Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:00:00 -
[1]
Formal Petition: Fix Precision Heavy Missiles
Preface IÆve been asked to bring this to the CSM board several times now. Given the unanswered state (despite strong support of) the Original Thread in Game Development Forum, I turn now to the CSM for an escalation of this issue. My goal is to not crosspost or spam, but I am no longer confident that keeping the original thread bumped would ever lead to a dev reply.
I used ElectroFreak's resolved missile damage formula for the below figures; they mirror what is seen in game. For reference, his original thread is Here.
Introduction:
Precision Missiles are weapon systems that are designed to give the skilled missile user a weapon capable of dealing with fast or small targets that would normally exceed high power missiles ability to engage. They attempt to perform this task while giving up firepower, range, and ship velocity.
In their current incarnation, precision lights are the only system capable of achieving this goal. Precision Heavy Missiles are in every way worse to Precision Cruise Missiles, and both Precision Heavy and Precision Cruise are inadequate to engage fast moving targets.
While a buff to Precision Missiles on the whole would be nice (not to mention all T2 ammo), I believe that to be beyond the feasible range of short term implementation. In the case of T2 heavy missiles, we are dealing with a bug, and it is high time it is fixed.
The cause of this bug dates back to the earliest days of T2 ammo. CCP caved to forum cries regarding their stats back in 2006, and crippled the missile into the worthless form it now is. Errors, intentional or not, in good faith or not, should always be fixed. Even if theseàstatsà were justified two years ago, HP boosts, rigs, heat, and other game changes have occurred. Their stats must be changed, must be fixed to allow this weapon to have any bearing in todayÆs combat.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:00:00 -
[2]
Formal Petition: Fix Precision Heavy Missiles
Preface IÆve been asked to bring this to the CSM board several times now. Given the unanswered state (despite strong support of) the Original Thread in Game Development Forum, I turn now to the CSM for an escalation of this issue. My goal is to not crosspost or spam, but I am no longer confident that keeping the original thread bumped would ever lead to a dev reply.
I used ElectroFreak's resolved missile damage formula for the below figures; they mirror what is seen in game. For reference, his original thread is Here.
Introduction:
Precision Missiles are weapon systems that are designed to give the skilled missile user a weapon capable of dealing with fast or small targets that would normally exceed high power missiles ability to engage. They attempt to perform this task while giving up firepower, range, and ship velocity.
In their current incarnation, precision lights are the only system capable of achieving this goal. Precision Heavy Missiles are in every way worse to Precision Cruise Missiles, and both Precision Heavy and Precision Cruise are inadequate to engage fast moving targets.
While a buff to Precision Missiles on the whole would be nice (not to mention all T2 ammo), I believe that to be beyond the feasible range of short term implementation. In the case of T2 heavy missiles, we are dealing with a bug, and it is high time it is fixed.
The cause of this bug dates back to the earliest days of T2 ammo. CCP caved to forum cries regarding their stats back in 2006, and crippled the missile into the worthless form it now is. Errors, intentional or not, in good faith or not, should always be fixed. Even if theseàstatsà were justified two years ago, HP boosts, rigs, heat, and other game changes have occurred. Their stats must be changed, must be fixed to allow this weapon to have any bearing in todayÆs combat.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:01:00 -
[3]
Raw Stats:
These are the base states of all T1 guided missiles and their T2 Precision Counterparts. The impact of skills + ship bonuses will be examined in the next section.
Light Missiles: These are the only decent precision missiles. They do not carry reduced range or damage compared to their T1 base, have 71% better explosion velocity and 250% improved explosion radius. The explosion radius is completely wasted, however, given that 50m is already at your average frigate level, and 20m is smaller than a pod. -7.5% Ship Velocity is an extreme penalty; it effectively prevents any frigate class vessel from using these without murdering their own speed as well.
Light: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 5.00s Est. Max Range: 18750m Explosion Velocity: 1750m/s Explosion Radius: 50m damage: 75
Precision Light: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 5.00s Est. Max Range: 18750m Explosion Velocity: 3000m/s Explosion Radius: 20m damage: 75 Drawback: -7.5% Ship Velocity
Heavy Missiles: These are the worst of all precision missiles. They carry reduced range, reduced velocity (the only one to do so), reduced damage, and marginal gains in precision and explosion velocity. They are, for all intents and purposes, worthless. The -5% ship velocity is a deal breaker for any nano-HAC that would wish to employ these. While a lower value than the Light missiles, these ships carry the most launcher hardpoints of any missile class until the Caldari Navy Raven (Hawk: 4, Caracal/Cerberus: 5, CN Caracal: 6, Drake: 7, Raven: 6, CN Raven: 7), while still needing the speed advantage like frigates (notable exception: Drake)
Heavy: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 10.00s Est. Max Range: 37500m Explosion Velocity: 750m/s Explosion Radius: 125m damage: 150
Precision Heavy: Velocity: 3250m/s Flight Time: 5.25s Est. Max Range: 17062.5 Explosion Velocity: 1000m/s Explosion Radius: 75m damage: 135 Drawback: -5% Ship Velocity
Cruise Missiles:: Precision Cruise Missiles have better stats in every field than Precision Heavies, save only explosion radius (which is meaningless, but will be discussed in another section). They are left, ironically, with no target class to shoot at: Nothing of the battleship or battlecruiser size moves at the speeds you would really need these. Most ships will go much faster than your explosion velocity will ever hope to reach. The -4% ship velocity is the kindest to the ship class most immobile; no cruise raven is going to care about that penalty. These missiles suffer from all the reduced damage and range of Heavies.
Cruise: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 20,000s Est. Max Range: 75,000m Explosion Velocity: 500m/s Explosion Radius: 300m Damage: 300
Precision Cruise: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 10.00s Est. Max Range: 37500m Explosion Velocity: 1000m/s Explosion Radius: 200m damage: 260 Drawback: -4% Ship Velocity
Overview:
The Precision Heavy is slower for no reason, has a meaningless 33% explosion velocity improvement (compared to the 100% improvement to explosion velocity of Precision Cruise over base), a heavy velocity penalty, and dramatically shorter range. Precision Cruise are in every way superior for shooting nano-HACs than a Precision Heavy. This is the equivalent of Battleship long range turrets having superior tracking, range, and damage of cruiser class counterparts.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:01:00 -
[4]
Edited by: MalVortex on 16/06/2008 11:05:35 Impact of Skills
After level 5 skills (not unreasonable for Target Navigation Prediction û Rank 2), these explosion velocities are as follows:
Light: 2625m/s Precision Light: 4500m/s
Heavy: 1125m/s Precision Heavy: 1500m/s
Cruise: 750m/s Precision Cruise: 1500m/s
Where are the explosion Radiuses you ask? Frankly, in the age of the MWD, these are irrelevant. The worst case scenario, a MWDing Interceptor, has a signature radius of around 160m^2. A T1 cruise missile with Guided Missile Precision 4 has an explosion radius of 240m^2. Your reduction from signature loss is a mere -33.33%. However, it is far worse than this. The missile damage formula picks the worst case variable: speed or radius.
The interceptor will outrun your missileÆs explosion radius by several fold; you will see no lost damage to radius as your explosion velocity will reduce far more than -33.33%. In other words, in the vast, vast, vast majority of situations, you will never see explosion radius matter. If it does matter, your damage reduction is nothing compared to that target using speed anyways.
What Will Those Missiles Hit For? This article will show what Level V TNP missiles will hit a target an X velocity for in % damage transferred. 100% = no damage lost to velocity, 1% = 1% of listed missile damage was transferred (pre-resistances).
Light Missiles: 4500m/s vs: 5000m/s: 89.48393168% 5500m/s: 64.11803884% 6000m/s: 36.78794412% 6500m/s: 16.90133154% 7000m/s: 6.217652402% 7500m/s: 1.831563889% 8000m/s: 0.432023947%
Interceptors rapidly enter the zone of ôminimal damageö. A max skilled P-ASM Cerberus can take ~25 seconds to kill a 6kms interceptor, ~35 to kill a 6.3kms inty, ~50 to kill 6.5kms, and it gets even sillier from there on in. Precession Lights fired from ASM IIs are the only missile capable of hitting nano-HACs.
Heavy + Cruise Missiles: 1500m/s vs: 2000m/s: 89.48393168% 2500m/s: 64.11803884% 3000m/s: 36.78794412% 3500m/s: 16.90133154% 4000m/s: 6.217652402% 4500m/s: 1.831563889% 5000m/s: 0.432023947%
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.
Precision Cruise Missiles are Faster, Longer Reaching, More Damaging, and just as ôPreciseö as Heavy Precision Missiles. In short, Precision Heavies are broken.
How Bad is The Range Loss?
Another area of contention in the Precision Heavy Missile department is their reduction of range. While cruise missiles also lose out on range, Heavy Precisions are inordinately cut short due to a duel nerf of their velocity and their flight time. Please refer to the above section for their base attributes; IÆm specifically going to go into precision missile range here.
Precision Missile Theoretical Range, Level 5 Range Skills:
Precision Light: 42,187.5m (5625m/s * 7.5s) Precision Heavy: 38,390.625m (4875m/s * 7.875s) Precision Cruise: 84,375.0m (5626m/s * 15s)
Precision Heavy Missiles are shorter ranged than the frigate weapon, while being slower as well.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:01:00 -
[5]
Raw Stats:
These are the base states of all T1 guided missiles and their T2 Precision Counterparts. The impact of skills + ship bonuses will be examined in the next section.
Light Missiles: These are the only decent precision missiles. They do not carry reduced range or damage compared to their T1 base, have 71% better explosion velocity and 250% improved explosion radius. The explosion radius is completely wasted, however, given that 50m is already at your average frigate level, and 20m is smaller than a pod. -7.5% Ship Velocity is an extreme penalty; it effectively prevents any frigate class vessel from using these without murdering their own speed as well.
Light: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 5.00s Est. Max Range: 18750m Explosion Velocity: 1750m/s Explosion Radius: 50m damage: 75
Precision Light: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 5.00s Est. Max Range: 18750m Explosion Velocity: 3000m/s Explosion Radius: 20m damage: 75 Drawback: -7.5% Ship Velocity
Heavy Missiles: These are the worst of all precision missiles. They carry reduced range, reduced velocity (the only one to do so), reduced damage, and marginal gains in precision and explosion velocity. They are, for all intents and purposes, worthless. The -5% ship velocity is a deal breaker for any nano-HAC that would wish to employ these. While a lower value than the Light missiles, these ships carry the most launcher hardpoints of any missile class until the Caldari Navy Raven (Hawk: 4, Caracal/Cerberus: 5, CN Caracal: 6, Drake: 7, Raven: 6, CN Raven: 7), while still needing the speed advantage like frigates (notable exception: Drake)
Heavy: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 10.00s Est. Max Range: 37500m Explosion Velocity: 750m/s Explosion Radius: 125m damage: 150
Precision Heavy: Velocity: 3250m/s Flight Time: 5.25s Est. Max Range: 17062.5 Explosion Velocity: 1000m/s Explosion Radius: 75m damage: 135 Drawback: -5% Ship Velocity
Cruise Missiles:: Precision Cruise Missiles have better stats in every field than Precision Heavies, save only explosion radius (which is meaningless, but will be discussed in another section). They are left, ironically, with no target class to shoot at: Nothing of the battleship or battlecruiser size moves at the speeds you would really need these. Most ships will go much faster than your explosion velocity will ever hope to reach. The -4% ship velocity is the kindest to the ship class most immobile; no cruise raven is going to care about that penalty. These missiles suffer from all the reduced damage and range of Heavies.
Cruise: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 20,000s Est. Max Range: 75,000m Explosion Velocity: 500m/s Explosion Radius: 300m Damage: 300
Precision Cruise: Velocity: 3750m/s Flight Time: 10.00s Est. Max Range: 37500m Explosion Velocity: 1000m/s Explosion Radius: 200m damage: 260 Drawback: -4% Ship Velocity
Overview:
The Precision Heavy is slower for no reason, has a meaningless 33% explosion velocity improvement (compared to the 100% improvement to explosion velocity of Precision Cruise over base), a heavy velocity penalty, and dramatically shorter range. Precision Cruise are in every way superior for shooting nano-HACs than a Precision Heavy. This is the equivalent of Battleship long range turrets having superior tracking, range, and damage of cruiser class counterparts.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:01:00 -
[6]
Edited by: MalVortex on 16/06/2008 11:05:35 Impact of Skills
After level 5 skills (not unreasonable for Target Navigation Prediction û Rank 2), these explosion velocities are as follows:
Light: 2625m/s Precision Light: 4500m/s
Heavy: 1125m/s Precision Heavy: 1500m/s
Cruise: 750m/s Precision Cruise: 1500m/s
Where are the explosion Radiuses you ask? Frankly, in the age of the MWD, these are irrelevant. The worst case scenario, a MWDing Interceptor, has a signature radius of around 160m^2. A T1 cruise missile with Guided Missile Precision 4 has an explosion radius of 240m^2. Your reduction from signature loss is a mere -33.33%. However, it is far worse than this. The missile damage formula picks the worst case variable: speed or radius.
The interceptor will outrun your missileÆs explosion radius by several fold; you will see no lost damage to radius as your explosion velocity will reduce far more than -33.33%. In other words, in the vast, vast, vast majority of situations, you will never see explosion radius matter. If it does matter, your damage reduction is nothing compared to that target using speed anyways.
What Will Those Missiles Hit For? This article will show what Level V TNP missiles will hit a target an X velocity for in % damage transferred. 100% = no damage lost to velocity, 1% = 1% of listed missile damage was transferred (pre-resistances).
Light Missiles: 4500m/s vs: 5000m/s: 89.48393168% 5500m/s: 64.11803884% 6000m/s: 36.78794412% 6500m/s: 16.90133154% 7000m/s: 6.217652402% 7500m/s: 1.831563889% 8000m/s: 0.432023947%
Interceptors rapidly enter the zone of ôminimal damageö. A max skilled P-ASM Cerberus can take ~25 seconds to kill a 6kms interceptor, ~35 to kill a 6.3kms inty, ~50 to kill 6.5kms, and it gets even sillier from there on in. Precession Lights fired from ASM IIs are the only missile capable of hitting nano-HACs.
Heavy + Cruise Missiles: 1500m/s vs: 2000m/s: 89.48393168% 2500m/s: 64.11803884% 3000m/s: 36.78794412% 3500m/s: 16.90133154% 4000m/s: 6.217652402% 4500m/s: 1.831563889% 5000m/s: 0.432023947%
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.
Precision Cruise Missiles are Faster, Longer Reaching, More Damaging, and just as ôPreciseö as Heavy Precision Missiles. In short, Precision Heavies are broken.
How Bad is The Range Loss?
Another area of contention in the Precision Heavy Missile department is their reduction of range. While cruise missiles also lose out on range, Heavy Precisions are inordinately cut short due to a duel nerf of their velocity and their flight time. Please refer to the above section for their base attributes; IÆm specifically going to go into precision missile range here.
Precision Missile Theoretical Range, Level 5 Range Skills:
Precision Light: 42,187.5m (5625m/s * 7.5s) Precision Heavy: 38,390.625m (4875m/s * 7.875s) Precision Cruise: 84,375.0m (5626m/s * 15s)
Precision Heavy Missiles are shorter ranged than the frigate weapon, while being slower as well.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:02:00 -
[7]
Proposed Solution: Fix The TypoÆs
I really cannot imagine that these figures are intentional. There is no reason for Heavy Precision Missiles to be missing a base 500m/s to their velocity, nor should the be missing flight time, nor should their explosion velocity be the same as Cruise Missiles!
Fix:
Precision Heavy Raw Stats: Velocity: 3250m/s -> 3750m/s Flight Time: 5.25 -> 7.5 Explosion Velocity: 1000m/s -> 2000m/s
This would give Precision Heavy missiles their rightful base velocity as every other guided missile (the broken Fury excluded). This would also create a tiered stepping in explosion velocity:
Precision Light: 3000m/s Precision Heavy: 2000m/s Precision Cruise: 1000m/s
The New Damage % Breakdown at Level V skills:
Precision Heavy û 3000m/s (2000*1.5) 3500m/s: 89.48393168% 4000m/s: 64.11803884% 4500m/s: 36.78794412% 5000m/s: 16.90133154% 5500m/s: 6.217652402% 6000m/s: 1.831563889% 6500m/s: 0.432023947%
These damage %Æs are sufficient to impart meaningful DPS to most Nano-HACS, while not being anywhere near fast enough to hit interceptors. They become û yes û a lower damage, lower ranged (still has half flight time), anti-fast cruiser weapon. The Roll They Are Supposed to Perform.
In addition to the explosive velocity tier, there would be a proper tier for flight time as well. Remember, all guided missiles (T2 precision and T1 base) have the same 3750m/s velocity base.
Precision Light: 5s Precision Heavy: 7.5s Precision Cruise: 15s
For Comparison, this would create the following Maximum ranges on an unbonused cruiser at level V range skills:
Precision Light: ~42.2km Precision Heavy: ~63.3km Precision Heavy: ~84.4km
The boost to their flight time and velocity was necessary to bring them back into line with cruiser sized weaponry; as it stands, they had 4km less range than the light missiles. Even boosting their velocity back to the proper velocity only exceeded Precision Light Missile range by 2km. Given the significant range boost of cruises, I believe this too to be in error; a proper increase in ranges at each level is in line with T1 missile increases (100% range per increase in size of missile on T1, compared to ~50% increase in range on proposed T2 precision per size).
I humbly submit to the CSM board that these proposed changes be escalated to CCP. The original thread in the Game Development Forum has so far gone unanswered. I seek not to radically alter game balance, nerf nano ships, buff Caldari, or usher in a new breed of solopwn. I simply ask that these glitched, broken, worthless weapons have the stats they clearly need and deserve.
- MalVortex
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:02:00 -
[8]
- Reserved -
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:02:00 -
[9]
Proposed Solution: Fix The TypoÆs
I really cannot imagine that these figures are intentional. There is no reason for Heavy Precision Missiles to be missing a base 500m/s to their velocity, nor should the be missing flight time, nor should their explosion velocity be the same as Cruise Missiles!
Fix:
Precision Heavy Raw Stats: Velocity: 3250m/s -> 3750m/s Flight Time: 5.25 -> 7.5 Explosion Velocity: 1000m/s -> 2000m/s
This would give Precision Heavy missiles their rightful base velocity as every other guided missile (the broken Fury excluded). This would also create a tiered stepping in explosion velocity:
Precision Light: 3000m/s Precision Heavy: 2000m/s Precision Cruise: 1000m/s
The New Damage % Breakdown at Level V skills:
Precision Heavy û 3000m/s (2000*1.5) 3500m/s: 89.48393168% 4000m/s: 64.11803884% 4500m/s: 36.78794412% 5000m/s: 16.90133154% 5500m/s: 6.217652402% 6000m/s: 1.831563889% 6500m/s: 0.432023947%
These damage %Æs are sufficient to impart meaningful DPS to most Nano-HACS, while not being anywhere near fast enough to hit interceptors. They become û yes û a lower damage, lower ranged (still has half flight time), anti-fast cruiser weapon. The Roll They Are Supposed to Perform.
In addition to the explosive velocity tier, there would be a proper tier for flight time as well. Remember, all guided missiles (T2 precision and T1 base) have the same 3750m/s velocity base.
Precision Light: 5s Precision Heavy: 7.5s Precision Cruise: 15s
For Comparison, this would create the following Maximum ranges on an unbonused cruiser at level V range skills:
Precision Light: ~42.2km Precision Heavy: ~63.3km Precision Heavy: ~84.4km
The boost to their flight time and velocity was necessary to bring them back into line with cruiser sized weaponry; as it stands, they had 4km less range than the light missiles. Even boosting their velocity back to the proper velocity only exceeded Precision Light Missile range by 2km. Given the significant range boost of cruises, I believe this too to be in error; a proper increase in ranges at each level is in line with T1 missile increases (100% range per increase in size of missile on T1, compared to ~50% increase in range on proposed T2 precision per size).
I humbly submit to the CSM board that these proposed changes be escalated to CCP. The original thread in the Game Development Forum has so far gone unanswered. I seek not to radically alter game balance, nerf nano ships, buff Caldari, or usher in a new breed of solopwn. I simply ask that these glitched, broken, worthless weapons have the stats they clearly need and deserve.
- MalVortex
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:02:00 -
[10]
- Reserved -
|
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:05:00 -
[11]
Signed a million, million times. Precision Heavies are hilariously bad, and are effectively useless in PVP.
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 11:05:00 -
[12]
Signed a million, million times. Precision Heavies are hilariously bad, and are effectively useless in PVP.
|
Lt Graco
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 15:18:00 -
[13]
|
Tesseract d'Urberville
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 15:29:00 -
[14]
I confess that I've never used precision missiles before, but I really appreciate the exhaustive numbercrunching you did to present concrete evidence. Supported.
--------------------------------- Thomas Hardy is going to eat your brains. |
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 19:59:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Ulstan on 16/06/2008 19:59:37 If there is one issue that deserves to be fixed it is this one. Very narrow very specific fixes are required - these should be implemented immediately to end the travesty of terrible heavy precision missiles :(
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 23:11:00 -
[16]
Edited by: James Lyrus on 16/06/2008 23:12:21 I would be inclined to agree. I'd mention though, that this does have a significant impact on 'nanoships' - precision heavy missiles can hit, but just do minimal damage to a speed fitted cruiser. Upping their explosion velocity would raise this bar somewhat. I don't feel this would be a bad thing, but it would represent an indirect 'nerfing' of your average polycarboned speed ship.
As it stands now, the 250m/sec difference in explosion velocity, between precision heavy missiles, and faction heavy missiles, when combined with the significant difference in damage, range, skills and secondary effects, makes them not worth the cargo space. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? |
marie blueprint
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 23:32:00 -
[17]
yes
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 21:11:00 -
[18]
*sigh*. Already on the bottom of page 2? Perhaps I should have just said "lawls, fix teh missiles, they suxors". It seems to be the winning strategy for all issues that the CSM has voted in.
:Bump:
|
Ranamar
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 21:55:00 -
[19]
Being a missile user myself, though having not gotten to the point of looking at those numbers yet, that's quite ridiculous. Yeah, fix them. I'd even say stealth-fix the velocity problem, because that part is just plain silly.
|
Patri Andari
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 23:53:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Patri Andari on 17/06/2008 23:53:34 Would love to see Developers comment on this issue. Signed
A fool usually thinks he is a genius |
|
Zaran Darkstar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 03:35:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Zaran Darkstar on 18/06/2008 03:44:24
For PvE the current precision heavies are very good. You can hit anything apart spider drones II perhaps and do good damage. The diminished signature of the precision heavies helps much against the NPC annoying frigates. While the supposed "better" precision cruise missiles have very big signature unable to deliver good damage even to NPC cruisers. I know you have the PvP in mind but there are also PvE needs. In PvE the frigates never go faster than 880m/s so the current explosion velocity of the heavies at 1000 does matter.
If an upgrade would be made that should be on cruise precision missiles giving them maybe half their current signature radius. That would help against those sturdy tech 2 frigates in Lvl 4 missions.
Initially i thought that perhaps it would be better if CCP creates additional missile types like "Precision MKII" for example more inclined for PvP purposes.But then i realised that there is a reason there are these current missile limitations. Don't forget that it not about a specific missile penalty in particular. Actually everything is impossible to be hit when traveling very fast regardless of weapon platform be it turrets or missiles. At least missiles always hit at non mwd speeds regardless while the turrets keep failing. Also missiles don't take into consideration your (caldari) ship's speed For example a mwd moving turret boat canlt hit much while orbiting with mwd on while a missile ship can keep traveling ultra fast and alwasy hit a supposed imobile target.
So for all these reasons i don;t support this idea. That is why i don't support this idea. Not because i have this Minmatar character. I happen to have another account that flies Caldari. But it just dosn't seem good for game balance. |
iudex
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 07:18:00 -
[22]
I totally agree, we'd defenitely need an explosion velocity boost with heavy missiles. Atm. the majority of caldaris can't do much against nano ships. Not many of us are trained in turrets, yet we are forced to use them, to do any damage at all at those nano-fleets, harassing the faction warfare battlegrounds (no, you can't web them, since they won't get into web range).
Precision light missiles don't have sufficient range to fight the current nano-camps, precision heavy- and cruise missiles don't have the explosion velocity to hurt them. So an explosion velocity boost for heavies as proposed above might help a lot to do at least a little damage and not exclude the major weapontype of the biggest faction from fighting nano-ships.
_________________________________________ Faction Standings: Serpentis +7.50 // Angel Cartel +7.17 // Minmatar Republic -8.49 // Gallente Federation -9.53 Faction Warfare Rank: Lieutenant Colonel |
Acidictadpole
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 07:36:00 -
[23]
I don't have any experience with t2 missiles as I can't use them. But I've gone over your numbers and you make a strong point backed by fact.
I just hope that CCP/the CSM recognizes your hard work and works towards a steady fix for all t2 ammo, starting with the ones with the best factual corrections.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 07:47:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Zaran Darkstar Edited by: Zaran Darkstar on 18/06/2008 04:37:24 Horrible Fail
I'd normally let blatant fail like this slide, but I can't afford to let some innocent hear something so blatantly wrong and believe it.
Spider Drone I Stats
1) All Caldari Missioning ships have drone bays. Drake for Level 3s: Drone bays. Nighthawk, level 4s: Drone bays. Raven Variants: Large drone bays. The only Heavy Missile, non-drone bayed using Caldari ship is the Cerberus, which should never be used in a level 4, and would *****level 3s. Why on earth would you waste missiles on a target like the spider drone?
2) Even if you did, for some godforsaken reason, need to use heavy missiles on this Spider Drone, your base explosion velocity, on plain-old T1 heavies, without skills, is higher than the drone's movement velocity. With level V TNP, its nearly 3 times higher than its actual orbit speed.
3) If you read my post, you would know that the missile damage formula picks the worst case scenario, and disregards the other stat. Given the drones 27mm signature radius, your heavy missiles will suffer *no* loss of damage to velocity, as your signature radius reduces it far more. That drone would have to break 1150m/s orbit before explosion velocity would take over in damage reduction.
4) Precision Heavy missiles will go from 28.8% damage imparted to 48%. You will note, however, that I'm not proposing to change P-HM missile explosion radius, so you will see no change to your imaginary heavy missile level 4 mission runner's performance.
5) I have no idea why your bringing cruise missiles into this. I listed all guidance stats for comparison purposes. Precision Cruise missiles are better in every way than precision heavy missiles. Hell, cruise missiles would even out gank heavies on NPC cruisers due to the massive damage increase, compared to the signature radius loss.
6) Turret ships actually can drive off orbiting nanohacs. Obviously pimp 6kms+ nanohacs will be very hard to hit, and take a long time to run off. Amazingly, 6kms is where the changed precision heavy missiles would start doing close to no damage. 1.83% damage before resists isn't exactly scary.
7) Finally, T2 ammo is, by and large, PVP ammo. Marauders excepted, you can't afford to use it in PVE, nor should you ever need it to begin with. Saying "don't fix precision heavy missiles, they are great for popping frigates my drones should be killing" is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard proposed in earnest.
To all other posters, thanks for the support.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 14:12:00 -
[25]
Zaran: if you're shooting missiles at anything frigate sized and below, you're doing it wrong. Use your drones.
Quote: Actually everything is impossible to be hit when traveling very fast regardless of weapon platform be it turrets or missiles.
This is quite simply completely false. Turrets don't care how fast you are going, only your transversal. It's easy for turrets to hit someone going fast if they are at an angle or distance where the transversal isn't very good.
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 14:33:00 -
[26]
This thread, and the Nighthawk one, illustrate the problem with getting the community to comment on Caldari balance issues - too many people either assume that we're talking about PVE, or tell us that the item is fine in PVE, and therefore fine.
|
Kurt Gergard
Federal European Industry Science and Research
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 18:09:00 -
[27]
It's hard to be caldari.Ppeople assume that when you talk about missiles = PVE and caldari PVP = EW
"No plan has ever survived the contact with the enemy" von Moltke |
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 18:12:00 -
[28]
I've pretty much made up my mind that whoever runs for CSM next time as a Caldari PvP'er who understands PvP issues is going to get my vote. The "but it's fine in PvE" defence gets old fast.
|
Zaran Darkstar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 18:54:00 -
[29]
Originally by: MalVortex ....
1) As we all know when you arrive at the mission area there are several "packs" of enemies that act separatly as small groups. So you try to get the minimal aggro possible. You never engage the whole spawn.Only just a small pack of enemies each time then proceed to the next. In most Guristas missions the drones get agrroed from the packs you have not aggroed yet. The only way to keep your drones from geting agroo is to agrro the whole spawn therefore packs A B C D which is "unprofessional" . So i mostly use drones to break the tank of the BSes faster. I can kill the T2 frigates using precision heavies much easier. Usually a couple of salvoes will do it. i don't remember exaxctly how many salvos i need cause i haven't played a lvl 4 in Drake for ages. It's a bit dull to play Drake lvl 4s...Anyway... The thing is that i take down frigates t1 and tech 2 much faster using only missiles. I got good drone skills with that Caldari character but why use drones when i do it with heavies a lot faster? And much more conveniently for most guristas missions.
For the same reason if i happen to play missions with Zaran that flies Apocalypse and Maelstorm i try to pop the frigates from afar before they reach me (AB helps much in that) so that i save my drones from the aggro in Guristas missions. I remember one case in a guristas mission using the Maelstorm (without AB) that while i aggroed a pack of frigates i got jammed and by the time i was unjammed the frigates were orbiting near me. I had to use drones but they got aggroed by a pack of cruisers far away that was "neutral" so far. I managed to kill the frigates but when i was done i had lost about 7 light drones II) And that is the problem with the drones in some guristas missions. Thats why i prefer to use precision heavies when i can (if in Drake) .
2) For the first moments they orbit very fast around you at 5000m/s !! Gradually they orbit for less. In fact i don't remember very well that is why i mentioned it before that is why i said that [b]perhaps[b/] you can't hit spider drones II with precision. I haven't been in a lvl 4 with a Drake that contained Spiders II . With Zaran i take them out with Drones since Zaran doesn't fly the Drake) The problem is in their signature. Spider drones have a signature of 25? maybe 20? If i hit them with missiles of 150signature i won't damage them much. The base 75signature of the precision heavies + the skills gets down to about 45 if i remember right so i could deal them some decent damage like that.
3) Yes but as i said the problem is in the signature of missiles in that case. Explosion velocity is fine for PvE. And the lessened signature counts as i mentioned in 2)
4) i just mentioned that about the missions in case you hadn't taken into consideration how nicely the current precision heavies work in missions and for the same reason how bad the precision cruiser missiles are for missions with their current large signature radius. Probably you say that the precision cruiser missiles are great since in PvP with all these ships MWDing the signature is not a problem even against interceptors. I ve never happened to use precision missiles in PvP so far due to th fact that when i was PvPing (for Razor) i had not the skills for tech 2 missiles yet.
5) i bet that precision cruise missiles they do an overall good damage against cruiser ships for the reasons you said but they will be worthless against the frigates cause their base signature even with skills is too big to destroy the T2 frigates. That was my point. I perceived the mater from a PvE scope not PvP.
6) Perhaps i should have been more precise. Lets take this example. Ship A is a nano cruiser. Ship B is a turret BS. Ship C is a Raven or a Drake (non nano)
1) Ship A is orbiting ship B with mwd on. Ship B fails to hit everytime. 2) Ship A is orbiting ship B without mwd on but in close orbit . Ship B depending on the weapon platform it uses may hit some "light hit" here and there but still keeps missing mostly.
Lets see what happens with ship C
1) Ship A is orbiting ship C with mwd on. Ship C hits but for 0 damage everytime due to the missile penalties 2) Ship A is orbiting ship C without mwd on but in close orbit . Here ship C will hit for big damage. See the advantage of missiles?
So missiles will do big damage and always hit non mwded targets. Turrets will fail to hit even non mwded targets if they orbit too close.
And let's not forget the example of Nano Typhoon orbiting around and immobile Blasterthron. The nano Typhoon will kill the Blasterthron because the missiles give it the advantage to move in MWD and hit. The opposite can't happen. See now the advantages of the missiles in PvP?
|
Kurt Gergard
Federal European Industry Science and Research
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 19:43:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Zaran Darkstar
Originally by: MalVortex ....
6) Perhaps i should have been more precise. Lets take this example. Ship A is a nano cruiser. Ship B is a turret BS. Ship C is a Raven or a Drake (non nano)
1) Ship A is orbiting ship B with mwd on. Ship B fails to hit everytime. 2) Ship A is orbiting ship B without mwd on but in close orbit . Ship B depending on the weapon platform it uses may hit some "light hit" here and there but still keeps missing mostly.
Lets see what happens with ship C
1) Ship A is orbiting ship C with mwd on. Ship C hits but for 0 damage everytime due to the missile penalties 2) Ship A is orbiting ship C without mwd on but in close orbit . Here ship C will hit for big damage. See the advantage of missiles?
So missiles will do big damage and always hit non mwded targets. Turrets will fail to hit even non mwded targets if they orbit too close.
And let's not forget the example of Nano Typhoon orbiting around and immobile Blasterthron. The nano Typhoon will kill the Blasterthron because the missiles give it the advantage to move in MWD and hit. The opposite can't happen. See now the advantages of the missiles in PvP?
Disregarding the fact that the topic is about PVP not PVE i won't coment on the other points you made. But I see a deep sens of you not understanding the issue. First of all the BS ship attacking nano has a slight chance of hitting especialy if the nano pilot does sth wrong while the missile guy has non because speed = immunity to missiles. Second did you read the op's post? I seriously doubt it. The main point of it was to bring the heavy precisions in line with light and cruise nothing more. And if missiles are so great in pvp why do I see mainly turret ships ? Missiles have a lot of drawbacks in the world of nano and some advantages when ships with missiles are nanoed. But missile ships are mainly a caldari thing and caldari ships are not the fastest out there so giving us(the caldari) some slight compensation for not being able to compete for speed seems a good trade don't you think ?
"No plan has ever survived the contact with the enemy" von Moltke |
|
Kesper North
Epiphyte Mining and Exploration Combined Planetary Union
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 20:36:00 -
[31]
A well-researched, well-rounded proposal. Has my vote.
|
Dru McCarty
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 20:50:00 -
[32]
Agreed. Excellent research.
~ Dru
* Comments are packaged by intellectual weight, not volume. Some settling of contents may have occurred during transmission. |
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 22:16:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Zaran Darkstar
Ramblings
Ughhh. A simple tiny fix draws this much of a troll?
Quote:
Arriving at the mission
Unless your in a well tanked turret ship, you don't start firing on frigates or cruisers. You kill the DPS - either starting with the BS's, or any high DPS BCs you can 1-2 volley. The very fact your seriouslly proposing starting a mission by using T2 ammo on frigates demonstrates you either 1) don't know how to play or 2) are trolling.
Quote:
Spider drones - 5kms!!!!
Actually, the stats page I linked you says they move 3kms. Which matters not, as you still can't hit their 27mm signature radius effectively. Thats why your ship has a drone bay.
Quote:
OMG drone agroes oh noz
Learn to use drones without using them. Protip: you can ignore spider drones until the rest of the pocket is dead if you need to. If you are in danger of dying, and an elite frig has you warp disrupted, you don't really care if you loose a coule Hobgoblin II - they just saved your ship. This situation will never occur, except in cases of pilot error.
Quote:
They are fine for PVE!
Your possibly the only person who uses a PVP based weapon in PVE, then claims that horrible, broken stats are excused because you use them to kill spider drones, when 50,000isk worth of drones will do that for all time. Its a pvp weapon. Period, the end.
Quote:
precision cruise are bad for missions, thank god we have broken precision heavies!
........
Quote:
Turret ships can't hit a close orbiting ship!
That Turret Battlehip? The one that cannot hit you because your too close? He just hit you with a 90% web, and then a half second later alpha striked your cruiser. He also had a pack of drones on you, and really did not care in the slightest that you were close.
A Raven (and to lesser Extent, Typhoon) will either hit you for decent damage with cruise, or hit you with torpedos, which will have drastically reduced impact damage due to signature radius problems. Neither one will demonstrate the raw destructive damage of 8 megapulse in your face, or 7 Neutrons, etc.
Quote:
Nanophoon vs. blasterthron
Oh gawd, luls. Nanophoons can't move fast enough to kite a 'thron to death. They aren't agile enough to begin with, and their absolute velocity is still lol. Even in this imaginary world of yours, that nanophoon is shotting 4 cruise missiles (if you even begin to utter the word torpedo, that Thron will 90% web you and *****your face off). Thats not scaring anybody. Thron either waits for backup, or deagresses jumps/docks.
Please, stop trolling in my thread. You either don't know what your talking about, or your some Caldari hater. Either way, please leave now.
|
Zaran Darkstar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 22:41:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Kurt Gergard
Disregarding the fact that the topic is about PVP not PVE i won't coment on the other points you made. But I see a deep sens of you not understanding the issue. First of all the BS ship attacking nano has a slight chance of hitting especialy if the nano pilot does sth wrong while the missile guy has non because speed = immunity to missiles. Second did you read the op's post? I seriously doubt it. The main point of it was to bring the heavy precisions in line with light and cruise nothing more. And if missiles are so great in pvp why do I see mainly turret ships ? Missiles have a lot of drawbacks in the world of nano and some advantages when ships with missiles are nanoed. But missile ships are mainly a caldari thing and caldari ships are not the fastest out there so giving us(the caldari) some slight compensation for not being able to compete for speed seems a good trade don't you think ?
Yes perhaps i carried away too much with PvE. I just wanted to mention that as they are they are very useful for PvE anf reply to the other guy about some things he said on PvE.
The thing is that if we see what the OP says: _______________________________________________ The New Damage % Breakdown at Level V skills:
Precision Heavy û 3000m/s (2000*1.5) 3500m/s: 89.48393168% 4000m/s: 64.11803884% 4500m/s: 36.78794412% 5000m/s: 16.90133154% 5500m/s: 6.217652402% 6000m/s: 1.831563889% 6500m/s: 0.432023947% ___________________________________________
Since the average interceptor orbits at about 4500m/s to 5000m/s
The damage it will be recieving seems to be around 30%. 30% from heavy missiles that are doing about 290 damage each. The 30% of that is around 100 damage. 100 damage x 7 launchers of the Drake = 700 damage per salvo to an orbiting interceptor. Assuming that some of it will be reduced by the natural resistences it will be around 400 damage per salvo. I think it's too much. The Drakes apart of all the rest (the godly tank comes to mind) will be anticeptor pwnmobiles) Consider that even turret cruiser ships will always miss an interceptor orbiting around them at that speed.
Does this seem balanced to you?
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 22:56:00 -
[35]
Quote:
Since the average interceptor orbits at about 4500m/s to 5000m/s
The damage it will be recieving seems to be around 30%. 30% from heavy missiles that are doing about 290 damage each. The 30% of that is around 100 damage. 100 damage x 7 launchers of the Drake = 700 damage per salvo to an orbiting interceptor. Assuming that some of it will be reduced by the natural resistences it will be around 400 damage per salvo. I think it's too much. The Drakes apart of all the rest (the godly tank comes to mind) will be anticeptor pwnmobiles) Consider that even turret cruiser ships will always miss an interceptor orbiting around them at that speed.
Does this seem balanced to you?
Given that my AC IV, unrigged crow, does 6.3kms, and will orbit at 24km slightly below that, yes. The only interceptor that is reliably 4.5kms is the Taranis. The 'Ranis is not a tackler. It is a killer. It hunts targets of opportunity and hits them with some odd 150-200dps.
Every other interceptor can go at least 6.4kms unrigged.
Even better? Depending on pilot skills, interceptors can be hit by pulse lasers even at very high speeds. 6.3kms is no guarantee of permatackling a harbinger.
You've already made it clear, however, that you don't know how PVP works on the field. These changes to heavy missiles make them too slow to hit the vast majority of interceptors. Those it can hit, would already be hit by any other reasonable turret weapon anyways, or be too slow to dodge the Warrior IIs.
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 23:02:00 -
[36]
Precision Heavies as currently fired by a Drake have a top speed of 4875 m/s/ With the proposed boost, it will be 5625 m/s/
Outrunning either in an inty is trivial.
|
Darth Vaders
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 00:15:00 -
[37]
Originally by: MalVortex
Quote:
Since the average interceptor orbits at about 4500m/s to 5000m/s
The damage it will be recieving seems to be around 30%. 30% from heavy missiles that are doing about 290 damage each. The 30% of that is around 100 damage. 100 damage x 7 launchers of the Drake = 700 damage per salvo to an orbiting interceptor. Assuming that some of it will be reduced by the natural resistences it will be around 400 damage per salvo. I think it's too much. The Drakes apart of all the rest (the godly tank comes to mind) will be anticeptor pwnmobiles) Consider that even turret cruiser ships will always miss an interceptor orbiting around them at that speed.
Does this seem balanced to you?
Given that my AC IV, unrigged crow, does 6.3kms, and will orbit at 24km slightly below that, yes. The only interceptor that is reliably 4.5kms is the Taranis. The 'Ranis is not a tackler. It is a killer. It hunts targets of opportunity and hits them with some odd 150-200dps.
Every other interceptor can go at least 6.4kms unrigged.
Even better? Depending on pilot skills, interceptors can be hit by pulse lasers even at very high speeds. 6.3kms is no guarantee of permatackling a harbinger.
You've already made it clear, however, that you don't know how PVP works on the field. These changes to heavy missiles make them too slow to hit the vast majority of interceptors. Those it can hit, would already be hit by any other reasonable turret weapon anyways, or be too slow to dodge the Warrior IIs.
Surprise surprise ,do i look like a Caldari hater? I am Caldari for God's sake! This character is at least.
For the speeds you are exagerating. Consider that a Crusader (3 overdrives II ,1 nanofiber II) with top speed of 7100 can orbit at 21km at around 5600 with acceleration control lvl 3 and navigation lvl 5 with an align time of 4 sec Crow's top speed with these skills is 6100 (3 overdrives II) (align time 4.5) so when orbiting will be less than what you said. Maybe with top skills it goes up but who has top skills anyway. also here are many cases that an interceptor won't orbit so far away. In small gangs that don't have the luxury of a rapier the interceptor may have to web so it will have to orbit closer so the orbiting speed will be lesser. Also you may pretend you are some expert crow pilot but if you orbit so far away you won't be able to scramble since the crow has no bonus in the warp disruptor unless you overheat but not many have that skill. In any case it's not always possible to orbit so far also because there is some possibitlity that the target manages to get out of your scrambling range. So you may have to orbit closer just to be sure.
So i loged with this account to show you that even if you pass this change you will benefit ME. Hate me as much as you like for being who i am , a guy that cares about game balance regardless of what suits him best. You boost Caldari? I am happy. You boost Gallente i am happy. You boost Minmatar i am happy, you boost Amarr i am happy. I happen to worry though for the player that has only 1 account and the changes may not make him so happy. |
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 01:55:00 -
[38]
This is the last time I'm feeding this troll:
1) My Crow does 6.3kms. 2x ODII, 1x NFII, AC IV. Learn to fit crows.
2) Interceptors tackling at sub 24km is fail. My warp disrupter II goes to 24km. Why on earth would I orbit at 21km?
3) If your crow goes to web, expect to be counterwebed and instapopped by the vast majority of PVP targets you will engage.
4) If you want to orbit closer to ensure the target can't *somehow* juke scrambling, be prepared to take a hit. You would take it from most other turret based ships.
5) Drakes don't have velocity bonus to missiles. As Gypsio stated, those missiles won't even catch you once you break 5.5kms
6) None of your points are relevant to this fix.
7) Finally, I don't hate you. I hate your troll posts. Now leave.
|
Zaran Darkstar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 03:49:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Zaran Darkstar on 19/06/2008 03:52:36
Originally by: MalVortex This is the last time I'm feeding this troll:
1) My Crow does 6.3kms. 2x ODII, 1x NFII, AC IV. Learn to fit crows.
Oh yeah? Well my Crusader goes 7100 but still when it orbits at 21 (3 overdrives II, 1 nanofiber II )it doesn't go beyond 5600. Perhaps if i had AC 4 could go a bit more but always that speed would be below the max possible speed. So improbable your crow to orbit at it's max speed as well.
Quote:
2) Interceptors tackling at sub 24km is fail. My warp disrupter II goes to 24km. Why on earth would I orbit at 21km?
Because the way the game works nothing works at the exact nominal range. For example one may have drone range 54km but if you are siting at 54km the drones will deny to attack. You have to go down to 53km to actually fire them. This from experience. So you can't expect that you will orbit with that crow at 24km and that the crow will maintain that exact orbit at all times. You need to leave some space to it. Let's not forget that your target isn't static and that will affect yopur orbit accuracy. That is why you chose a closer orbit that the nominal for your disruptor.
Quote:
3) If your crow goes to web, expect to be counterwebed and instapopped by the vast majority of PVP targets you will engage.
There is no rule imposing that every ship wears always a webber at the mids. Let alone that it has happened before to be grabed in web by a Deimos and still was unable to hit me with blasters probably because i was orbiting at 500. why should the Cerberus have the insane advantage to pwn any ceptor in most cases irregardless of mwd or not?
Quote:
4) If you want to orbit closer to ensure the target can't *somehow* juke scrambling, be prepared to take a hit. You would take it from most other turret based ships.
I am prepared to take a hit but not be pwned with a couple of slavos as you try to make happen.
Quote:
5) Drakes don't have velocity bonus to missiles. As Gypsio stated, those missiles won't even catch you once you break 5.5kms
How about Cerberus? Cerberus with the rate of fire bonus makes around same damage as a Drake and with velocity bonus with your upgrade will catch even ceptors travelling at 9km. Let alone that will be the ship that will pwn the nano cruisers even the average Vagabond without breaking a sweat. Why should Cerberus be so much upgraded? Because you happen to fly it?
Quote:
6) None of your points are relevant to this fix.
They are but you fail to realise it blinded by your arrogance.
Quote:
7) Finally, I don't hate you. I hate your troll posts. Now leave.
I don't hate you either. I hate only your arrogant geekish posts. Nop, i am not leaving |
Sabrina Al'Kian
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 04:17:00 -
[40]
Sounds good. I've never used the things myself, but I can see a boost when one's needed.
|
|
Sabrina Al'Kian
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 04:25:00 -
[41]
Also, Zaran, the "30% damage" was for a ship going about 4600m/s. Your 5600m/s sader will be taking minimal damage. MINIMAL.
Also, Vagabonds can easily get over 10km/s. They aren't going to be TOO greatly affected by this change. It's mainly the other nano cruisers that will have to start sweating (which is nice, because, honestly, I doubt CreoDron had speed in mind when they built the Ishtar...).
|
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Wreckless Abandon Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 06:47:00 -
[42]
Just like nothing should out-run an inti in the ships department, nothing should outrun a missle. Especially a percision missle. ----
GO BLUE!! |
ArmyOfMe
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 18:40:00 -
[43]
this belongs on the first page
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 18:54:00 -
[44]
Although I'm sure there is scope for tweaking of the exact figures, it is unquestionable that Precision Heavies need some sort of boost, as currently they are worse than precision Cruise in all PVP situations that occur.
And no more discussing PVE in this thread, please.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 18:58:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Ulstan on 19/06/2008 19:01:53 This Zaran troll fails hard in almost every possible way.
Heavy precision missiles are not 'very good' in pve, they are extremely sub-par for what you use them for in pve and you'd be much better off using drones. Fortunately for you, pve is very rewarding of terrible play and so you can get by even using atrociously bad tactics and fits.
That said, obviously pve performance has 0 impact on whether or not something is balanced for PvP so I'm not sure why you even brought it up, unless you wanted to firmly establish your noob credentials.
Now, moving onto the interceptors issue, obviously you are terrible at fitting and flying interceptors, or simply lack the skill points to do it. 6km/s should be considered a 'base speed' for interceptors and it only goes up from there when you add in more epxensive implants and rigs and gang bonuses. 12km/s is routine.
As MalVortex showed, anything moving 6km/s or greater is going to be virtually immune to heavy precision missiles (and don't forget the signature radius penalty for shooting heavies at interceptors, and remember that the game will use whichever is least good for the attacker - so even if heavy precision had an explosion velocity of INFINITY they'd still do crap damage to interceptors because of their tiny sig radius, but that wouldn't even matter because they couldn't even hit an interceptor in the first place, as an inties speed is higher than the max velocity of heavy missiles shot by a drake)
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 19:05:00 -
[46]
Quote: How about Cerberus? Cerberus with the rate of fire bonus makes around same damage as a Drake and with velocity bonus with your upgrade will catch even ceptors travelling at 9km. Let alone that will be the ship that will pwn the nano cruisers even the average Vagabond without breaking a sweat. Why should Cerberus be so much upgraded? Because you happen to fly it?
It's supposed to be able to counter nano ships, that's the entire point of the vessel. It can't right now because precision heavies are bugged and useless (arguably all explosion velocities across the board are too low, but the heavy precision missile problem is undeniable).
|
Arkanjuca
R.U.S.T.
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 12:57:00 -
[47]
the balance point is:
Cerberus should be able to hit a vaga, but cause minimal to 0 dmg on an interceptor.
The problem with this concept is that a vaga in orbit goes at speeds close to interceptors, and inties with mwd turned on has the signature of a cruiser.
So a little tweak to that could be something like the explosion velocity getting a bonus when hitting targets with sigs larger than the missile itself.
This would be an indirect boost to TP as well ^^ -- AF should be like HACs
|
Nyx Cyth
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 13:26:00 -
[48]
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc. Ursa Stellar Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 15:41:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Arkanjuca the balance point is:
Cerberus should be able to hit a vaga, but cause minimal to 0 dmg on an interceptor.
The problem with this concept is that a vaga in orbit goes at speeds close to interceptors, and inties with mwd turned on has the signature of a cruiser.
Why should vaga, but not cerb, be able to kill interceptors?
|
Carrus Thrace
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 05:58:00 -
[50]
I agree with this fix, the fact that this change could potentially mean that the Caldari militia can finally kill something and make some of the expensive nano setups less effective, does not mean that this error should not be fixed and I endorse it.
Carrus
|
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 23:42:00 -
[51]
The thought occurs, that a lot of the current objection to 'nano' ships, is because there's a weapon class that's basically utterly useless.
No matter how many heavy missiles you fire at a nano-ishtar, you're _not_ going to do it any damage.
But at the same time, 'fixing' nanoships, in such a way as to make the Vagabond (and it's fellow Minmatar ships) actively worse, I feel would also be a bad thing.
Something as simple as upping the explosion velocity on precision heavy missiles by 'a bit' - maybe to 2km/sec, maybe 1500m/sec - would serve to raise the bar on 'immune to heavy missiles' such that the really good speed ships (e.g. the vagabond) are still fine in the same situations.
But the 'not so good' nano ships have a much harder time of it. (e.g. Sacrilege, Ishtar). -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? |
DogSlime
Wilde Cards
|
Posted - 2008.06.24 01:22:00 -
[52]
Not that I think CCP will do a damn thing about it.
The CSM will most likely vote it straight off the agenda like they did with the nighthawk :(
|
Gypsio III
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2008.06.24 02:00:00 -
[53]
CSM will ignore it because the PVEers will tell us that Precision Heavies are great for hitting small stuff in missions, and the PVPers will... probably do the same, tbh.
I think I'll get some numbers together later and start a new Nighthawk thread, asking for the useless precision bonus to be changed to explosion velocity. I expect I'll be told that "the Nighthawk is a wonderful antisupport ship with a huge tank and is probably overpowered if anything"...
|
van Uber
Swedish Aerospace Inc Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.06.24 10:04:00 -
[54]
A small adjustment to explosion velocity should be in order for Precision Heavy Missiles.
|
Setana Manoro
Firefly Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.24 15:01:00 -
[55]
No.
Also, is writing novels something of a practice in Jericho Fraction ?
|
Nessaji
Rosa Alba Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.24 16:23:00 -
[56]
Fix 'em! ______________________________________ "Originally by: Tuxford It was a dirty hack to be honest but we couldn't find anyway around it. I hope we never have to do it again."
|
FlameGlow
Caldari State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 15:22:00 -
[57]
Explosion velocity: precision light 3000m/s precision heavy 1000m/s <- CCP, you got a typo here, it must be 2000 precision cruise 1000m/s
|
Hellaciouss
Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 16:08:00 -
[58]
All precision missiles need a buff, especially heavies.
|
Little Fistter
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 17:05:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Little Fistter on 28/06/2008 17:06:09
Originally by: Hellaciouss All precision missiles need a buff, especially heavies.
This is absolutely true. T2 missiles should equal, if not exceed, T1 versions. Especially in velocity and duration.
Lag issue: The explosion radius thing consumes far too many CPU cycles and I wish that you just had a look up table instead of a floating point calculation involving trig functions.... for every explosion! If you want to balance the game we understand, but not at the expense of magnifying lag! Complex math should be calculated rarely, maybe one calculation every few seconds could set a scaling factor? The present algorithm wastes Server side resources!
Now truely, even if you do not find a way to save the many milliseconds each explosion takes to calculate, the T2 missiles all fall short of expectations.
For any purpose, all of the T2 designs are flawed. Regardless of skills, ship bonuses or implant bonuses, a T2 missile should always fly farther and hit harder than a T1!
At the very least, the OP's general idea is correct (and very well presented too) and I feel is very conservative! His suggest is just the beginning of an effective game balance (Oh and I am not much of a missile fighter, I feel the same way about T2 hybrid ammos, they are unfairly nerfed!)
Thank you. Edited to add my vote to this idea. |
Anaalys Fluuterby
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 17:12:00 -
[60]
Agreed. Precision heavies are just utterly horrible. |
|
yani dumyat
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 20:08:00 -
[61]
There should NOT be a magic missile that can kill any speed tank just as there should not be a magic anti-armour or anti-shield missile.
PVE: I don't see a big issue here because i use drones to kill the frigs while my T1 missiles take out the big boats. I don't see the point in using T2 or faction missiles in a mission situation where you are trying to make isk not spend it.
I do understand that there is a nice feeling of 'I win' about using the best gear you can especially if mission running is what you do in eve and so there may be an issue here for some people however nerfing the entire minmatar speed strategy is not the answer.
PVP: It should be remembered that the speed tank is one of the most inteligent tactics in this game, it involves piloting your ship so that you are never flying directly towards a turret and the entire minmatar syrategy is built on this so if you introduce missiles that can hit any fast moving target you will nerf an entire faction. Any uber precision missile should have some kind of directional drawback so that a smart pilot can avoid it but a nanogank who knows nothing but orbit at 20k will soon fall foul.
IMO there should be a correlation between the size of missile and the size of nanoship:
light precision missiles - able to kill a nanofrig heavy precision missiles - able to kill a nanocruiser cruise precision missiles - able to kill a nano BS
Nanoships have already been nerfed so if we can't have directional missiles it may be wize to have a specific launcher for these missiles or even better read this thread for an intresting idea about giving AF's a % powergrid reduction for assault launchers which would give them a specific antinano role: CSM issues about AF's |
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 21:51:00 -
[62]
You'll notice that the table I listed for their changed values would be unable to hurt a Vagabond at speed - they easily do 6kms.
If that vagabond slows down to shoot - golly gee - it will get killed by any flavor of missile. This change prevents non-pimp Nano-hacs from completley ignoring the entire line of cruiser sized missiles. Believe it or not - far more ships are nanoed than just Vagabonds.
You say yourself you want precision heavies to kill nano-hacs... Then what exactly, is the problem? Also, what on Earth are you going on about PVE? The only person thats brought PVE up in this thread is a troll. |
yani dumyat
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 22:41:00 -
[63]
Ignore the troll, I reply about pve because CCP need to think about carebears too, that 'I win' feeling from people who don't pvp or read these forums is their income. Anyway carebears are cudly like ewoks
Originally by: MalVortex
This change prevents non-pimp Nano-hacs from completley ignoring the entire line of cruiser sized missiles.
Agreed there is an issue here, my point is slightly different in that I want to see an inteligent piloting aspect rather than pure maths, either in the form of directional blasts or ship choice. EVE chess should be more than 'to outrun missile X you need to do speed Y' otherwise people will skill up to the point where they outrun the missile regardless of how fast it goes. Giving the AF a % PG bonus to assault launchers would give people a choice of flying a boat that could take down a nano bs or flying a cruiser to fill another role.
Should point out that i fly caldari ships a lot so see this from both sides however bringing this subject up with minmatar milita folk was, err, not positive. |
yani dumyat
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 23:28:00 -
[64]
OK, went in game and tested the numbers, gonna support this.
Given that nowt's likely to happen soon though i'm off to fit a cerb with assault launchers and see how long it takes me to come home in a pod.
Have fun all |
waristina
Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 01:11:00 -
[65]
must admit I fully endorse this thread, precision heavy missiles need to be addressed. Sooner rather than later if possible |
Sir Ibex
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 02:25:00 -
[66]
/supported |
Maus Bailey
International House of PWNCakes Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 06:37:00 -
[67]
signed. |
Darth Vaders
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 08:57:00 -
[68]
Yes it's me again.... "the troll" as you had named me. I decided to support this idea since i plan to go Caldari for HAC since i plan to go for ECM after that. So i vote yes cause i am a selfish bastard after all. |
Miyamoto Shigesuke
Jugis Modo Utopia Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 10:02:00 -
[69]
I agree wholeheartedly.
|
Shianeer Salvan
Jugis Modo Utopia Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 10:04:00 -
[70]
/signed
|
|
Chani Moonkeeper
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 10:06:00 -
[71]
agree
|
Shiny Copperpot
Jugis Modo Utopia
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 10:07:00 -
[72]
I support this idea. |
Molock Saronen
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 11:17:00 -
[73]
|
ArmyOfMe
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 21:46:00 -
[74]
This belongs on the top for the damn csm to read and for once try to understand that there actually are caldari pvp'ers as well in this game, and that this would go a long way in actually making caldari missile boats somewhat usefull in gangs
|
Ulstan
Caldari State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 14:52:00 -
[75]
Sadly I don't think there are any caldari PvP'ers on the CSM. If the Nighthawk issue is anything to go by, the CSM will just say "lolcaldari - go pve" and vote it down.
|
Lucai
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 15:33:00 -
[76]
Sounds good.
|
Ranamar
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 18:07:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Ranamar on 02/07/2008 18:09:34
Originally by: Lucai Edited by: Lucai on 02/07/2008 15:42:47
Hm. On second thought im undecided, what about precision heavy assault missiles then to make it fair?
There are no precision rockets or torpedoes, either.
quickedit: I'm not saying there should be, I'm merely observing that such a missile class is not present in the other short-range missile classes.
|
Lucai
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 19:52:00 -
[78]
Im not entirely sure, either.
But while precision heavies should obviously be fixed, doing only that puts a strong disincentive on using heavy assault launchers.
E.g. torpedoes obviously have their own role compared to cruise missiles. With heavy assault missiles i dont see it that clearly.
Admittedly i have T2 HAMs trained, in addition to T2 HMs, and see myself more or less only using them on hulls which have boni for them already. If precision heavies were fixed i personally wouldnt e.g. ever fit HAMs on a drake or such. So less variety.
Heavy missiles and heavy assault missiles are more or less meant to hit cruiser sized targets. Now many cruiser sized targets travel quite fast these days, resulting in both missiles types often not being adequate for the task.
An increase of both heavy missile types' explosion velocity maybe? Plus fixing precision of course. Thus a no from me for only fixing precision ones.
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 20:57:00 -
[79]
HAMs Grid is a much larger problem than any other stat about them, TBH. The grid they consume just cripples some Caldari ships that would be happy to use them.
Anyways, I would not personally be in favor of a "precision" style variant of any T2 unguided missile. Its out of flavor and unnecessary. HAM drakes can dump 600dps into a target at warp disruption range - all the while being more agile than a Harbinger and still sporting a very large buffer tank. The ability to hit distant or fast ships is a worthy trade for the sum odd 25% DPS increase from HAMs. T2 HAMs also have Javelins, which allow them to play the mini-HML game and is in line with the other short range weapon system Long Range T2 Ammo.
Fixing Rage/Fury missiles should be done along with fixing all other broken T2 ammo. In the case of precisions, at least, its a normally good ammo thats just ********ly broken at a specific tier.
|
Varilinda
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:18:00 -
[80]
Yep fix em
|
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 15:30:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Ulstan Sadly I don't think there are any caldari PvP'ers on the CSM. If the Nighthawk issue is anything to go by, the CSM will just say "lolcaldari - go pve" and vote it down.
You are very wrong Ulstan. I love my caldari ships for pvp and if I was allowed to post killboard links on the forums I'd be happy to prove it.
I voted for the Nighthawk Issue and I'm voting for this Issue too.
Support.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Warmal Thunker
Tacos Revolution
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 18:16:00 -
[82]
Has got my vote!
|
Bleedingthrough
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 18:25:00 -
[83]
/this needs a fix!
|
Threv Echandari
K Directorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 16:10:00 -
[84]
/signed
Caldarip PvP needs a little love, yes I use ECM but ECM doesn't get the Final Blow LOLsauce, and the Precisions are good place to start. (Don't give a Crap about PvE TBH ) Happiness is a Wet Pod
|
Roger Douglas
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 16:13:00 -
[85]
Agree. Fixing T2 variant missles to combat nanoships, or at least making them more effective would go a long way to rebalancing the nano issue, given the large population of caldari and missle skill based characters in game.
|
PirceHat
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 00:34:00 -
[86]
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 16:36:00 -
[87]
Was successfully voted through the CSM so its going to be on the next formal agenda for discussions with CCP.
(and tbh I'd love to have a second run at that Nighthawk vote if somebody can find a way to address the issue again).
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
Amoun Ra
Caldari Assault Fleet
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 17:09:00 -
[88]
totally supported.
Show some PvP love for the caldari CCP |
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 17:16:00 -
[89]
We did
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
MalVortex
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 22:40:00 -
[90]
Talk about your tight votes >_>
|
|
Rinaldo Titano
Caldari Caldari Elite Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.09 08:50:00 -
[91]
/Signed
|
dolmant
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 13:32:00 -
[92]
/signed /salute to MalVortex the bug and trollhunter
Fantastic. Im about to go to bed - ill check the thread in the morning - but how about HAM precisions: how do they shape up? do they look like current HML precisions or are they a different style? Sorry for the noobish q ;)
|
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Wreckless Abandon Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 23:07:00 -
[93]
I think this needs a look at - missles in general are in need of a little more 'oomph' ----
GO BLUE!! |
Ulstan
Caldari State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.16 16:52:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Ulstan Sadly I don't think there are any caldari PvP'ers on the CSM. If the Nighthawk issue is anything to go by, the CSM will just say "lolcaldari - go pve" and vote it down.
You are very wrong Ulstan. I love my caldari ships for pvp and if I was allowed to post killboard links on the forums I'd be happy to prove it.
I voted for the Nighthawk Issue and I'm voting for this Issue too.
Support.
Good point. You and Hardin are doing good work on this issue which I very much appreciate, so it's unfair for me to say there are no people who understand about pvp'ing in caldari ships.
Amend my post to "sadly I don't think there's a majority of caldari PvP'ers..."
My faith was severely rattled by the off hand manner in which the exhaustively well researched and presented nighthawk issue was dismissed.
"It's ok in pve" "It's ok for ships to suck" "Not worthy of our time, too small an issue"
|
Solara Astaris
Agronards Haulage Company
|
Posted - 2008.07.17 03:37:00 -
[95]
Edited by: Solara Astaris on 17/07/2008 03:46:17 /signed
Good post. I hope the CSM gives this serious consideration... |
hired goon
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.07.17 12:01:00 -
[96]
-omg-
|
Mika Meroko
Crayon Posting Inc
|
Posted - 2008.07.19 09:29:00 -
[97]
oui
Originally by: CCP Atropos I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.
|
Mamba Lev
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.19 10:47:00 -
[98]
|
WishBlade
League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.07.19 13:57:00 -
[99]
/signed Signature |
Thorradin
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.19 16:21:00 -
[100]
The stats on these have to have been an oversight that is simply in dire need of being properly fixed.
|
|
Calla Vee
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 19:46:00 -
[101]
|
reklawer
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 13:54:00 -
[102]
Edited by: reklawer on 24/07/2008 13:55:19 I completely agree
CCP please fix our (broken) Precision Heavy Missiles
|
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 14:23:00 -
[103]
FIX ALL T2 AMMO, not just missiles.
|
darkmancer
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 18:07:00 -
[104]
Please make this useless ammo work :) --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 18:11:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Gypsio III Precision Heavies as currently fired by a Drake have a top speed of 4875 m/s/ With the proposed boost, it will be 5625 m/s/
Outrunning either in an inty is trivial.
this is way I like this idea, your not asking for "incease it by 2000% velocity!" but are in fact just looking for something more balanced without baing game breaking.
|
Pwett
QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 19:29:00 -
[106]
signed, signed, a thousand times signed. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
|
Malcanis
We are Legend
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 20:32:00 -
[107]
I support the OP.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
Onar Maldarian
3B Legio IX Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 01:07:00 -
[108]
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |