| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ol' Delsai
Caldari
Kernel of War
Tau Ceti Federation
   |
Posted - 2008.06.28 11:16:00 -
[91]
Great post, nicely developed. I fully agree with the demonstration and the conclusion.
Actually, Heavy precision are useless
Perhaps this issue should also be brought to the attention of CSM,these guys seems to make a good job out there
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 12:19:00 -
[92]
I did bring it to the CSM - it was trolled by Caldari haters and then ignored.
The CSM by and large is composed of either carebares, who won't care, or 1337 pvpers, who see Caldari PVP inferiority as an acceptable situation as they aren't effected. The few sane ones on the board are outvoted and the issue therefore never raised. Read the transcripts of the Nighthawk, which got rejected by the CSM, to the "fix large autocanons lawls", which got widespread approval, despite having no evidence, examples, or reasoning.
The political process at work. I'm far more hopeful that a Dev one day reads this and goes "huh, that makes sense" and it gets changed at some uncertain impossible future, compared to the CSM jointly deciding to demand CCP intervention in a Caldari matter.
|
PirceHat
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 21:30:00 -
[93]
Your forgot the Cerberus in your list of heavy missile users :).
Basically /signed. While I am not convinced that any specific change has been mentioned that would be right *something* needs to be done about nano's vs. missiles, especially heavy missiles. |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 23:00:00 -
[94]
 Originally by: MalVortex
I did bring it to the CSM - it was trolled by Caldari haters and then ignored.
Why you feel the need to misinterpreter things? your thread
It was supported. As all the threads in the CSM forum after some time it dropped from the first page. It was not trolled, maybe the argument about precision missiles in PvE was not appropriate as the focus was PvP, but it was not trolling.
BTW: why you haven't liked it to this thread? if you want further support for it linking it here so it has more visibility is the way to go. |
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 00:09:00 -
[95]
Edited by: MalVortex on 30/06/2008 00:09:35
I woudn't consider it a misrepresentation, no. When you get into pointless, time and space consuming arguments to not fix this because some moron uses T2 missile ammo in PVE... Thats trolling. Even if there was a place for Precision Heavies in PVE (and there most definitely is not, the entire argument becomes irrelevant, as this entire fix is aimed at PVP!
Its trolling pure and simple; as are the "no, lawls" replies that dotted that thread.
Also, don't take this as a whine about that CSM threads fate. Its an objective analysis of its outcome - I'm quite pleased with how this thread has fared and its continued support.
edit: cross linking it both ways is not a bad idea though.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 00:46:00 -
[96]
Originally by: MalVortex
I did bring it to the CSM - it was trolled by Caldari haters and then ignored.
You probably would get more support for a general revision of all T2 ammo instead of focusing on just one, especially since precision missiles in general is one of the better types. There is even a topic for that already in the csm forum if i remember right. |
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 08:49:00 -
[97]
My faith in the CSM disappeared when I read some quite astonishing comments about the propoosed PG boost for the Nighthawk:
Quote:
[ 2008.06.15 18:22:00 ] Leandro Salazar > just wanted to say that while playing with EFT I also noticed a small pg issue with the NH, it has a lot of other strong points and is fairly popular despite that, so only a fairly small boost would be acceptable imho, too much would make it overpowered
Quote:
Serenity Steele > Almost every ship class has a lame-duck ship in 1/4 races of EvE. Is the NightHawk any different to the lame duck for field command ships?
Quote:
[ 2008.06.15 18:24:24 ] Serenity Steele > It just occured to me that the request to CCP should just check the usage/ownership/production of the NH in comparison to other field command ships and see if it's drastically out of line.
Leandro is talking about PVE, when the entire focus of the thread was PVP. Just another classic "lol Caldari PVP" attitude. Serenity Steel's attitude was one of casual disregard - she made no effort to understand the problem or investigate the supporting material provided. She just didn't want to know. Her second comment is extraordinary - the belief that a census would tell us anything about the PVP balance of any ship is staggering. That kind of comment only makes sense if she, too, assumed that the thread was about PVE.
I can handle "LOL Caldari PVP, stick to Motsu noob" comments from the general playerbase, it's no more than I expect, and an attitude that I benefit greatly from in space. But seeing it so brazenly among certain members of the CSM itself left me aghast in horror.
|
Ulstan
Caldari
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 19:47:00 -
[98]
Quote:
The CSM by and large is composed of either carebares, who won't care, or 1337 pvpers, who see Caldari PVP inferiority as an acceptable situation as they aren't effected. The few sane ones on the board are outvoted and the issue therefore never raised. Read the transcripts of the Nighthawk, which got rejected by the CSM, to the "fix large autocanons lawls", which got widespread approval, despite having no evidence, examples, or reasoning.
Yeah, that was deeply disappointing. It was obvious that none of them flew a nighthawk in PvP and just didn't care to see it's PvP performance improved.
The much more vague and much less supported "make large AC's more betterer" idea on the other hand, received enthusiastic support. Guess we know which race's ships the CSM flies.
Sounds like we need a CSM for each race!
|
BhallSpawn
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 04:47:00 -
[99]
/signed
buff missles
|
SDragoon
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 05:47:00 -
[100]
Well the problem is that precision missiles seem to just double the explosion velocity. When in real eve terms, ships are either non-mwd and go about 200-500, or MWD and going 3km-9km. Simply doubling the explosion velocity isn't really going to do anything when the gap between speed brackets is a factor of 5.
Also what is up with fury missiles? They have huge range and tech 2 penalties, all for the same damage as faction missiles.  |
ArmyOfMe
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:21:00 -
[101]
i refuse to let this thread drop out of page 1 without a dev reply even if i will have to bump it back up once a day until the servers go down for good
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:50:00 -
[102]
Originally by: SDragoon
Well the problem is that precision missiles seem to just double the explosion velocity. When in real eve terms, ships are either non-mwd and go about 200-500, or MWD and going 3km-9km. Simply doubling the explosion velocity isn't really going to do anything when the gap between speed brackets is a factor of 5.
Also what is up with fury missiles? They have huge range and tech 2 penalties, all for the same damage as faction missiles.
Scourge Heavy missile: explosion velocity 750m/sec.
Precision heavy missile: 1000m/sec.
That's no where near double. It it were double, I think these would be ok.
--
Crane needs more grid
249km locking? |
Albaluna74
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 08:37:00 -
[103]
Originally by: ArmyOfMe
i refuse to let this thread drop out of page 1 without a dev reply even if i will have to bump it back up once a day until the servers go down for good
/bump
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 22:36:00 -
[104]
Originally by: MalVortex
The numbers here speak for themselves. Nano-Hacs are untouchable by missiles (even the awkward Cerberus will have a free -36% to incoming damage); even if they do hit for 20%, they still have to go through T2 resistances and tens of thousands of EHP on top of any active tank / shield regen the ship will boast.
I'm afraid the numbers do not speak for themselves. Please provide actual nanofits on Hacs and Recons and give the damage reduction for them at maximum skills. Compare to the damage reduction if the nanoships had used their slots and rigs for a full tank, passive or active. Compare to their damage increase if they had used the slots for damage modules. Consider the advantageous choice of missile damage type and the existence of flare rigs and missile implants.
|
Albaluna74
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 00:23:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Ruciza
I'm afraid the numbers do not speak for themselves.
Precision Light exp velocity: 3000m/s (frig weapon)
Precision heavy exp velocity: 1000m/s (cruiser weapon)
Precision Cruise exp velocity: 1000m/s (BS weapon)
Do numbers speak for themselves now?
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 10:13:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Albaluna74
Originally by: Ruciza
I'm afraid the numbers do not speak for themselves.
Precision Light exp velocity: 3000m/s (frig weapon)
Precision heavy exp velocity: 1000m/s (cruiser weapon)
Precision Cruise exp velocity: 1000m/s (BS weapon)
Do numbers speak for themselves now?
No they don't. If the numbers really suggest to change something, it could as well be a nerf of precision cruise, not a buff of precision heavies. It's not that easy.
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage, just like half of the other threads on the forum. The OP is lacking for anything but numbers without any further context but nebulous/mystic (and populist) claims of the the overpoweredness of nanofits ('thousands of hp', 't2 resists', 'modern nanohacs'  ).
|
Bleedingthrough
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 10:57:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 10:29:21
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage.
lol?! The claims of the OP are IMHO totaly valid and his suggestions reasonable.
But: You lack some convincing arguements.
|
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:05:00 -
[108]
What I love about missiles currently is that the actual missile travels faster than the explosion 'shock front'. |
Bleedingthrough
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:08:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Karina Bellac
What I love about missiles currently is that the actual missile travels faster than the explosion 'shock front'.
Actually, in space only relative speed differences should matter... but this is an other topic. *g
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:26:00 -
[110]
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 11:27:04
Originally by: Bleedingthrough
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 10:29:21
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage.
lol?! The claims of the OP are IMHO totaly valid and his suggestions reasonable.
But: You lack some convincing arguements.
I don't need arguments, the OP has a point to make, not me. His argument is MORE DAMAGE! I ask for some substance.
|
Jim Raynor
Caldari
Shinra
Shinra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:47:00 -
[111]
Light: 2625m/s
Precision Light: 4500m/s
Heavy: 1125m/s<-higher than cruise missiles
Precision Heavy: 1500m/s <-OH HI!!! IM BROKEN BECAUSE I AM THE SAME VALUE AS A BATTLESHIP CLASS WEAPON PLEASE CHANGE MY VALUE TO ABOUT 2200-3000m/s CCP
Cruise: 750m/s
Precision Cruise: 1500m/s
Even the most rabid Caldari hater has to admit this is broken. It's been broken since T2 missiles came out, how long does this have to remain broken before it is fixed?
Can we please please get this stuff fixed?
------
I'll make a sig later. |
Carth Reynolds
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 12:40:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 11:27:04
Originally by: Bleedingthrough
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 10:29:21
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage.
lol?! The claims of the OP are IMHO totaly valid and his suggestions reasonable.
But: You lack some convincing arguements.
I don't need arguments, the OP has a point to make, not me. His argument is MORE DAMAGE! I ask for some substance.
I don't understand how you don't follow the logic train at play here. Missile using cruisers and battlecruisers rely entirely on a frigate class weapon system to deal even modest amounts of damage to nano cruisers. Using a proper medium missile will generally result in negligable amounts of damage to the average non-pimped nano cruiser.
Gun users have more options available for engaging a nano ship. Using their own MWD to cut the angular velocity, painting the target, using tracking enhancers and computers and so forth. Missile users have one option: use precison lights or wait to die while watching your missiles follow a target until they burn out.
I have personally seen this discrepency in my own play time. When armed with HML's my Cerb manages to deliver an astounding 0 - ~10 damage per missile to the nano ships I've seen (specifically a Vagabond who ignored me and a Sac who murdered me). Since that day I've generally armed my Cerb with Assault Launchers because they are simply a better weapon system for the situations I find my Cerb in.
So, while the OP is indeed asking for more damage, I don't think it's unreasonable to want a cruiser class missile that can actually hit the average modern cruiser.
|
Bleedingthrough
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 12:42:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Bleedingthrough on 06/07/2008 12:44:25
Originally by: Ruciza
His argument is MORE DAMAGE! I ask for some substance.
Wrong! This is not about HM but HPM (you know the drawbacks, do you?)and not simply about more dps but a reasonable balancing of diffrent missile types regarding their roles.
Compare the damage of LightPrecitionMissiles with HeavyPrecitionMissiles:
Vs. 2250 km targetspeed both do the same damage over time (unskilled, unriged, rof taken into account). If the target moves faster you are better off using light missiles.
The point of equal dps should be somewhere near 3.5 - 5 k considering the role of HPM, dps to nano-cruisers.
|
Jim Raynor
Caldari
Shinra
Shinra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 12:53:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 11:27:04
Originally by: Bleedingthrough
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 10:29:21
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage.
lol?! The claims of the OP are IMHO totaly valid and his suggestions reasonable.
But: You lack some convincing arguements.
I don't need arguments, the OP has a point to make, not me. His argument is MORE DAMAGE! I ask for some substance.
I don't understand how you don't follow the logic train at play here. Missile using cruisers and battlecruisers rely entirely on a frigate class weapon system to deal even modest amounts of damage to nano cruisers. Using a proper medium missile will generally result in negligable amounts of damage to the average non-pimped nano cruiser.
Gun users have more options available for engaging a nano ship. Using their own MWD to cut the angular velocity, painting the target, using tracking enhancers and computers and so forth. Missile users have one option: use precison lights or wait to die while watching your missiles follow a target until they burn out.
I have personally seen this discrepency in my own play time. When armed with HML's my Cerb manages to deliver an astounding 0 - ~10 damage per missile to the nano ships I've seen (specifically a Vagabond who ignored me and a Sac who murdered me). Since that day I've generally armed my Cerb with Assault Launchers because they are simply a better weapon system for the situations I find my Cerb in.
So, while the OP is indeed asking for more damage, I don't think it's unreasonable to want a cruiser class missile that can actually hit the average modern cruiser.
Exactly. It's a really bad time to be flying Caldari in EVE right now. Nano warfare makes Caldari look really really sad. Precision are supposed to be our defense against nanoships (remember the drawback on precision is HUGE) and they don't even have the correct explosive velocity values.
CCPs murdering of the Cerberus and crowning the Sacrilege as the king of missile cruisers also makes me very very sad. I don't mind the Sac being good or anything but wow it sure makes a Cerberus LOOK LIKE A COMPLETE JOKE.
me -> 
------
I'll make a sig later. |
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 14:05:00 -
[115]
Excellent OP, and good thread as a whole.
I've got mixed feeling on the current nano-craze, but the least CCP could do is toss the most badly affected race this small and minor bone.
The only reason I can think of for them NOT doing so is that they are thinking of a more serious nerf to nanos, but thoughts on that would be for another thread.....
Play nice while you butcher each other.
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 16:25:00 -
[116]
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 16:30:55
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Missile using cruisers and battlecruisers rely entirely on a frigate class weapon system to deal even modest amounts of damage to nano cruisers.
Irrelevant. It's about the absolute damage, not what you think is a "frigate weapon", which is an empty word in itself.
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Using a proper medium missile will generally result in negligable amounts of damage to the average non-pimped nano cruiser.
Irrelevant. What a "proper" missile is lies in the eye of the beholder. Empty words. No substance.
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Gun users have more options available for engaging a nano ship. Using their own MWD to cut the angular velocity, painting the target, using tracking enhancers and computers and so forth. Missile users have one option: use precison lights or wait to die while watching your missiles follow a target until they burn out.
And you want to sit there and F1-F5 and kill everything in a 100km radius around you with your "proper missile" while picking your nose. While the others are using resources on tracking enhancers and do work to hit.
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
I have personally seen this discrepency in my own play time. When armed with HML's my Cerb manages to deliver an astounding 0 - ~10 damage per missile to the nano ships I've seen (specifically a Vagabond who ignored me and a Sac who murdered me). Since that day I've generally armed my Cerb with Assault Launchers because they are simply a better weapon system for the situations I find my Cerb in.
And why is this not WAD?
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
So, while the OP is indeed asking for more damage, I don't think it's unreasonable to want a cruiser class missile that can actually hit the average modern cruiser.
But why? Give us some fits and tactics to compare. Give us some situations and numbers on absolute damage.
|
Derek Sigres
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 01:02:00 -
[117]
With absolute maxed skills an no rigs a Cerberus using precision heavy missiles can generate an explosion velocity of 1500 m/s - see the opening posts regarding the damage this yeilds and note that above 3500 m/s or so you damage becomes negligable especially when you consider you're punching through T2 resists - the end result is single digit damage numbers against even Vanilla T2 nano ships.
Gun users, especially pulse laser and autocannons can still deliver DPS on target with reliability on a nano ship traveling 4 - 5 k/s thanks to ballooning signature radiuses. Given a gun user can cut transversal by using their own MWD and maneuvering the native ability to generate DPS on fast moving targets is increased even more.
Missiles on the other hand don't care what you're own ship is doing - transversal is irrelevent and only absolute speed is necissary to evade the damage. Currently, the only weapon system that generates appreciable (I.E. significant enough to actually be able to generate a kill) is a precision light missile. The munition is a frigate class weapon system, generating very low damage meaning that even in the best of circumstances a Vagabond can simply slow down to autocannon velocity and generate more DPS than a Caracal could ever hope to when armed with Precision lights.
Gun users get plenty of options to expand the abilities of their guns to hit fast moving targets. Along with good use of on board navigation possibilities they can also load up on tracking enchancers and tracking computers that can handily boost their ability to hit fast moving targets, along with the requisite rigs. Missile users on the other hand have a single choice: rigs. To choose to use rigs to generate missile damage against a fast moving ship means not only dramatically increasing the uninsured cost of your ship but also removes other ship options such as polycarbs, aux thrusters, resist rigs, extender rigs and so forth.
As the OP pointed out the precision heavy missile is simply worse in every attribute when it comes to delivering effecient damage to a nano ship than a Cruise missile - and the simple fact that a battleship class weapon is better suited to hitting a small fast target than a cruiser class weapon points to an extreme discrepency in how the cruiser class weapon operates. The OP went over this point with great detail and clarity, and the only counter argument generated is "you want more DPS and that's unfair unless you can prove it".
Look at the success of the missile using ships against nano boats - you're not going to find steller successes simply because once a ship has been built to counter a nano ship it's DPS generation under the best of circumstances is laughably low. A HAM Cerb for example can generate around 500 DPS, a HML Drake around 420 DPS, and a HML Caracal around 250 DPS. A precision light Cerb will generate under 200 DPS (well under at that) under the best of circumstances, a precision light Caracal will barely break 100 DPS, and a precison light Drake will struggle to get more than 250 DPS. All of these ships will already be flying slow enough that they are at a maneuverability disadvantage, and even the Vagabonds DPS will exceed the Drake in this circumstance.
Regardless of belief of how the system works, missile using ships need an option other than using tiny launcher shooting tiny missiles to have a hope of bringing down the increasingly common nano ship. The OP's proposed changes don't mean that nano ships will be doomed, but it WOULD mean that nano ships would once again take notice of their presence beyond anticipation of an easy kill mail. Increase the base velocity of the cruiser class missile or have the decency to give us a set a low and mid slot modules that increase the explosion velocity of our missiles - I don't care which solution is chosen as long as something is done to resolve the issue.
|
Albaluna74
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 14:21:00 -
[118]
/bump
|
Damned Force
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 14:39:00 -
[119]
Edited by: Damned Force on 08/07/2008 14:40:19
Quote:
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
So, while the OP is indeed asking for more damage, I don't think it's unreasonable to want a cruiser class missile that can actually hit the average modern cruiser.
But why? Give us some fits and tactics to compare. Give us some situations and numbers on absolute damage.
Because nothing and absolute nothing should be able to make a same class ship 100% immune to a same shipclass weapon!!!!!!
And some numbers why prec heavys are broken
Ship used Cerb:
If i fit heavy missilel with CN scourge do around 400 dps on 190km with missile velocity 8400 and explosion velocity 1125
If i fit with Precision scourge i do around 300dps on 90km with missile velocity 7300 and explosion velocity 1500
Thats with my maxed missileskills.....So lets summarise:
I loose around 25% dps, over 50% range, 13% missile velocity to gain 375 explosion velocity!!!!!!!
|
Bleedingthrough
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 22:59:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Bleedingthrough on 08/07/2008 23:00:06
Originally by: Damned Force
Edited by: Damned Force on 08/07/2008 14:40:19
Quote:
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
So, while the OP is indeed asking for more damage, I don't think it's unreasonable to want a cruiser class missile that can actually hit the average modern cruiser.
But why? Give us some fits and tactics to compare. Give us some situations and numbers on absolute damage.
Because nothing and absolute nothing should be able to make a same class ship 100% immune to a same shipclass weapon!!!!!!
And some numbers why prec heavys are broken
Ship used Cerb:
If i fit heavy missilel with CN scourge do around 400 dps on 190km with missile velocity 8400 and explosion velocity 1125
If i fit with Precision scourge i do around 300dps on 90km with missile velocity 7300 and explosion velocity 1500
Thats with my maxed missileskills.....So lets summarise:
I loose around 25% dps, over 50% range, 13% missile velocity to gain 375 explosion velocity!!!!!!!
Dont forget about the speedmalus makes them even more usefull. ;(
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |