|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
92
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 17:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
When you said, "bringing heavy missiles in line with other long range cruiser weapons" did you have beam lasers in mind?
Because you've turned Heavy Missiles into the new Railguns. Bottom of the barrel here, we're going to. Now if HMLs only lost maybe 5% of their damage, but kept their -25% current range like you propose, that'd probably be ok. But this change is reducing a fifth of their current damage output from them. That's kind of significant. Unless you're going to boost their RoF to try and compensate slightly (for maybe a net 5 or 10 percent loss in damage output), which I don't think is going to happen.
It doesn't seem like you guys are very good at balancing things. If something is too effective you don't take your tools to it and chisel away, reshaping the role and powers of a ship, which is generally a rational approach.
You take a sledgehammer, and you smash out the metaphorical legs of the construction, and leave the wreck of what could've still been something decent to rot.
That's Caldari medium missile platforms right now. I'm fully aware that you can still boost the range back to how it was before. But this is at the cost of now utterly **** poor DPS compared to other long range weapon systems. The problem with the Drake wasn't sheer damagedealing potential. It was damage projection. Which isn't something you fix by making the damage that they project nearly irrelevant compared to other weapon systems. So now the Drake is going to have average at best defensive capabilities, but utterly awful offense.
So with this horribad blanket nerf you've thrown over Caldari, you've axed the Caracal's ability to strike at things it's own size or larger (somehow I don't think it's going to be that great with HAMs), the entire Caldari HAC lineup is overwhelmingly useless for a multitude of reasons, the Nighthawk? Oh well.
Why not just remove Caldari from the game? It's not like they're going to have much of a presence after all is said and done anyways. Unless you guys somehow manage to make the Moa and Ferox truly awe inspiring in a balanced fashion. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
92
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Esteban Dragonovic wrote:Why does CCP hate my nighthawk? What did it ever do to you? D:
Better question really is why does CCP hate Caldari? |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
93
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:My initial gut reaction to the HML nerf is that it seems a bit heavy handed.
Before I jump to conclusions on that one though, I have to ask; what's the baseline weapons system performance benchmark you're going for with cruiser sized weapon systems?
I personally think they had railguns in mind for the new HML stats. Find the problem.
Hint, it's railguns. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
96
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Haquer wrote:
Let's pull up the top 20 page on eve-kill dot net
RankWeaponsKills 1Heavy Missile Launcher II78177 2425mm AutoCannon II20772 3Heavy Pulse Laser II15799
Yeah, you're pretty much full of ****. Heavy missiles are OP and should be nerfed.
You can correlate that with the Drake being the top ship. HMLs on most other ships are meh. Hell, this is also almost all kinetic damage! If you change to something else, it's much less. I can guarantee you that maybe 75000 of those HML II kills were using kinetic missiles grunted out of a drake. The problem is the combination of traits the Drake has/had that make it viable. Nobody screams bloody murder if you put HMLs on a Rook, or a Lachesis. Also what about the Minmatar missile boats that are going to be negatively impacted by this, such as the new Bellicose this winter? Well, it's probably going to become Caracal II and the bane of frigates and destroyers everywhere. Making the Caracal useless.
Watch how this all changes after winter. Caldari and Gallente are going to be having a tea party together, down at the "least used ships" rung of the ladder. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
96
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:42:00 -
[5] - Quote
I think another prong to this issue here is the fact that to my knowledge the Drake is the only T1 missile focused battlecruiser. Has anyone else noticed that? Because that seems to be a thing. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
96
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:
Actually, when you look at effective (as opposed to theoretical) DPS against 200 m/sec moving targets of equal (cruiser) size, the numbers still come out with an advantage to HMLs even after the nerf, and thats before any damage reduction as a result of transversal is factored in. I'd say that HMLs still will deliver twice the effective DPS as a 250mm rail/spike combo for example.
"If you'll see here, the effective damage that missiles will output compared to railguns is approximately double." >Missiles will output compared to railguns >compared to railguns >railguns
Don't compare things to railguns. Everything will be better than railguns. This is objective fact. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
99
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 00:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
Oh my god, please stop comparing missiles in a positive light to medium railguns.
They're easily the most broken weapon system in the game. Saying that something still does X% better than railguns is NOT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT. It's like being 35% more intelligent than the kid who has finally learnt that pain means you are damaging your body, or whoever thought that reducing HML damage output by a fifth was a good idea when their damage WASN'T THE PROBLEM, rather it was the damage PROJECTION! They need just as much work as HMLs are GOING to if this change goes through.
It's utterly irrelevant to compare something to the worst of something and then claim that this is excellent, without also taking into effect the fact that beam lasers are a better long range platform than railguns for comparison. AFAIK, beam lasers are actually quite well balanced in terms of damage projection and how much pain they actually cause. They should be more of a benchmark for the HML changes than railguns!
|
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
99
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 00:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Aglais wrote:Bla Railguns are worse system ever
Actually, 70km is the range were railguns start to become even or better than beams. Yes railguns are bad until this range, but don't take the only thing they have please.
Ok, so they have the highest operational range. Fascinating. But what's their peak damage output compared to beams and artillery? Range is pretty much all they have going for them. If you can present to me a DPS graph in which two ships in the same class, one using medium railguns, and the other using any other kind of long range weapon system for cruisers of the same size rating, with the railgun ship somehow doing more peak DPS than the other, then I'll change my view. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
99
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 01:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
All weapons work differently, they all have their own drawbacks and plus points. This does not mean that HML should out class everything else in the way they do. HML are being brough back in line. You might dread losing your easy mode but I am looking forwards to the new options that will now be viable.
I'm sorry, but when does "brought back in line" mean "now on par damagewise with railguns in addition to having other factors that severely cripple their damage output"? You do realize also that this is going to be their raw DPS that's breaking through the floor here, not counting anything lost because a target is moving. And cruisers very rarely fight stationary targets.
"Brought back in line" would mean keeping some semblance of being able to do damage, but losing a large chunk of range. Not what's happening here. And if they absolutely HAVE to lose damage, then between five and ten percent, not twenty. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
100
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 02:32:00 -
[10] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Because turrets arn't impacted by moving targets at all
Ever heard of sig radius? The thing that missiles have to deal with far more than turrets, that is part of the reason why torpedoes are awful? Because motion is only part of the equation here. And due to the fact that I do indeed also fly turret ships I'm aware of this whole "missing" thing that happens if a target's transversal is greater than a target's tracking speed. But the thing is, at least with railguns, your damage isn't already being cut by the fact that your target doesn't have a retardedly large sig radius. |
|
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
100
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 02:45:00 -
[11] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote: Let's play a game. See how many pages we can go before you start putting words in my mouth again.
The only game being played here is your poor attempts to keep your easy mode ratting machines and lazy man pvp missile slingers.
That is the single most elitist comment I've seen in this thread. Ok, so you don't have to take transversal into account in missile ships. That can give you more freedom for evasive manuevers, trying to throw off the other guy's attempts to decrease his transversal as much as possible. By falling into the "All missile users are braindead draek pilots who don't know how to do anything but press f1 and orbit" trap, you label an entire population based on a few people.
Also: HMLs are NOT on par with artillery in terms of damage. DPS maybe, but artillery does facerippingly large volley damage. The only one they'll be close to on Drakes and Caracals is probably going to be railguns, or at least between railguns and beams; the fact that they're near railguns means they're approaching "broken and useless" territory. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
100
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 02:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: Sig radius actually has the same weight as tracking in the chance to hit formula for turrets.
Ah, but turrets still have a 'stationary' target that has none of these things applied to it. Missiles always, to my knowledge, have to deal with signature radius. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
100
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 03:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Aglais wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: Sig radius actually has the same weight as tracking in the chance to hit formula for turrets.
Ah, but turrets still have a 'stationary' target that has none of these things applied to it. Missiles always, to my knowledge, have to deal with signature radius. I'm not sure what you mean by this. Sig radius is always evaluated even if transversal is 0 (both targets stationary).
That's exactly the point. Doesn't this mean that even if a target is stationary, if it's signature radius is a certain value, missiles are guaranteed to do some amount less damage than if the signature radius is arbitrarily large?
IE. An armor tanking Amarr ship with a small signature radius will naturally take less damage from a missile volley than a heavy shield tanking Caldari ship. And that's even before anything to do with velocity is thrown into the mix, which will take off even more damage potential. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
100
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 03:14:00 -
[14] - Quote
Well, I suppose the real kicker now is whether or not HAM Caracals are going to shine/be fittable, more than anything else. Kind of hoping that at the end of it all, the only real choice of what ship you PvP in isn't "which of these two/three battlecruisers do I choose".
Onto something a little more befitting of the topic, what of the Kestrel? I mean, I've not heard much good on standard missile performance, ever. With the increase in precision and damage, how's this going to go for a Kestrel that has improved fitting ability, potentially enough to fit four T2 standard launchers without having nothing else? |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
117
|
Posted - 2012.10.14 16:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote: So while basically I agree with you about the existing balance problems I am not sure you are aware of the much bigger issue with the complete removal of Caldari missile PvP in medium and large hulls which is incoming.
Ignore the HAM Caracal at your peril. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
120
|
Posted - 2012.10.17 00:07:00 -
[16] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:
Mael, Cyclone, Pest, Phoon, Vaga, Rifter, Rupture .. they are all viable. I dont say they are all OP. But its OP to have so many ships which are working, and look at how Rupture will get buffed.
caldari have plenty of working ships, and look at the buffs the moa and caracal are getting.
Moa's been nerfed; it's slower than all of the other offensive cruisers and far easier to kite than it is now. And it's still got an awful slot layout compared to everything else with a useless highslot.
Caracal's going to be excellent, however. Especially with the addition of the GMP skill bonus and the easier fitting.
And being able to fit a web, if it so chooses. :\ |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
120
|
Posted - 2012.10.17 02:28:00 -
[17] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Aglais wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:Noemi Nagano wrote:
Mael, Cyclone, Pest, Phoon, Vaga, Rifter, Rupture .. they are all viable. I dont say they are all OP. But its OP to have so many ships which are working, and look at how Rupture will get buffed.
caldari have plenty of working ships, and look at the buffs the moa and caracal are getting. Moa's been nerfed; it's slower than all of the other offensive cruisers and far easier to kite than it is now. And it's still got an awful slot layout compared to everything else with a useless highslot. Caracal's going to be excellent, however. Especially with the addition of the GMP skill bonus and the easier fitting. And being able to fit a web, if it so chooses. :\ How was it nerfed? It's faster than before with more fitting and more base HP.
It's range bonus is gone, it's the slowest combat cruiser (and since combat cruisers are slower than attack cruisers, that makes it the base-slowest direct combat ship), it's slot layout is unchanged (read: idiotic, seeing as the Vexor and Rupture both also have four medslots now as well). So it's going to have a wealth of fitting problems compared to the others, it's easier to kite (unless you slap on rails; it seems that CCP is trying to deny the Moa the ability to be anything but a sniper) and pretty much just has being fittable as almost-bait going for it, unless it can get a fifth medslot, in which case I can see it getting that much more competitive. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
125
|
Posted - 2012.10.18 22:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
I keep seeing people saying that the Bellicose is superior to the Caracal. This MAY be the case as an anti-frigate platform. But a HAM Caracal will rip the Bellicose apart. Caracal is tougher, has better range, and more damage. Yes, the Bellicose is faster, but really it has to get in closer before it can deal damage thanks to it's lack of a missile velocity bonus if it so chooses to use HAMs. And when it does it's going to get pelted by nearly 500 raw DPS (with my skills), and if it gets too close, well... It'll be webbed and likely die. Both are going to be competent missile ships, and honestly I don't have any problems with the Bellicose being so strong in combat, because it reflects that Minmatar use both projectiles and missiles as weapons, and it kind of almost acts as an extension of the Breacher, but focused more on damage and actually applying it thanks to target painters. Yes, the Bellicose will be a competent missile cruiser, to the point that I'm honestly actually considering trying it, but it's not going to outclass the Caracal, in any way whatsoever; they perform different roles. Which is exactly as CCP intends. Furthermore, the Caracal doesn't really have to rely on drones; the Bellicose needs them for a significant chunk of it's DPS. 445 of my Caracal fit's ~481 DPS is missiles and missiles alone. And that's comparable to the total DPS that the Bellicose (also with my skills) deals out at a shorter range. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
130
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 15:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
And then everyone again forgot the HAM buff which will keep Drakes in the game at shorter ranges and also produce actually effective Caracals. And also Sacrilege buff. |
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
132
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 16:35:00 -
[20] - Quote
Seriously guys. HAMs are going to get easier to fit. If you want, try to put a few on your Tengus, too. Yeah, they'll have far less range. But you'll notice that you're doing obscene amounts of damage. And you've already still got some pretty good tank. Why not give it a try? It might not be that bad. |
|
Aglais
Liberation Army BricK sQuAD.
133
|
Posted - 2012.10.23 17:16:00 -
[21] - Quote
Noemi Nagano wrote:Aglais wrote:Seriously guys. HAMs are going to get easier to fit. If you want, try to put a few on your Tengus, too. Yeah, they'll have far less range. But you'll notice that you're doing obscene amounts of damage. And you've already still got some pretty good tank. Why not give it a try? It might not be that bad. On Tengus they might be ok (I cant judge, never used a HAM Tengu before and the ones I met and killed were maybe failfits..), but if the t3 is the only thing which is working in missile PvP - would that be balance?
HAM Caracals. HAM Drakes. Standard missile launchers. Rockets. Maybe even some torp ships appear due to Guided Missile Precision affecting all missiles now. Also, the Legion can be HAM fit- this buff may be the thing that gets people to legitimately look at it. |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
159
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 04:58:00 -
[22] - Quote
Connall Tara wrote:
am i happy to trade the drake in favour of all this? FRACK YES \o/
Honestly, I'm kind of sad that part of the Caldari ship lineup won't be as useful, but at the same time I really want this series of events to be those that remove focus from battlecruisers in PvP. Note that they wouldn't not be viable anymore, but simply that particular ship class stops being the only thing people ever fly, forever. I'd be happy if EVE's PvP had more emphasis on frigates and cruisers in no particular order, definitely, and that destroyers see regular use helping out cruiser+ gangs in stopping the likely deadly wolf packs of frigates with the new logistics hulls going around. |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
163
|
Posted - 2012.11.12 03:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Missiles without any counter is also bad idea.
Have you tried moving? This'll seriously cut the DPS of T2 damage missiles. I think that's kind of a counter.
Kenshi Hanshin wrote: On a different subject, I strongly dislike the proliferation of hybrid turrets among caldari ships. It doesn't fit into the Caldari canon well at all. Caldari make use of and are masters of missiles. That should be reflected in their ships and and ship-bonuses. In other words, Caldari ships should be uniquely different but still missile systems. If you want to use hybrids that is what Gallente are for.
The amount of sloth that oozes from this post causes me to shrink away from it in revulsion.
Caldari use hybrids and missiles. It's like how Gallente use hybrids and drones. Notice how both factions have specialized missile/drone ships but also have ones that primarily use hybrids. Not to mention, that Caldari and Gallente were, in the lore, which you seem to be a rabid supporter of, were for a long time the same political entity. You could say that this is a hint that they have shared ancestry.
If you only want to use Caldari missile ships, by all means go ahead. But don't complain when you can't join in on some fleets, because you don't have a ship that'll properly perform in that role (ie. snipers- Notice how long it takes missiles to hit things at range. Hybrid boats can at least be fit to snipe. The Moa may not really be an optimal choice yet but that's because medium railguns are horribad. Once that's fixed, well, I think they may be mobile mini-Rokhs.) |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
168
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 15:38:00 -
[24] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:This all is rly fun. Single thing for me to ask is WHEN we do get NEW content. Nope, i don't mean shady role ships noone will fly. No, i also don't mean nerfs. I mean palpable new content. Like what WH's were once back in time. Balance? ImBalance? Just have a look at the aggresion mechanics, or the risks for gankers, and you begin to laugh, like i did, and most of us also do. ***"We cannot match the GREATNESS of our ancestors"*** This could be the today's CCP motto. Because what we get is cheap nerf instead of new content.
Do you get bored if pointless new ships don't get rolled out every half a year or something? |
|
|
|