous levels. And in the same manner as TCs, none of the small ships will have any goddamn space to fit them, unless they arbitrarily have 6 mid slots.
For the time being drones will remain being the better missiles. If CCP doesn't nerf missiles, ABs will be even more s***; as if the 44% damage reduction gained from running on ABs against missiles actually mattered.
These modules aren't needed TBH. It seems like they are added solely because someone at CCP caved into the crowd that mindlessly wanted Missile TE/TCs cos turrets have them. It's like they were begging to have mids/low removed or wasted on compulsory modules.
Inb4 "you have choice". Like, lose because you have a gimp fit or lose because you apply 30% of your paper DPS. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1350
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 14:38:15 -
[75] - Quote
And the paper dps is already weaksauce.
My money is on major range nerfs, than application to the long range systems and vice versa for short.
Of course this doesn't change the fact there's few ships with slots to use these. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1128
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 14:44:06 -
[76] - Quote
Well all we can do now is voice our concerns and wait until the People at CCP are able to tell us more about them.
who knows maybe they have a great idea.... maybe
just hope this will be one of the times they listen this has become at least a little more common now
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Alexis Nightwish
235
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 14:51:58 -
[77] - Quote
unidenify wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:unidenify wrote:stoicfaux wrote:Guys, there are missile modules in both the TE and TC sections, so there will be a mid-slot item: TC - Missile Guidance Computer (Compact, T1, and T2.) TE - Missile Guidance Enhancer (Compact, T1, and T2.)
Also here's the description for the Missile TC: "By predicting the trajectory of targets, it helps to boost the precision and range of missiles. This module can be loaded with scripts to increase its effectiveness in certain areas. Penalty: Using more than one type of this module or similar modules that affect the same attribute on the ship will be penalized."
and for the Missile TE: "Enhances the range and improves the precision of missiles. Penalty: Using more than one type of this module or similar modules that affect the same attribute on the ship will be penalized"
Again, none of them have stats yet.
I guess we can expect nerf on missiles then at this point we just have to hope its not to bad :/ best scenarios is heavy and torpedoes left alone while other 4 class get nerf. However, given that rhml exist, I will bet they nerf heavy further Well Fozzie's MO is such: Hear a bunch of people complaining that a ship is OP because of valid reasons. Nerf the weapon system said ship uses so that said ship is the only one that can really make use of it, and all other ships suffer for it.
References: Drake and medium missiles*, Tengu and medium rails, Ishtar and Sentries, and now Orthrus/Garmur (and to a lesser extent Caracal) and LMLs/RLMLs.
*Not sure if Fozzie did this one actually, and this nerf was so hard that even the Drake no longer uses them effectively.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1128
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 15:04:34 -
[78] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote: Well Fozzie's MO is such: Hear a bunch of people complaining that a ship is OP because of valid reasons. Nerf the weapon system said ship uses so that said ship is the only one that can really make use of it, and all other ships suffer for it.
References: Drake and medium missiles*, Tengu and medium rails, Ishtar and Sentries, and now Orthrus/Garmur (and to a lesser extent Caracal) and LMLs/RLMLs.
*Not sure if Fozzie did this one actually, and this nerf was so hard that even the Drake no longer uses them effectively.
the tengu was not the only reason med rails were the problem as they were broken on almost any ship that used them moa/eagle/tengu/prot
this nerf is more likely coming from the amount of people that were wining that "turrets get application mods so missiles need them to"
rather than just because of light missiles being op, and it is the missiles because again just like med rails they tend to be a bit on the powerful side no matter what missile ship you fit them to
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
299
|
Posted - 2015.06.06 16:24:24 -
[79] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Well Fozzie's MO is such: Hear a bunch of people complaining that a ship is OP because of valid reasons. Nerf the weapon system said ship uses so that said ship is the only one that can really make use of it, and all other ships suffer for it.
References: Drake and medium missiles*, Tengu and medium rails, Ishtar and Sentries, and now Orthrus/Garmur (and to a lesser extent Caracal) and LMLs/RLMLs.
*Not sure if Fozzie did this one actually, and this nerf was so hard that even the Drake no longer uses them effectively.
the tengu was not the only reason med rails were the problem as they were broken on almost any ship that used them moa/eagle/tengu/prot this nerf is more likely coming from the amount of people that were wining that "turrets get application mods so missiles need them to" rather than just because of light missiles being op, and it is the missiles because again just like med rails they tend to be a bit on the powerful side no matter what missile ship you fit them to
yea medium rails were pretty powerful. Putting them on a stabber netted you more dps than bonused artillery. Course artillery is not really dps related, but was still amusing, and easier to fit. Plus i heard 250's had close to blaster dps, but way more range.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role
|
stoicfaux
5826
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 01:04:57 -
[80] - Quote
Whoops, the missile formulas have the missile explosion radius in the bottom, which means that a 30% MGC, would be the equivalent of a 43% target painter., i.e. 1 / (1 - .3) = 1.43. Meaning, a 30% reduction when looking at the (S/ E) part of the formula is : S / ((1-.3)E) = S / .7E = 1/.7 * S/E = 1.43 * S/E
By comparision, a PWNAGE TP provides 37.25% bonus (1.3725).
A 25% MGC would be a 33% TP, and a 20% MGC would be a 25% TP.
Hrm...
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
|
Nafensoriel
Armored Apocalypse The Ancestors
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 01:14:40 -
[81] - Quote
I sit here wondering if the meta would be so drastically changed if these were introduced with no nerfs whatsoever. A strong voice in the back of my head says no. We'd still be drones online but it MIGHT just make missiles more viable in pvp... Especially if they added a health script sufficient enough to break firewalls.
/edit By balance I refer to larger weapons. Lights are still rather healthy. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
77
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 01:48:07 -
[82] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:I sit here wondering if the meta would be so drastically changed if these were introduced with no nerfs whatsoever. A strong voice in the back of my head says no. We'd still be drones online but it MIGHT just make missiles more viable in pvp... Especially if they added a health script sufficient enough to break firewalls.
/edit By balance I refer to larger weapons. Lights are still rather healthy.
Firewalls just simply need to go. Offensive systems should never have been allowed to work in a defensive manner. Defender missiles also need to be reworked to effectively mimic flares to reduce incoming damage from missiles by altering incoming missile explosion velocity/radius for a duration after each cycle against you. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1134
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 01:55:38 -
[83] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:
Firewalls just simply need to go. Offensive systems should never have been allowed to work in a defensive manner. Defender missiles also need to be reworked to effectively mimic flares to reduce incoming damage from missiles by altering incoming missile explosion velocity/radius for a duration after each cycle against you.
fire walls are fine missiles just need to be more resistant to them so that you need more than 8 or so that a missile has 99 resists in all but one type (so opposite of bombs)
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
77
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 04:33:22 -
[84] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:fire walls are fine missiles just need to be more resistant to them so that you need more than 8 or so that a missile has 99 resists in all but one type (so opposite of bombs)
That's pretty easily bypassed by having your command ships or specific doctrine ship fly between you and the hostiles equip with different smartbomb types. Not exactly hard to do since most command ships already do such a thing to handle l/m/h drones on fleet or annoying ecm bursting ceptors...
You can give them larger buffers requiring larger numbers of smartbombs to kill them, but that creates an issue of fleets taking more damage from friendly fire than the missiles themselves. So it begs the question, why should the ability of one offensive weapon be allowed to completely counter another even remain?
I'd rather smartbombs be relegated to their original design as (anti)close combat weapon systems and defender missiles given a reliable use/purpose in defending against incoming waves of missiles. Not asking for a buff to missiles here, just defense against them given to the module specifically designed to do so. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
1135
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 09:17:04 -
[85] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:
I'd rather smartbombs be relegated to their original design as (anti)close combat weapon systems and defender missiles given a reliable use/purpose in defending against incoming waves of missiles. Not asking for a buff to missiles here, just defense against them given to the module specifically designed to do so.
pretty sure smart bombs original design was to be anti drone witch is a weapon system
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|
Arla Sarain
492
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 10:03:07 -
[86] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Whoops, the missile formulas have the missile explosion radius in the bottom, which means that a 30% MGC, would be the equivalent of a 43% target painter., i.e. 1 / (1 - .3) = 1.43. Meaning, a 30% reduction when looking at the (S/ E) part of the formula is : S / ((1-.3)E) = S / .7E = 1/.7 * S/E = 1.43 * S/E By comparision, a PWNAGE TP provides 37.25% bonus (1.3725). A 25% MGC would be a 33% TP, and a 20% MGC would be a 25% TP. Hrm... It will only end up being a 43% boost if the ratio ends up being the smallest of the 3 terms. The function looks for the minimum. |
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
736
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 17:50:12 -
[87] - Quote
Haatakan Reppola wrote: Yout talkin deadspace fit slaved armor freighters can get same EHP and cargo? What about the natural shield tankers that have most of their EHP in shield or structure? A Charon need 3 Cargo Extenders to reach the same cargo space it had before (3 extenders = 200k more cargo, 2 extenders = 40k less)
You have the ability to select what they do and freighters are way safer than they were before because of it.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
stoicfaux
5828
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 18:18:41 -
[88] - Quote
Fyi, posted a thread for a googledocs spreadsheet with speculative values for the MGC/MGE and their effect on applied missile damage: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=428613&find=unread
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Haatakan Reppola
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 20:50:48 -
[89] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:Haatakan Reppola wrote: Yout talkin deadspace fit slaved armor freighters can get same EHP and cargo? What about the natural shield tankers that have most of their EHP in shield or structure? A Charon need 3 Cargo Extenders to reach the same cargo space it had before (3 extenders = 200k more cargo, 2 extenders = 40k less)
You have the ability to select what they do and freighters are way safer than they were before because of it.
I agree it was a boost to armor freighters and jump freighters. The Caldari line got screwed by those changes, Charon with Bulkheads get less than 50% of the cargo space it used to have, with meta 13 (best deadspace) armor tank it have around same tank as a Providence that use no modules.
Have not undocked with my Charon since the changes, there is very little reason to ever use a freighter and even less reason to use a Caldari freighter. Before the changes all the freighters had something going for them, cargo/speed/align/ehp that changed for the worse and i suspect the "choice" we get from missile application modules would do the same |
Arthur Aihaken
Jormungand Corporation
4456
|
Posted - 2015.06.08 02:26:51 -
[90] - Quote
Officer Missile Guidance modules for the win! I for one welcome our new Missile Overlords. Oh wait, that's me!
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |