open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked correct rocket explosion speed
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... : last (40)

Author Topic

Krennel Darius
Caldari
EON Solutions
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2010.05.06 22:20:00 - [601]
 

Quote:
Vengeance 78dps. Jaguar (3x 150mm) 117dps.Harpy (4x electron blaster - dunno what harpies use) 134 dps. Against jag thats 35% difference. Against harpy 42%.
So again - in its own ship class (and i cant call it "tackle AF" this time) rockets are waaay behind. So even excluding fix to explo velocity/DRM/whatever rockets need plain DPS boost.

The 20% i proposed would give veng 94dps. Still behind but falling only 20% short of jag. Diction 72dps... thats still lagging way behind. Dunno - this + 10% damage boost on diction instead of 5%? Anyways wanted only to show that missiles in their own ship classes work ok. Except rockets which are far behind.




I'm not sure what kind of fits you've got running, but the damage difference is much worse than that.

As far as damage on my Af's go, I've got my Vengeance pushed to 107 dps, Jag does 165, a blaster Harpy does 190, and my Enyo does 220(with a rocket launcher btwVery Happy).

Right off the bat you'll notice that the Enyo does 100% more dps, the Harpy does 80% more, and the Jaguar does 60% more against the Vengeance. And thats not counting the fact that the explosion velocity of rockets makes it so they cant even hit their AF counterparts for full damage unless they are dual webbed and target painted.

As far as the other AF's that aren't listed, they all beat the Vengeance by at least 60% if not greater. Except for the Hawk, because the Hawk uses rockets.

I'm not particularly sure, but either all of the other AF's are extremely overpowered, or rockets are extremely broken.


Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2010.05.06 23:43:00 - [602]
 

Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 06/05/2010 23:43:20
It was stated in my post: clear setups with only guns/launchers (no damage mods) and no drones. Only to compare gun/launcher damage ability. If i were to use some stupid numbers i could compare veng to blaster ishkur (300+? cant remember) or maled to blaster ranis + drones + stuff (also 250+dps).

Xyfu
Minmatar
Love From Above
Posted - 2010.05.07 10:51:00 - [603]
 

Originally by: RoCkEt X
rocket speed? i'm pretty damn fast tbh ugh
Took you 20 pages to get here. =P

Oram Nyx
Gallente
Texas Inc.
Posted - 2010.05.07 12:09:00 - [604]
 

/I support this

Mallariah
Posted - 2010.05.07 18:24:00 - [605]
 

were rockets fixed yet?

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2010.05.07 19:28:00 - [606]
 

Edited by: yani dumyat on 07/05/2010 19:59:12

I've done some in game testing to provide data on the damage reduction against orbiting ships, the spreadsheet can be downloaded at http://www.4shared.com/file/4eFV-YTR/rockets_again.html (can't linkify it because the forum censors the address Confused)

Originally by: Notes

I found Stafen's modifier to be slightly out so changed it from 0.9175 to 0.215, this brought the spreadsheet in line with the results of in game testing, the original modifier is noted at the top of the spreadsheet in case you want to change it back.

Minmatar ships were used because my toon with lvl 5 navigation skills only flys matari ships.

You can alter the damage comparison chart by entering a new number in the "% change" column, the top number will alter rocket damage and the bottom number will alter turret damage.

The spreadsheet is in .xlr (microsoft works) format. It should open in excel but if you have problems let me know and I'll try and save it in a different format.



I've suspected for a while that people have been taking Stafen's original spreadsheet then checking EFT to get the velocity and sig radius of a frigate and dropping it in to the spreadsheet. This tends to produce unrealistic numbers because orbit speeds are much lower than straight line speeds.

EG:
Webbed AB rifter in a straight line gets 37% damage reduction
Webbed AB rifter orbiting at 7,500m gets 37% damage reduction
Webbed AB rifter orbiting at 500m gets 20% damage reduction

This has significant implications when trying to work out the stats rockets should have. If the rifter in the above example wants to get the full 37% damage reduction it will have to sit out at 7,500m with barrage and will be doing roughly 50% less damage in game than it's EFT damage with RF EMP loaded.

A quick analysis of my damage logs shows that when flying rifters with RF EMP I lose about 20% of my potential DPS to tracking and falloff, that is in no way a scientific number and was only tested for 3 fights plus I've not got perfect gunnery skills so comments from other turret users would be appreciated. For now I'm working on the premise that to compare rockets with turrets I need to reduce the EFT damage of turret ships by 20% to compensate for tracking and falloff.

After playing with the spreadsheet for a while I've come to the conclusion the way to make rockets competitive but not overpowered would be:

Increase base damage by 45%*
Increase Ev to 120 m/s
Decrease DRF to 1.5

*The 45% number was based on reducing the EFT damage of turret ships by 20% so if I'm wrong on that estimate the 45% figure will be wrong too.

Try putting those numbers in the spreadsheet and see what you think, It means rocket AFs will still have slightly lower applied DPS than turret ones, which is as it should be because rocket AFs get a tanking bonus. Afterburners are still effective tanking modules but webbed AB frigates will be hit for full damage if they orbit at 500m and get a slight damage reduction if they go in a straight line.

AB interceptors will get a damage reduction even when webbed but this would stop the crow becoming overpowered and the give possibility of a good interceptor pilot being able to kill a rocket AF that's low SP or not fitted a web.

Kestrel might need a slight nerf and the flycatcher might have to lose a launcher hardpoint but I can't think of any other ships that might become overpowered.

Enjoy Wink

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2010.05.07 22:39:00 - [607]
 

Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 07/05/2010 22:40:32
That actually seems pretty reasonable to me.

On the Kestrel thing: Personally I think just knock it down to 5% damage all round and have a second bonus to shield.

Better still give it a 4th mid and finally give the middle finger to the stupid tier system.

Beronarr
Posted - 2010.05.08 11:31:00 - [608]
 

Did they fix the rockets already?ugh

Maeve Kell
Posted - 2010.05.08 13:41:00 - [609]
 

Edited by: Maeve Kell on 08/05/2010 13:42:18
isnt a weapon system that can hit while you fly like 15 km/s imba? isnt it good that it does no reasonable damage.. i dont want my cruisers to be ****ed by crows.

kthxbye

the one thing i learned in eve in all the years is: eft numbers dont tell anything, the damage that hits the target is important

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2010.05.08 14:47:00 - [610]
 

Originally by: Maeve Kell
Edited by: Maeve Kell on 08/05/2010 13:42:18
isnt a weapon system that can hit while you fly like 15 km/s imba? isnt it good that it does no reasonable damage.. i dont want my cruisers to be ****ed by crows.

kthxbye

the one thing i learned in eve in all the years is: eft numbers dont tell anything, the damage that hits the target is important


Clueless troll warning. Dont read it can cause brain damage.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.05.08 14:55:00 - [611]
 

Originally by: Maeve Kell
the one thing i learned in eve in all the years is: eft numbers dont tell anything, the damage that hits the target is important


er right, okay









Laughing

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2010.05.08 15:50:00 - [612]
 

Originally by: Maeve Kell

isnt a weapon system that can hit while you fly like 15 km/s imba?



I wholeheartedly agree, as a solution to this nano ships should be made fast enough to outrun all turret ammunition. Due to turret damage being instantaneous this may result in dramiels traveling backwards in time.

Great Artista
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.05.09 08:33:00 - [613]
 

Bamp.

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2010.05.09 21:07:00 - [614]
 

bump.

Braitai
Ice Fire Warriors
Posted - 2010.05.10 00:07:00 - [615]
 

I heard a rumour that rockets were still broken, C/D?

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2010.05.10 10:45:00 - [616]
 

Originally by: Braitai
I heard a rumour that rockets were still broken, C/D?


C

In recent testing it was shown that a eunuch could shoot further than rage rockets.

PinkGirl
Posted - 2010.05.10 11:49:00 - [617]
 

Originally by: Dreed Roberts
Originally by: Deva Blackfire

Here you go then all 5 v's all 5 AB cyanabal (110m, 380m/s) v's Kessie (no damage mods cause they wont change the ratio)
max damage per rocket, 51.56
damage no prop, 51.56
damage AB (1075m/s), 39.15 or 76%


If someone need to calculate missiles damage reduction - use MDRC (MissilesDamageRedusingCalculator)

For example MDRC show 75,93342%
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

You can download MDRC here http://forum.eve-ru.com/index.php?showtopic=44722&hl=

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2010.05.10 22:05:00 - [618]
 

Bump.

Allen Ramses
Caldari
Zombicidal Mania
Posted - 2010.05.10 22:57:00 - [619]
 

Originally by: yani dumyat
*snip*

Holy Christ! Someone is finally looking at more than raw stats! Apocalypse is nigh, C/D?

Quote:
Increase base damage by 45%*
Increase Ev to 120 m/s
Decrease DRF to 1.5

The actual base damage increase is 50% (for light missiles, as well). The EV becomes somewhat redundant after DRF comes into play, and we don't want to achieve 100% damage so easily. Ceptors should be very hard to hit, but ABing ships should not. The only way I would see any way of making this less of a problem is to attach a 30% signature bloom to ABs. It was foolish of CCP not to consider this during the nano nerf.

Also, don't forget the velocity issue. Rockets also suck because many ships can outrun them.

Braitai
Ice Fire Warriors
Posted - 2010.05.11 03:12:00 - [620]
 

Originally by: Allen Ramses
Also, don't forget the velocity issue. Rockets also suck because many ships can outrun them.
This is probably the only useful thing you've said.

50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well.

30% sig bloom when an AB is active? Maybe if they give them 30% more speed as well, otherwise no. AB's are used to tank cruisers, which is already hard enough.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.05.11 08:43:00 - [621]
 

Originally by: Braitai
50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well.


That's straightforward enough to do simply by fiddling with AML/SML RoF.

Braitai
Ice Fire Warriors
Posted - 2010.05.11 08:53:00 - [622]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Originally by: Braitai
50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well.


That's straightforward enough to do simply by fiddling with AML/SML RoF.
true enough I guess but that would mean SML's have a higher ROF than AML's. Fiddling with lights will be problematic. Getting even close to the theoretical damage/range of lights using beams/arty/rails requires t2 ammo that messes with your tracking, so it's not as if other long range weapons are clearly out in front of lights.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.05.11 11:05:00 - [623]
 

Originally by: Braitai
true enough I guess but that would mean SML's have a higher ROF than AML's. Fiddling with lights will be problematic. Getting even close to the theoretical damage/range of lights using beams/arty/rails requires t2 ammo that messes with your tracking, so it's not as if other long range weapons are clearly out in front of lights.


Oh, I've just noticed that this was in response to Allen's insane OCD MUST MAEK PRITTY PATTURNS OF NUMBERS balancing proposals.

I'm fairly ambivalent on SMLs atm, their damage against an ABing target isn't too good but their range is so great that I'm not sure we should expect it to be. If SML changes were to be made, I'd be looking more at the PG/CPU of SMLs themselves, really - they're really a pain to fit. But you could argue that this is just a ship problem (e.g., Hawk).

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2010.05.11 11:50:00 - [624]
 

Originally by: Allen Ramses
Originally by: yani dumyat
*snip*

Holy Christ! Someone is finally looking at more than raw stats! Apocalypse is nigh, C/D?



C, I will be the hookbill of the apocalypse riding along side ECM, Nano and Nerfbat.

Originally by: Allen Ramses

The actual base damage increase is 50% (for light missiles, as well). The EV becomes somewhat redundant after DRF comes into play, and we don't want to achieve 100% damage so easily. Ceptors should be very hard to hit, but ABing ships should not.



AB was intended as a tanking mod during the QR changes and has a lot of drawbacks for ships that only have 3 mids and need to tackle stuff. These screenshots show what would happen if the numbers were altered as I suggested:

rifter.jpg
claw.jpg
damage chart.jpg

Ev is certainly not redundant even with a DRF of 1.5, I think the % of damage reduction is about right in those pics but I'm not greatly confident about damage reduction of turrets so 45% base damage increase to rockets may be wrong.

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2010.05.11 12:04:00 - [625]
 

Originally by: Braitai
Originally by: Gypsio III
Originally by: Braitai
50% increased damage for lights? Great, so AML Caracals will own frigates EVEN HARDER than they do already. Balancing lights is actually quite difficult because of the fact that they're used in AML launchers as well.


That's straightforward enough to do simply by fiddling with AML/SML RoF.
true enough I guess but that would mean SML's have a higher ROF than AML's. Fiddling with lights will be problematic. Getting even close to the theoretical damage/range of lights using beams/arty/rails requires t2 ammo that messes with your tracking, so it's not as if other long range weapons are clearly out in front of lights.


The problem isn't AML's it's destroyer class ships - flycatcher with 50% more damage on light missiles Shocked. If you've ever tried to put arties on a rifter or claw you'll know that LM ships are in a different league when it comes to ranged frigates, on the other hand if you boosted small arties to the point where an arty claw was viable then there'd be some absurd thrasher fits going about.

I'd love to see more viable ranged frigates than just the crow, harpy (and to some extent ishkur) but it would need a complete reworking of the destroyer class so we're getting a bit off topic.

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2010.05.11 12:33:00 - [626]
 

Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 11/05/2010 14:44:06
Quote:
just a ship problem


Maybe if it was just the Hawk, but can you think of any ship that has an easy time fitting a full set of standards?
I don't really see much harm in knocking the grid reqs down to 6 (before skills), especially as the T2 versions in particular are really CPU hungry on top of that.

The current situation with standard missiles is the equivilent of removing all long range turrets except for 150mm rails, medium pulses and 280mm artillery. We don't get the fitting flexibility of different caliber turrets and the only equivilent launcher has stupidly high grid requirements considering the fail power grid stats of the ships meant to use them.

Braitai
Ice Fire Warriors
Posted - 2010.05.11 12:46:00 - [627]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Oh, I've just noticed that this was in response to Allen's insane OCD MUST MAEK PRITTY PATTURNS OF NUMBERS balancing proposals.
I lol'ed

Duchess Starbuckington
Posted - 2010.05.11 20:22:00 - [628]
 

Back to the top.

Krennel Darius
Caldari
EON Solutions
The Laughing Men
Posted - 2010.05.12 08:43:00 - [629]
 

Page 2? Blasphemy!

Number 17
Caldari
COLD-Wing
Posted - 2010.05.12 12:04:00 - [630]
 

Don't have time to log in test server, have they fixed rockets yet?


Pages: first : previous : ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... : last (40)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only