Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
hyesp24
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 01:54:00 -
[571]
signed.
caldari are now the joke race. not only do caldari ships have to rely on mid slots for tanking (reduces tackling ability) but if they decide to tackle (as in web/scram so ur missiles can actually do some damage) they loose their tanking ability.
the missile nerf went way toooooooooo far. they should at least reverse it partially.
|
hyesp24
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 01:54:00 -
[572]
oops. forgot to check support. so here i go. |
chrisss0r
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 03:44:00 -
[573]
Originally by: Harkonin Let's do the same to turrets that u have done to missiles.
If u try to hit a ship that is smaller than the ammunition that it's supposed to be required to kill it, u should reduce the damage in the same way than missiles are suffering now. Using a Large turret vs a ceptor should mean doing 25/400 = 1/16 of damage. Using a Medium turret vs a ceptor should mean 25/125 = 1/5 of damage. Using a small turret vs a ceptor 25/40 = 5/8 of damage. Let's see what happends then. This is totally ridiculous to think that this nerf means balance. This means de destruction of missiles.
actually i would fall on my knees and kiss ccps feet if my large guns could hit a ceptor with 1/16 of their dps ;D |
Motaka
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 04:02:00 -
[574]
Signed.
|
Rohkan Lo'Tan
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 05:42:00 -
[575]
/signed
|
retro mike
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 10:05:00 -
[576]
signed
|
chatgris
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 17:26:00 -
[577]
Edited by: chatgris on 11/02/2009 17:27:17
Originally by: chrisss0r
Originally by: Harkonin Let's do the same to turrets that u have done to missiles.
If u try to hit a ship that is smaller than the ammunition that it's supposed to be required to kill it, u should reduce the damage in the same way than missiles are suffering now. Using a Large turret vs a ceptor should mean doing 25/400 = 1/16 of damage. Using a Medium turret vs a ceptor should mean 25/125 = 1/5 of damage. Using a small turret vs a ceptor 25/40 = 5/8 of damage. Let's see what happends then. This is totally ridiculous to think that this nerf means balance. This means de destruction of missiles.
actually i would fall on my knees and kiss ccps feet if my large guns could hit a ceptor with 1/16 of their dps ;D
THIS ^^
(That said however, I like things the way they were. Missiles vs Turrets actually provide for some diversity in the game mechanics. Even if my large turrets do 0% damage to interceptor.)
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 18:20:00 -
[578]
Edited by: James Lyrus on 11/02/2009 18:19:39 Would like to see cruise missiles and torps generally hitting BS for full damage. Would like to see HAMs/Heavys hitting for mostly full damage against cruiser targets. Would like to see rockets and standards do the same.
Would also like to see HAMs/Rockets be worth using compared to their long range counterparts - a blaster does 60% more DPS than a railgun. A HAM does 25% more DPS than a HML. -- 249km locking? |
Lorzion
Minmatar IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 04:51:00 -
[579]
Oh Noes!!!! My cit torps on my naglfar won't hit a frigate going 5k a sec. WTF CCP!!!!!!!! On another note my Nano Mach I spent 3 Bil on only goes like 1.8k with snakes!
|
Marlona Sky
Caldari Astroglide X
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 08:36:00 -
[580]
Get over it already.
|
|
Naomi Knight
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 11:02:00 -
[581]
Originally by: Lorzion Oh Noes!!!! My cit torps on my naglfar won't hit a frigate going 5k a sec. WTF CCP!!!!!!!! On another note my Nano Mach I spent 3 Bil on only goes like 1.8k with snakes!
Looks like you fail in pvp then ,and in trolling too.
|
retro mike
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 10:46:00 -
[582]
any news on this one?
|
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 14:25:00 -
[583]
Originally by: retro mike any news on this one?
Nah it's not broken anyway. _________________________________
|
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:10:00 -
[584]
Edited by: Kaidelong Einfachs on 16/02/2009 12:18:41 When I first joined people were telling me that if I wanted to do any sort of pvp I'd have to cross train away from Caldari because missiles are useless.
I cross-trained Gallente and I am mostly happy with it in spite of the weaknesses of the race. I did not see a reason to specialize in anything caldari or missile related (ECM is kinda cool though, I have a scorp in hanger).
What was the point of missiles? Well, they were an inferior but (usually) usable projectile turret when I first joined up, and torpedoes had a long range for a short range turrets, although their damage wasn't really up to par. Now they don't really seem to have one at all. Turret ships are generally better in some way against stationary targets anyway (with the exception of large autocannons), and much better against moving ones. If you want to make missiles only good against stationary targets, can't they at least be better at destroying stationary targets than turrets are?
It doesn't even make sense for PvE really; you can do better in an Ishtar or Armegeddon than you can in a Raven or Drake with the right skills.
If missiles are not in for a fix, why not just throw in the towel at balancing them and make the Caldari a agile shield-tanked turret race with missiles as their main secondary weapons system, like the minmatar? Minmatar seem to be a little underpowered anyway so it won't break anything, will it?
Hell, if you wanted to nerf them to begin with why not just nerf the missile hardpoints on missile ships so that Ravens were no longer the pwn machines people thought they were because they had split weapons systems?
It's hard to think of anything missiles can do better than turrets. Torpedos will slightly outdamage a mega neutron hardpoint for hardpoint but no ship can fit as many torpedoes as a megathron or hyperion can fit neutrons, and the moment something starts moving torpedoes aren't very effective anymore. Rockets have a really low explosion radius, but their DPS is so terrible they are hardly worth using anyway (range could also maybe use a slight boost so that they can operate outside scram range).
Maybe standard missiles are still ok? Don't know for sure on that much. Citadel Torpedoes?
I'm signing this just because I think there should be a reason (other than ECM) to fly caldari ships. Either make the caldari less reliant on missiles or make it so that missiles can't be outrun by ships larger than the size they were intended to hit, or just do something to make missiles useful.
There are a few promising caldari features (ECM, their shield buffer tanks can be very strong, sensor range, agility modifiers, free low slots etc...) but the fact that they rely on a weapon system that is effectively useless makes them sub-par.
tl;dr: Missiles don't have a point. This hurts the caldari a lot. Either make the caldari a turret race or give missiles some kind of thing to make them not look like really useless turrets.
also signed.
|
tubelight
Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:45:00 -
[585]
Like so many other things in this game, it seems that CCP have over-nerfed missiles to the point where at bc/bs size they are essentially useless.
Large missiles were hardly setting the world alight pre-QR so it boggles the mind as to why CCP feel the need to nerf them even further.
Cruise missiles seem very average and torpedos are barely useable other than in bs fleet battles.
The Raven, once considered the best ship on Eve, now lags behind the Megathron, the Armageddon and even the Tempest for DPS output and number of build requests.
This stinks of the fame fate that befell webs, nanos and nos: CCP see something that's too good, then instead of balancing it they just make it awful with no regard given to the players who have spent months or years skilling in those areas.
The objective of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his |
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:45:00 -
[586]
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
tl;dr: Missiles don't have a point. This hurts the caldari a lot. Either make the caldari a turret race or give missiles some kind of thing to make them not look like really useless turrets.
Moa, Ferox, Rokh, Vulture, Eagle and a few more.
When was the last time you flew said megathron?
_________________________________
|
tubelight
Caldari Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:48:00 -
[587]
Also confirming regular missile boats i.e. Cerebus do not seem to have suffered badly, have not flown with Citadel Torps since the newest nerf.
The objective of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his |
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 12:59:00 -
[588]
Originally by: Stalina
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
tl;dr: Missiles don't have a point. This hurts the caldari a lot. Either make the caldari a turret race or give missiles some kind of thing to make them not look like really useless turrets.
Moa, Ferox, Rokh, Vulture, Eagle and a few more.
When was the last time you flew said megathron?
I generally prefer being in an Ishtar or Dominix, although those are both expensive for me to risk.
Also the caldari get a few turret ships too. They are for the most part inferior to those of other races, with a few advantages to make them stand out, which is fair enough. But can't their missile ships be primarily turret ships with a little bit of missiles as long as missiles aren't useful? If they're a little bit worse than racial alternatives, but still useful and special, that's fine too.
|
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 14:15:00 -
[589]
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
Originally by: Stalina
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
tl;dr: Missiles don't have a point. This hurts the caldari a lot. Either make the caldari a turret race or give missiles some kind of thing to make them not look like really useless turrets.
Moa, Ferox, Rokh, Vulture, Eagle and a few more.
When was the last time you flew said megathron?
I generally prefer being in an Ishtar or Dominix, although those are both expensive for me to risk.
Also the caldari get a few turret ships too. They are for the most part inferior to those of other races, with a few advantages to make them stand out, which is fair enough. But can't their missile ships be primarily turret ships with a little bit of missiles as long as missiles aren't useful? If they're a little bit worse than racial alternatives, but still useful and special, that's fine too.
Missiles are useful.
_________________________________
|
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 15:34:00 -
[590]
Edited by: Kaidelong Einfachs on 16/02/2009 15:34:37 What are they good for exactly though? What do they do better than say, a pulse laser? And do they do it better enough to make it worth using missiles? I'd like to know.
When I first joined people told me "no". Looking at the missile damage formula that was spaded missiles now do such poor damage they're hardly worth considering.
I have learned the hard way that MWDing your thorax directly toward a mega is a bad idea, but if you do it toward a raven it's not really all that risky now.
Again, what are missiles useful for exactly? And do missile ships exploit any such advantage in a way that distinguishes them from other ships?
|
|
SK Rooster
No Trademark
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 17:28:00 -
[591]
Originally by: Arikanaiz I am start a formal petition to eliminate the missile nerf that has been put into effect with the release of the Queantum Rise Expansion. According to these new "changes" missiles of all sizes are relatively ineffective against ships. Every "class size" that the missiles are designed to target can move faster than the missile's explosion velocity. Therefore, the only way to get your BASE damage back is to target something bigger than your missiles were made to shoot. Even then the speed of the vehicle is still faster than your missile explosion velocity and decreases the damage. So I ask you to sign your name and or comments to this petition to return missiles to thier old already WEAK state. Or to at least change the specs to make missile use viable again.
I am start a formal petition to eliminate the turret nerf that has been put into effect with the release of the Queantum Rise Expansion. According to these new "changes" turrets of all sizes are relatively ineffective against ships. Every "class size" that the turrets are designed to target can move faster than the turret's tracking. Therefore, the only way to get your BASE damage back is to target something bigger than your turrets were made to shoot. Even then the speed of the vehicle is still faster than your turret tracking and decreases the damage. So I ask you to sign your name and or comments to this petition to return turrets to thier old already WEAK state. Or to at least change the specs to make turret use viable again.
|
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 22:02:00 -
[592]
Edited by: Stalina on 16/02/2009 22:08:32
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
What are they good for exactly though? What do they do better than say, a pulse laser? And do they do it better enough to make it worth using missiles? I'd like to know.
They are good for damageing things. Why should they be better than Pulse Lasers? The still hit things in orbit, now matter if close or wide orbit? No matter if it is a frigate or battleship?
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
When I first joined people told me "no". Looking at the missile damage formula that was spaded missiles now do such poor damage they're hardly worth considering.
Yeh, because people fitting their caldari ships for the biggest tanks and afterwards finding out that there aint much damage left without damage mods are the ones to be asked about what to fly. Also if your damage gets reduced due to the target moving, you just slow your target down, its what turretusers do all the time. While even cruisemissiles from a Raven hurt orbiting Interceptors, turret-bs will never ever hit them once.
On the other hand, its is kinda unfair that anything, from a frigate to battleship, fitted with bonused missiles still hits orbiting ships for damage, when turrets rotate way behind their tracking.
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
I have learned the hard way that MWDing your thorax directly toward a mega is a bad idea, but if you do it toward a raven it's not really all that risky now.
But orbiting the megathron pretty closerange reduces your taken damage to zero, while the raven still hits you, amirite?
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
Again, what are missiles useful for exactly? And do missile ships exploit any such advantage in a way that distinguishes them from other ships?
Again, they do damage. Maybe you dont get "weapons" but the point of them is doing damage to things around. You wont and you should not do full damage to that frigate in that mission with your torpedo or cruisemissile, yet you will hit it, you will hit everything in PvE and PvP, in situations where turrets wont ever hit.
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
PS: Look at all the people whining that minmatar ships need to get rid of their launcher hardpoints in favor of more turrets. Projectile turrets aren't even all that awesome. Right now it seems Amarr is the way to go.
At this point, you are telling that you absolutely have no clue about the other races.
Anyway, replies to this thread : 588, supports: 119. Seems like missiles are way to ok-ish for the majority of eve. _________________________________
|
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 03:07:00 -
[593]
Edited by: Kaidelong Einfachs on 17/02/2009 03:07:59
Originally by: Stalina Edited by: Stalina on 16/02/2009 22:08:32
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
What are they good for exactly though? What do they do better than say, a pulse laser? And do they do it better enough to make it worth using missiles? I'd like to know.
They are good for damageing things. Why should they be better than Pulse Lasers? The still hit things in orbit, now matter if close or wide orbit?
They should be better at something and that something should be a reason to use them.
Originally by: Stalina Yeh, because people fitting their caldari ships for the biggest tanks and afterwards finding out that there aint much damage left without damage mods are the ones to be asked about what to fly.
Also if your damage gets reduced due to the target moving, you just slow your target down, its what turretusers do all the time. While even cruisemissiles from a Raven hurt orbiting Interceptors, turret-bs will never ever hit them once.
Cald tank is in mids. Buffer tank can be okay but they generally don't have the capacitor to do anything like a dual MAR. It's not a jaw dropping tank either, and you sacrifice webbers or scrams as well as electronic warfare.
It does have the advantage of opening up low slots for damage and tracking modules. But there are no tracking modules for missiles.
Also cruise missiles will still do neglible damage against an interceptor. Look at the formula and put in some figures, it won't round to one, I was getting DPS figures to the tune of 6.48847E-4. Even though they always hit, they effectively do no damage.
Originally by: Stalina On the other hand, its is kinda unfair that anything, from a frigate to battleship, fitted with bonused missiles still hits orbiting ships for damage, when turrets rotate way behind their tracking.
I think you'll be hard pressed to find ships with missile explosion velocity bonuses. Tracking bonuses on the other hand...
Originally by: Stalina But orbiting the megathron pretty closerange reduces your taken damage to zero, while the raven still hits you, amirite?
It doesn't reduce my damage taken to zero because I have to keep up my traversal which isn't always easy, and if I make one mistake the turret is calculated as if it's doing full damage even with a MWD running.
Originally by: Stalina
Again, they do damage. Maybe you dont get "weapons" but the point of them is doing damage to things around. You wont and you should not do full damage to that frigate in that mission with your torpedo or cruisemissile, yet you will hit it, you will hit everything in PvE and PvP, in situations where turrets wont ever hit.
And in those situations where turrets will never hit, you'll always hit for neglible damage anyway. At with turrets there is an incredibly remote change of hitting for good damage. Also you'll likely be in an armor tanked ship with things like stasis webifiers or tracking computers.
Originally by: Stalina Anyway, replies to this thread : 588, supports: 119. Seems like missiles are way to ok-ish for the majority of eve.
Would you put a bunch of SP into missile launcher spec?
|
Stalina
Gallente Deep Space Exploration Squad
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 10:23:00 -
[594]
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs Stuff
At this point you should re-read everything you wrote. Your writing reflects your low knowledge of ingame-mechanics.
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
Would you put a bunch of SP into missile launcher spec?
I, for one, fly all races. _________________________________
|
van Uber
Swedish Aerospace Inc Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 13:36:00 -
[595]
Originally by: James Lyrus Edited by: James Lyrus on 11/02/2009 18:19:39 Would like to see cruise missiles and torps generally hitting BS for full damage. Would like to see HAMs/Heavys hitting for mostly full damage against cruiser targets. Would like to see rockets and standards do the same.
Would also like to see HAMs/Rockets be worth using compared to their long range counterparts - a blaster does 60% more DPS than a railgun. A HAM does 25% more DPS than a HML.
An adjustment towards this would be most welcome.
|
Raiven Parker
The Athiest Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 19:08:00 -
[596]
I love it how everyone signs without actually signing. lol
/really signed |
Aethrwolf
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 19:27:00 -
[597]
/signed
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 16:33:00 -
[598]
Signed.
Missile were allready the weekest offensive weapon , they didnt need nerfing.
|
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 22:23:00 -
[599]
Originally by: Stalina Edited by: Stalina on 17/02/2009 11:03:13
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs Stuff
At this point you should re-read everything you wrote. Your writing reflects your low unterstanding of ingame-mechanics and experience.
Originally by: Kaidelong Einfachs
Would you put a bunch of SP into missile launcher spec?
I, for one, fly all races.
They changed the missile damage formula apparently and since I don't know what it is I'm neutral to this thread now.
Running the old one with the new numbers though I was getting figures like 0.0006 DPS for a raven on some targets, which is a rounding error. Turrets start missing to the point they are missing all the time too but it doesn't happen at any range. Missiles do a rounding error all the time, turrets do it if traversal is high.
Interceptors get a MWD sig radius penalty bonus now, that's also part of the reason for the huge drop but it dropped a lot for just about everything I tried since the explosion velocity of missiles are tiny now.
Once we know the new ways in which tracking and explosion velocity is calculated (if someone knows please point me to it) it'll be hard to say, from what I've heard from people their missiles have gotten weaker.
One thing that does stand out is that battleships are able to outrun heavy missile explosions now, a different formula will only affect by how much they can outrun them. A medium pulse laser should not have terrible trouble with tracking against a battleship.
|
hupa
Amarr Secret Service
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 17:45:00 -
[600]
i want missiles do to 100% more effective dmg than turrets :p (even when i shoot a torp at a shuttle moving away from me at full speed) :D
but ill settle for equall :/
and this is the worst missile nerf in eve's 6 years :(
fix it............. ..!
I r pwn3r3r th4n y0u. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |