I was under the impression you could, as missiles still have HP values, CCP even buffed their HP in some cases. Plus you have defender missiles which were reworked.
1 Like
Pretty sure you still can because I have found nothing to support his claim that you can’t.
Re: Hidden damage bonus
Doubtful. Counter argument:
All Artillery has a significantly lower RoF than all other weapons …
… except pimped 650mm, I guess, but that’s extreme and expensive …
… which means that all other higher RoFweapon systems apply wrecking shots far more often.
It would be balanced. I have my doubt that this has been considered at removal.
Maybe there are missile launchers as slow …
… i have never reached even a million SP in missiles …
… but even if so would they just be a fraction of all of them.
It’s your idea, you shouldn’t have a doubt about it. Does it deal more damage when it “punches through” than it would do without it?
What’s that? Way too complicated. “Punching through structure” would just add to the already chance based Hit, Glazed, Penetrated and “Wrecking shot”. Artillery would just need one more type, which is fair, because it is the one weapon type that gets wrecking shots the least.
You either have a good random algo for this if you want to preserve memory bandwidth, or you just precalc one array of arbitrary size, per node, and every player in the node cycles through it. Random starting positions, of course. No one would ever notice this, as long as it has sufficient size and it could be implemented pretty cache friendly.
I could work out some working numbers, but that’s beyond this thread. : p
This could be called a trick question, because the whole point of this is to punch through theblast half of structure. See my comment regarding “wrecking shots”.
What you seem to be forgetting, is that the rate of fire of Artillery, especially the big ones, is so low that even over hours there would not be any imbalance.
1400mm, I need to re-check for accuracy, shoot every 15+ seconds iirc. That’s four shots per minute, or less. See, when you look at it like this then I could argue that blasters are overpowered, because their high RoF over time, increases the rate of wrecking shots per [time-frame].
And for lower sizes it balances itself out, because they lack the impact of 1400s, or 1200s. They, too, lose the race for wrecking shots, though.
No, I’m not forgetting it. See, the rate of fire is already balanced by the high alpha. But when you increase the alpha (i.e. with a “punch through”) then you need to rebalance it by reducing the rate of fire a bit. No?!
1 Like
I see no reason why it should, because in the end it just adds to the RNG of damage application, which has plenty. Hit, Miss, Glaze, Penetrate, and Wrecking Shots. Sorry if I missed one.
Bonus points: Artillery has such a low RoF that additional computations are spread out widely over time anyway. See also my thoughts about blasters in my last post.
Sorry for making seperate posts, it is more structured that way.
No.
It applies only once per ship, per targetted ship.
You have a good approach sometimes.
I like it.
This “punch” only happens once per ship attacked, and applys only when the damage is high enough to punch through both at least 25% armor and a minimum of 50% hull.
I guess this words it better and was not obvious…
It did not work when already in hull. If a shot went into structure, without punching through it, then instapopping it that way did not work anymore.
I guess I should file a ticket and ask.
If it adds more damage in certain situations then it does put an imbalance to it, because not all weapons have the same alpha and rate of fire. Some weapons will trigger a punch through more often than others and this does not depend on the weapons, but on the targets. It needs to be looked at for every possible target to avoid that certain weapons gain a favour against a specific target. A “punch through” is a conditional damage bonus and can change entire fleet doctrines should it show that it gives an advantage against a specific ship type.
This is also what I think led to the removal of it, because it makes it tedious to balance damage fair for all situations.
1 Like
[s]No.
Name one for each respective size.
One which provides the alpha necessary …
… to punch through the requirements I have laid out above.
One that is not Artillery, of course, because we are talking about Artillery.
Which is, as far as I know, the only one capable of achieving this.
Please correct me if I am wrong![/s]
Misunderstood your question.
I did just now. But if you think it is not then I’m not going to argue with you, but CCP can worry about it.
I guess you are right.
The problem solves itself by lowering the bonus of the wrecking shot, for Artillery only.
You know, there is one thing weird about your line of argumentation.
It blindly assumes that it matters, while looking at RoF and the chance of it happening in the first place clearly shows that it does not. Fights do not last endlessly. TiDi time does not count as real time.
The only way for this to every actually have a significant impact on a single fight (which is what this really is about), would be if it happened every damn shot, which is impossible.
The RoF is too low to matter,
it is not accumulative (aka a group of ships does not act as one and thus do not get this bonus),
fights generally do not last long enough.
Yeah, no, you got nothing but speculation.
Thank you! You have helped getting a lot of detail written down. : D
No. The dependency between RoF and alpha is the same for all weapons. Only the “punch through” changes its nature in a non-linear way and that will likely lead to problems as I’ve described, such as a shift in fleet doctrines and all because of one small weapon effect. This is what I’m on about.
2 Likes
A chech tree is is a tree of if else statements in programming, and pretty much required in a condition such as this.
In other words, you want them to reintroduce a bug they patched OUT in the first place? A bug is not a “distinct mechanic” of the game. If a ship is dying when it isnt at 0% structure, it’s a bug. That’s not something you want to reintroduce.
Defender missiles work against bombs.
Go and test it then and report back.
Only thing I could find that is any where close to your claims is this. https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/topic/430967/ and that doesn’t even do what you claim, it buffs the hp and gives them a damage resist bonus based on their damage type. Stop speaking out of your ass and link me some proof.
Wanna fix the lag issues in EVE.
Hard cap blue standings to like 25 for Corp/alliance, 100 for players.
Hard cap corporations to 1000 members.
Hard cap alliances to say 20 member corps.
This way, all the horse poop CCP has spouted off before about wanting more fights happening on a smaller scale (bad paraphrase. Dev blogs and fan fest from years past)
If people start gathering in large groups which result in TiDi, they (CCP) should be able to spawn NPCs to attack players and their structures.
I think you just replied off topic…
@ISD_Buldath I summon thee to delete both my and the off topic post please.