Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
13 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

[December] Defender Missiles

First post First post First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2016-11-25 11:24:09 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Larrikin
Hi Space Friends,

Coming with the December release, we're going to be releasing a feature we talked about at EVE Vegas 2016.


Defender Missile Skill
The skill, Defender Missiles, will no longer require Missile Launcher Operation. All alpha characters will be able to train this to Level 1. The skill will provide a 10% per level bonus to Defender Missile velocity. No other skills will effect Defender Missiles.


Defender Missiles
Defender Missiles will no longer shoot down missiles aimed at you. Instead they will launch at a random bomb (non-structure) within its flight range. A single defender missile will kill any bomb. These defender missiles can only be loaded into a new defender launcher (described below)
The Defender Missile I has a base range of 30km (45km at max skills), and a flight time of 3 seconds.
During the December patch downtime, all existing defender missiles (and their blueprints) will become the new Defender Missile I


Defender Launchers
The Defender Launcher I can only load Defender Missiles. It may only be fit to Destroyer class vessels (Destroyers, Interdictors, Command Destroyers and Tactical Destroyers). Once activated, it will scan local space for any bombs,and if it finds one within range, launch a defender missile to intercept it. If it doesn't find any bombs within range, it will still cycle.
The Defender Launcher I has a 120 second reactivation timer. It doesn't require a launcher hardpoint, and has low fitting requirements (10 cpu, 2 powergrid), but uses some capacitor (50gj) to activate. You can only fit one defender launcher.


Command Destroyers
Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.


Bomb Changes
Bombs now have a Minimum Velocity of 1m/s that you must be traveling at before you can launch. This is to fix some issues that can happen when your velocity is 0, causing the bomb not to move and just explode on you.


You can checkout these changes (and more) on Sisi soon. We appreciate any feedback you have!

Cheers,
CCP Larrikin and Team Phenomenon

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

C C P Alliance
#2 - 2016-11-25 11:24:18 UTC
Reserved

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

Rollback to 2012
#3 - 2016-11-25 12:07:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
waste of goddamn time

fozzie sov was enough of a nerf to bombing already, this is totally unnecessary

noone is bombing currently in eve because you reliably cannot predict where the fight will be and bombing requires some setup time

these changes would have been good 2 years ago

now adays test and friends are literally flying around in the most bombable doctrines in history but noone can be bothered bombing them because its impossible to predict where engagements will happen and super dds are just better bombs anyway, not to mention the general power creep of ehp/speed making bombs harder than ever to land

in adition 0 velocity bombs was some of the hardest **** to pull off and almost never saw any use so removing it for no reason i dont even understand, you just dont want people to be able to innovate?

thanks for the final nail o7 bongers

here is a suggestion because i guess i should be constructive

make them target drones or anyone using ecm on you instead
Rollback to 2012
#4 - 2016-11-25 12:11:19 UTC
Capqu wrote:
waste of goddamn time
God bless.
#5 - 2016-11-25 12:26:33 UTC
My god you guys seem to have some serious love for destroyers lately.
Elemental Tide
#6 - 2016-11-25 12:38:55 UTC  |  Edited by: James Zimmer
A few thoughts:

1. Bombs are generally launched in waves, and defenders will now randomly go after bombs. One bomb wave, and you may destroy every bomb, the next wave, only a single bomb (at least that's how I understand the mechanics as you describe them). That lack of consistency would be frustrating, especially in a game that is significantly less random than other MMOs.

2. Bombers are in a pretty good place right now. IMO they don't need this nerf.

3. Destroyers are the meta right now, they don't need the help.

4. Command destroyers are already unique and strong. Adding a third fleet assistance role to command destroyers on top of jumping and command bursts would make them too good IMO, though I do appreciate the effort to reward people who bring combined fleets.
Coalition of the Unfortunate
#7 - 2016-11-25 12:39:42 UTC
So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.

They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers.
#8 - 2016-11-25 14:00:58 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

Command Destroyers
Command Destroyers receive at 50% role bonus to decreasing the reactivation timer on Defender Launchers.


Please do not surcharge Command Destroyers with stuffs they don't need... We are having fun with them and they have a great and defined role in the meta right now.

I don't want to wake up and see them getting nerfed because *they did too much*.

Create a new class of Destroyers, Utility Destroyers or whatever, if you really want a Defender Missile bonus for Destroyers, no need to muddle Command Destroyers to do so.
The Bastard Cartel
#9 - 2016-11-25 14:33:41 UTC
Dantelion Shinoni wrote:
Create a new class of Destroyers, Utility Destroyers or whatever, if you really want a Defender Missile bonus for Destroyers, no need to muddle Command Destroyers to do so.

We don't need more Destroyers, or in fact small ships love, we need CCP to fix T3c, BLOPS and Battleships.

I think CCP is trying to get Alpha clones involved in fleet as Dessie's pilot with a use, thus the Defender Missiles change (fine enough) and the use of combined fleets (ok).

However, as already stated, Dessies will just be alphaed off the field before Bombers commit. Looks to me like another indirect atempt to fix Battleship's vulnerabilities while trying to not actually touch Battleships.

IMHO, Defenders would have seen such a better use as a battleship module.
Tactical-Retreat
#10 - 2016-11-25 15:19:25 UTC
I like the fact that it motivates people to bring more destroyers to the field, but since this fits on T3Ds, we'll just see brick tanked T3Ds that aren't killable easily. It removes the whole strategic choice of targeting the smaller ships to unleash the bomb run and that's a shame.

Apart fom that, I don't like how it nerfs bombers again. Bombs have already been nerfed already, and lining up a good bombing run can be a PITA, not to mention that one guy that has a disconnect (something that happens quite often to some) will screw up the entire run.

These missiles shouldn't do enough damage to oneshot a bomb. Why not have bombs take two hits to explode for instance? Or maybe introduce a new type of bombs with a 20km diameter area but that can take one defender hit without dying.

And all of this doesn't address the fact that armor tanking is insanely more resistant to bombs than shield tanking. Nerfing bomb damage on both tanks doesn't solve this issue at all.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#11 - 2016-11-25 15:27:32 UTC
lol

Former member of CSM6.

#12 - 2016-11-25 15:50:03 UTC
Solid nerf to lame solo bombers doing lame bombings of rookie ship cyno's for lol's in hostile space. Not writing for sympathy, just sayin'. Solo bombers can have enough trouble with nearby interdictors, (oops - cloaky, didn't see you there!) and interceptors following to celestial warp-away points.

If this is meant primarily as a new option for fleet defense & damage reduction from waves of bombers, Altrue's suggestion of two hits to destroy a bomb seems worth considering.

Also new bomb types with different stats, deployment requirements, or effects: throw bombers a bone while you are nerfing one aspect, it's a good distraction.
Freedom Among the Stars
#13 - 2016-11-25 16:02:06 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
My god you guys seem to have some serious love for destroyers lately.


It's not like we have some kind of a ship class that serves no purpose right now other than doing anomic agent and team missions.
Mercenary Coalition
#14 - 2016-11-25 16:22:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Sentient Blade wrote:
So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.

They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers.

A command Dessie could sit 70-130km off the fleet, see bombs, jump in and fire the missiles. Or the other way around if the bombs are the biggest danger.

With the range they offer, there's lots of flexibility in where you need to be.
C C P Alliance
#15 - 2016-11-25 16:23:33 UTC
Sentient Blade wrote:
So in order to guard your fleet effectively, you really need to put these almost directly on top of your existing fleet (which to need them would be something slow and heavy, say battlecruisers or battleships)... But they're destroyers... so realistically one or two bombs gets through and they're going to explode due to the low EHP of destroyers, especially when sig-bloomed by MWD.

They'll probably get annihilated by a small wing of RLML caracals anyway prior to bombs launching, but I'd say a passive bonus resistance to bomb damage wouldn't go amiss when fitting to destroyers.


This is by design. We want to ensure there is plenty of counter-gameplay to destroyers screening a fleet from bombs with defenders.


Altrue wrote:
These missiles shouldn't do enough damage to oneshot a bomb. Why not have bombs take two hits to explode for instance?

Given the random nature of the defender-to-bomb targeting, this would make defender missiles mostly useless, unless used en-mass.

Altrue wrote:
Or maybe introduce a new type of bombs with a 20km diameter area but that can take one defender hit without dying.

Thats a cool idea. Part of the effect of this change is that we have additional design room with bombs, such as hardier bombs, or new types of Ewar bombs. To clarify, we're not promising these things, just suggesting at some of the design space this change enables.

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

#16 - 2016-11-25 16:32:17 UTC
Starrakatt wrote:

We don't need more Destroyers, or in fact small ships love, we need CCP to fix T3c, BLOPS and Battleships.


One does not prevent the other, what do you have against Small ships? Are you a sizeist??


Starrakatt wrote:

I think CCP is trying to get Alpha clones involved in fleet as Dessie's pilot with a use, thus the Defender Missiles change (fine enough) and the use of combined fleets (ok).

However, as already stated, Dessies will just be alphaed off the field before Bombers commit. Looks to me like another indirect atempt to fix Battleship's vulnerabilities while trying to not actually touch Battleships.


Clear as day, and as you said yourself, this is not a bad thing. Giving more things Alphas can do in fleets is an obvious good thing.

And as the comment right after you shows, it won't be that simple to get rid of Defender destroyers, once again it all depends on the players fitting and using the thing.

BCs, Battleships provide affordable firepower, you can't also give them utility otherwise all the ships underneath them become that much useless, the move to have MJDFG on Destroyers was genius and more moves like this can only be a good thing.

Also, new ships are always fun, screw balance.

Starrakatt wrote:

IMHO, Defenders would have seen such a better use as a battleship module.


Sizeist!
Mercenary Coalition
#17 - 2016-11-25 16:33:25 UTC
So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one?
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2016-11-25 16:37:55 UTC
Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs?
Brave Collective
#19 - 2016-11-25 16:54:40 UTC
VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:
Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs?

There is a difference? A bomb will do damage to whatever is in range when it explodes no matter who launched it.
Just don't activate the module if friendlies are bombing close by.

"Memories are meant to fade. They're designed that way for a reason."

C C P Alliance
#20 - 2016-11-25 18:28:42 UTC
VCBee 2fast2furious wrote:
Just to confirm, do Defender Missiles 2.0 distinguish between friendly and non-friendly bombs?

They do not, they target a random bomb within intercept range. It does not consider friendly or non-friendly bombs.

Rowells wrote:
So, in regards to how it selects a bomb, is it truly random or does it pick the closest one?

Its truly random.

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

13 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump