Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
208
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:25:00 -
[61] - Quote
DeBingJos wrote:NiGhTTraX wrote:The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs outputs 477 DPS.
Remind you : that is 477 DPS for the cane at what optimal? 5km? And that 321 drake dps is at what range?
this!
plus...
Daneel Trevize wrote:NiGhTTraX wrote:CCP Frozie wrote:The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm. No other battlecruiser requires implants or gun downgrading to fulfill its intended purpose. These decisions seem terrible imho. Who said the intended purpose was 2 medium neuts? Or that BCs were balanced? Or that a Brutix can fit Neutrons while using its active tank bonus?
bring on the drake army and whelpfleet tears
also medium rails need some love and gal ships need to be fixed without changing their intended tank style or weapon choices. |
NiGhTTraX
FISKL GUARDS Nulli Secunda
161
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:25:00 -
[62] - Quote
DeBingJos wrote:NiGhTTraX wrote:The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs outputs 477 DPS.
Remind you : that is 477 DPS for the cane at what optimal? 5km? And that 321 drake dps is at what range?
Nonetheless, the new 257 DPS is laughable. You can't kill anything with that if you're solo. If you're gonna post here thinking your idea is the greatest thing since bacon and that it will save EVE and possibly all humankind with it, you're gonna have a bad time. |
Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
31
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:25:00 -
[63] - Quote
This is amazing stuff. The dmg difference between 220s and 425s arent too steep, less fitting really addresses the core issue of the cane, in that it honestly does a bit of everything a bit too well. You can have great utility, or great DPS, just like every other ship.
Really excited about the beam changes. Lets see if it actually does it though. With the HML changes one might actually fit beams, though I think arty is still far more versatile and does more practical damage. Happy to test it though!. |
Connall Tara
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
35
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:26:00 -
[64] - Quote
NiGhTTraX wrote:The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs outputs 477 DPS. The new Drake will only have 0.8 x 321 = 257 DPS at a 25% lower range. It becomes the shittiest battlecruiser in terms of DPS. And if you nerf it further by reducing its tank, well.... Oh and now they can be tracking disrupted? Goodbye solo missile platforms! CCP Frozie wrote:The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm. No other battlecruiser requires implants or gun downgrading to fulfill its intended purpose. These decisions seem terrible imho.
to be fair, consider that the current range is at "peak" around 80km, the 25% nerf will take it down to around 60km meaning you'll engage at most around 50km. thats still not exactly BAD when you have 100% of the damage being applied out that far and still have reasonable options to push that range out further?
as for "no other battlecruiser needs fitting implants or gun downgrading", brutix and ferox. sweeping claims woo!
Fly reckless cohost and all round bad pilot o7 |
stoicfaux
1650
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:26:00 -
[65] - Quote
TDs (and TCs/TEs) only affect guided missiles? (not rockets, HAMs and torps.)
Is anyone going to bother using TPs on guided missile boats?
How much is the Fury damage increase going to be? You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head. Feature Request: -áDamnation Ship Codpiece-áfor the NeX store.
|
Karah Serrigan
The Hatchery Team Liquid
65
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:26:00 -
[66] - Quote
Tyrus Tenebros wrote:I virtually never post to eve-o forums but the missile changes are way to excessive.
While I generally never join the whines of "don't make everything the same" I have to agree that the move to make missiles "more inline" with other weapon types is misguided. Missiles have always done low-ish to moderate dps in exchange for being reliable and difficult to stop barring outranging them. Shoving them in to the TE/TD paradigm dramatically affects the character of missiles.
While I understand the desire to increase the use of HAMs and promote the LR/CR dichotomy, I also don't think needing HMLs in ti the ground is the way to go with that either. 1) DPS reduction is too high. 10% would be a better start. 2) Range reduction is slightly too significant. 15-20% base might be better... missiles don't have falloff and are subject to chase distance against fast targets 3) TE/TD paradigm will likely reduce DPS further as some lows are swapped to TEs. While I "get" how the reduced dps is supposed to be compensated for slightly by increased applied damage to small targets, I don't think it will play out very well. 4) TDs themselves become extremely powerful. I suggest dropping the TE/TD change entirely, there's no reason for it. As they say, if it ain't broke don't fix it.. and the balance of missile damage actually applied is fine as is, even if tweaks need to be applied there'sno need for a wholesale shift.
The 10% damage nerf should be sufficient to promote the use of HAMs. Slightly increasing damage applied by HAMs would also promote their use. Have to agree with this guy. The whole TE/TD/TC change is way too much homogenization and there is simply no need for that. There is also the difference, that a pilot can undo the penalties done by TDs to a degree, by going into range or by flying parallel and recuding the transversal. There is no way to undo a worse explosion radius/speed and it is significantly harder to get into range with somethign that is running away from you at decent speed, because it could mean that even if youre 1km away from him, given enough speed he will outrun your missiles. The damage reduction to HMLs is beyond all good and holy of course. With faction missiles, a 3 bcs tengu does ~470 dps on a target that is standing still. A 2bcs drake does 407. A thrasher does 350 and an enyo can reach 450. But were talking about medium sized guns. Reducing the range of missiles is ok as i agree that HMLs had way too much range, especially combined with range bonuses on hulls like caracal and tengu. |
Aprudena Gist
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:26:00 -
[67] - Quote
Why are the tech 2 missles still **** compared to tech 2 auto, blaster or pulse ammo. |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
104
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:27:00 -
[68] - Quote
Boogie Jones wrote:The powergrid nerf on the cane is a bit much imo. It should be able to fit a full rack of 425s + the neuts. You mean the same way a Myrmidon should be able to fit a full rack of Neutrons and a triple rep tank? |
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:28:00 -
[69] - Quote
adopt wrote:20% damage nerf is far too much. Same with the Hurricane PG Nerf.
I think you should reduce damage by 15% not 20%, and cut the PG by 150 rather than 225.
If you follow through with these changes you're making the entire BattleCruiser class obsolete.
I don't care much about the changes to HMLs, they might be a bit over the top with both a dps and a range nerf but whatever - I ******* hate flying Drakes.
The nerf to the hurricane is much much too harsh, however. Nerf autocannons rather than specific hulls - autocannons are too versatile. |
Merkal Aubauch
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:29:00 -
[70] - Quote
Well death to OP battlecruisers. Now EVE gonna have some room for other tacticis than blobbing with t1 cheap **** battlecruisers. See ya on the field :) |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
1462
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:29:00 -
[71] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: -Explosion velocity reduced from 50 to 40
Ahemm... Psst it's Explosion Radius I'm sure?
:oops: Indeed.
Lili Lu wrote: Fozzie, are you guys considering any slight nerf to TD base strength? Because if not, everyone and his mother will be fitting TDs. It seems to me that the module could use little nerf, so as not to become the must have "multispec of doom", and to make the speicialized ships more desirable in fleets.
Yup it's something we're looking very closely at. Game Designer | Team Game of Drones https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
192
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:29:00 -
[72] - Quote
Karah Serrigan wrote:There is also the difference, that a pilot can undo the penalties done by TDs to a degree, by going into range or by flying parallel and recuding the transversal. There is no way to undo a worse explosion radius/speed Painters, webs, rigs. ZOMG committing and not fitting full tank on your brick drakes/Tengus?
Cry more. |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
104
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:31:00 -
[73] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:for christs sake, why do TDs need to affect missiles? Now you can't properly ever fight back against something wielding a TD!
Baww. The rage is "Nerf ECM", did you forget? |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
104
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:33:00 -
[74] - Quote
NiGhTTraX wrote:The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs outputs 477 DPS.
Yeah, at a 2km Optimal range. At actual engagement range.... Not so much. GTFO EFT |
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
363
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:34:00 -
[75] - Quote
NiGhTTraX wrote:The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS. The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs outputs 477 DPS. The new Drake will only have 0.8 x 321 = 257 DPS at a 25% lower range. It becomes the shittiest battlecruiser in terms of DPS. And if you nerf it further by reducing its tank, well.... Oh and now they can be tracking disrupted? Goodbye solo missile platforms! CCP Frozie wrote:The upshot is that fitting a full rack of 720s with a MWD and LSE and full mids and lows will require a RCUII and either an ACR or PG implant. Also fitting a standard shield autocane with neuts and LSE will require dropping a few guns down to 220mm. No other battlecruiser requires implants or gun downgrading to fulfill its intended purpose. These decisions seem terrible on paper imho. Explain to me why you compare the DPS of a long range weapon to that of a close range weapon?
use heavy assault missiles, with the TC/TE boost they will be amazing. |
Steelshine
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:35:00 -
[76] - Quote
RIP Heavy Missiles, you now get to go to that special place where hybrids lived for so many years. Maybe you'll be useful again in 2016 |
Memrox
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
63
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:37:00 -
[77] - Quote
Heavys range nerf.. ok. The DMG nerf is bad, Fozzie wake up!?!?!?! |
Fowler
Black Flag Operations The Kadeshi
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:38:00 -
[78] - Quote
I'm curious what will happen to the Nighthawk and Cerberus after theese changes to missiles and especially heavy missiles.
Seems the Nighthawk gets a smack in the face it doesn't deserve. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:39:00 -
[79] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time
Excellent changes. Will there be name changes for these modules to go along with their expanded roles? |
Hannott Thanos
Notorious Legion
104
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:40:00 -
[80] - Quote
Memrox wrote:Heavys range nerf.. ok. The DMG nerf is bad, Fozzie wake up!?!?!?! Yeah!! Wake up and give us medium railguns that has 400 dps at 0-80 km!!!! |
|
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
36
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:40:00 -
[81] - Quote
Also, reducing rage range is just going to make them even less used. They are fine how they are currently regardless of damage.
I am thinking of rage rockets, they really need the range they currently have to be useful, nerfing it at all makes them completely useless. I flown rocket hawks in PvP for a long time and they need that rage range to fit their niche. (This was before ASBs, but still.) It's really important that a rocket boat can hit at 9km with rage, because if they can successfully kite within scram range, their mediocre dps compared with other close range weapons can grind them down. Making rage have less range is basically saying "now you have to use CN ammo to do it", which is basically nerfing rocket damage in general, since CN ammo has less DPS.
Rage HAMs have short enough range, 18km? Thats well within scorch range, barrage range, which are similar in applied DPS when you get down to it because of the ****** explosion radius/velocity on rages. HAMs need more DPS in general, regardless of damage type, so slightly buffing rage missile damage while nerfing range really doesnt help.
Rage torps are horrible NOW, why would anyone every use them in the future if their range gets nerfed? They can't hit anything that is moving as it is, so decreasing their range is just a horrible idea, even if they get additional DPS. Leave them as they are in terms of range and make them better for hitting targets to become closer to other torps, if anything. |
Raging Beaver
VAMPIRE COUNTS
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:40:00 -
[82] - Quote
Most of the changes seem interesting to me apart from this:
CCP Fozzie wrote: Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time
So maybe let's call the missiles' flight to the target "tracking", this is the only way it would made sense to me. You have an anti-missile module, it's called a launcher, a launcher loaded with defender missiles. It's useless? Make it useful then, don't introduce a ridiculous mechanic like the one above. |
Heimdallofasgard
Apex Overplayed Coalition Fatal Ascension
251
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:41:00 -
[83] - Quote
Suddenly... Armor tank bc fleets everywhere! Kick Heim... MATE |
Bap1811
Club Bear
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:41:00 -
[84] - Quote
I would like to know what was the reasoning behind making TDs affect missiles? What made you decide to go ahead with this, what was the problem with missiles that making them TD-able fixes?
This and the base HML nerf is a massive nerf to small gang podla drake pvp which was the biggest small gang pvp "doctrine". Not only do we have to play with less range and damage (trivial I suppose...) but making TDs affect missiles means that our 5-6 man gangs are gonna be forced in even closer to gangs usually twice or three times our size. HML range and damage projection is literally the only thing that allowed us to do that, nothing else really works.
Meaning that we'll probably have to start fitting TE to our drakes, and its not like drake DPS is good to start with. Or we'll probably just have to run from any gang with any amount of random TD equipped. I know no one gives a **** about small gang pvp and solo to a lesser extent but at least leave it alone, dont nerf it.
So apart from my ranting, i'm still interested in what you are hoping to fix/change with the TDs affecting missiles part.
The hurricane changes are kinda bad as they are asymmetrical to how its always been. Its always been that you can shield tank a typically armor ship and have more PG to play around for guns and high utility. Its the exact same for the rupture, shield tank it and you can get a rack of 425s and some med neuts, same with Thorax, if you shield tank it you can shove a bunch of ions/neutrons on it etc. Hurricane fit this perfectly. Moreover not only that but it means you are litterally shitting all over the armor cane.
Also just buff HAMS a little, reduce PG a little or smth, because the caracal is still **** even with the cruiser changes.
|
stoicfaux
1650
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:42:00 -
[85] - Quote
Karah Serrigan wrote:Reducing the range of missiles is ok as i agree that HMLs had way too much range, especially combined with range bonuses on hulls like caracal and tengu.
Meh.
New Range of Fury missiles: Cerberus ~128km Tengu, Caracal, ~85km Drake, Nighthawk ~57km (no range bonus)
TC range script possibilities for Drake and Tengu. 10% : 63km 94km (i.e. 110% times base ranges above, or 63km for Drake, 94 for Tengu) 20% : 68km, 102km 30% : 74km, 111km
I would like more numbers on how the TCs/TEs will affect missiles. Because it's going to be interesting on how to balance them without the Tengu's HML's easily having the same range again.
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head. Feature Request: -áDamnation Ship Codpiece-áfor the NeX store.
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:42:00 -
[86] - Quote
Steelshine wrote:RIP Heavy Missiles, you now get to go to that special place where hybrids lived for so many years. Maybe you'll be useful again in 2016
Perhaps we can expect to see some variety in fleet compositions now. Less "oh look, another drake gang" is a good thing in my book. |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
303
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:43:00 -
[87] - Quote
eat **** Tengus This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:43:00 -
[88] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Karah Serrigan wrote:Reducing the range of missiles is ok as i agree that HMLs had way too much range, especially combined with range bonuses on hulls like caracal and tengu. Meh. New Range of Fury missiles: Cerberus ~128km Tengu, Caracal, ~85km Drake, Nighthawk ~57km (no range bonus) TC range script possibilities for Drake and Tengu. 10% : 63km 94km (i.e. 110% times base ranges above, or 63km for Drake, 94 for Tengu) 20% : 68km, 102km 30% : 74km, 111km I would like more numbers on how the TCs/TEs will affect missiles. Because it's going to be interesting on how to balance them without the Drake and Tengu HMLs easily having the same range again.
They have to sacrifice tank to do it though. Like every other ship in the game. Seems to be more in line with everything else this way. |
Lili Lu
434
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:43:00 -
[89] - Quote
Steelshine wrote:RIP Heavy Missiles, you now get to go to that special place where hybrids lived for so many years. Maybe you'll be useful again in 2016 LOL, no. It's back to BSs with you, nbd. No more cheap ass drake blobs. Earn those tech moons brother. Well at least until they are also nerfed. I think you guys will be able to adjust.
And wtg Blarff, love the trolling.
This is all subject to tweaking on percentages. But don't anybody think the base ideas are going to be nixed. |
Dirk Morbho
Mindstar Technology Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.18 14:44:00 -
[90] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tracking/Range Mods and Ewar -Modify tracking enhancers and tracking computers to affect: Max flight time (with optimal range script) Explosion radius and explosion velocity (with tracking speed script) -Make TDs affect Missiles Tracking speed disruption script lowers explosion velocity and explosion radius Optimal range disruption script lowers flight time
HELL YES
Death to all drakes!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 213 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |