Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 03:05:00 -
[1]
Not a particularly useful electronic warfare module; how about a boost in regards to facing nano-ships?
On top of the signature increase, what if it also had an effect that all shots against a target (miss or hit, or regardless of exp velocity) did a minimal fixed amount of damage based on the signature radius of the target being shot at.
Essentially a nano-ship counter; the minimal damage would make speed tanking a bit more difficult against those who would fit to counter it and provide more use for the module. Could also act as a deterrent to using MWD for everything.
Just an idea to give it a unique use. Thoughts?
|
Stuart Price
Caldari Havoc Inc Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 03:20:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Stuart Price on 15/02/2008 03:20:15 The problem is not target painters per se, it's nanofaggotry.
I propose some radical changes:
1. Unlink target painters from minny ship bonuses. 2. Keep painters as they are. 3. Introduce new module: Active camouflage: Reduces your own signature radius. 4. Ships that had a painter bonus now get a camouflage bonus. 5. Change nanofibers so that instead of reducing armour, they reduce something useful for combat (no ideas spring to mind here) OR make is so that only one can be fitted to a ship (a la AB/MWD). Do similar with overdrives (here the penalty could be reduced cap recharge since the engine is now drawing more power from the ship).
Reasoning: Minmatar specialise in hit and run, so it stands to reason they'd be better at fading away than other races, becoming elusive and hard to engage. Also, there's only so far you can tune an engine and only so much you can strip out to reduce weight before you're flying a chair, surrounded by pipe cleaners strapped to the top of dangerously unstable and energy inefficient engine.
Balance reasons: Combat in general gets slower, but minmatar ships (who specialise in speed) can still go faster than everyone else and thanks to active camouflage are still appreciably harder to hit unless you fit painters. It will still be possible to make ships go very fast, just not game breakingly so.
Comments please!
EDIT: lol at language filter failure. "I got soul but I'm not a soldier" |
Hannobaal
Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 04:05:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Hannobaal on 15/02/2008 04:07:05
Originally by: Ariel Dawn Not a particularly useful electronic warfare module; how about a boost in regards to facing nano-ships?
On top of the signature increase, what if it also had an effect that all shots against a target (miss or hit, or regardless of exp velocity) did a minimal fixed amount of damage based on the signature radius of the target being shot at.
Essentially a nano-ship counter; the minimal damage would make speed tanking a bit more difficult against those who would fit to counter it and provide more use for the module. Could also act as a deterrent to using MWD for everything.
Just an idea to give it a unique use. Thoughts?
Why don't you paint the fast ships and then shoot at them with guns instead of missiles?
The problem is not with target painters. They're very useful. The problem is with people not understanding how signature radius works for tracking.
|
Broken Jester
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 04:17:00 -
[4]
Or we could go with what others have suggested before by keeping them basically the same, but have them cause a slight reduction in shield and armor resistance.
|
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 04:25:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Broken Jester Or we could go with what others have suggested before by keeping them basically the same, but have them cause a slight reduction in shield and armor resistance.
what the christ, lowering resistance? this is one of the worst suggestions I've ever heard even as conjecture
if you want improved tracking for nearly no fitting and reasonably large range, use them, otherwise fit something else ___ Eve Players are not very smart. Support Killmail Overhaul
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 05:07:00 -
[6]
The best way to make target painters better is to make sig radius more important.
<.< >.>
|
Vyllana
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 05:21:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Vyllana on 15/02/2008 05:21:38 Well, I dunno about adding a "minimum damage" based on sig radius or anything like that, but it might be worth considering making it work in an analogous way to guns.
Specifically, for a missile, if the explosion radius is smaller than the sig radius of the target, all you get is no damage reduction, but no extra bonus. In contrast, with guns, when a target has a larger sig radius than your gun's sig resolution, then you get a bonus to your chance to hit, which can at least partially compensate for insufficient tracking speed.
To me, it'd make sense if missiles worked similarly, such that if one of the stats (sig radius or velocity) was reducing damage, the other could be used to compensate. For example, right now, say a target's sig radius is 150 and your missile's explosion radius is 100, that means you get full damage from that step of the calculation. But say at the same time, the target's speed is 3000m/s and your missile's explosion velocity is 1500m/s. That gives you a 63% dmg reduction, so you end up with 37% damage.
Now if your missile's low explosion radius could be used to compensate, as sig resolution does for guns, then you'd also get a (for example) 50% bonus damage bonus from that side of the calculation. That'd mean your 37% damage that was left would get multiplied by 1.5, thus increasing it to 55% damage.
Of course, damage would still be capped at 100%, as it is now. Thoughts?
|
Stuart Price
Caldari Havoc Inc Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 05:37:00 -
[8]
My idea must be stunning since no-one's flamed it. Yet.
Goum, I read your thread and you make a strong case. I think we're both in agreement that ships are going too fast to balance a lot of game mechanics around and that sig radius is not well understood OR used. Your proposed solution is both elegant and well explained.
Unfortunately it has flaws ie: short range ships getting to the target (blasterboats mostly). The biggest problem I can see is with people kiting them more effectively than they do now thanks to most blasterboats being plated AND the monstrous cap needed to keep the MWD running.
I'd like to think my proposal is a more subtle method of encouraging proper usage! "I got soul but I'm not a soldier" |
Guer
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 10:09:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Stuart Price My idea must be stunning since no-one's flamed it. Yet.
i stopped reading at "active camouflage."
|
Xoth Freefall
Minmatar Imperium Forces
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 10:52:00 -
[10]
To the OP: how about better tracking? A while back on the forums, someone did some tests of target painters vs tracking computers. I suggest you look it up, but basicly that 25% increase to sig radius is like a 25% bonus to tracking. I would also suggest you look up the tracking formula (don't know off the top of my head).
|
|
Cpt Branko
Surge. Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 11:00:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 15/02/2008 11:03:09
Originally by: Hannobaal
The problem is not with target painters. They're very useful. The problem is with people not understanding how signature radius works for tracking.
This.
Although, mind you, one TC + tracking script does more for you then one painter; painter just happens to work for everyone else plus you.
Sig radius is already very important (reason why you can hit medium-sized nano-ships very fine with medium guns tracking-wise, they have 1km-sized sig radiuses); both for guns and for missiles (reason why torp ravens really really love TPs), it's just that painters don't increase it enough really, at least not enough to compare it with a, for instance, tracking computer.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Jayne Tamm
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 11:59:00 -
[12]
Target Painters should not be used solo!!! think about what a target painter is!!
if you want something that is going to help your own tracking....get a tracking computer!!
Target painters are for Fleet/ Squad Commanders! they should be used by the commander to paint the primary target so that the rest of the squad has a better chance of hitting it! So individually they may not be as good as tracking comps...but since they affect the whole squad...they are better..as it frees up a slot for the everyone else in the squad (assuming you are organised)
think of it like a gang warfare link bonus ;) except the bonus is better :)
|
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 13:38:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Xoth Freefall To the OP: how about better tracking? A while back on the forums, someone did some tests of target painters vs tracking computers. I suggest you look it up, but basicly that 25% increase to sig radius is like a 25% bonus to tracking. I would also suggest you look up the tracking formula (don't know off the top of my head).
Well, the information provided by CCP actually says 'one cannot really explain in words how much the signature comparison affects the chance to hit'; but my idea is mostly aimed towards the ships achieving transversal velocities so high that they will never be hit (Target Painters are stacking nerfed, so cant keep adding more onto them), or for missiles. Mostly dealing with the 'issue' of people who use 900m-3000m snake sets becoming immune (and causing distress on these forums).
Stasis Webifiers working vs signature radius is interesting Goum, but it would be a pretty darn huge change in EVE.
|
Msobe
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 14:49:00 -
[14]
TP aren't without use - they are just very different in what they do than most EW mods. They benefit missile, turret, and drone dps . . . nothing else does that. They also work for your whole gang. To me, the greatest benefit comes when several people paint the same target. The sig increase is stacking nerfed (so I've been told, never tested), but if you have 3 TP's on your target, its like 2 TC's on each ship in your gang. (While still helping other weapon systems.) Even more useful when you remember that a bigger sig combines well with any +tracking you do have from TE/TC, and the two effects aren't stacking nerfed with each other.
|
Hannobaal
Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 17:29:00 -
[15]
Ok, I used numbers from EFT and put them into the tracking guide on this site to illustrate what target painters do:
An artillery Hurricane using best named 650mm artillery with depleted uranium ammo (and my skills, which are kind of average) is firing on a speed fitted Ishtar going at exactly 6 km/s (that's speed that it takes quite a bit for an Ishtar to reach) and orbiting the Hurricane at 20 km range. The Hurricane is not using any tracking mods.
The Hurricane's guns will hit with around 33% accuracy, or around 36 dps with 6 guns (it's only 108 dps from the guns at full accuracy).
Now, if we use 2 tech 2 target painters from a Bellicose piloted by someone with a little bit of skill into target painters and Minmatar cruiser 4 (that is, me) on the Ishtar, it's 44.85% sig radius increase per target painter or about 82.5% total increase with the two of them (with stacking penalties).
With those on the Ishtar, the Hurricane's guns will hit with around 71% accuracy or around 78 dps with 6 guns.
That's more than twice the dps with the target painters compared to without them.
|
Xoth Freefall
Minmatar Imperium Forces
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 18:25:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Hannobaal
snip
how does that compare with two targeting computers (with and without scripts) or two tracking enhancers?
|
Hannobaal
Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 18:52:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Xoth Freefall
Originally by: Hannobaal
snip
how does that compare with two targeting computers (with and without scripts) or two tracking enhancers?
What does it matter? You can have all of that on your ship and a bonused ship in your gang target painting for you.
However, a 30% increase in sig radius (a tech 2 or best named target painter before skill or ship bonuses) is the exact same thing for tracking as a 30% increase in the guns' tracking stats (a tech 2 tracking computer with a tracking speed script). So, even on a non-bonused ship flying solo, a target painter would be better if you have the signature focusing skill trained up, but only if the target is within the optimal range of your target painter. The best would be to have both since there is (obviously) no stacking penalty between them.
|
Bronson Hughes
Knights of the Wild
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 18:56:00 -
[18]
With the way that accuracy works, an X% increase to your guns tracking will improve your chances to hit exactly the same as an X% increase to your target's signature radius. It doesn't matter if your tracking is already well above your target's angular velocity or if your signature resolution is already well above your target's signature radius; stacking up on one cna help offset poor performance of the other. This is different from missiles where if having a smaller explosion radius than your target's signature radius does not improve your damage.
A T2 Tracking Computer with a Tracking Script will improve your tracking by 30%.
A T2 Target Painter will increase your target's signature radius by 30%.
Both modules have a 5% per skill level modifier (Motion Prediction and Signature Focusing), although Motion Prediction is useful with or without a Tracking Computer whereas Signature Focusing is useless without a Target Painter. Both have the same impact on your chances to hit, but the Tracking Computer works regardless of range and the Target Painter works for everyone shooting at that target. The TP also eats more cap.
So for medium-long range fights (past 50km or so) or tight cap fits Tracking Computers work best, for work closer in, espeically in gangs, Target Painters are the way to go. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne |
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:00:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Guer
Originally by: Stuart Price My idea must be stunning since no-one's flamed it. Yet.
i stopped reading at "active camouflage."
me too.
The only thing I would do to TPs is give them the current range plus falloff as their range, and leave the falloff in. Minmatar should get better Ewar bonuses, but their ok without any changes so why bother (someone tell me the rapier is a crappy ship because it gets a tp bonus....)
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar KULT Production Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:03:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Stuart Price Also, there's only so far you can tune an engine and only so much you can strip out to reduce weight before you're flying a chair, surrounded by pipe cleaners strapped to the top of dangerously unstable and energy inefficient engine.
Err, actually, this is a proven working Minmatar design spec, you just forgot the guns. -- [17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim |
|
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:05:00 -
[21]
Originally by: El'essar Viocragh
Originally by: Stuart Price Also, there's only so far you can tune an engine and only so much you can strip out to reduce weight before you're flying a chair, surrounded by pipe cleaners strapped to the top of dangerously unstable and energy inefficient engine.
Err, actually, this is a proven working Minmatar design spec, you just forgot the guns.
And the high levels of radiation.....
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
Vanessa Vale
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:08:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Haradgrim changes so why bother (someone tell me the rapier is a crappy ship because it gets a tp bonus....)
No but the rapier certainly did suffer from the drone and damp nerf.
|
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:11:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Vanessa Vale
Originally by: Haradgrim changes so why bother (someone tell me the rapier is a crappy ship because it gets a tp bonus....)
No but the rapier certainly did suffer from the drone and damp nerf.
still, the rapier is a pretty solid ship these days, given the state of "things."
Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
Hannobaal
Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:18:00 -
[24]
Well, the thing with target painting on the Minmatar recons is that with their long-range webbing, the target painting is kind of redundant unless they're supporting a battleship or dreadnought with missiles.
|
Bronson Hughes
Knights of the Wild
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 19:50:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Hannobaal Well, the thing with target painting on the Minmatar recons is that with their long-range webbing, the target painting is kind of redundant unless they're supporting a battleship or dreadnought with missiles.
It's not redundant so much as it is overkill. Rather like a Rook with 6 Multi-specs jamming you from 100km. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne |
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 20:40:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Vanessa Vale
Originally by: Haradgrim changes so why bother (someone tell me the rapier is a crappy ship because it gets a tp bonus....)
No but the rapier certainly did suffer from the drone and damp nerf.
Rapier will be back in style with the new TD boost though and comfortably sit outside turret range of anything that isn't a Zealot/Amarr BS with a single Balmer.
|
Savannah Marie
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 15:40:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Vyllana Edited by: Vyllana on 15/02/2008 05:21:38 Well, I dunno about adding a "minimum damage" based on sig radius or anything like that, but it might be worth considering making it work in an analogous way to guns.
Specifically, for a missile, if the explosion radius is smaller than the sig radius of the target, all you get is no damage reduction, but no extra bonus. In contrast, with guns, when a target has a larger sig radius than your gun's sig resolution, then you get a bonus to your chance to hit, which can at least partially compensate for insufficient tracking speed.
To me, it'd make sense if missiles worked similarly, such that if one of the stats (sig radius or velocity) was reducing damage, the other could be used to compensate. For example, right now, say a target's sig radius is 150 and your missile's explosion radius is 100, that means you get full damage from that step of the calculation. But say at the same time, the target's speed is 3000m/s and your missile's explosion velocity is 1500m/s. That gives you a 63% dmg reduction, so you end up with 37% damage.
Now if your missile's low explosion radius could be used to compensate, as sig resolution does for guns, then you'd also get a (for example) 50% bonus damage bonus from that side of the calculation. That'd mean your 37% damage that was left would get multiplied by 1.5, thus increasing it to 55% damage.
Of course, damage would still be capped at 100%, as it is now. Thoughts?
I think this is how it works for missile boats. :) Painters definitely increase damage significantly for moving targets, when using missiles.
YARRRR!!
|
Lt Angus
Caldari the united Sex Panthers
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 17:44:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Lt Angus on 17/02/2008 17:44:55 Target painter + cap ships = BOOM to anything bigger than a frigate
Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 19:04:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Goumindong The best way to make target painters better is to make sig radius more important.
<.< >.>
this
|
Hannobaal
|
Posted - 2008.02.17 19:30:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Savannah Marie Painters definitely increase damage significantly for moving targets, when using missiles.
YARRRR!!
No, they do not. They have absolutely no effect in that way at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |