EVE Search - torp nerf?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

torp nerf?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Johnie Cyno	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:44:00 - [1] what the reasoning behind nerfing torps and siege launchers?
Kaben	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:51:00 - [2] Their range was reduced but the damage was increased, so voila, a raven can now do sweet damage at 30klicks away. The only ship this really hurts is a phoon if it's fitted with torps.
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:52:00 - [3] Originally by: Johnie Cyno what the reasoning behind nerfing torps and siege launchers? nerf ?? no nerf. range got balanced to tbe inline whit other short range missiles like rockets and hams. cruise missiles - long range large heavy missiles - long range medium light missiles - long range light siege - short range large HAM - short range medium rockets - short range light the rate of fire and overall damage of torps was allso increased (torp rof is alot faster than cruise now) so tell me again how is this a nerf (its rather a balancing + huge boost to caldari pvp) if you do missions whit torps... to bad.. use cruise... its just as good
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:53:00 - [4] Originally by: Kaben Their range was reduced but the damage was increased, so voila, a raven can now do sweet damage at 30klicks away. The only ship this really hurts is a phoon if it's fitted with torps. my phoon disagrees whit you 100% :) my phoon is now good enough to pvp :)
Johnie Cyno	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:54:00 - [5] ok, sorry. i read it as 'plus' 25% Rof :) and i didn't know the torps got a dps increase. nice!
Kaben	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:57:00 - [6] Originally by: Riho Originally by: Kaben Their range was reduced but the damage was increased, so voila, a raven can now do sweet damage at 30klicks away. The only ship this really hurts is a phoon if it's fitted with torps. my phoon disagrees whit you 100% :) my phoon is now good enough to pvp :) I don't fly a phoon, I just figured the new range of torps and the fact the phoon doesn't get a range modifier it would be hindered, thanks for clearing it up though, so it doesn't effect any ship. (save for maybe a mission runner, but who cares about that, they can use cruise)
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2007.12.08 16:57:00 - [7] Originally by: Johnie Cyno ok, sorry. i read it as 'plus' 25% Rof :) and i didn't know the torps got a dps increase. nice! aye.. plus mean its faster.. but yeah.. u could have read that its slower :P
Acoco Osiris Gallente Sublime.	Posted - 2007.12.08 17:06:00 - [8] Originally by: Kaben Their range was reduced but the damage was increased, so voila, a raven can now do sweet damage at 30klicks away. The only ship this really hurts is a phoon if it's fitted with torps. Damage was not actually increased, it was a RoF boost. Anyways, as I've said before, I agree with the principle, but I think that CCP went just a tad overboard with the change. Really, I think they should have at least 50% more range than HAMs, Javelin torps worth a damn, and maybe an edge cut off the RoF boost.
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2007.12.08 17:08:00 - [9] Originally by: Acoco Osiris Originally by: Kaben Their range was reduced but the damage was increased, so voila, a raven can now do sweet damage at 30klicks away. The only ship this really hurts is a phoon if it's fitted with torps. Damage was not actually increased, it was a RoF boost. Anyways, as I've said before, I agree with the principle, but I think that CCP went just a tad overboard with the change. Really, I think they should have at least 50% more range than HAMs, Javelin torps worth a damn, and maybe an edge cut off the RoF boost. dunno.. my torps are hitting for ALOT more than before patch. i never hit someone for 500 whit t1 torps in pvp :P
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.08 17:18:00 - [10] Originally by: Riho Originally by: Acoco Osiris Originally by: Kaben Their range was reduced but the damage was increased, so voila, a raven can now do sweet damage at 30klicks away. The only ship this really hurts is a phoon if it's fitted with torps. Damage was not actually increased, it was a RoF boost. Anyways, as I've said before, I agree with the principle, but I think that CCP went just a tad overboard with the change. Really, I think they should have at least 50% more range than HAMs, Javelin torps worth a damn, and maybe an edge cut off the RoF boost. dunno.. my torps are hitting for ALOT more than before patch. i never hit someone for 500 whit t1 torps in pvp :P I think the explosion radius was decreased a little bit, and that may be why.
Scott Logan Caldari	Posted - 2007.12.08 17:33:00 - [11] Edited by: Scott Logan on 08/12/2007 17:33:38 If the changes made to torps were brought in to bring them into line with other unguided missiles why does a torp still do more damage than a cruise missile? Lights hits harder than rockets, heavy's harder than HAM's - surely a cruise should now hit harder? The rof of torp lauchers has gone up, and both rockets and HAM's have similar advantages over there guided couterparts. So why is there no change to cruise or a reduction in damage for torps?
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2007.12.08 17:40:00 - [12] Originally by: Scott Logan Edited by: Scott Logan on 08/12/2007 17:33:38 If the changes made to torps were brought in to bring them into line with other unguided missiles why does a torp still do more damage than a cruise missile? Lights hits harder than rockets, heavy's harder than HAM's - surely a cruise should now hit harder? The rof of torp lauchers has gone up, and both rockets and HAM's have similar advantages over there guided couterparts. So why is there no change to cruise or a reduction in damage for torps? heavys dont hit harder than HAMs ??? hams do more dps and hit harder and lights out dps rockers only if use assault launchers. i see no problems here
joshmorris Ravenous Inc. SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.08 17:42:00 - [13] it was a buff u care bear Uber idea solves all !!
Jasai Kameron Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.12.08 18:24:00 - [14] Edited by: Jasai Kameron on 08/12/2007 18:24:59 Originally by: joshmorris it was a buff u care bear Poor effort. Guy asked a reasonable question. He'd misunderstood the way +25% bonus worked. Someone explained. Everyone's happy. But you want to jump in and troll, don't you?
Acoco Osiris Gallente Sublime.	Posted - 2007.12.08 18:30:00 - [15] Originally by: Riho Originally by: Scott Logan Edited by: Scott Logan on 08/12/2007 17:33:38 If the changes made to torps were brought in to bring them into line with other unguided missiles why does a torp still do more damage than a cruise missile? Lights hits harder than rockets, heavy's harder than HAM's - surely a cruise should now hit harder? The rof of torp lauchers has gone up, and both rockets and HAM's have similar advantages over there guided couterparts. So why is there no change to cruise or a reduction in damage for torps? heavys dont hit harder than HAMs ??? hams do more dps and hit harder and lights out dps rockers only if use assault launchers. i see no problems here I think he means alpha. The other short-range missiles are characterized by quick RoF, low damage, so the long-range ones actually hit harder (but fire a lot slower, resulting in lower net DPS). Torps are the other way around, both slower-firing and higher-damage than cruises.
Chomapuraku Templar Republic R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.12.08 18:36:00 - [16] come to think of it, this "nerf" makes torps VASTLY out-dps cruises. ham's do, what, 33% more dps than heavies (2/3 damage, almost double ROF)? pre-trin, the only thing that got popped when i stepped out in a torp raven was me, but now, this thing is a friggin' monster. any of you balance-whiner types (apart from the echo of neutron mega vs. torp raven) think the "nerf" overshot the mark?
Scott Logan Caldari	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:00:00 - [17] Acoco Osiris, yes mate :)
joshmorris Ravenous Inc. SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:01:00 - [18] Originally by: Jasai Kameron Edited by: Jasai Kameron on 08/12/2007 18:24:59 Originally by: joshmorris it was a buff u care bear Poor effort. Guy asked a reasonable question. He'd misunderstood the way +25% bonus worked. Someone explained. Everyone's happy. But you want to jump in and troll, don't you? So many other threads for it though ... And yeah i alreayd read that some1 explianed it .. i just thought ide be a troll .. yar ? Uber idea solves all !!
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:12:00 - [19] Originally by: Johnie Cyno ok, sorry. i read it as 'plus' 25% Rof :) and i didn't know the torps got a dps increase. nice! Can you change your thread title then? A guy in my corp just killed himself because of it. hiccup
Johnie Cyno	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:15:00 - [20] eh, no biggie. it's just a game. we're all here to have fun. well, except the macros, then it's a way of life
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.12.08 19:38:00 - [21] Originally by: joshmorris Originally by: Jasai Kameron Edited by: Jasai Kameron on 08/12/2007 18:24:59 Originally by: joshmorris it was a buff u care bear Poor effort. Guy asked a reasonable question. He'd misunderstood the way +25% bonus worked. Someone explained. Everyone's happy. But you want to jump in and troll, don't you? So many other threads for it though ... And yeah i alreayd read that some1 explianed it .. i just thought ide be a troll .. yar ? I feel your pain my brother. I get a bit huffed when I see people post their view on something and their view is incorrect. The OP in this thread already stated that he didn't read correctly and now understands that torps were buffed. The "torp nerf" is by far the worst of all the incorrect opinions on this board. I know what you're thinking. "But OOOSOOO, I am entitled to my own opinion on things." Yes, my friend, I know you are. However you are not exempt from having an incorrect opinion. Example: MissionRunnerGuy > "what the hell!!1 they nerfed torps and stuff! i spent all of three weeks making my internet spaceship shoot the poo shaped thingies at the red crosses. Now I...oh, potato salad!" This is wrong. Now, it may be that he is a smart enough fellow and just doesn't realize that three weeks of training time isn't a lot in the grand scheme of it all. On the other hand, he may be a complete moron, which believe it or not is a much higher possibility. Don't get offended if you share this particular view. As I have pointed out, if your opinion on a subject is incorrect, it doesn't guarantee you are stupid. However, it does suggest as such and your chances of actually being confirmed to be stupid are much greater than a person with a correct opinion. hiccup
Sismar Minmatar Vagabundos	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:18:00 - [22] they completely ruined my phoon for pve.....
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:19:00 - [23] Originally by: Sismar they completely ruined my phoon for pve..... Fit cruise launchers. Originally by: ISD Cortes You're at liberty to use the rolling sig you had, as long as there's no chimeras covering the nether regions of voluptuous females.
Qui Shon	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:26:00 - [24] Originally by: OOOSOOO I feel your pain my brother. I get a bit huffed when I see people post their view on something and their view is incorrect. All those hiccups are because you're drunk, right? Would explain your posting. It did make me think about how to make an actual fact based decision, how you would choose criteria for an overall judgement on the matter, not that such a judgement would be of much use. Eveybody knows torps will be less effective at most of the roles they excelled at before, and more effective in roles they were relatively poor at before. So, some people are delighted, others indifferent, while yet others are disappointed. So, how to give weight to each category, how to measure the full impact on Eve's population? Ammo consumption, i.e. frequency of use, comes first to mind. Of course, PvP situations use far less ammo, so that group would probably feel underrepresented using this criteria. So maybe look at launchers instead, siege launchers sold for example. Since PvP usage is far more likely to end in destruction, this would, much like ammo useage, skew the result in favor of one group over the other. So some kind of Siege Launcher value index, looking at the changes in value of the different types of launchers? Hmm, not sure what conclusions we could draw from that. What we'd really need is changes in the average "siege launcher hours" actively spent in space before and after the torp change. I say "actively" to indicate that only clients with activity matters, true afk behaviour shouldn't count. Of course, no such statistics will ever be made available, and is most probably not logged in the first place. This has been another post brought to you buy bordedom, enjoy.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.12.08 20:26:00 - [25] Originally by: Johnie Cyno well, except the macros, then it's a way of life _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Riho Northen Breeze	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:34:00 - [26] Originally by: Acoco Osiris Originally by: Riho Originally by: Scott Logan Edited by: Scott Logan on 08/12/2007 17:33:38 If the changes made to torps were brought in to bring them into line with other unguided missiles why does a torp still do more damage than a cruise missile? Lights hits harder than rockets, heavy's harder than HAM's - surely a cruise should now hit harder? The rof of torp lauchers has gone up, and both rockets and HAM's have similar advantages over there guided couterparts. So why is there no change to cruise or a reduction in damage for torps? heavys dont hit harder than HAMs ??? hams do more dps and hit harder and lights out dps rockers only if use assault launchers. i see no problems here I think he means alpha. The other short-range missiles are characterized by quick RoF, low damage, so the long-range ones actually hit harder (but fire a lot slower, resulting in lower net DPS). Torps are the other way around, both slower-firing and higher-damage than cruises. no i mean dps... Hams hit harder(more dps allso) and have faster rof than heavys rocets have higher dps and faster rof only.. alpha is lower torps have higher alpha and higher rof + hit lot harder
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:39:00 - [27] Originally by: Johnie Cyno Edited by: Johnie Cyno on 08/12/2007 20:17:50 what the reasoning behind nerfing torps and siege launchers? Its to make caldari(like amarr)Be able to get some range out of their weapons but at the same time do alot of dps.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari Advanced Logistics	Posted - 2007.12.08 21:42:00 - [28] Originally by: Scott Logan Edited by: Scott Logan on 08/12/2007 17:33:38 If the changes made to torps were brought in to bring them into line with other unguided missiles why does a torp still do more damage than a cruise missile? Lights hits harder than rockets, heavy's harder than HAM's - surely a cruise should now hit harder? The rof of torp lauchers has gone up, and both rockets and HAM's have similar advantages over there guided couterparts. So why is there no change to cruise or a reduction in damage for torps? That's because rockets and hams shoot very quickly as opposed to their longer ranged counterparts, while torps still fire slowly in comparison to other short ranged weapons. At least, that's how I see it.
NCP S2	Posted - 2007.12.08 22:07:00 - [29] Torps fire pretty quickly for short ranged weapons, I think they are pretty close to being in line with other short range Large weapons. I don't have any numbers for other systems off hand, though. I know my Minmatar, if I put him in a BS with Large AC's would still fire faster than torps by a good bit, but the hits are also instant. I was a little worried at first, wishing that my torps would go out to 30k (missile skills to 4, BS to 4, in a Raven) I'm actually hitting 24.5k or so. Most of the rats in the belts where I'm at are close range, but there are the rare one or two that likes to go sit at 32k and fire at me. An AB fixed this for the most part, although those ships still take forever to hit (due to slow torp travel speed) All in all, second best named torp launchers, I fire at 8.0 sec ROF with my set up, and I went from 10 mil an hour with Cruises to 17 mil an hour with the new torps. Not perfect, but the range is the sacrifice I make for doing a LOT more damage. But yes, I can see how the Phoon would get a nice boost from this as well. That would make an insane alpha strike. Oh, and because it is "unguided" doesn't mean it misses the target :p and explosion radius was lowered slightly.
Righteous Deeds	Posted - 2007.12.09 00:22:00 - [30] I'm thinking the fact that siege launcher and torp prices are tanking while cruise launcher and missile prices are going through the roof has something to say about how the changes are being regarded community-wide.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.