open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Missle Balance Rant
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Nyarlothotep
The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency
Posted - 2011.08.23 23:10:00 - [1]
 

{rant}

  • Boost Cruise damage!

  • Decrease rocket damage!

  • Increase Torpedo range!

  • Rename Heavy Assault Missiles/Launcher!

  • Add new Battleship sized launcher!

  • Add F.O.F. Torpedoes, Heavy Assault Missiles, and Rockets.

  • Add T2 F.O.F. missiles!

{/rant}

Frigate Missiles
Rocket 6.6 DPS (33 dam/5 sec) Range= 4,500k
Standard 5 DPS (75 dam/15 sec) Range= 18,750k
Rockets deal 32% more damage than Standard Missiles - Rocket damage needs decreased to 31 damage
Range increase from short to long range is 417% - standard baseline

Cruiser Missiles
Heavy Assault 12.5 DPS (100 dam/8 sec) Range= 9,000k
Heavy 10 DPS (150 dam/15 sec) Range= 37,500k
Heavy Assaults deal 25% more damage than Heavy Missiles - good baseline for damage
Range increase from short to long range is 417% - standard baseline

Battleship Missiles
Torpedo 25 DPS (450 dam/18 sec) Range= 9,000k
Cruise 13.63 DPS (300 dam/22 sec) Range= 75,000k
Torpedoes deal 83% more damage than Cruise Missiles - Cruise damage needs boosted to 412 damage
Range increase from short to long range is 833% - Torpedo range needs increased to 18,000k

The Heavy Assault launcher is not really a heavy version of the Assault Launcher. Thus a new name is needed.

Add BS sized Assault Launcher, that is actually a heavy version of the Assault Launcher.
Assault 6.25 DPS (75 dam/12 sec)
25% increase in DPS over standard missile
-37.5% decrease in DPS from heavy missile

Add F.O.F. missiles for the rocket, heavy assault and torpedo launchers that deal 75% of the damage of the normal. Why do these not exist already?

Why no T2 F.O.F.?

*math bits are based on T1 missile and launcher with no skill or ship bonus

Hwong Jian
Posted - 2011.08.23 23:39:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Hwong Jian on 23/08/2011 23:41:12
Edited by: Hwong Jian on 23/08/2011 23:40:50
I'm not sure where to begin with this, so I'll take your post sort of in order:

[Rant]: Ignoring it because it is a summary of what is described below.

[Frigate Missiles]: I think you'd have better luck arguing that frigates should be the baseline for which all other missiles are compared, rather than saying "range is the standard, damage should be nerfed". Especially since the rocket buff last year managed to make rockets a viable weapons platform for frigates, without making them overpowered. (Hopefully that statement won't change this topic to what a rocket ship that can dictate range can do. This should be a basic discussion on the 4th weapon group [missiles], not a situational or setup debate.)

[Cruiser Missiles]: I would suggest that the damage on HAMs needs to be increased. While you do use the "range" of missiles as a factor in your discussion, there are a few key elements that are overlooked. Specifically, "missile acceleration", which causes all missiles to have a shorter-than-advertised maximum range. Also, you should compare the damage on standard HAMs versus the damage on "rage" heavy missiles. For the most part, you end up with a much better mix of damage and range by using rage heavies than you do by using HAMs in any form. Especially considering the additional limitation of decreased range due to acceleration.

[Battleship Missiles]: I will agree that cruise missiles could use an increase in damage at the sacrifice of range. However, I do not believe that torpedoes should have an increase in range. Torpedoes are "unguided" missiles and, as such, require a closer range. That is the balance of their damage versus range. And, as a battleship-sized weapon, it should pack a punch while having a drawback that makes it something that isn't "now required for every ship."

[Battleship Assault Launcher]: I think it would be cool to have a "heavy assault launcher", but it should most certainly not use frigate-sized missiles. Having it use heavy missiles, instead, would add the ability to more effectively engage smaller ships than them without giving every ship in the game a second "anti-interceptor" option. That's already covered with the range on heavy neuts. Not to mention the fact that every battleship can field enough drones to make life difficult for smaller ships already.

[FoF Missiles]: Rockets and HAMs... maybe. Torpedoes, no. As was stated above, torpedoes are "unguided missiles" which require a target to shoot at.

[T2 FoF]: I'm pretty sure that the number of people that use FoF missiles is small enough that the market for T2 variants would be minimal at best. However, not having done the research means I can't speak to this topic much. I just, personally, don't see a need for them. Of course, if the demand for them went up, the desire for T2 variants might actually pick up. As it is now, I don't think they get used enough to warrant "research into how to make them even better".

TL;DR: Rockets, standard missiles, heavy missiles and torpedoes are fine, HAMs and cruise could use with a bit more damage. Heavy Assault Launcher would be cool, but isn't really needed. FoF missiles aren't going to get love because too few people use them.

Nyarlothotep
The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency
Posted - 2011.08.24 12:45:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Hwong Jian
[Battleship Missiles]: I will agree that cruise missiles could use an increase in damage at the sacrifice of range. However, I do not believe that torpedoes should have an increase in range. Torpedoes are "unguided" missiles and, as such, require a closer range. That is the balance of their damage versus range. And, as a battleship-sized weapon, it should pack a punch while having a drawback that makes it something that isn't "now required for every ship."

[Battleship Assault Launcher]: I think it would be cool to have a "heavy assault launcher", but it should most certainly not use frigate-sized missiles. Having it use heavy missiles, instead, would add the ability to more effectively engage smaller ships than them without giving every ship in the game a second "anti-interceptor" option. That's already covered with the range on heavy neuts. Not to mention the fact that every battleship can field enough drones to make life difficult for smaller ships already.

[T2 FoF]: I'm pretty sure that the number of people that use FoF missiles is small enough that the market for T2 variants would be minimal at best. However, not having done the research means I can't speak to this topic much. I just, personally, don't see a need for them. Of course, if the demand for them went up, the desire for T2 variants might actually pick up. As it is now, I don't think they get used enough to warrant "research into how to make them even better".

Torpedoes, unguided or not, should have their range scaled to be inline with the other short range missiles. I don't see why cruise need range decreased in exchange for a damage increase, again they would scale with the other sized missiles.

T2 F.O.F. missiles should just have a damage increase and no other bonus.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.08.24 15:53:00 - [4]
 

As far as I can tell, your justification for all of this is nothing to do with game balance considerations, but simply "pretty patterns of numbers".

Right?

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.24 17:45:00 - [5]
 

Yeah, you seem to be confused. This isn't balance, this is uniformity.

And no. Missiles are fine.

Nyarlothotep
The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency
Posted - 2011.08.24 20:28:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
As far as I can tell, your justification for all of this is nothing to do with game balance considerations, but simply "pretty patterns of numbers".

Right?
I won't lie, I like pretty numbers that make patterns. And that is the main reason for the damage balancing. The torp range increase is so my bomber stays out of web/scram range. Totally selfishness on my part!

Still I would really like a battleship assault launcher firing heavy missiles. And T2 FOF that deal better damage than the T1 counterpart.

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.24 20:46:00 - [7]
 

Uhm.. my bomber hits from 42km with torps 2.

Nyarlothotep
The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency
Posted - 2011.08.24 20:51:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Feligast
Uhm.. my bomber hits from 42km with torps 2.
I feel dirty training missile skills. I almost went postal when the bombers changed from cruise to torps. I have 2 missile skils now... Sad

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.24 20:51:00 - [9]
 

soz m8 Sad

Korii K'naar
Posted - 2011.08.24 21:37:00 - [10]
 

You are seriously saying "Boost torp range because I can't be arsed to train skills"? Perhaps a velocity boost/flight time reduction would be nice, but the whole point of skills is that you're supposed to have them.

Nyarlothotep
The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency
Posted - 2011.08.24 21:58:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Korii K'naar
You are seriously saying "Boost torp range because I can't be arsed to train skills"? Perhaps a velocity boost/flight time reduction would be nice, but the whole point of skills is that you're supposed to have them.
No, I want the range of torpedoes to be boosted to be inline with the range increase from rockets to HAM. Standard, heavy, and cruise have a steady progression.

PewPewYou
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.25 01:34:00 - [12]
 

Cruise missile damage is too low. It (and also hybrids) needs to be brought in line with arty/lasers.

Torp range. meh, it is a little too low even with maxed skills (about 50k with maxed skills and no rigs on raven would be better), but I can live with it as it is I guess. Only use them on bombers these days anyway - CCP killed them for anything else.

Taron Hakard
Posted - 2011.08.25 17:12:00 - [13]
 

lololo eft numbers, u want to nerf rockets too, how long are you playing this game, 2 months?


 

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