EVE Search - The new relation on explosion velocity and targe t velocity

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

The new relation on explosion velocity and targe t velocity

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.29 00:49:00 - [1] The fact taht there is a explosion velocity in game is a clear signal that we shoudl be able to reduce at least a bit the damage we take from missiles usign speed (sicen its the only way , taken in to account they always hit). Now a vagabond with a normal fittign will take 100% of the damage of NORMAL heavy missiels , not even precision. 100%. What is the value of speed tank when the damage tanked is ZERO? I agree completely that nanohacs beign imune to missiles are wrong.But now its the 100% oposite. Speed tanking has ZERO, NADA, KEIN value. If the speed is to be nerfe thta much then the explosion velocities must also go down a bit. It snothign but fair that a ship completely focused and fitted for speed should avoid around 50% of the damage directed upon it. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.29 01:09:00 - [2] Edited by: MotherMoon on 29/07/2008 01:09:09 they allready said missiles would be getting a nerf. can't find quote just saw thread.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.29 01:20:00 - [3] Aa good to know. Then one of my major conecrns won 't happen. I was worried that missile swould be insta pown against minmatar ships. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Tomic The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.29 01:49:00 - [4] Lol, whats the point of nerfing nanos and then nerfing missiles. It seems to me that the devs have entered a never ending nerf spiral. Instead of balancing the game, the devs find something that they don't like and nerf it, causing a load more problems that cause another nerf a few weeks/months later. The only end this can have is when you've nerfed everything so much the game is dead.
Broegitte Bardot BINFORD Solidus Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.29 01:55:00 - [5] well... the speed problem wasn't just about missles. long range setups were good for one, maybe two, rounds until the nanofit had reached its orbit for example. but yeah... 230km falcons/rooks/blackbirds will be ridiculous alt of Roemy Schneider (probably lacking game time again)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.29 02:15:00 - [6] Originally by: Tomic Lol, whats the point of nerfing nanos and then nerfing missiles. It seems to me that the devs have entered a never ending nerf spiral. Instead of balancing the game, the devs find something that they don't like and nerf it, causing a load more problems that cause another nerf a few weeks/months later. The only end this can have is when you've nerfed everything so much the game is dead. because balance is NOT in the extremes. Ships takign always 0% of damage from missiles is wrong.... ships takign always 100% of damage even when maxed for speed.. is ALSO wrong. Balance as by the definition of the word, is in between the extremes ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
LetsDoThis	Posted - 2008.07.29 02:21:00 - [7] Originally by: Tomic Lol, whats the point of nerfing nanos and then nerfing missiles. It seems to me that the devs have entered a never ending nerf spiral. Instead of balancing the game, the devs find something that they don't like and nerf it, causing a load more problems that cause another nerf a few weeks/months later. The only end this can have is when you've nerfed everything so much the game is dead. So we've got ship variables (signiture radius and velocity) affecting weapon damage variables (explosion velocity, explosion radius, signature resolution, and tracking speed). CCP is admitting that they've allowed speed to get out of hand. -They don't like how the ship classes don't have proper speed and sig radius. (most frigates too slow, some cruisers and BS too fast) -They don't like how webber is GAME OVER MAN -They don't like how MWD is must have while AB is useless -They want to make achieving the previous 90% slowdown require a scram + webber (this is actually GOOD for speed tanks) -They want AB use to not be hindered by tackling as much as a MWD is. When tackled, an AB user is now much faster than a MWD user. So in order to make these changes, they essentially HAVE to F up explosion velocity, explosion radius, signature resolution, and tracking speed balance. Its all gonna have to be rebalanced. Thats probably why they're gonna spend over a month, and as long as it takes, until they can rebalance all the weapon systems. So yeah its F'd up right now. I doubt CCP will push it to Tranq until its ready.
Titan Pilot Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.07.29 02:25:00 - [8] Confirmation of a missile nerf would be warranted. Might reduce some tension... CCP, any confirmation of said rumour?
LetsDoThis	Posted - 2008.07.29 03:04:00 - [9] I would really appreciate direct confirmation as well. But in the meantime I've found this on eve-search.com http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=831524&page=27#807 Originally by: CCP Dionysus Originally by: Heartstone So umm no offense but can we have an answer to them rather than answering the flippant ones please? Such as my question about how you are going to test the wide ranging implications of a change like this when you need the numbers to do so which simply aren't ever going to be available on SISI? None taken at all. Yes, the design and testing of these changes has already taken a lot of time and arguments here in CCP. But the range of testing has mainly been done to see that ships are balanced in speed and still able to be hit by appropriate weapon types, so most tests have involved small numbers of ships with very mixed weapon setups. eg, Crow with speed setup vs a harp at extreme range, vs a kestrel with light missiles, and vs a drone boat using light drones. - or a vagabond vs a set of cruisers using turrets, missiles, and med drones to try to hit it etc. The ships have been balanced so far so that frigate sized ships can, with fitting, hit any other frigate sized ship, same for cruisers and battleships. We are not sure about the final impact of things like the additional MWD disable effect of scramblers (just that it works and so far seems to give balanced results) We have a month of time on Sisi to get play tests with more numbers. We would like to see some tests like a gatecamp setup, or a close in brawl, or an attempt at a hit/run attack. The things that are going on sisi need further playtesting and balancing - the values that have been given are not final and will be changed according to how the playtests go. From the test we have done so far, a "speed setup" ship can still become pretty much invulnerable to ships that are not setup to counter them, but now an enemy that knows to expect "nano ships" will be able to have a serious effect, rather than just scaring them away.

CCP Tenitigo	Posted - 2008.07.29 17:21:00 - [10] We are currently looking at and testing missiles and their damages to various ship types. Some more info of what we're looking into here.

LetsDoThis	Posted - 2008.07.29 17:53:00 - [11] Thanks! :)
Vengal Seyhan Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.07.29 18:11:00 - [12] Edited by: Vengal Seyhan on 29/07/2008 18:14:45 Nice to see the Devs jumping on all the threads about missiles vs speed tanks... I think that they're taking this one kind of seriously before it becomes a huge bonfire. Really, I think the core issue is that Precision missiles are the only T2 ammo in the game to get a bonus to hit smaller ships (in terms of explosion velocity). Every other T2 ammo (lasers / guns) suffers a tracking penalty, making it less effective vs smaller targets... than the T1 equivalent
Meiyang Lee Gallente Azteca Transportation Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy	Posted - 2008.07.29 18:34:00 - [13] Edited by: Meiyang Lee on 29/07/2008 18:36:16 Originally by: Vengal Seyhan Really, I think the core issue is that Precision missiles are the only T2 ammo in the game to get a bonus to hit smaller ships (in terms of explosion velocity). Every other T2 ammo (lasers / guns) suffers a tracking penalty, making it less effective vs smaller targets... than the T1 equivalent While you're right there, don't forget that long range T2 ammo, while usually getting a serious tracking penalty also has vastly increased range (Null is a bit of an exception) making the tracking less important if the target is at optimal. The guns own signature resolution becomes a problem against smaller vessels at this point. Maybe it's an idea to make the T2 short range ammo (which currently very few players use) lower the signature resolution instead of providing more damage with heavy penalties?
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.29 18:43:00 - [14] Edited by: Pohbis on 29/07/2008 18:44:35 What exactly has changed in regards to explosion velocity and target velocity? With all lvl 5 skills, heavy T1 missiles have an explosion velocity of 1125 ( on a drake ). Vagas still do around 3k - 4k right? 50% damage mitigation would be achieved at ~2365 m/s. So what has changed that wasn't in the initial notes for SiSi?
Draahk Chimera Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2008.07.29 19:23:00 - [15] I thought the balancing was that you can no longer outrun explosion velocity of t1 missiles 1 class larger. Your comparison should therefore be vaga vs cruise missiles and interceptors vs heavy missiles.
Vengal Seyhan Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.07.29 19:32:00 - [16] Originally by: Draahk Chimera I thought the balancing was that you can no longer outrun explosion velocity of t1 missiles 1 class larger. Your comparison should therefore be vaga vs cruise missiles and interceptors vs heavy missiles. Yeah, but youi can always / very frequently evade the guns of ships one class larger than your own with the current situation. What this appears to mean in testing is that Caldari missile boats pwn things out of their own size class very easily at every range (Ravens wax frigs, etc), while other races struggle to even hit them.
Kaylana Syi Minmatar Stimulus	Posted - 2008.07.29 19:43:00 - [17] A vaga going 3k m/s does not take full missile damage at all. We've tested it on Sisi with drakes, nighthawks, cerbs and ravens and you do 18 ( loldrake w. t1 scourge) to 80 ( nighthawk with precision scourge ). The times where you are taking full damage is when you turn. Learn to pilot and you won't explode so often. Team Minmatar
LetsDoThis	Posted - 2008.07.29 20:03:00 - [18] Originally by: Kaylana Syi A vaga going 3k m/s does not take full missile damage at all. We've tested it on Sisi with drakes, nighthawks, cerbs and ravens and you do 18 ( loldrake w. t1 scourge) to 80 ( nighthawk with precision scourge ). The times where you are taking full damage is when you turn. Learn to pilot and you won't explode so often. I think the issue is the amount of damage being mitigated by speed. As in, come to a full stop, how much damage are you taking, turn on afterburner and go for max speed, how much damage are you taking. From their action and responses to feedback, I think it is clear that CCP wants speed tank, they just don't want it to go from useless speed tank to invulnerable speed tank.
Draahk Chimera Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2008.07.29 20:07:00 - [19] Ok, just back from sissy. Crow vs cerberus. Precision thunderbols heavy missile 3.7 damage, fury 2.5. When crow switched to afterburner. Precison 100, fury 33. So empiric evidence, missiles still suck, ab still suck.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.07.29 22:26:00 - [20] Originally by: Draahk Chimera Ok, just back from sissy. Crow vs cerberus. Precision thunderbols heavy missile 3.7 damage, fury 2.5. When crow switched to afterburner. Precison 100, fury 33. So empiric evidence, missiles still suck, ab still suck. You seriously want your heavy missiles to be able to do damage to an interceptor? Originally by: CCP Wrangler We are pleased to aim! Or was that the other way around?
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.29 22:41:00 - [21] Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 29/07/2008 18:51:11 What exactly has changed in regards to explosion velocity and target velocity? With all lvl 5 skills, heavy T1 missiles have an explosion velocity of 1125 ( on a drake ). Vagas still do around 3k - 4k right? 50% damage mitigation would be achieved at ~2365 m/s. So what has changed that wasn't in the initial notes for SiSi? ( and just so we're clear on this, missiles don't always hit. Even if they are faster than you they can still be outrunned if you have the range, due to flight time ) nope vagas don 't go that fast anymore. A vaga with 1 poly 2 overdrives go 2400ms with hardwirings. And hnow is much heavier so accelerate much slowerly. A very pimped up vaga can reach 4k. But for very pimped up ships you have the t2 missiles. Its important that the normal vagas can have some damage reduction. And thanks a lot CCP for looking in the issue. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.07.29 22:43:00 - [22] Originally by: Draahk Chimera Ok, just back from sissy. Crow vs cerberus. Precision thunderbols heavy missile 3.7 damage, fury 2.5. When crow switched to afterburner. Precison 100, fury 33. So empiric evidence, missiles still suck, ab still suck. We are talkign about NORMAL non precision heavies against vagabonds and other speed oriented medium ships. I can 't fly a ceptor so don 't know how small shps relation is working. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.29 23:35:00 - [23] Originally by: LetsDoThis Originally by: Kaylana Syi A vaga going 3k m/s does not take full missile damage at all. We've tested it on Sisi with drakes, nighthawks, cerbs and ravens and you do 18 ( loldrake w. t1 scourge) to 80 ( nighthawk with precision scourge ). The times where you are taking full damage is when you turn. Learn to pilot and you won't explode so often. I think the issue is the amount of damage being mitigated by speed. As in, come to a full stop, how much damage are you taking, turn on afterburner and go for max speed, how much damage are you taking. From their action and responses to feedback, I think it is clear that CCP wants speed tank, they just don't want it to go from useless speed tank to invulnerable speed tank. thank you for hitting the nail on rthe head. they want game play to stay the samish, but don't want you to be able to out of rqange in a fight nin les than a 10th of a second.peed tanks will work jsut let CCP figure it out. and lets help them do it!
Draahk Chimera Caldari Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2008.07.30 03:51:00 - [24] Originally by: Reem Fairchild Originally by: Draahk Chimera Ok, just back from sissy. Crow vs cerberus. Precision thunderbols heavy missile 3.7 damage, fury 2.5. When crow switched to afterburner. Precison 100, fury 33. So empiric evidence, missiles still suck, ab still suck. You seriously want your heavy missiles to be able to do damage to an interceptor? Nah, not really. Precision could do a little more damage maybe concidering the drawbacks to my cerberus. But anyway, the post was an answer to all the people blurting "missiles will kill everything now" and "welcome to caldari online" without actual evidence.
Tanen Menog Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:01:00 - [25] Why not fix (Tech 2) precision heavy missiles so that they can hit Tech 2 nano-cruisers instead of nerfing speed for everyone? IMO the proper counter to a Tech 2 ship should be a Tech 2 weapon, not plain vanilla Tech 1 missiles.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:59:00 - [26] Originally by: Tanen Menog Why not fix (Tech 2) precision heavy missiles so that they can hit Tech 2 nano-cruisers instead of nerfing speed for everyone? IMO the proper counter to a Tech 2 ship should be a Tech 2 weapon, not plain vanilla Tech 1 missiles. they tried this learn to read it broke the game it doesn't want things moving that fast. if the ratio of speed to damage is the same then you think nothing changes. that couldn't be further from the truth. Originally by: Dapanman1 Terrible idea, you're an idiot
Altho Regilian Caldari Zantiu-Braun Security Services Zantiu-Braun Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.31 05:58:00 - [27] Originally by: Vengal Seyhan Edited by: Vengal Seyhan on 29/07/2008 18:14:45 Nice to see the Devs jumping on all the threads about missiles vs speed tanks... I think that they're taking this one kind of seriously before it becomes a huge bonfire. Really, I think the core issue is that Precision missiles are the only T2 ammo in the game to get a bonus to hit smaller ships (in terms of explosion velocity). Every other T2 ammo (lasers / guns) suffers a tracking penalty, making it less effective vs smaller targets... than the T1 equivalent Not quite right there chief. Close, but not quite. See the explosion velocity bonus is to allow it to hit faster targets, not necessarily smaller target. The way missiles work is you have your explosion velocity which determines how much damage the missile will cause to a target going a given speed. If the target is going below that speed then it will be full damage. If the target is going faster than that speed then it will cause less and less damage up to the point where the target ship is going 3k faster than the explosion velocity of the missile, at which point the missile no longer causes damage. The SECOND aspect to determine missile damage is signature radius and explosion radius. If a target is larger than the explosion radius then the missile does full damage, if the target is smaller than the explosion radius then the missile does less damage. Both of these aspects have to be looked at when calculating missile damage. The only way for a missile to cause maximum damage to a target is for the missile to have BOTH a smaller explosion radius than the targets signature radius AND the target must be moving slower than the missiles explosion velocity. On that note since people are talking about comparing missiles to guns here, where are the modules to affect missile velocity and explosion velocity? Gun users have tracking computers and tracking enhancers but all we get are some rigs? I don't know about you but I would like to be able to tweak my ship to better fit certain roles like you can a turret ship.
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.31 07:50:00 - [28] Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 07:52:21 Originally by: Kagura Nikon nope vagas don 't go that fast anymore. A vaga with 1 poly 2 overdrives go 2400ms with hardwirings. And hnow is much heavier so accelerate much slowerly. A very pimped up vaga can reach 4k. But for very pimped up ships you have the t2 missiles. Its important that the normal vagas can have some damage reduction. And thanks a lot CCP for looking in the issue. So... you still get above 50% mitigation just from speed alone. Wasn't that what you asked for?
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2008.07.31 08:06:00 - [29] Edited by: Kalintos Tyl on 31/07/2008 08:06:50 Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 07:52:21 Originally by: Kagura Nikon nope vagas don 't go that fast anymore. A vaga with 1 poly 2 overdrives go 2400ms with hardwirings. And hnow is much heavier so accelerate much slowerly. A very pimped up vaga can reach 4k. But for very pimped up ships you have the t2 missiles. Its important that the normal vagas can have some damage reduction. And thanks a lot CCP for looking in the issue. So... you still get above 50% mitigation just from speed alone. Wasn't that what you asked for? lowest vaga resist is 40% and damage was reduced to 50%. Got clue?
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.31 08:23:00 - [30] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl lowest vaga resist is 40% and damage was reduced to 50%. Got clue? Speed alone mitigated 50% damage. It's called explosion velocity vs. target speed. Get clue? Then you add resists on top of that.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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