Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
5832
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:11:15 -
[1] - Quote
With the first part of the Aegis update on July 7 we will see a set of new missile modules to fine tune missile speed, missile flight time, explosion velocity, and explosion radius in various ways. We also will get the Gallente Tech-3 destroyer "Hecate" and a couple of interesting balance updates including a buff to the Tempest.
Read more about those interesting changes in CCP RIse' latest dev blog Missile guidance modules, the Hecate and balance updates in Aegis.
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer - Volunteer Manager
|
|
ChromeStriker
Out of Focus Odin's Call
901
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:17:54 -
[2] - Quote
First!!!
My typhoon approves of these changes!
No Worries
|
Charlie Firpol
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc. Monkeys with Guns.
313
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:20:59 -
[3] - Quote
You-¦ve got NO idea how much I am looking forward to flying the Hecate!
The Butcher of Black Rise - eve-radio.com
|
Funless Saisima
Strange Energy The Bastion
62
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:29:15 -
[4] - Quote
The missile rig stealth nerf seems to be missing here and in the patch notes. |
Tonrak awesomesauce
Bold Originals
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:40:48 -
[5] - Quote
Any news regarding the rig stacking changes?
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P C C P Alliance
5267
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:51:34 -
[6] - Quote
I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis.
@ccp_rise
|
|
Tonrak awesomesauce
Bold Originals
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 16:27:27 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis.
Expected, but sad - Thank you for the update however!
A side question; What is the reasoning behind this change? Does missiles become to powerfull with the new modules, or is it part of a bigger balancing act? - It seems torpedoes are fairly underwhelming, and will be even more so.
Just wondering tbh.
|
HeXxploiT
Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn
160
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 16:34:54 -
[8] - Quote
I still find it odd that these missile changes are coming prior to the remainder of the launcher tiericide changes. Does the team that created these new missile modules communicate with the team doing the module tiericide? |
HeXxploiT
Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn
160
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 16:37:22 -
[9] - Quote
Tonrak awesomesauce wrote:CCP Rise wrote:I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis. Expected, but sad - Thank you for the update however! A side question; What is the reasoning behind this change? Does missiles become to powerfull with the new modules, or is it part of a bigger balancing act? - It seems torpedoes are fairly underwhelming, and will be even more so. Just wondering tbh.
Torpedoes will be more powerful after this change hence the need for the stacking penalty. |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
863
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 16:42:18 -
[10] - Quote
You did not increase the "agility" of the Ishtar, you increased its inertia modifier.
"Agility" is not a stat anywhere in the game, and plus if you say that you increased agility it sounds like you made it more agile, when in reality when you increase the inertia modifier it makes it less agile (e.g. increased align time, slower acceleration, etc). |
|
Tonrak awesomesauce
Bold Originals
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 16:43:34 -
[11] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:Tonrak awesomesauce wrote:CCP Rise wrote:I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis. Expected, but sad - Thank you for the update however! A side question; What is the reasoning behind this change? Does missiles become to powerfull with the new modules, or is it part of a bigger balancing act? - It seems torpedoes are fairly underwhelming, and will be even more so. Just wondering tbh. Torpedoes will be more powerful after this change hence the need for the stacking penalty.
I realise they will be more powerfull after the changes IF the said ship can fit the modules there is now available. But slots are of limited availability, and that is especially the case on shield tanked ships. It seems odd that missilies as a type need so many modules in order to have proper damage application.
|
Fzhal
Tessaract Industries
35
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 19:32:07 -
[12] - Quote
Turrets have tracking enhancers so that larger guns can hit smaller/faster ships, now missiles will. Sounds fair? Tonrak awesomesauce, as you said, medium slots are at a premium, so the mid modules will be rarely used except for in PVE. So in PVP you should only expect to see the low modules used. This means that they will be trading a straight damage enhancer for the equivalent of a tracking enhancer. Missile ships will now be able to further customize their ship's role by reducing damage to big ships for extra damage against fast/small ships. |
Freelancer117
so you want to be a Hero
294
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 19:43:42 -
[13] - Quote
Quote:Aegis promises to deliver some of the biggest changes to New Eden in some time with the new sovereignty system on July 14th
In the patch notes this was mentioned
Bob has spoken: the spawn rate and lifetime of some wormhole connections to Nullsec space have changed.
source: http://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-aegis
CCP recently gave us their thoughts about what this could mean:
We'll be providing a bit more info in an upcoming blog, but some aspects of wormhole connections are intended to be mysterious. Players are welcome to figure it out themselves.
source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3bzols/patch_notes_patch_notes_for_aegis_ccp_phantom/csr0nvm
Now I sincerely hope CCP takes this as an opportunity to add to the open world sandbox that is New Eden,
and not nerf Anoikis (worm hole space) to fix a problem that did not originate there, namely nullsec's tedium.
source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5862804
In the past The Company has shown a tendency to ruin the open world sandbox in order to fix their own shortcomings.
It would be a good sign towards the remaining capsuleers that CCP can deliver Excellence and a proper Expansion again.
source: http://jestertrek.com/eve/players/
Freelancer has spoken
The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
|
Chan'aar
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 19:56:20 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis.
Well jeez thanks for at least finally officially confirming this nerf THREE DAYS after a CSM member brought this to our attention.
Any official comments on the 10 days / 16 pages of feedback you received from us after you pre-nerfed the MGC / MGE's ?
|
Mario Putzo
1482
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:26:13 -
[15] - Quote
Fzhal wrote:Turrets have tracking enhancers so that larger guns can hit smaller/faster ships, now missiles will. Sounds fair? Tonrak awesomesauce, as you said, medium slots are at a premium, so the mid modules will be rarely used except for in PVE. So in PVP you should only expect to see the low modules used. This means that they will be trading a straight damage enhancer for the equivalent of a tracking enhancer. Missile ships will now be able to further customize their ship's role by reducing damage to big ships for extra damage against fast/small ships.
Extra Damage?
The stacking penalty on rigs effectively means you MUST fit one of these new modules (either a mid slot, or a low slot) just to retain the same application rate you have right now. There is no choice. You either fit it, or you simply will apply less damage period.
If you never used rigs before with missiles, then cool these mods seem fancy and fun and will give you a boost!, until you realize a Rig > in application value than these modules in which case you should be using a Rig instead =D.
This really fucks shield missile ships that are already limited in midslot space (tank, tackle if needed, prop mods) and natively low on low slots.
When this goes live here are your options.
Less Tank + Same Application Less Gank + Same Application Less Utility + Same Application.
There is your missile balance pass. A net nerf across all missile ships.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
309
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:31:56 -
[16] - Quote
Fzhal wrote:Turrets have tracking enhancers so that larger guns can hit smaller/faster ships, now missiles will. You have no idea what you talking about.
"-What are you doing?"
"-Docking."(...)
-"It's not possible"
-"No, it's necessary."
|
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2094
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:47:10 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis.
please do the same of trimarks and shield extending rigs...
personally i just want to see it done to make super carrier pilots cry...
is that soo bad?
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Mario Putzo
1482
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:47:24 -
[18] - Quote
Also, im not sure what math you are using. But Missile Velocity and Missile Flight Time have no impact on the missile damage application formula. For a module intended to mirror TCs and TEs why is there also an increase to total range included on these modules. You do know that Optimal Range on TCs and TEs functions differently than increased missile range mods right....right?
So when you say this Rise:
CCP Rise wrote:There's a few problems with the numbers proposed originally but at the end of the day it would have meant Missile Guidance Modules were substantially stronger than their tracking counterparts (around 50% stronger for the enhancer and around 33% stronger for the computer).
Im not quite sure what the **** you are talking about. You have values being compared that have nothing to do with application. It makes ZERO sense.
Missile mods OP guys you get 50% the value of application than you would from a TC, but you get like 100% more range!.
Dear Seagull. Commissar your balance team. Thanks. Me. |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
512
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 21:04:57 -
[19] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:You did not increase the "agility" of the Ishtar, you increased its inertia modifier.
"Agility" is not a stat anywhere in the game, and plus if you say that you increased agility it sounds like you made it more agile, when in reality when you increase the inertia modifier it makes it less agile (e.g. increased align time, slower acceleration, etc). Mass is being decreased. So, and I don't do math, apparently even with the increased inertia modifier, the reduced mass makes the ship a little more agile. However, now we are being pushed toward armor tank, where agility means essentially nothing because you will be 1600mm plated.
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.
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
25
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 21:10:13 -
[20] - Quote
Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them. |
|
Hal Morsh
Aliastra Gallente Federation
325
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 21:53:33 -
[21] - Quote
You spelled transition wrong. YOU SPELLED TRANSITION WRONG!!! AWGHFABFFFFFFFFf
Anyways torpoedos already didn't make sense fitting so many in a stealth bomber size wise and now it's going to make less sense.
Lastly my hecate is going to be PVE fit! With a salvager! I may even sacrifice a turret for scanners.
edit: CCP also plans sov updates in a week after tomorrow.
Dun'Gal > Hal is simply an imperfect ai, though if drunkeness ever gets programmed into ai's I foresee both a hilarious and tragic end to humanity.
|
stoicfaux
6067
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 22:40:41 -
[22] - Quote
Fzhal wrote:Turrets have tracking enhancers so that larger guns can hit smaller/faster ships, now missiles will. Sounds fair? Tonrak awesomesauce, as you said, medium slots are at a premium, so the mid modules will be rarely used except for in PVE. So in PVP you should only expect to see the low modules used. This means that they will be trading a straight damage enhancer for the equivalent of a tracking enhancer. Missile ships will now be able to further customize their ship's role by reducing damage to big ships for extra damage against fast/small ships. If I still flew my Golem, I would swap the 4th bonused PWNAGE TP for a MGC II w/Precision script for a slight improvement that probably isn't worth the time to fly to a hub and buy the MGC II and script. On the positive side, the stacking penalty on two rigs is pretty slight, but the folks with three rigor rigs will probably want/need to swap one for a flare.
Also, a 16 CPU PWNAGE TP outperforms a 35 CPU MGC II w/Precision script.
How many PvP fits current carry 2 TPs and no rigor/flare rigs? Those fits can swap the 2nd TP for an MGC which would be a boost due to TPs and MGCs not stacking with each other.
However, if you're in a fleet and Someone Else(tm) is providing the TPs, then the MGC makes sense over a TP (assuming you have the CPU to spare.)
You can also treat a MGC II w/Precision as Rigor I + Flare I which essentially lets you use a mid to free up two rig slots. But I'm still waiting for someone to post a fit that takes advantage of that.
/grumble
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Mario Putzo
1484
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 00:40:32 -
[23] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:You can also treat a MGC II w/Precision as Rigor I + Flare I which essentially lets you use a mid to free up two rig slots. But I'm still waiting for someone to post a fit that takes advantage of that. /grumble
HAM Sac could probably shine tbh which means HAM Legion might be a real thing...although its a bit tougher to fit and less rangey but boy oh boy that tank. |
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
26
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 01:33:58 -
[24] - Quote
Except that thanks to the stacking pen you wont really see that 5% damage buff in the wild.
Basically what we got was all other platforms nerfed and HM remaining exactly where they were.
Oh yes.. and CCP still thinking this somehow makes missiles better... which still doesn't add up. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2574
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 03:37:43 -
[25] - Quote
Quote:We were looking into a set of Battleship and Battlecruiser changes as well, but unfortunately we had to delay most of that pass until a later release. GGRRRRRRREEJEIWIOWOSHDBDIDIJDHDJSKKAPPWJWNBXNOCDWII!!!!!!! |
Janeway84
Def Squadron Pride Before Fall
172
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 05:40:58 -
[26] - Quote
Will be intresting to see how the new missile changes unfold and hecate To bad you guys had to delay the battlecruiser changes, perhaps you can release them when in 1-2 week when the next part of the sov change is coming? |
Poke InTheEye
Anti-BoB Flash Mob
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 06:18:03 -
[27] - Quote
" The Gila, Dominix, Tristan, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, and Stratios all make top lists for usage and damage in their respective classes. "
I'd be interested to know where the Amarr drone boats land. Why aren't the Geddon, Pilgrim, Curse, Arbitrator, Crucifier, and Sentinal on the list? WTB Amarr love. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1933
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 10:57:44 -
[28] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I'm getting the stacking penalty changes added to the patch notes as we speak. Sorry for any confusion about that.
Bonuses to missile explosion velocity and explosion radius will both be stacking penalized on rigs and modules after Aegis.
Stealth Nerf level V
Poor missiles, between the pre-nerfed jackdaw as slow as a Mauler, the ridiculously small hp and resist increase against firewalling, and the pre-nerfed missile modules with the lowest impact of all time on effective dps due to application... Way to go for making people hope before crushing it mercylessly... Way to go CCP.
Lets be reasonable here, nobody is going to use more missile ships in fleet comps post Aegis. Who would want a weapon system that requires the target to be motionless AND warned in advance of the incoming damage AND will be able to mitigate 75% of it with a single firewall...
That damage application stealth nerf really was what we needed! I will enjoy it as much as my jump fatigue while moving my dread from fountain yo low sec
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Mike Whiite
Geuzen Inc
390
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 11:41:43 -
[29] - Quote
so strange that from "guys we're going to something for missiles users and on top of that we're giving heavy missiles a straight buff"
it ends with logging in and finding out that my 40% Explosion radius bonus turned in to a 37.38% bonus
but no problem if you have cpu to spare and remove a current mid-slot you can get 5,5 something % bonus, oh and that mid slot cant be your target painters or it is useless. |
Ransu Asanari
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
271
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 12:28:49 -
[30] - Quote
I despair that we're never actually going to see missiles balanced properly, damage-type locks removed, or the missile skilltree fixed.
Considering these missile mods are coming out pre-nerfed with no feedback acknowledged on the thread except for that one post (classic Rise btw). And the fact that it was hinted that on top of the stacking penalty on missile rigs, we can look forward to Missile disruption modules to further reduce any effectiveness we could have hoped to gain from these modules.
Can really feel the love here CCP.
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
|
Soldarius
Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore
1327
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 13:55:34 -
[31] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them.
MGCs were available on sisi at the original numbers for at least 2 days. The range bonus was OP at 42% scripted. Do you like 120km RLML Cerbs? The application bonuses were not OP as far as I could tell. But they were effective.
I have a spreadsheet that does the numbers to within 4 significant digits, and is .1% accurate on all stats. I found very little to concern me when it came to large missiles like torpedoes or cruise missiles. The problems were with missiles that are already a bit OP; namely light missiles. Your standard light missile frigate has more range than a Confessor or Svipul in sharpshooter mode even before MGCs are used.
Also, the MGCs have been in EFT for at least a week if not 2. So numbers have been available for anyone that wants to check them.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Soldarius
Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore
1327
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 13:58:19 -
[32] - Quote
Poke InTheEye wrote:" The Gila, Dominix, Tristan, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, and Stratios all make top lists for usage and damage in their respective classes. "
I'd be interested to know where the Amarr drone boats land. Why aren't the Geddon, Pilgrim, Curse, Arbitrator, Crucifier, and Sentinal on the list? WTB Amarr love.
I recall Fozzie saying that Armageddon was #2 in the BS class. Because of drones.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
35
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 15:41:41 -
[33] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Nafensoriel wrote:Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them. MGCs were available on sisi at the original numbers for at least 2 days. The range bonus was OP at 42% scripted. Do you like 120km RLML Cerbs? The application bonuses were not OP as far as I could tell. But they were effective. I have a spreadsheet that does the numbers to within 4 significant digits, and is .1% accurate on all stats. I found very little to concern me when it came to large missiles like torpedoes or cruise missiles. The problems were with missiles that are already a bit OP; namely light missiles. Your standard light missile frigate has more range than a Confessor or Svipul in sharpshooter mode even before MGCs are used. Also, the MGCs have been in EFT for at least a week if not 2. So numbers have been available for anyone that wants to check them.
Actually no. They were not. Rise stated himself the mods were broken on sisi and not applying all stats properly. Then before fixing them to actually apply properly they were nerfed. No player ever saw the actual pre nerfed mods under gameplay conditions.
Also 120km cerbs? To counter 120km ishtars? Yes please. Additionally to DO that.. a cerb really needs to fit a 3 slot tank. That EM hole.. such op. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Academy Heiian Conglomerate
549
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 16:53:23 -
[34] - Quote
I'm not too concerned about the new stacking penalties for the missile rigs, because from where i see it the only ship they have a serious effect on are bombers.
Larger ships with more slots to fit the new application mods will be better off overall since they won't be forced to sacrifice rig slots for application any more, and said modules affect MORE than just one modifier, so it really is a win for everyone except the bomber crowd. My Caracals and Ravens will be very happy after this change, and i expect to see the Sac to get a little stronger with the new missile guidance computers. |
stoicfaux
6074
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 17:11:32 -
[35] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:I'm not too concerned about the new stacking penalties for the missile rigs, because from where i see it the only ship they have a serious effect on are bombers. Nope. Two stacking rigors isn't a big deal: 73.9% explosion radius versus the old 72.3%. And bombers don't have the CPU or slots to go nuts with the new missile guidance mods. And a 16 CPU TP is better than a 35 CPU MGC II. And bomber torps have plenty of range as is.
The MGC could benefit bomber fleets that have plenty of TPs already and that can fit a CPU intensive MGC in place of a existing TP.
Quote:Larger ships with more slots to fit the new application mods will be better off overall since they won't be forced to sacrifice rig slots for application any more, and said modules affect MORE than just one modifier, so it really is a win for everyone except the bomber crowd. My Caracals and Ravens will be very happy after this change, and i expect to see the Sac to get a little stronger with the new missile guidance computers. Post fits. If someone else is providing TPs and/or tackle, if you're doing extreme range missile sniping, etc., then the MGC is probably a good choice over a TP. If you currently mount multiple TPs, then the MGC could be a good replacement for the 2nd TP. Aside from that, the MGC and MGE appear a bit underwhelming.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
325
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 18:54:31 -
[36] - Quote
I'll be suggesting to BL leadership that F-88's new station name will be: CCP FIX MISSILES 4 REAL KTHANKS |
Daemun Khanid
Sanctus Imperialis
112
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 01:04:19 -
[37] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Nafensoriel wrote:Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them. MGCs were available on sisi at the original numbers for at least 2 days. The range bonus was OP at 42% scripted. Do you like 120km RLML Cerbs? The application bonuses were not OP as far as I could tell. But they were effective. I have a spreadsheet that does the numbers to within 4 significant digits, and is .1% accurate on all stats. I found very little to concern me when it came to large missiles like torpedoes or cruise missiles. The problems were with missiles that are already a bit OP; namely light missiles. Your standard light missile frigate has more range than a Confessor or Svipul in sharpshooter mode even before MGCs are used. Also, the MGCs have been in EFT for at least a week if not 2. So numbers have been available for anyone that wants to check them.
WTF fights at 120k? It isn't happening in lowsec so I can only assume it's a null-sec thing. Maybe you can bubble someone and get some use out of 120k rlmls. In low sec anything outside 20k just means your opponent warps off at will. Hard to be OP when it's useless to have more than 20k range in most pvp encounters. Not everyone is running around with linked garmurs to hold point while they sit off safely at 100+k lobbing missiles and idiotic to call something op and nerf every solo piloted missile boat in eve based on potential fleet application. Well, it should be anyway. CCP have proven they are more than willing to do so. If bombers were a problem fix bombers, if ishtars are a problem fix ishtars. STOP the mindless nuking of entire weapon systems with total disregard for the effect on ships that aren't OP due to their individual bonuses. Not to mention total disregard for the fact that the slot layouts on these ships were never meant to accommodate these extra mid/low slot modules. Why even bother with low slot missile enhancers when half the missile boats have all of 2 slots available and how can you say "trade a tank module" for one of these steaming pieces of crap? Most missile boats are already low on DPS and average to sub par on tank and this is what we get for improvements? Entire thought process is brain dead.
Stated before and I'll state it again. This so called Aegis "package" is a bag of feces.
AND FIX THE G.D. LAUNCHER OR GET RID OF IT!!!!!!
Daemun of Khanid
|
Beanhead2
The Bean Consortium
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 02:54:04 -
[38] - Quote
Thank you guys for another smooth release! I was wondering if we will see a re-balance of navy battleships soon? my navy apoc is feeling left out. |
Daemun Khanid
Sanctus Imperialis
114
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 15:53:52 -
[39] - Quote
Was actually going through my ship fits last night to see what ships I might actually use these missile modules on and noticed a funny thing. Pretty much every ship I could actually use one on without totally gimping the DPS or EHP of the fit turned out to be non-caldari. Who of course just happen to be the primary missile users. Maybe that has something to do with slot layout balancing.... Aegis is full of win.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Daemun Khanid
Sanctus Imperialis
114
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 16:05:46 -
[40] - Quote
Soldarius wrote: Also, the MGCs have been in EFT for at least a week if not 2. So numbers have been available for anyone that wants to check them.
Curious what version of EFT you're using and where you got it. Version 2.30.1 is the most recent version I've come across, was released 26 june and does not have the MGC's or MGE's. Perhaps you meant PYFA?
Daemun of Khanid
|
|
Sorrow Mist
Star Angel's Mini-Mart Inc
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 06:11:41 -
[41] - Quote
So with the great missile love of Aegis promised in the devblogs, has anybody came up with fits that actually IMPROVED missile damage application without sacrificing mid/low slots, ehp ... etc compared to fits prior to the patch?
I only do boring PVE, and I don't feel much love atm, a lot more than often, I can't even pop non-elite cruisers or BCs in a single cruise volley in my 3 pwnage tp Golem, spending way more time in missions and can't say it's making the boring missions anymore enjoyable (in fact, it's much more boring now).
Is this a troll or the devs simply don't use missiles? I don't really need a PVE cruise missile to hit rats at 250km away....but I'd hope it'd do some damage to them at 25km away than just scratch them every 10s ish....
|
stoicfaux
6088
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 14:13:18 -
[42] - Quote
Sorrow Mist wrote:So with the great missile love of Aegis promised in the devblogs, has anybody came up with fits that actually IMPROVED missile damage application without sacrificing mid/low slots, ehp ... etc compared to fits prior to the patch?
I only do boring PVE, and I don't feel much love atm, a lot more than often, I can't even pop non-elite cruisers or BCs in a single cruise volley in my 3 pwnage tp Golem, spending way more time in missions and can't say it's making the boring missions anymore enjoyable (in fact, it's much more boring now).
Is this a troll or the devs simply don't use missiles? I don't really need a PVE cruise missile to hit rats at 250km away....but I'd hope it'd do some damage to them at 25km away than just scratch them every 10s ish....
Use 3 TPs and a MGC II w/Precision script (or Compact should work as well.) It's a small improvement over a 4 TP pre-Aegis Golem.
Although, even though I haven't re-run the numbers, a 4 TP setup + 5% damage implant pre-Aegis Golem should be fine.
Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
|
Sky Marshal
Core Industry. Circle-Of-Two
83
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 10:31:38 -
[43] - Quote
Seriously...
You just add a new module who is less efficient than a Target Painter II by a few percents, and using it is a tedious exercice as Caldari ships can't afford to lose one more medium slot, but as the same time you nerf the rigs who do the same thing, making his usage nearly an obligation.
In short, you still consider that missiles are OP and just nerf most of the few remaining Caldari players, excepted the ones who do PVE of course.
Good job. And it is not that there weren't any constructive feedback in the related topic. Oh well, it is now official that you just don't care of it anyway. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
312
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 10:56:54 -
[44] - Quote
Sky Marshal wrote:In short, you still consider that missiles are OP and just nerf most of the few remaining Caldari players, excepted the ones who do PVE of course as they can afford to counter it. Don't forget the missiles specific ECM incoming. I will bet npc will using them more often than players. CCP still wondering why players use drones all the time...
"-What are you doing?"
"-Docking."(...)
-"It's not possible"
-"No, it's necessary."
|
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development Sev3rance
112
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 23:41:37 -
[45] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them.
Maybe it looked something like this?
[Cerberus, Sniper] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Damage Control II
10MN Afterburner II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile
Medium Ionic Field Projector II Medium Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II
240km/180km/120km Faction/Fury/Precision missile range. |
Syri Taneka
Un4seen Development Sev3rance
112
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 23:47:37 -
[46] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Also, im not sure what math you are using. But Missile Velocity and Missile Flight Time have no impact on the missile damage application formula. For a module intended to mirror TCs and TEs why is there also an increase to total range included on these modules. You do know that Optimal Range on TCs and TEs functions differently than increased missile range mods right....right? So when you say this Rise: CCP Rise wrote:There's a few problems with the numbers proposed originally but at the end of the day it would have meant Missile Guidance Modules were substantially stronger than their tracking counterparts (around 50% stronger for the enhancer and around 33% stronger for the computer).
Im not quite sure what the **** you are talking about. You have values being compared that have nothing to do with application. It makes ZERO sense. Missile mods OP guys you get 50% the value of application than you would from a TC, but you get like 100% more range!. Dear Seagull. Buff your balance team. Thanks. Me.
Missile Velocity and Flight Time have EVERYTHING to do with damage application.
All the gun-type weapons in the game have effectively instantaneous round-time-to-target (that is to say, the relative acceleration of your bullet is infinite, as is your velocity, because the distance between your ship and the target is covered more-or-less right away). Missiles do not do this! Missiles have to FLY to the target, which takes time. A sufficiently fast target CANNOT be hit by certain missiles/fits, whether because the missile simply can't fly fast enough, or because the target moves so far during the missile's flight time that it runs out of fuel before impact.
So your ability to apply damage to a target with missiles hinges 100% on your ability to even HIT them in the first place.
For instance, a Cerb firing RLMs gives its ordnance, without Guidance mods (IE Pre-Aegis), 11.25 seconds of flight time and 8437 m/s velocity, with high skills. This results in a theoretical range of 94.9km (nominally a bit less than that due to missile acceleration factor). If the Cerb pilot fires on a kiting interceptor which is initially at, say, 30km and is traveling 7,000m/s (very doable without OH), the Cerb WILL NOT HIT the interceptor (unless, for some reason, it stops or doubles back on its previous vector before the missile burns too much of its fuel). The inty could be flying with 0 transveral - the Cerb will still miss where a gun would not.
So, yes, velocity and flight time are very, very important to damage application for missiles, perhaps more so than explosion velocity and explosion radius. |
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
39
|
Posted - 2015.07.11 11:28:21 -
[47] - Quote
Will there be a faction variant to the Missile guidance modules or will the current modules be nerfed so that faction variants can exist? (Just curious because i'm trying to get my bomber to fire torpedoes up to 250km) |
Lady Nadra
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.11 16:51:30 -
[48] - Quote
Tried out the new guidance computer modules on my tengu. Very disappointed.
With 3 rigors the explo radius of my ham rage missiles is 103m now which is.. worse then it used to be at iirc 87m! Thanks for the stacking penalty.
And.. the new guidance computer modules stack against the rigors for a double nerf right off the bat! With 3 rigors + 3 tech two application scripted guidance computers the explo radius is now at.. wait for it.. 97m !
I can't even get back to the old explosion radius I used to have, with the new modules!
The only nice part about it is you can get more range, but what I was really looking forward to was being able to actually apply the damage.
|
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
1087
|
Posted - 2015.07.11 20:17:55 -
[49] - Quote
Just sayin thanks for the 5%. I do a lot of solo PVE with heavies. The way heavy missiles were, I couldn't kill a second BS rat, without doing a reload to finish him. Then he would regen and what should have taken 1 more volley suddenly turns into reload time + 5 more volleys. For my game, this makes it a lot more reasonable.
As for the old "can I bring my Drake?" fleets. Those were EVEs glory days, and I think bringing back battlecruisers is a + for the game overall. |
Tiberius Heth
Say No to Features
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 12:38:54 -
[50] - Quote
RavenPaine wrote:As for the old "can I bring my Drake?" fleets. Those were EVEs glory shittiest days, and I think bringing back battlecruisers is a + - for the game overall.
|
|
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 00:49:29 -
[51] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Sorrow Mist wrote:So with the great missile love of Aegis promised in the devblogs, has anybody came up with fits that actually IMPROVED missile damage application without sacrificing mid/low slots, ehp ... etc compared to fits prior to the patch?
I only do boring PVE, and I don't feel much love atm, a lot more than often, I can't even pop non-elite cruisers or BCs in a single cruise volley in my 3 pwnage tp Golem, spending way more time in missions and can't say it's making the boring missions anymore enjoyable (in fact, it's much more boring now).
Is this a troll or the devs simply don't use missiles? I don't really need a PVE cruise missile to hit rats at 250km away....but I'd hope it'd do some damage to them at 25km away than just scratch them every 10s ish....
Use 3 TPs and a MGC II w/Precision script (or Compact should work as well.) It's a small improvement over a 4 TP pre-Aegis Golem. Although, even though I haven't re-run the numbers, a 4 TP setup + 5% damage implant pre-Aegis Golem should be fine.
Thats just rediculous.
|
Vailen Sere
The Oasis Group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 00:58:02 -
[52] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Also, im not sure what math you are using. But Missile Velocity and Missile Flight Time have no impact on the missile damage application formula. For a module intended to mirror TCs and TEs why is there also an increase to total range included on these modules. You do know that Optimal Range on TCs and TEs functions differently than increased missile range mods right....right? So when you say this Rise: CCP Rise wrote:There's a few problems with the numbers proposed originally but at the end of the day it would have meant Missile Guidance Modules were substantially stronger than their tracking counterparts (around 50% stronger for the enhancer and around 33% stronger for the computer).
Im not quite sure what the **** you are talking about. You have values being compared that have nothing to do with application. It makes ZERO sense. Missile mods OP guys you get 50% the value of application than you would from a TC, but you get like 100% more range!. Dear Seagull. Buff your balance team. Thanks. Me.
That is because we need to be that far away and have them burning directly at us forever to stand a chance. |
Tiberius Heth
Say No to Features
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 13:05:44 -
[53] - Quote
Well, the old "be careful what you wish for" applies. For long people have asked for missile TC and TE to be "on par because it's not fair we don't have them", not realising that introducing them would of course cause trouble.
What we now have is the following:
- people who never used rigor/flare rigs might decide to use a mid/low slot for the guidance stuff and see an increase in performance, at the cost of a slot. Sounds fair to me.
- people who already used rigor/flare now run into the stacking problem meaning that with those same rigs and helped by one Guidance Comp with precision script they're WORSE off than before the changes while wasting a slot. That makes no sense whatsoever.
I understand that in order to not get silly values you had to start applying a stacking penalty to those stats, I understand that you can't just give an all round buff. But this is just dumb as hell, this is a missile nerf. So much so that even with the 5% damage buff HML got they actually perform LESS good while wasting an extra mid slot. |
Jarvae Simalia
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.14 12:19:23 -
[54] - Quote
well looks like all my missile ships can be stuck to one side for if i decide i want to do missions again. Was already bad enough that most of the time you got ignored for incursions it also appears that someone in ccp wants to make PvP less viable.
So on that point i think i better start upping my gunnery skills now and maybe in 6 months or so i might just get a chance at incursions and decent PvP (unless they change everything again before then). |
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
40
|
Posted - 2015.07.14 12:30:17 -
[55] - Quote
Syri Taneka wrote:Nafensoriel wrote:Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them. Maybe it looked something like this? [Cerberus, Sniper] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Damage Control II 10MN Afterburner II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Medium Ionic Field Projector II Medium Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II 240km/180km/120km Faction/Fury/Precision missile range.
You do realize that any sniper rail fit or sniper drone fit will eat this fit for breakfast right? You do realize you posted a fit with exactly Zero tank right? You also realize that the flight time for those missiles makes it fundamentally impossible to actually do any damage whatsoever right?
This is why I keep stressing why it is so unusual and frankly disturbing that we never were allowed to test these mods in the test server in a functional fashion. Your paper warrioring dies in 5 seconds under actual gameplay conditions.
CCP has shown its total lack of trust in its players and its decision to trust literally a handful of people rather than facts is probably the most disturbing thing I've seen in the last several years. It's not like we, the players, have a vested interest in the survival and playability of the game after all.. |
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.18 19:57:52 -
[56] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:Syri Taneka wrote:Nafensoriel wrote:Many of us are still waiting for rise to HTFU and post some numbers. I'm extremely curious as to what fit scared the balance team into gutting the missile balance package before it was even available to test by players... and since you did gut the mods before you even fully gave us a preview of them only the balance team knows how well or poorly they would have done pre nerf.
Though that said this is the first time in CCP history that a new item has been both released AND nerfed before players ever fit them. Maybe it looked something like this? [Cerberus, Sniper] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Damage Control II 10MN Afterburner II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Medium Ionic Field Projector II Medium Hydraulic Bay Thrusters II 240km/180km/120km Faction/Fury/Precision missile range. You do realize that any sniper rail fit or sniper drone fit will eat this fit for breakfast right? You do realize you posted a fit with exactly Zero tank right? You also realize that the flight time for those missiles makes it fundamentally impossible to actually do any damage whatsoever right? This is why I keep stressing why it is so unusual and frankly disturbing that we never were allowed to test these mods in the test server in a functional fashion. Your paper warrioring dies in 5 seconds under actual gameplay conditions. CCP has shown its total lack of trust in its players and its decision to trust literally a handful of people rather than facts is probably the most disturbing thing I've seen in the last several years. It's not like we, the players, have a vested interest in the survival and playability of the game after all..
Notice the last Dev post too? I think since its broken, they are required to try something every so often. It would be nice at least to say "we are compiling data on the live server and will go from there", but we can't even get that. |
Falos Kumamato
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 20:13:03 -
[57] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote:Was actually going through my ship fits last night to see what ships I might actually use these missile modules on and noticed a funny thing. Pretty much every ship I could actually use one on without totally gimping the DPS or EHP of the fit turned out to be non-caldari. Who of course just happen to be the primary missile users. Maybe that has something to do with slot layout balancing.... Aegis is full of win.
Actually I've dumped any calari ship training from my main's plan and am swapping to amarr / minmatar. Better options across the board that don't leave me kinetic damage locked.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |