EVE Search - Sticky:[Aegis] Missile balance package

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Aegis] Missile balance package

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Feodor Romanov Blitzkrieg Federation OLD MAN GANG 12	Posted - 2015.06.24 18:25:54 - [271] - Quote I like what you are doing. Missiles definitely need a boost. But I do not understand, why I need to fit "Missile Guidance Enhancers", when i can fit ballistic controls(BC). Rise new modules char-tics to be comparable with Ballistic controls. Or make new modules more profiled with one bonus, for example: +25% missile max velocity or +25% exp. radius. bonus.
stoicfaux 5975	Posted - 2015.06.24 18:53:39 - [272] - Quote afkalt wrote: Trajectory analysis?! What? Surely a copypasta error cloning the mods? Well, missiles are just slow moving guided bullets... Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Feodor Romanov Blitzkrieg Federation OLD MAN GANG 12	Posted - 2015.06.24 18:54:43 - [273] - Quote Only Light missiles is good enough to be used. Other apply damage very badly. For example heavy missile Cerberus is useless against frigs or AB cruisers, while Ishtar apply good damage to any type of ships. I am sure missiles need more damage applying capabilities, for example explosion velocity boost or changing of DRF and DRS. PS: Caldari kinetic damage bonus is mad! All 3 other nations have ability to choose damage type, but not Caldari. Even Amarrs and Matars have better missile boats then "missile profiled" Caldari.
stoicfaux 5975	Posted - 2015.06.24 18:57:58 - [274] - Quote Feodor Romanov wrote: I like what you are doing. Missiles definitely need a boost. But I do not understand, why I need to fit "Missile Guidance Enhancers", when i can fit ballistic controls(BC). Rise new modules char-tics to be comparable with Ballistic controls. Or make new modules more profiled with one bonus, for example: +25% missile max velocity or +25% exp. radius. bonus. Yeah, I could see a more focused MGC as being a low slot item instead of a mid slot item, i.e. trading rof/damage mode for an application mod. The only trouble would be balancing it with ships like the Typhoon with its plethora of lows. Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1448	Posted - 2015.06.24 19:21:03 - [275] - Quote stoicfaux wrote: afkalt wrote: Trajectory analysis?! What? Surely a copypasta error cloning the mods? Well, missiles are just slow moving guided bullets... Well yes, but what the hell is a newbie wanting to train that and gunnery IV for, if they're a dedicated missile jock? It's madness. Sure, most people wont notice but still!
Deacon Abox Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 510	Posted - 2015.06.24 19:49:50 - [276] - Quote Matt Faithbringer wrote: Styphon the Black wrote: Samira Kernher wrote: Really needs an anti-missile tracking disruptor to go with these additions. Also, it's so fitting that these missile modules are coming with the Aegis release. it is called defender missiles. well I never used it but everyone say it is broken and not really usable Yeah, they are broken. Don't see much demand for them on the markets do you. Also, they require a launcher slot. Many ships in this game with no launcher slots. Forget that they even exist, they are complete trash. Even FoF missiles work better than defender missiles and that's saying a lot. Brokk Witgenstein wrote: Why do some guys want to apply Tracking Disruption on non-tracking weapon systems? How about using Damps to mitigate their range hmmm...? Because when the evil missile boat and the beloved turret boat are both within engagement range, the turrets win on DPS alone. Really looking forward to this! Next patch is going to be so brilliant [evil, maniacal cackling] You seem to have not been reading the thread, and your little over one year in this game lack of experience is showing. Anyway, if you have some philosophical objection to tracking disruption on a non tracking weapon system, where then is you consternation at tracking enhancement on those same weapon systems. And no, the beloved turret boat does not win on DPS alone. Often the missile boat is shield and sometimes will fit a TD or two [dual TD Hookbill] to partially or completely screw over the turret dps. As for fleet battles and ewar, if CCP is going to be taking away the efficacy of firewalling it damn well better have something better to take its place. TD boats should be getting more use in this game against both turret and missile fleet comps. However, atm everything is ecm and damp boats for fleets. Lastly, damps are just as effective against turret boats as missile boats because, tada, lock range and/or lock time has nothing to do with whether you are using turrets or missiles. CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony 6	Posted - 2015.06.24 20:26:13 - [277] - Quote stoicfaux wrote: The only trouble would be balancing it with ships like the Typhoon with its plethora of lows. ...which is filled with Ballistic Control Units currently. Better application, less DPS? Still fair.
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony 6	Posted - 2015.06.24 20:51:17 - [278] - Quote Deacon Abox wrote: You seem to have not been reading the thread, and your little over one year in this game lack of experience is showing. Anyway, if you have some philosophical objection to tracking disruption on a non tracking weapon system, where then is you consternation at tracking enhancement on those same weapon systems. And no, the beloved turret boat does not win on DPS alone. Often the missile boat is shield and sometimes will fit a TD or two [dual TD Hookbill] to partially or completely screw over the turret dps. As for fleet battles and ewar, if CCP is going to be taking away the efficacy of firewalling it damn well better have something better to take its place. TD boats should be getting more use in this game against both turret and missile fleet comps. However, atm everything is ecm and damp boats for fleets. Lastly, damps are just as effective against turret boats as missile boats because, tada, lock range and/or lock time has nothing to do with whether you are using turrets or missiles. I shall read between objections based on "my experience" -- although tr%#@%% nope- not going there. Moving on. I'll even humour you and grant you have half a point there. But still... NOT IN THE TRACKING DISRUPTOR! Make it a separate module, but don't extend the usefulness of the tracking disruptor to counter "all kinds of incoming DPS". Such a "can't hit me" mod already exists and it's called ECM. It was mostly the extention of the TD that worried me. I do not object to a different module -- more tough choices, more variety is always better. That said, Yes I love my Hookbill and yes I put TDs (and other fun stuff) in there as well; but when people get all up close and personal I DO feel severely out-DPSsed. You don't? How jolly for you. I was under the impression short-range weapon systems did a lot more damage than long range weaponry (countered by damps); and when one looks closely at short range weapon systems, Rockets and HAMs deal sub-par damage. But ... sub-par damage that hits. Which is good. Now if everybody starts fitting TDs because a couple of scripts make them roflstomp against anyone, then I must object.
Elsa Hayes Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 81	Posted - 2015.06.24 20:58:13 - [279] - Quote Any "missile package" should include a look at ship bonuses related to missiles as well and here caldari should be ridden of that abysmal kinetic bonus and it should be replaced with something else. Preferably a damage bonus for all the according missiles like 5% heavy missile damage or something. Or an explosion velocity/radius bonus if you are afraid of too much dps vs 1 type of target. I am sure someone has already suggested this but it does no harm to mention it again, it is neither logical nor does it add any flavor since other races are not plague by such constrictions. Kill it kill it naoh, that stupid kinetic bonus! Also if you call it missile package should you not take a long overdue look at precision missiles as well? Right now, in most cases they are not worth using at all, that should not be the case. Precision missiles have been in a sorry state for years now overshadowed by rage and faction ammo and are long long overdue for an overhaul especially heavy precision and cruise precision missiles, because right now they are not really very "precise".
Deacon Abox Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 510	Posted - 2015.06.24 21:03:50 - [280] - Quote Brokk Witgenstein wrote: Now if everybody starts fitting TDs because a couple of scripts make them roflstomp against anyone, then I must object. Of course. This is probably the only, but unstated, reason TDs aren't being introduced at the same time. The devs are very aware of not creating a new multispec as of old. However, for some reason they appear to have an aversion to using the same remedy to prevent the TD becoming the new old multispec. That is to nerf the base effect on the TD module itself, and give a counterbalancing buff to the TD boat TD bonuses. What is the problem with it Rise and Fozzie? Just do the ecm boat thing with all the other ewar? It worked for ECM. It can work for damps, painters, and TDs. Painter and TD boats are not seen much. Any tom **** or harry can fit damps, TDs, or painters in a spare mid. So presently there is no or little desirability to fly these ships. But lending them their ewar roles back, by giving them the ecm boat treatment, would make the game more diverse actually. CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
Poranius Fisc State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.06.25 00:40:56 - [281] - Quote Hanazava Karyna wrote: Now we need only some effective EWAR that works on missiles. It's called ECM
Deacon Abox Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 511	Posted - 2015.06.25 02:52:47 - [282] - Quote Poranius Fisc wrote: Hanazava Karyna wrote: Now we need only some effective EWAR that works on missiles. It's called ECM Which is not missile specific. What don't you get? CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1451	Posted - 2015.06.25 09:01:14 - [283] - Quote Deacon Abox wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Hanazava Karyna wrote: Now we need only some effective EWAR that works on missiles. It's called ECM Which is not missile specific. What don't you get? He didn't say missile specific /pendant Besides, if missiles get TD, guns should be smartbomb-able. I mean if we're making them all the same and fair and equal ;)
Skyler Hawk Boars on Parade The Tuskers Co. 40	Posted - 2015.06.25 11:41:02 - [284] - Quote When can we expect information on the scripts for the missile guidance computers?
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1452	Posted - 2015.06.25 12:05:02 - [285] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: When can we expect information on the scripts for the missile guidance computers? I believe they are on sisi
Mario Putzo 1437	Posted - 2015.06.25 13:38:29 - [286] - Quote I still believe redeacting the changes made to Heavy Missile explosion radius is better than adding a flat 5% to base missile damage. This is only going to step on the toes of Medium Arties. HMs do not need higher Alpha, they need better application resulting in more reliable DPS. Redact that change + new modules and suddenly you have 4 mid sized weapon systems ALL sitting around the same % of DPS being applied. Please stop pushing damage levels higher and higher and calling it ~balance~. (drones still be comfortably ahead in terms of effective range and applied DPS though, but drones are ****** anyway across the board.) Say no to power creep.
Kitty Bear Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance 1481	Posted - 2015.06.25 14:14:40 - [287] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Heyo We would have liked to include disruption modules to go along with these enhancement modules but there are actually some technical hurdles we need to figure out and we didn't want to keep holding back on adding these in the mean time. Look for those sometime in the future. Let us know what you think! When these adjustments are complete will you be ensuring that missiles will not hit for 0 points of damage? Or will the application of these e-war changes effectively give targets sufficient speed to escape the explosion radius? Always scoring 'a hit' was one of the few strengths of missile usage.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1941	Posted - 2015.06.25 14:24:26 - [288] - Quote Kitty Bear wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Heyo We would have liked to include disruption modules to go along with these enhancement modules but there are actually some technical hurdles we need to figure out and we didn't want to keep holding back on adding these in the mean time. Look for those sometime in the future. Let us know what you think! When these adjustments are complete will you be ensuring that missiles will not hit for 0 points of damage? Or will the application of these e-war changes effectively give targets sufficient speed to escape the explosion radius? Always scoring 'a hit' was one of the few strengths of missile usage. If you can script against missile speed, it will be rather fun to see how many ship can just outrun missiles...
Deacon Abox Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 511	Posted - 2015.06.25 16:19:27 - [289] - Quote afkalt wrote: Deacon Abox wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Hanazava Karyna wrote: Now we need only some effective EWAR that works on missiles. It's called ECM Which is not missile specific. What don't you get? He didn't say missile specific /pendant Besides, if missiles get TD, guns should be smartbomb-able. I mean if we're making them all the same and fair and equal ;) Firewalling missiles with smarties is being made more difficult, all the way to possibly so difficult that it is done away with. Are you not following all the changes that are being made? Besides that firewalling is not used in FW and lowsec in general due to standing and or sec level hits from the use of smarties. Also, smarties are in the game as another antidrone defense, other than waiting on the drones to get targeted and then shoot them. Oh, how about that reasoning back at ya. I should be able to target missiles and shoot them. There should be something in the game to evade missiles, since defenders are worthless and require a launcher slot anyway. CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
Kitty Bear Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance 1481	Posted - 2015.06.25 16:23:11 - [290] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: If you can script against missile speed, it will be rather fun to see how many ship can just outrun missiles... That could be the reason for the delay. With turrets when you nuke their effective range, it doesn't affect their ability to actually apply any damage. worst case scenario A CM travels at 10,575 m/s with a flight time of 15.75s Giving a range of 166.56 km If the e-war effect is capped at 90% (similar to Webs & Damps) you get a missile velocity of 1057 m/s a reduced flight time of 1.57s Script choice of Velocity OR flight time Drops the range to 16.66km If the script affects both values Range drops to 1.67km 1057 m/s is still going to be fast enough to hit other Battleships even if fitted with an AB some MWD equipped Battleships will be fast enough to out-run the missile Put a MWD on anything smaller and they become invulnerable to CM's despite the sig-bloom
Mario Putzo 1438	Posted - 2015.06.25 16:25:55 - [291] - Quote Deacon Abox wrote: afkalt wrote: Deacon Abox wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Hanazava Karyna wrote: Now we need only some effective EWAR that works on missiles. It's called ECM Which is not missile specific. What don't you get? He didn't say missile specific /pendant Besides, if missiles get TD, guns should be smartbomb-able. I mean if we're making them all the same and fair and equal ;) Firewalling missiles with smarties is being made more difficult, all the way to possibly so difficult that it is done away with. Are you not following all the changes that are being made? Not really true. Firewalling will still exist, and you can use it as a defensive advantage by using Smartbombs "force" missile chuckers into using the matching damage type...to which you fit your tanks to super tank against that type. Added HP will help missiles make it through, but you are still going to mitigate a lot of DPS.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 909	Posted - 2015.06.25 16:30:33 - [292] - Quote This looks like an improvement, I look forward to trying it out.
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 22	Posted - 2015.06.25 22:29:31 - [293] - Quote Tried them out on Sisi, bunch of bugs. They stop during warp (pretty sure other tracking computers don't). When I removed a script, stats didn't change, neither on guidance computer, nor on launcher. It were still working as if it's scripted.
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 4460	Posted - 2015.06.26 02:33:30 - [294] - Quote With this change torpedoes are finally a viable alternative to cruise missiles. Now we just need to revise the explosion radius for torpedoes to less than cruise missiles and we'll be good to go. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 4461	Posted - 2015.06.26 03:03:27 - [295] - Quote afkalt wrote: I'm wary, I think there are a few hulls that are going to be a little bit OTT with these and CCP never nerf problem hulls, they rinse the entire weapon system instead. These modules really allow you rob Peter by paying Paul, so there's definite tradeoffs. More likely se'll see fits that previously had 4x BCUs run a passive MGC instead since that will easily offset the +2.5% damage of the 4th BCU. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
James Baboli Novablasters 922	Posted - 2015.06.26 05:23:58 - [296] - Quote I retract my earlier skeptism about these modules due to time on target. It will remain a niche use of very specifically set up ships with little application in most fights involving missile boats, and will almost require a stupid or extremely heavily tackled opponent. In other words, jackdaw can only stack a max of 3 volleys, even with mode swapping and over heating, and 2 seems to be the hard limit on anything else not coming out of rapid launchers, which might be able to get 3 in perfect setups but are practically limited to 2. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Dino Zavr Shadow Owls 38	Posted - 2015.06.26 09:15:26 - [297] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We would have liked to include disruption modules to go along with these enhancement modules but there are actually some technical hurdles we need to figure out and we didn't want to keep holding back on adding these in the mean time. Look for those sometime in the future. I would like to wonder how many different E-War modules we would have to carry with us and how do we quickly refiit Trackdis with Missiles one in PVP engagements? Why not to allow existing tracking disruptors work against new feature?
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1460	Posted - 2015.06.26 10:20:20 - [298] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: afkalt wrote: I'm wary, I think there are a few hulls that are going to be a little bit OTT with these and CCP never nerf problem hulls, they rinse the entire weapon system instead. These modules really allow you rob Peter by paying Paul, so there's definite tradeoffs. More likely se'll see fits that previously had 4x BCUs run a passive MGC instead since that will easily offset the +2.5% damage of the 4th BCU. Remember there are a couple of boats with enough ancillary mids to make these a really viable proposition to get around TP stacking. I'm looking at you, HAMcriledge and RHMLPhoon and some odd bhargy fits.
Skyler Hawk Boars on Parade The Tuskers Co. 40	Posted - 2015.06.26 10:23:16 - [299] - Quote These things are overpowered to the point of being broken as it stands. A single range-scripted MGC increases range by 42% whereas a range-scripted tracking computer gives a 15% increase to optimal and 30% to falloff, which is much less powerful. It's harder to directly compare the difference in damage application between a tracking-scripted TC and a precision-scripted MGC due to the differences between the tracking and missile damage equations, but in practical terms the improvement in application that you get from the scripted MGCs is vastly more significant than a 35% boost to tracking on a turret.
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 4463	Posted - 2015.06.26 11:18:56 - [300] - Quote Skyler Hawk wrote: These things are overpowered to the point of being broken as it stands. A single range-scripted MGC increases range by 42% whereas a range-scripted tracking computer gives a 15% increase to optimal and 30% to falloff, which is much less powerful. It's harder to directly compare the difference in damage application between a tracking-scripted TC and a precision-scripted MGC due to the differences between the tracking and missile damage equations, but in practical terms the improvement in application that you get from the scripted MGCs is vastly more significant than a 30% boost to tracking on a turret. Actually, the current velocity bonus (there is no range bonus) for a scripted MGC on SiSi is only 21%. And this is stacking penalized. Heavy use of these will seriously cut into any shield tank, tackle or EW. You can't make a direct comparison between missiles and guns, because it's apples to oranges (or grapes to sour grapes). afkalt wrote: Remember there are a couple of boats with enough ancillary mids to make these a really viable proposition to get around TP stacking. I'm looking at you, HAMcriledge and RHMLPhoon and some odd bhargy fits. Typhoons don't get any kind of range bonus to begin with, so best case scenario is that 2-3 of these put them on par with the Ravens in terms of missile range. That really precludes any kind of effective shield tank for a Typhoon, so I think these modules are really going to be a catch-22 in terms of tradeoffs and sacrifices. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.