Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
388
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 03:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
Missiles.... and Missile disruptors.
So missiles are in a really weird place right now.
These topics are for the ammo only. Not the launchers!
FIRST THINGS FIRST! GET RID OF THE STUPID KINETIC ONLY BONUS TO SHIPS AND GIVE THEM A 5% ALL DAMAGE TYPES LIKE TURRET SHIPS GET!
Now on to missiles
Light missiles..... are awesome. hit everything and do decent damage. Maybe reduce their damage a little. However overall they are in a good place.
Rockets - Again very good, do there job and hit most targets well.
Heavy Missiles - OMG super nerf bat destroyed these things. You need to give them their range back at expense of hitting small targets. They are afterall the long range missile type for cruiser hulls.
HAMS - I like hams, I think they are okay. 5% to all damge types would really fix any holes they have.
Cruise Missiles - In a very good place they are fine!
Torps - OMFG what a joke! These suck. My suggestion ..... reduce the range of them to say.... 10-15km, but also let them hit smaller targets. They are supposed to have a big boom that rocks the world around them, let the smaller ships that get too close feel the PAIN!
Now for something that I cannot honestly believe doesnt already exist! Missile Disruption Modules.
They would act the same as Tracking Disruptors but differently at the same time....
So it would make no sense to have the mod reduce flight time. Whats it doing sucking fuel out of the missile? No I dont think so.... This is what I propose. Make it chance based like ECM. It would have a 15 second activation time... All missiles in flight in that time from the ship firing at the ship with with the Missile Disruptor would be subject to a RNG game. If the Missile disruptor loses the missiles continue nothing happening as they slam into your ship. Now however if the Missile Disruptor wins then those missiles in flight would have a "hacked" computer guidence and hilariously and recklessly fly off in random directions (just like fireworks... which their program could be used to help with this) not hitting their intended target.
Some skills that could affect the disrputors could be..... a disruptor specific skill to fit and use module (new skill). Hacking - would increase strength of module. Advanced Hacking (new skill) as a secondary power boost to the module.
Even if you dont like the RNG idea..... we really need a missile disruption module.
Wild |
Anhenka
Daktaklakpak.
603
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 03:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:Missiles.... and Missile disruptors.
FIRST THINGS FIRST! GET RID OF THE STUPID KINETIC ONLY BONUS TO SHIPS AND GIVE THEM A 5% ALL DAMAGE TYPES LIKE TURRET SHIPS GET!
Wild And... everything past this point can be safely ignored.
Why exactly do you think you deserve selectable damage types AND the same level of bonuses as guns?
Because 5% of limited damage types -> 5% all damage types is a flat up buff. Why exactly do you think they need this? And if you don't intend it as a flat up operational buff, what do you intend to remove in compensation.
FFS people, seen this a hundred times. Just because you don't like something or it's restrictive does NOT mean it's not factored into the overall power of the ship, you don't just get to remove restrictive parts of it without resulting in a ship that is more powerful. |
MagicToes
Dr Pepper Sales Team
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 04:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Not a fan of the missile disruption idea personally. Simply because like most things eve it's swings and roundabouts, they can't be disrupted like you point out but have other drawbacks, such as the delay in hitting a target including having to wait for the deeps to apply before being able to warp off.
The thing about omni damage bonus I agree with and that torps need fixing. Seriously faction torps being able to do more damage than rage (in a phoon) against a target painted battleship is stupid. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1425
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 04:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
Missiles actually need their application looked at more than anything. There are base hulls that are capable of mitigating 30-40% of the same size missiles damage before any modules or boosts are added. If you came to me and told me you had designed a system designed to shoot at cruisers but some of them would dodge 30-40% of the damage without any fittings at all, I'd laugh, and tell you to go back to the drawing board and make a better system. |
Nariya Kentaya
Phoenix funds
1459
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 05:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
MagicToes wrote:Not a fan of the missile disruption idea personally. Simply because like most things eve it's swings and roundabouts, they can't be disrupted like you point out but have other drawbacks, such as the delay in hitting a target including having to wait for the deeps to apply before being able to warp off.
The thing about omni damage bonus I agree with and that torps need fixing. Seriously faction torps being able to do more damage than rage (in a phoon) against a target painted battleship is stupid. This, Missiles are a counter to tracking disruptors/neuts, like smartbombs are a counter to missiles/drones. Missiles should not receive benefits from tracking computers, nor penalties from tracking disruptors, since they are a different weapon type with different strengths and weaknesses as guns or drones. |
Syrias Bizniz
Zebra Corp The Bastion
317
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 07:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:MagicToes wrote:Not a fan of the missile disruption idea personally. Simply because like most things eve it's swings and roundabouts, they can't be disrupted like you point out but have other drawbacks, such as the delay in hitting a target including having to wait for the deeps to apply before being able to warp off.
The thing about omni damage bonus I agree with and that torps need fixing. Seriously faction torps being able to do more damage than rage (in a phoon) against a target painted battleship is stupid. This, Missiles are a counter to tracking disruptors/neuts, like smartbombs are a counter to missiles/drones. Missiles should not receive benefits from tracking computers, nor penalties from tracking disruptors, since they are a different weapon type with different strengths and weaknesses as guns or drones.
Claiming that smartbombs are a counter to missiles would mean that i can fit a smartbomb into my utility high and just through fitting this mod i'd suddenly be way more efficient when encountering a missile ship. Note how i used singular. And how it's not true.
Right now, as Wildcat pointed out, if you fit Heavy Missile Launchers or Torp Launchers, you're most likely doing something wrong.
Also, without the possibility to disrupt missile damage, you end up with a situation where a frigate can bring quite some sweat to a turret-BS, turret-BC and turret-cruiser, while basically comitting suicide whenever it goes up against the same sizes of a BS. Where engaging a Missile BS is probably still the smartest thing.
I'd be proposing a targeted module that will manipulate the explosion velocity / -radius / damage reduction factor of the target ship's missiles. Cause ECM like random-faggotry in an AoE radius around people will sure as hell not totally void any missile-ships in bigger fleet engagements. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
210
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 07:53:00 -
[7] - Quote
Anhenka wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:Missiles.... and Missile disruptors.
FIRST THINGS FIRST! GET RID OF THE STUPID KINETIC ONLY BONUS TO SHIPS AND GIVE THEM A 5% ALL DAMAGE TYPES LIKE TURRET SHIPS GET!
Wild And... everything past this point can be safely ignored. Why exactly do you think you deserve selectable damage types AND the same level of bonuses as guns? Because 5% of limited damage types -> 5% all damage types is a flat up buff. Why exactly do you think they need this? And if you don't intend it as a flat up operational buff, what do you intend to remove in compensation. FFS people, seen this a hundred times. Just because you don't like something or it's restrictive does NOT mean it's not factored into the overall power of the ship, you don't just get to remove restrictive parts of it without resulting in a ship that is more powerful.
You realise a MAX skilled pilot firing faction HML at a STATIONARY cruiser won't hit for full damage?
You think turrets have that kind of problem?
I've had ONE pilot shoot a heavy missile at me in the last 3 months.
Why do you think a missile user shouldn't be able to hit a stationary target in the same size class for its full (weak) damage? |
Fer'isam K'ahn
None Of One
222
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 08:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hmm, I would be more interested adding my observations and arguments if the OP would be more consistent and less ranty. It would also help if he would include links to the already existing discussions or at least acknowledge them. Here is the chance to edit it.
I will drop by later again ... if the thread still exists. It has some good chances of being locked (hint at edit).
Cheers Are you sure your issues aren't elsewhere ?! |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1903
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 09:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
If you want to address a proposed change at a CCP Dev, please feel free to do so. Addressing it at a character whose player became a CCP Dev, is not the way to go.
Thread locked.
The Rules: 30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties. Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |