Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 10:10:31 -
[1] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I have only one question: Wouldn't these missile TE/TCs put even Light missile engagement ranges well past 100 km mark - would that be intended? I think it's the same kind of issue as the base drone stats staying unchanged IIRC on the introduction of DDAs.  Fitting one of these on a caracal for example will require foregoing another mod. Whether it's a nano or BCU. It's a tradeoff for supposedly better damage application. Now to take advantage of a 100km missile range, a caracal will need a sebo to achieve this which in turn means much less tank or no TP. Sniping harpy/corm fits already hit targets out to this range and they don't have to deal with the 100km damage delay or the target supposedly warping off before damage is even applied.
|

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
17
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 22:08:13 -
[2] - Quote
AskariRising wrote:Zekora Rally wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I have only one question: Wouldn't these missile TE/TCs put even Light missile engagement ranges well past 100 km mark - would that be intended? I think it's the same kind of issue as the base drone stats staying unchanged IIRC on the introduction of DDAs.  Fitting one of these on a caracal for example will require foregoing another mod. Whether it's a nano or BCU. It's a tradeoff for supposedly better damage application. Now to take advantage of a 100km missile range, a caracal will need a sebo to achieve this which in turn means much less tank or no TP. Sniping harpy/corm fits already hit targets out to this range and they don't have to deal with the 100km damage delay or the target supposedly warping off before damage is even applied. its an issue on a caracal yes. but a kestrel is a different story. kestrel vs corm, the kestrel has far better lock range. a kestrel vs harpy, the kestrel has better range. a kestrel can hit targets at 97km just using rigs. ive got a kessy right now thats cap stable with a lock range at 126km, a top speed of 2815m/s, and a missile range of 97km. these new computers will increase my range even further. How long exactly do you have to wait for said missiles to hit your targets? Turrets don't possess such a delay and as such are inherently better for blapping and sniping even though their reach is a bit less. So, it's only normal to expect missiles to hit out to much farther ranges as compensation for ridiculous damage application delay. This won't change much in pvp as most people will still have ample time to get away while the missiles are approaching. The same thing can be said for turrets. You will be popped before you can even react if they have enough alpha. Garmurs and other succesful pvp missile boats will have to forgo important mods that constitute their speed and tank in other to fit this modules. I don't see a problem here. At least, for now. |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 17:48:44 -
[3] - Quote
What exactly does this fix or change? I can only see this being used mostly for its range improving bonus. TPs and Rigors still easily trounce this for damage application effectiveness; something that isn't the case for turrets. We still won't get to see torp ravens or typhoons back in pvp unlike their turret counterparts. |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 18:08:06 -
[4] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Zekora Rally wrote:What exactly does this fix or change? I can only see this being used mostly for its range improving bonus. TPs and Rigors still easily trounce this for damage application effectiveness; something that isn't the case for turrets. We still won't get to see torp ravens or typhoons back in pvp unlike their turret counterparts. For that to happen you need proper targets fro them (BC sized). And btw.. when in hell you see turret battleships so much? They are rare as well :P I still see blaster fitted megas and vindis regularly. Machariels are still as popular as ever. APOC navy issues are still a staple when it comes to reliably projecting dps while standing your ground. When was the last time you saw a torp raven or a SNI or RNI? Torps are currently only useful on bombers and the golem. Even with the barghest, you fit RHMLs all day. You would be ******** to fit torps on any other ship for whatever the occasion. The fact that everyone is willing to deal with a 35 second reload delay shows how useless missiles can be at the top end. |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 18:11:36 -
[5] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:Zekora Rally wrote:What exactly does this fix or change? I can only see this being used mostly for its range improving bonus. TPs and Rigors still easily trounce this for damage application effectiveness; something that isn't the case for turrets. We still won't get to see torp ravens or typhoons back in pvp unlike their turret counterparts. Can't put rigors everywhere. For example, a fleet ham sacrilege gets very interesting gains with MGCs, and it has no slots to spare for any missile rigs. I imagine phoon would benefit greatly from this stuff too. TPs still trounce them and even more so in a fleet of HACs.
|

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 18:31:05 -
[6] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:Zekora Rally wrote:TPs still trounce them and even more so in a fleet of HACs.
Stacking penalty, what is it? Obviously, the benefits cap at around 3 or 4 TPs but it's still better than each HAC fitting a MGCII with precision scripts unless i'm wrong somewhere. |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 05:24:57 -
[7] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:So I've been trying to keep stacking penalties in the discussion as much as possible when it comes to these modules, since it seemed ambiguous at first how they'd apply, especially considering that currently missile rigs are exempt from these penalties. I was hoping that a lack of stacking penalties wouldn't make the modules too overpowered, especially for the ganky crap I pull off, but also that stacking wouldn't be so oppressive that people would be forced to use the new modules just to stay in the same place as before. Seeing both stacking penalties AND stat decreases at once seems like a very big swing. Having one or the other may have left more fitting options open -- but having both nerfs will render current application fits less powerful and force new fits to dedicate more slots to their cause. In shorthand:
- New powerful mods + new stacking penalties: Good
- New nerfed mods + old non-penalized stacking: Good
- New powerful mods + old non-penalized stacking: Overpowered
- New nerfed mods + new stacking penalties: Underpowered
Could you backup your claims with numbers that show that this is exactly the case? I'd like to see a number of current missile pvp ships with fittings that will be overpowered with the additon of said new modules in their old form without having to sacrifice something in return. Feel free to use any missile ship and it would be nice if you stuck to their original sized weapon systems and not rapid launchers. For example: Caracal, Typhoon, Raven, Bellicose, Tengu, Sacrilege, etc... |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 11:55:24 -
[8] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote: For anyone not crippled in the logic department, say CCP Rise, who is reading this far down the balance discussion, here's my concerns.
1) Wolf-Rayets. What crazy crack pipe is TF smoking? The RLML Cerb crack pipe, where RLML fits in Wolf Rayet wormholes look like: 6 x RLML MWD 3 x MGC's SeBo's 3 x BCU 1 x MGE Bay Thruster rig T2 Calefaction C6 Wolf Rayet you will be getting 1621 DPS, with no need for a tank, you're shooting at 140km with perfect precision!
2) Black Holes C4 Black Hole (cause no one lives C5-C6 much) Cruise Phoons packing 2 MGC's and 2 MGE's. Riht now you get 152m explosion radius and 223m/s explosion velocity. With those EWAR mods on, and 3 rigor rigs you'll get that down to 120m / 275m/s. That's....light missile territory, with 688 DPS cruise missiles (200km range) on a battleship. Not bad, you have to admit, but getting a bit broken.
Let alone a shield Barghest with souped up lows and rigs. Right now C4 BH it's 29km/s velocity. With MGE's you''ll top 32km/s, and better than 230m radius, 200m/s explosion velocity.
But, finally, the Torp Cavalry Raven is back on the cards!!!1! Fully tricked out, you can et the torp Raven in a C4 BH to HML-levels of application, without going over the top. All you need, really, are webs, and you've suddenly got 1200 DPS out to 70km with pretty much decent application vs cruisers. Arguably it's what the Raven needs, but we're talking torp Ravens.
I remain to be convinced that we need these modules AT ALL, given the above edge cases. Sure, it's not like C6 W-R Cerbs will blot out the sun in nullsec (least until you make the supercarriers into the hypothesised broadcasters of system effects....pls do this, it would be awesome) but W-R fighting is already basically who can bring a bunch of RLML damping ships to the hole first, very boring and lame game play.
So, please at least run these through your calculators, CCP Rise, and consider whether it's a good idea.
Every other ship is going to be moving almost twice as fast so it ends up balancing itself out. I'm a firm believer that If blackholes do indeed make a huge difference in missile damage application, more people would move in but a good 99% of them are still empty. |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 21:09:29 -
[9] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:I will trust kadesh's statements over stoic's on this matter, until ccp proves otherwise by rise coming in to explain the code magic he did to make sure comps and tes will ignore rigs when deciding if they're second or fourth in the stacking penalty line. Anyway, its looking like barely anything will change for missile ships except having to spend another slot just to stay where they currently stand. I concur and eagerly look forward to CCP Rise's statement on the matter. Otherwise, Plan B[1]... [1] Which is start a mega whine thread about getting my missile skills refunded. Does your spreadsheet take into account the new values? |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
20
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 17:32:18 -
[10] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Chance Ravinne wrote:Okay everyone so officially, for the record, application rig bonuses will be stacking penalized with both each other and with the new application modules. I'm sorry I couldn't get that made clearer sooner, and I was hoping it would be in the patch notes. Missiles must have been OP for CCP to decide to nerf them again. Exactly, which is why missile ships top the killboard charts and deal the most damage per ship class. /Sarcasm |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
20
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 07:45:20 -
[11] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:The amount of negativity every single person in this thread exudes is absolutely mind boggling.
tl;dr I hate people who do nothing but whinge and ***** about every little thing and talk about how bad it's going to be. Yes it sucks that torps and cruise are still pretty bad. Yes it'd be nice to have more active dev feedback. But my god, you people sound like a bunch of whiney silver spooning shitlords. Cool story, bruh. |

Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
20
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:09:27 -
[12] - Quote
Just sold my golem and bought a paladin. Jokes on you.  |
|
|