open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked More Missiles!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (15)

Author Topic

CCP TomB

Posted - 2004.07.03 18:18:00 - [1]
 

After some thoughts on reduced missile damage based on missile vs. target and reading ideas from people in the last missile thread, I have come to a new idea on missiles:

Damage that missiles cause would be two way;

1. Fake "Area of Effect" explosion that uses signature radius and velocity of target to calculate damage, allowing minimization of the damage.

2. Shock wave damage (kinetic only?) that uses same calculation from the physic engine as when collision impact takes place, only the collision impact uses mass * velocity vs. mass * velocity in the direction that the collision impact takes place. In this case only the direction velocity of the target vs. where the missile explodes would be used.


Fake "Area of Effect" Damage

This is mostly to counter that 2-3 cruise missiles or 1-2 torpedos can take out frigates, but also gives velocity a little more purpose.

Missiles explodes for explosion radius X, if the target is smaller than the explosion radius X, then the damage gets scaled down.

The damage then occurs over the radius X at velocity Y, if the target has faster velocity than the damage velocity Y, then the damage gets scaled down.

Example:

Cruise Missile
Area of Effect Damage: 300
Damage Radius: 400m3
Damage Velocity: 400mps

Target
Signature Radius: 40m3
Velocity: 500mps

Damage Calculation
Sig Radius: 40 / 400 = 0.1
Velocity: 400 / 500 = 0.8
Damage: 400 * 0.1 * 0.8 = 32 total damage


Shock Wave Damage

Shock waves occur before an explosion when a bomb explodes (see movie: Chain Reaction for good example), the state of the target, velocity wise, in the physic engine is taken into a calculation that then applies kinetic damage on the target.

If the target flies heads on at maximum speed towards the missile deployer and the missile explodes on the nose of the target, then it gets maximum shock wave damage. Like when two cars drive at each other and both passangers fly through the front windows and into each others cars (This scenario is not the same as would occur, simply stating how the car crash impact would be similar to when you fly vs. the shock wave).

If the target is flying away from the missile deployer or orbits him at close range, the missile is in chase mode and hits it in the rear where the ship gets only a portion of the shock wave damage. Like when a car bumps another in the rear and you only get pushed forward a little, only making it feel enjoyable (This scenario is not the same as would occur, simply stating how the car crash impact would be similar to when you fly away from the shock wave).

The damage would be limited to maximum damage vs. maximum velocity of target when they hit head on. And minimum damage vs. maximum velocity of target into oposite direction.

Cruise Missile
Area of Effect Damage: 300
Maximum Kinetic Damage: 100
Maximum Impact Velocity: 1500
Damage Radius: 400m3
Damage Velocity: 400mps

Target
Signature Radius: 40m3
Velocity: 500mps
State: Approuching and gets missile in the face

Damage Calculation
Sig Radius: 40 / 400 = 0.1
Velocity: 400 / 500 = 0.8
Area of Effect Damage: 400 * 0.1 * 0.8 = 32
Shock Wave State: 500 / 1500 = 0.33
Shock Wave Damage: 33
Total Damage: 32 + 33 = 65

Few comments on what this would do for missile boats and general game play:

1. Best offense for Raven would be to shoot at a Blasterthron approuching the Raven with a MWD because of maximum shock wave damage, truly making them long range (with increased missile velocity) and "good defence" against incoming short range oponents.

2. Worst offense for Raven would be to shoot Torps or Cruise missiles at orbiting frigates because of high velocity and signature radius decreasing Area of Effect damage + less shockwave damage as the missiles will most likely not explode at good location (agility of the missiles can be tuned for this scenario to only catch them in the rear tail if the missile has to turn alot at low speed when chasing short range orbiting target).

3. Gives player the option of manually manuevering their ship to counter missile spam, should I evade and take less damage and hope to get the bastard in long range or should I be a man and take the damage and hope I survive to get into close range?


Before replying and making fun of this idea, please read this:

1. I'm not a missile or explosion expert, any feedback that will be posted with more knowledge than I have is most welcome.

2. All values in this post are fake just for exampling and no resistance calc

3. Current missile movement in close range scenarios can be tuned around to get this effect, although we can't make them hit or not (which has been tried for quite some time).

4. Missile collision and the annoying scenarios that players can get into with them will get adressed.

5. This is only a post about missiles and ideas how to improve the system, please don't post "what about wtfomtpwn drones?" or similar.

Menath Zaro
Posted - 2004.07.03 18:31:00 - [2]
 

you mentioned increased missile speed. are you going to up them towards what we saw on chaos a while back, so raven pilots actually can use their long range again? could you just give little hint?

Menath Zaro
Posted - 2004.07.03 18:44:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Menath Zaro on 03/07/2004 18:46:31
Changes looks very good to me. Still being able to hit frigs, but not being able to kill them that easily is very nice. Better than the idea of having a activation time as proposed earlier, allthought that had some nice balancing featurs to it as well, but this truely seems better.
Got a question though. how do you think to change the dmg missiles has today, when youre implementing that shock wave damage? In ur example, that kinetic damage is bigger than the Area of Effect damage. So wont that ruin the fact that one of missile users biggest strenght is to change their damage at will?

I personally think thats a bad move, as it ruins the versatility that missiles users has today. Better that they just do the same damage as they allways did, it doestn have to be realistic. Cause us in that case f you want to implement that shockwave in a relistic way, you shouldnt remove the "missile bounching" effect either :)

CCP TomB

Posted - 2004.07.03 19:31:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Menath Zaro
Edited by: Menath Zaro on 03/07/2004 18:46:31
Changes looks very good to me. Still being able to hit frigs, but not being able to kill them that easily is very nice. Better than the idea of having a activation time as proposed earlier, allthought that had some nice balancing featurs to it as well, but this truely seems better.
Got a question though. how do you think to change the dmg missiles has today, when youre implementing that shock wave damage? In ur example, that kinetic damage is bigger than the Area of Effect damage. So wont that ruin the fact that one of missile users biggest strenght is to change their damage at will?

I personally think thats a bad move, as it ruins the versatility that missiles users has today. Better that they just do the same damage as they allways did, it doestn have to be realistic. Cause us in that case f you want to implement that shockwave in a relistic way, you shouldnt remove the "missile bounching" effect either :)

Note also that the ship the cruise missile hits is a frigate, there for the area of effect damage is so little ... and these values are all pure fictional and do not have anything to do with a computer game called EVE-Online™.

CCP TomB

Posted - 2004.07.03 19:37:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Menath Zaro
you mentioned increased missile speed. are you going to up them towards what we saw on chaos a while back, so raven pilots actually can use their long range again? could you just give little hint?


jess

Kojio
Posted - 2004.07.03 19:41:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Kojio on 03/07/2004 19:48:33

Originally by: TomB

1. I'm not a missile or explosion expert, any feedback that will be posted with more knowledge than I have is most welcome.



The idea in itself sounds good, but what are you trying to change in the bigger picture?

How will this affect most ships and setups that already avoid missile damage using Microwarp drives? How do you intend on balancing this idea against cruisers? (cruiser orbiting at 500m/s only gets 96 damage per cruise, by your calculations)


It's a very interesting idea, but I don't understand how it will change the current gameplay exept turn missiles into a 4th turret type. You already limited each launcher to a specific type of missile, now you are severely limiting the effectiveness of each missile (thus, each type of launcher) to a specific ship class.


By limiting missiles to a specific launcher, you nerfed the firepower of smaller ships against larger ships. By implementing this idea on top of that, along with the tracking changes, you would be nerfing the damage of larger ships against smaller ships. Cruise/Siege launchers would be most effective against battleships, standard/rocket launchers would be most effective against frigates, etc. It would make missiles behave like turrets, not only with class restrictions but the way damage is calculated using velocity/sig radius, like turrets.

Is this the direction you are trying to achieve? Or are there other big changes to missiles (like the velocity changes on chaos a while back) that you are going to implement along-side this change?

Originally by: TomB

Originally by: Menath Zaro
you mentioned increased missile speed. are you going to up them towards what we saw on chaos a while back, so raven pilots actually can use their long range again? could you just give little hint?



jess


Ahh, you posted that reply while I was typing up my post. EmbarassedLaughingRazz

CCP TomB

Posted - 2004.07.03 19:47:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: TomB on 03/07/2004 19:51:08
Originally by: Kojio
Originally by: TomB

1. I'm not a missile or explosion expert, any feedback that will be posted with more knowledge than I have is most welcome.



The idea in itself sounds good, but what are you trying to change in the bigger picture?

Are any of the lighter missiles getting a speed boost? How will this affect most ships and setups that already avoid missile damage using Microwarp drives? How do you intend on balancing this idea against cruisers? (cruiser orbiting at 500m/s only gets 96 damage per cruise, by your calculations)

On what I'm trying to achieve: make smaller vessels as survivable against bigger missiles just as they are with turrets + make more fun game play for missiles.

On missile velocity and MWD: All missiles would be getting velocity boost, if MicroWarpdriving will a part of avoiding missiles is still uncertain, if it will be up to some point, then caldari ships will be revisited to have perhabs velocity boost to missiles like Raven and Scorp have right now.

On the values: "... and these values are all pure fictional and do not have anything to do with a computer game called EVE-Online™."

Originally by: Kojio
Ahh, you posted that reply while I was typing up my post. EmbarassedLaughingRazz

As you just did ... now we are even Smile

Aequitas Veritas
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2004.07.03 19:55:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Aequitas Veritas on 03/07/2004 19:59:11
Originally by: TomB

On missile velocity and MWD: All missiles would be getting velocity boost, if MicroWarpdriving will a part of avoiding missiles is still uncertain, if it will be up to some point, then caldari ships will be revisited to have perhabs velocity boost to missiles like Raven and Scorp have right now.


So if you dont increase the speed of the CMs, will then the Raven's and Scorp's get a very much higher bonus to speed than the 5% we see today, so they get closer to the 6km's we had on chaos (which were superb at least from a Raven pilots pov)?

Kojio
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:05:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Kojio on 03/07/2004 20:08:08

Originally by: TomB

On missile velocity and MWD: All missiles would be getting velocity boost, if MicroWarpdriving will a part of avoiding missiles is still uncertain, if it will be up to some point, then caldari ships will be revisited to have perhabs velocity boost to missiles like Raven and Scorp have right now.


What about non-caldari missile boats, like the Breacher and Inquisitor? The firepower of missile frigates got nerfed in one fatal swoop, yet only the caldari got any missiles bonuses to compensate.

Will the bonuses of other missile frigates be re-evaluated? Possibly drop the useless 5% targeting bonus on the breacher, and give it a 5% missile ROF bonus instead? This would make the breacher a fast short-range type of missile boat, a nice opposite of the kestrel which is kinda slow and has longer targeting range (and if given a velocity bonus would have a much longer attack range as well). Smile

Maule
Amarr
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:13:00 - [10]
 

tbh I like this idear.. and it would make webbers more prefered that only on frigs, megathrons and caldari ships.. as you will slow down the target and then your missiles will make more dmg....

F4ze
Gallente
D00M.
RED.OverLord
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:17:00 - [11]
 

A Megathron in blastersetup approaching to orbit a Raven would get shredded without a look at the MWD penalty.

500% extra signature radius
traveling anywhere between 500 and 1000 m/s in the direction of the missiles
...

Your only chance would be when the missiles miss you on their first pass, but then you would need alot of speed and a pretty big angular velocity. If not, I would guess the Megathron is toast.


If you can find a solution for that, you have a winner.

Jim Raynor
Caldari
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:22:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Kojio
Edited by: Kojio on 03/07/2004 20:08:08

What about non-caldari missile boats, like the Breacher and Inquisitor? The firepower of missile frigates got nerfed in one fatal swoop, yet only the caldari got any missiles bonuses to compensate.

Will the bonuses of other missile frigates be re-evaluated? Possibly drop the useless 5% targeting bonus on the breacher, and give it a 5% missile ROF bonus instead? This would make the breacher a fast short-range type of missile boat, a nice opposite of the kestrel which is kinda slow and has longer targeting range (and if given a velocity bonus would have a much longer attack range as well). Smile


Minmatar frigates already have a bonus to projectiles and the highest top speed/lightest mass in the game.

You could enjoy that projectile bonus if sustained MWD on frigates was toned down enough so that turrets could be useful in combat.

Right now frigates go so fast, unless they're really really webbed, nothing can really hit them, except drones and smart bombs.

Altai Saker
Rapier Innovations
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:27:00 - [13]
 

Heh, gotta agree with jim but this is a missile thread so here goes.

Looks good!

Kojio
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:30:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Kojio on 03/07/2004 20:32:23

Originally by: Jim Raynor

Minmatar frigates already have a bonus to projectiles and the highest top speed/lightest mass in the game.


And.. what does that have to do with the breacher, which only has 1 turret slot? (and no damage bonuses to speak of)


Jim Raynor
Caldari
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2004.07.03 20:42:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Kojio
Edited by: Kojio on 03/07/2004 20:32:23

Originally by: Jim Raynor

Minmatar frigates already have a bonus to projectiles and the highest top speed/lightest mass in the game.


And.. what does that have to do with the breacher, which only has 1 turret slot? (and no damage bonuses to speak of)




Merlin has no damage bonus, Punisher has no damage bonus, Inquisitor has no damage bonus, shall I go on? Not all frigates have damage bonuses, in fact most do not.

Minmatar frigates, Breacher included, already have very favorable advantages in speed, mass, signature radius. They're not even more "frail" than other ships, which is a misconception of Minmatar ships if you ask me.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.

Anyways about missiles in general, I like this idea. Hopefully we can get to a point where MWD, even for frigates, is for bursts of speed, and frigates don't NEED MWD to survive.

God forbid, perhaps afterburners will become useful (and I don't mean the sticking 1 class higher on your ship stuff).

Kojio
Posted - 2004.07.03 21:06:00 - [16]
 

Quote:
Merlin has no damage bonus, Punisher has no damage bonus, Inquisitor has no damage bonus, shall I go on? Not all frigates have damage bonuses, in fact most do not.


Merlin did not get nerfed with this patch, it got a boost in bonuses as a matter of fact. Lasers are also getting a boost in diffrent ways, and while tracking is currently in an akward state the next castor patch will fix things and the Punisher will be better off than it used to be. I think the lack of inquisitor pilots, or the sound of laughter when you see one in 0.0 space kinda speaks for itself.

Also don't forget, tracking and ROF bonuses also effect and boost your damage output, so in fact most ships do have some sort of bonus which affects their damage.

Quote:
Minmatar frigates, Breacher included, already have very favorable advantages in speed, mass, signature radius. They're not even more "frail" than other ships, which is a misconception of Minmatar ships if you ask me.


"Just because it's fast" does not make a ship useful. The truth is that the breacher lacks a certain amount of usefulness, simply because rifters are better when it coems to damage/tacking/speed/versatility, and vigils are better in EW support.

So answer me, what sticks out on a breacher? It's missile hardpoints, which is the only noticeable feature on the breacher. So what bonuses does a breacher have, that make me want to fly one? There isn't any.

The breacher needs a bonus that takes advantage of it's missile hardpoints, which is the only thing that makes it stand out against the other minmitar ships.


Quote:
I'm sorry but I don't agree with you.


It's cool, everyone has their own opinion. Smile

Aequitas Veritas
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2004.07.03 21:45:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: lordmix
hey, you no you are just screwing the game up, u done the guns in they cant hit anything anymore. for example u have a shuttle stopped in space at good range and u fire yr large hybird and u cant hit it , ask yr self how silly that is. now u telling me the same thing with missiles they will hit but do s**t all damge now tell me why??? the target is not moving or anything but u cant hit it with good damge this is bull****, pvp in this game is being screwed up big style. might as well make this game a mining game nothing else.
(sorry for my languge and bad spelling in a rush)

lordmix


Balancing. Its making the game more versatile and therefore good changes :)

Aequitas Veritas
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2004.07.03 21:45:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Aequitas Veritas on 03/07/2004 21:47:05
sorry, double posted :(

Meridius
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance
Posted - 2004.07.03 21:47:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: TomB

1. I'm not a missile or explosion expert, any feedback that will be posted with more knowledge than I have is most welcome.



Shockwaves travel extremely fast, a lot faster then 500m/s.

Typical shockwave speeds generated by detonating
explosives:

ANFO: 3000 m/s
PETN: 6400 m/s
TNT: 6900 m/s
Tetryl: 7200 m/s
RDX: 7800 m/s
HMX: 8000 m/s

These are in atmospheric conditions so unconstrained by atmospheric pressures/gravity you could expect these vaulues to be quite a bit higher.

Interesting ideas though, perhaps taking it to far though.

Wouldnt it be easier just to greatly reduce the agility for cruise/torps so they just dont turn around and go after frigs?

GFLTorque
Minmatar
Lethal Corp
Red Alliance
Posted - 2004.07.03 23:09:00 - [20]
 

I need some time to absorb it all.

Damn tribbles are everywhere.....



Razz

JoCool
Caldari
Posted - 2004.07.03 23:22:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: JoCool on 03/07/2004 23:27:11
First: Very nice changes, I welcome them. Finally missiles will be useful at long range, without eating frigates and cruisers for breakfast.


But TomB, what about this:

Fictional: Megathron with 400m3 Signature Radius, using the MWD -> x500% = 2000m3 SR. Velocy: 800m/s

Sig Radius: 2000 / 400 = 5
Velocy: 400 / 800 = 0.5
Damage: 400*5*0.5 = 1000 total damage

Will you limit this to the maximal damage the missile is able to do, to prevent that?
Like: If damage exceeds 300, cut it down to 300 ?

Another question:
Will my Missiles do less damage when I shoot at Minmatar battleships and the like or will you even out the signature radii for the battleships?

lordmix
Caldari
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2004.07.04 00:05:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Aequitas Veritas
Originally by: lordmix
hey, you no you are just screwing the game up, u done the guns in they cant hit anything anymore. for example u have a shuttle stopped in space at good range and u fire yr large hybird and u cant hit it , ask yr self how silly that is. now u telling me the same thing with missiles they will hit but do s**t all damge now tell me why??? the target is not moving or anything but u cant hit it with good damge this is bull****, pvp in this game is being screwed up big style. might as well make this game a mining game nothing else.
(sorry for my languge and bad spelling in a rush)

lordmix


Balancing. Its making the game more versatile and therefore good changes :)


making the game more versatile yer rightRolling Eyes this is why eve is lossing so many pvpers because these silly changes stop us from hitting anything, i battle ship should be able 2 kill anything with out compation because it is ment 2 have the best fire power in the game, i can understand how u cant hit stuff if it is doing so much speed like yr weapons tracking but when it is just sitting there not moving why cant u hit it, dev plz tell why u cant hit something sitting still and not moving with large weapons (a shuttle for example).
now with these missiles changes u will be able 2 sit at a gate in a shuttle and let someone hit u with cruiser missiles for a bit and it will not kill you for long time why the hell is that???? dev's come to your sences now. just think for a sec and talk to the pvpers of eve and see wot they think before u do this.
(sorry for bad spelling)

lordmix

GFLTorque
Minmatar
Lethal Corp
Red Alliance
Posted - 2004.07.04 00:14:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: TomB
Originally by: Menath Zaro
you mentioned increased missile speed. are you going to up them towards what we saw on chaos a while back, so raven pilots actually can use their long range again? could you just give little hint?


jess



Actually with the testing on Entropy, Minmitars almost MUST have faster CMissles.

To have a gun that should be fired at 50-60km, its kinda silly to have 4 missle mounts as slow as they fly.

Tomb - Maybe a Minmitar solution for turret problems AND missles.

Reduce TEMPEST to 3 MISSLe hardpoints, and add 1 TURRET slot. Increase Powergrid, and CPU accordingly for the Turret.

Djagoan
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2004.07.04 00:19:00 - [24]
 

Its redicilous these changes.. its going into the missiles physics.. why would a missile do less dmg when it hits a target full on the head.. should do full dmg.. like nerfing the guns.. not many people liked that either.. and what was this guy telling about.. something about balancing.. yeah right.. caldari ships are for missiles etc.. and now with this what are they worth.. i mean good for bs vs bs but thats all.. so it seems like u wanna make it like frigate vs frigate, cruiser vs cruiser and bs vs bs.. thats how its going to look like this.. I mean these UBER carebears want all those nerfs because they aint doing more than mining and makin money and stuff like that.. they dont give a sh*t about pvp.. and we pvp'ers have to suffer the consequences of these ppl.. just aint fair.. plz dont nerf this game so much.. u will see people leaving after time..

ProphetGuru
Gallente
Evolution
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2004.07.04 00:33:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: GFLTorque

Tomb - Maybe a Minmitar solution for turret problems AND missles.

Reduce TEMPEST to 3 MISSLe hardpoints, and add 1 TURRET slot. Increase Powergrid, and CPU accordingly for the Turret.



\o/



Veskrashen
Caldari
A.W.M
Ka-Tet
Posted - 2004.07.04 00:57:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Meridius

Shockwaves travel extremely fast, a lot faster then 500m/s.
These are in atmospheric conditions so unconstrained by atmospheric pressures/gravity you could expect these vaulues to be quite a bit higher.


True; velocity would be higher. However - shockwaves are a wall of compressed medium, like water or air. In the absence of such a medium - as in space - the only shockwave would be produced from the gasses of the detonating material, and thus have a much much smaller effect.

On the other hand, I kinda like the idea from a damage standpoint.

On missile speeds, MWDs and the like:

Right now, there's a big problem IMO with tying damage to signature radius, as it pertains to MWDs. It looks like the detonation velocity will be a good way to tune that though, so I'm not too worried about it. I would like to see cruise missiles and torps not able to catch MWDing speed frigates, or at least interceptors. Light missiles, on the other hand, should be a bane on the existence of frigates everywhere.

3000 m/sec is not a bad idea for heavies, with 1500m/sec for torpedos, with 4500 m/sec for lights. Perhaps 6000 m/sec on the cruises, IF the detonation velocities are dropped a great deal - say, 200m/sec. That would mean a frigate running at 2000 m/sec would be taking 1/10th of the regular damage, which would be a good compromise. Lights would still be a better choice in taking out frigates. 6000m/sec on rockets would also not be out of character, given their inherent short range.

Speed would still be a defense, but you'd have to work at it. Now that defenders are a viable option, I think that would be workable.

Aequitas Veritas
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2004.07.04 01:00:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Djagoan
Its redicilous these changes.. its going into the missiles physics.. why would a missile do less dmg when it hits a target full on the head.. should do full dmg.. like nerfing the guns.. not many people liked that either.. and what was this guy telling about.. something about balancing.. yeah right.. caldari ships are for missiles etc.. and now with this what are they worth.. i mean good for bs vs bs but thats all.. so it seems like u wanna make it like frigate vs frigate, cruiser vs cruiser and bs vs bs.. thats how its going to look like this.. I mean these UBER carebears want all those nerfs because they aint doing more than mining and makin money and stuff like that.. they dont give a sh*t about pvp.. and we pvp'ers have to suffer the consequences of these ppl.. just aint fair.. plz dont nerf this game so much.. u will see people leaving after time..


If you look at ppl posting in this thread and who like the changes and actually recon that missiles with the upcoming increase to speed needs to have some drawbacks, you might see that they are among those who spend the most time trying to balance these ships with pros and cons, regardless if its nerfing their preffered ship.

Though TomB:
U posted that mwd's should be a way of avoiding missiles, maybe. But why should you add another missile defence. With all other turrets they track better ships using mwd's. It only fair that the same thing applies to missiels. At the same time that saves you a lot of work trying to balance that out how missiles should react to the increased signature radius. If the frigs mwd away from the missiels, theyll get lower damage anyway :) Then you can just use ur existing model for damage with missiles as well. And you dont have to sit down and figure out what missile speed bonuses to give to Minnmatar ships which use a 50/50 layout as you simply up the speed of CM's to 3500 again.

Jim Raynor, I think, posted that the upcoming changes to mwd etc now puts them more in the line of short speed burst modules instead of a ship speed upgrade module. Totally agree to that part, and it would be nice to actually see ships using afterburners again as well. Frigates dont need speed to survive when all these changes are coming into play.

JoCool's post would be nice to have a little answer to as well, as his example which isnt related to the game of EVE Online, show a valid point with danger of missile damage being too high in some cases.

Jim Raynor
Caldari
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2004.07.04 01:45:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Jim Raynor on 04/07/2004 01:49:55
Quote:
Merlin did not get nerfed with this patch, it got a boost in bonuses as a matter of fact. Lasers are also getting a boost in diffrent ways, and while tracking is currently in an akward state the next castor patch will fix things and the Punisher will be better off than it used to be. I think the lack of inquisitor pilots, or the sound of laughter when you see one in 0.0 space kinda speaks for itself.

Also don't forget, tracking and ROF bonuses also effect and boost your damage output, so in fact most ships do have some sort of bonus which affects their damage.


Not true, many frigates have no damage bonus. It is true, not all frigates are useful, let's be honest, most aren't very useful. Look at the Heron, it's the poster child of useless frigates.

Rifter, Kestrel, Crow, Taranis, what else is there? These are the top frigates in the game, period. Some are completely inadaquate for PvP, such as the Punisher and Merlin, and some come close to being PvP viable, but just aren't as good enough to justify using one.

Quote:
"Just because it's fast" does not make a ship useful. The truth is that the breacher lacks a certain amount of usefulness, simply because rifters are better when it coems to damage/tacking/speed/versatility, and vigils are better in EW support.


Speed is very important for frigates, don't be a fool. Compare a Merlin to a Rifter, they are very simular, however, one is fast, and one isn't. How many people PvP in Rifters? Now how many use Merlins? You can't tell me that speed is not a huge factor when it comes to choosing a frigate, it is perhaps one of the greatest if not the greatest factor.

Speed + Small Signature Radius, which Minmatar ships excel at, mean you are less likely to be hit in combat, and that's the only defense a frigate, has, is speed. So yes, "just because it's fast" is a HUGE factor.

Quote:
So answer me, what sticks out on a breacher? It's missile hardpoints, which is the only noticeable feature on the breacher. So what bonuses does a breacher have, that make me want to fly one? There isn't any.


It's faster than a Kestrel (thus can outrun cruise missiles, something a Kestrel can't do without major sacrifice for speed), and it has long targetting range, for a frigate. If a Breacher had ONE more missile hard point no one would use Kestrels. Kestrels packs a bit more firepower, so people use it more often, it's a MUCH slower frigate however, even with my skills, which are very very good, a Kestrel with a catalyzed goldgas merely goes 1400m/s..

Anyways, the whole point of rehauling combat should be to get frigates to use MWD for bursts of speed, to close in, they shouldn't be a sustainable module you run 24/7.

Frigate normal speed + low signature radius should protect it from larger missiles, but small turrets and light missiles/rockets should be able to hit these ships.

Hopefully it will all be balanced out with these changes.


gk0r
Gallente
BIG
Posted - 2004.07.04 03:53:00 - [29]
 

Great idea actually.

Yeah there will be some people who'll moan. They are always there no matter what you do.
A lot of people think of this change is a missile nerf - I am not sure how they are looking at it because form my stand point it seems as if missile boost?

This scenario is a bit more realistic, and enjoyable. Finally there is a strategy element.
May be, just may be - there will be some sense in positioning your ship and using more brains than - "turn this way and fly full speed while shooting bad guy"

It makes sense for ships velocity vector / position to have some sort of effect on damage ship deals / receives. After all - that's how it is in real life.

And I know this is not real life, you don't need to tell me that. Don’t need to argue your breath away that this is real or what's not.

And stop kicking Tom for his math - he said that these values are off-the-wall and have not (not even remote) resemblance with what actual game might see.
So judge this for what it is - an idea, and what appears to me - a good one

Zarquon Beeblebrox
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2004.07.04 07:14:00 - [30]
 

Id openly admit im not able to see neare 1/10 of the inpackts this changes can have to the game.

One thing that conserns me at first tought is the diference in complexity between missile usage and gunnery usage after this.

Not that i dont like complexity. But the balance between the two diferent damage types, as missile and gunnery are. Can be verry unbalanced and may have a negative inpackt on curent pvp balance.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (15)

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