|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Have to agree here, if that HM nerv is going live ships like the Nighthawk are going from so-so to terribad.
For me right now the HM vs. HAM PVE(!)-question is nonexistent because of range and that little skill called guided missle precision that gives me at least "some" dmg on small-sig targets. I don't PvP much with missles, therefor won't comment on it.
Melina Lin wrote:... Weren't these of all missiles the ones with the absolute shortest range? I hope they still make it out the launch tubes without a tracking mod.
I am smirking right now, need to wait if I need to cry because it was "too" true...
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 16:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
uh, one thinghy i nearly forgot:
like the Carebear i am i want to ask if all the NPCs are going to get some "defender-turrets"? Because, like how it is now missles against NPCs already receive an "applied" damage reduction that turrets do not?
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 18:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
about that range nerv... nobody wrote something about the one small little problem all missle based weapons share: there is NO falloff, if your target is just one little millimeter out of range you're doing how much dmg? Right: Zero.
if it is CCPs intention to bring weapon systems "inline" please consider an appropriate change to guns that have the shocking abillity to hit things outside of their "optimal"...
i still use that nighthawk now and then - but after these changes i can't think of anything usefull i could fly it for besides making it a somewhat expensive hauler with a 700m3 cargobay.
the longer i think about these changes the more they aggravate me
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 19:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
one possible way of doing this without destroying it:
- Remove the 5% per Lvl Kin-bonus - Replace it with a 1% Dmg-Bonus for HM and a 5% Dmg-Bonus for HAM consider NOT to balance Missles without balancing the ships using them.
Congrats you now have nerved HMs by 20% BUT given us the option to actually use ALL missle types...
|
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 22:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:
What...
The...
****...
?
The TE/TC change obviously isn't a boost.... because you say so?
*snip* -Liang
hm, i would really like to see a Nighthawk fit, that has tackle, propmod, your "boost" moduls and still can fit a tank... where do you find all those slots, last time i checked my Nighthawks had 5 mids and lows, how about yours?
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 22:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Rita May wrote:hm, i would really like to see a Nighthawk fit, that has tackle, propmod, your "boost" moduls and still can fit a tank... where do you find all those slots, last time i checked my Nighthawks had 5 mids and lows, how about yours? You aren't understanding what is being posted. Is the NH fine? No. Does that mean that the NH (and every other missile ship) isn't being boosted by the TE/TC change? No. Because they are. -Liang the TE/TC changes are a buff to missles, on that i can agree.
Now look at the ships that are NOT considered OP (read: Tengu) like the nighthawk or the cerberus. If you fit these - and they are tight on slots to play around and put on top of that the proposed changes to HMs... for me this looks like a whole weapon system will be mostly useless - just telling everyone: "use HAMs" is partly OK, because most other ships fit close-range systems too, but the layout of these missle ships was not intended to use yet another module to apply its damage. so i am saying if CCP touches missles the need to touch the ships that use them at the same time or it will not work.
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 02:45:00 -
[7] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Do not forget that missile boats are able to specifically pick the damage type they do. As in 100% of a damage type. Outside of drones, no other weapon system has that luxury.
and you see, fun fact: Those missile boats most talked about here don't have that luxury if you look at those numbers being thrown around up till now: They are all for the ONE bonused dmg type.
Shot with anything else and look at the numbers again. That would be 25% less base damage, 5% LESS as the proposed "patch" for HMs will bring - but wait, those 20% will hit the unbonused damage types too...
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 05:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Terik Deatharbingr wrote:Then just need to revamp missile mechanics to be in line with guns. That will solve everything. You mean like that missile will "teleport" next to target ship after launch and explodes. Yeah, if you can find the way to explain how it is possible... ... But of course 100+ km range on instantly hitting missiles... No thanks.
not that i want that, but your point about the teleporting thingy...
Ask the projectils or hybrid charges how they do it all day long in EVE
The only "nearly" instant-hit weaponsystem, from that point of view, would be the lazors
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 12:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
one thing i could not see till now (I know, hard to believe after 128 pages ): TC will affect missles, but need a gunnery skill (TA) to operate. So, is this going to be changed like it is possible to use TCs with GMP too instead of TA only or will we HAVE to skill a "useless" gunnery skill on a missle toon? Or should i say make it like that all those gunnery folks need to skill GMP to use their TC again?
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 16:01:00 -
[10] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote: On your first point-
Trajectory Analysis is indeed a gunnery skill. However, so is Weapons Upgrades (needed for TE). Now one could argue that WU and AWU could be moved into Mechanics (which would necessitate a change to intel and mem as attributes for it). Which would make TEs whether split missile and gun modules or remaining a unified module an easy and backstory consistent module to train for. Trajectory Analysis would probably have to stay in the Gunnery skill group.
This might be a good reason for there to be a separate modules for missiles akin to TC II, that could build off of Target Navigation Prediction 4 (which to my mind is the rough analogue of Trajectory Anaysis) and/or Guided Missile Precision. The trouble with keying any new mTC solely on TNP skill is that it is only a 2x skill while for turret users TA skill is a 5x skill. This would create yet another slight sp advantage for missile use (a la missile skill type ease v gunnery tree sp slogs). I suppose one could key the mod off of GMP 4 but then it would seem odd to have the then also boost "unguided" missiles. One could maybe do some hybrid skill requirement between the two missile skills that would roughly equate to having to train TA4, say like (without running the numbers and only for example purposes) TNP3 and GMP2 as a requirement for a mTC.
This of course brings up the sp investment disparity between TCs and TEs whether for missiles or gunnery and the advantage it could present due to racail slot and fitting propensities. But then there are always choices to be made. You fit a TE or mTE you lose a slot for a damage mod (or a tank mod on an armor tank), you fit a TC or mTC you lose a tackle slot (or a tanking slot on a shield tank). My guess is that shield tankers (being used to their drake tank risk aversion) will sacrifice a low slot damage mod before they sacrifice a mid tanking slot. That the damage nerf on HM is as proposed it may be some inducement to rethink it. It would be a no brainer to use a mTE over a mTC if there was no damage nerf on HM as so many are complaining about. And when talking about Drakes one cannot ignore the tanking advantage they have over other BCs.
That is why i didn't mention WU and AWU, those already affect all modules and have no bonus affecting guns only, it doesn't bother me that they are in the "gunnery" group as long as they affect all moduls and i don't need to train a similar skill for missles too. TA doesn't work this way as even if it would affect all moduls it has no inherent bonus for missles but does have one for guns, therefor not needed on missle toons, that is why i'm asking if there will be an adjustment made. I would be totally fine if for example GMP is removed and TA covers that bonus for missles, or if we get a mixed skill prerequesit like you mentioned.
Lili Lu wrote: On your second point -
I'm not sure to what you are referring when you say that CCP balancing is favoring a rof bonus over a damage bonus. Some examples might be needed to discuss that.
Edit - and thanks Rita. This is the kind of discusion that should be occuring itt, by page 128, and not the hyperbolic sky is falling that OT Smithers is still posting.
uh, sorry, i'm not sure which thread i read this, but if i recall correctly there is the idea of changing the kin bonuses on caldari ships to a rof bonus - which i see as a good thing because it allows them to use all their availiable missle types - but still, it could have been replaced with a dmg bonus instead to the same effect. so the question if this is intended income nerv or ISK sink, if even a small one, still stands.
cu |
|
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 19:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
Doddy wrote:Jorma Morkkis wrote:Rita May wrote:uh, sorry, i'm not sure which thread i read this, but if i recall correctly there is the idea of changing the kin bonuses on caldari ships to a rof bonus - which i see as a good thing because it allows them to use all their availiable missle types - but still, it could have been replaced with a dmg bonus instead to the same effect. 5% ROF per level is better than 5% dmg per level. This, the overall small increase in isk/hr from bounties due to better bonus and better damage types would most likely cancel out the cost of more ammo used. ok, didn't take that in account, you're probably right there
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2012.10.01 18:43:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey again everyone. I've updated the OP with the version 2.0 of these proposals after the discussion in this thread, with the CSM and with our whole team here. *snip* Thanks for the update, this looks (IMO) more like a buff to missles in general now, with HMs getting a slight cut down - we will have to see if 10% reduce is ok or if, with the other changes in mind, 15% or 20% is appropriate.
Thanks again, can't say this often enough, for you keeping up with this threadnought
cu |
Rita May
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2012.10.12 18:16:00 -
[13] - Quote
on a totally unrelated side note:
i have the feeling that the sudden changes in argumentation from the topic of this thread to "your points are invalid because you are posting with a NPC-Corp Alt" has two reasons:
1. The horse is dead, no more beating, let it rest in peace 2. if one starts to feal s/he has no (more) valid points to contribute s/he starts to flame the "inexperienced" noobs in the NPC-Corps
regarding point 1. i'd like to add: if new information comes up i'm more than happy to discuss that again
cu. |
|
|
|