Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
374
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 12:06:21 -
[1] - Quote
Not speaking about the launchers themselves but the ammo. Is it time that this now long suffering and languishing weapons system is revised? It's no secret, other weapons systems have overtaken them and are now pulling ahead.
This weapon system is just... terrible. For all the impressive volley damage it's nearly impossible to apply any of it without a dedicated support fleet. Even solo kiting artillery ships exist, HAMs are obviously scram range weapons yet what are HML?
I have nearly 7 million SP in missiles and I have a hard time understanding the underlying motives for some changes.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015
T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346
LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
722
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 13:07:10 -
[2] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Not speaking about the launchers themselves but the ammo. Is it time that this now long suffering and languishing weapons system is revised? It's no secret, other weapons systems have overtaken them and are now pulling ahead. This weapon system is just... terrible. For all the impressive volley damage it's nearly impossible to apply any of it without a dedicated support fleet. Even solo kiting artillery ships exist, HAMs are obviously scram range weapons yet what are HML? I have nearly 7 million SP in missiles and I have a hard time understanding the underlying motives for some changes. As an addendum I would like to propose simply an increase in the base damage of the missiles, rather than modifying application stats. Those who fit no application mods will not see much of a benefit as they see little applied damage today. Those who fit for the right conditions will see a boost in performance, also to help those pure missile boats especially caldari ones have another medium missile choice instead of *basically* just the RLML (or straight LML as many fits now include). As the heavy missile has tangentially been considered overpowered in the now distant past I would further do the damage increase incrementally in order to minimise the opportunities for abuse. A straight 5% for now, re-address in 3 months time. as someone elsewhere brilliantly put it: Quote:HML nerf to kill tengu fleets in null
killed every other viable HML fit in the game at the same time
brilliant CCP balancing.
I've only recently started using missiles on my Gila but am surprised that HML's aren't BC class or higher weapons to be honest. HAM's for cruisers fair enough, it's a smaller missile trading range for extra hitting power but heavy missiles ought to not fit on cruisers? Perhaps un-nerf them and change the fitting option to being a large system instead? |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
927
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 13:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
actually most of the sniper gunships usually have a tracking bonus or use tracking mods .. i guess missile snipers need the same things added too them
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
interstellar initiative Incorporated
305
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 15:56:43 -
[4] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:actually most of the sniper gunships usually have a tracking bonus or use tracking mods .. i guess missile snipers need the same things added too them The other difference is that every other weapon type in Eve can make use of Tracking Enhancers, Tracking Computers, and even Remote Tracking Computers. If you want to improve your missile application you have to use your rig slots. If only fozziebear would stop hating on missiles long enough to balance that aspect... |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
3014
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 16:22:49 -
[5] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Harvey James wrote:actually most of the sniper gunships usually have a tracking bonus or use tracking mods .. i guess missile snipers need the same things added too them The other difference is that every other weapon type in Eve can make use of Tracking Enhancers, Tracking Computers, and even Remote Tracking Computers. If you want to improve your missile application you have to use your rig slots. If only fozziebear would stop hating on missiles long enough to balance that aspect...
If you want to improve your missile application, you can use target painters. If you're up close, you can use webs. Please learn to missile. |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
interstellar initiative Incorporated
305
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 16:25:16 -
[6] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Harvey James wrote:actually most of the sniper gunships usually have a tracking bonus or use tracking mods .. i guess missile snipers need the same things added too them The other difference is that every other weapon type in Eve can make use of Tracking Enhancers, Tracking Computers, and even Remote Tracking Computers. If you want to improve your missile application you have to use your rig slots. If only fozziebear would stop hating on missiles long enough to balance that aspect... If you want to improve your missile application, you can use target painters. If you're up close, you can use webs. Please learn to missile. So, Target Painters and Webs are missile specific like TE's, TC's, and ReTC's are turret specific? Please learn to read. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
418
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 16:44:15 -
[7] - Quote
Then you need missile ewar.
The problem with heavy missiles remains the fact they were brought into line and then scarcely 12 months later ALL other long range medium weapons were significantly buffed leaving HM utterly in the dirt.
I don't see them fixing it any time soon, if ever. Time and again it been brought up and not so much as a peep from with CSM or CCP. Just throw the towel in and train guns already. |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
193
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 16:52:35 -
[8] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Harvey James wrote:actually most of the sniper gunships usually have a tracking bonus or use tracking mods .. i guess missile snipers need the same things added too them The other difference is that every other weapon type in Eve can make use of Tracking Enhancers, Tracking Computers, and even Remote Tracking Computers. If you want to improve your missile application you have to use your rig slots. If only fozziebear would stop hating on missiles long enough to balance that aspect...
I hope you realize that all those other weapontypes have to deal with tracking. Missiles are free from that, your missile ship can move freely on grid and not care a thing. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
418
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 16:55:21 -
[9] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Harvey James wrote:actually most of the sniper gunships usually have a tracking bonus or use tracking mods .. i guess missile snipers need the same things added too them The other difference is that every other weapon type in Eve can make use of Tracking Enhancers, Tracking Computers, and even Remote Tracking Computers. If you want to improve your missile application you have to use your rig slots. If only fozziebear would stop hating on missiles long enough to balance that aspect... I hope you realize that all those other weapontypes have to deal with tracking. Missiles are free from that, your missile ship can move freely on grid and not care a thing.
Let's have a look then eh?
Rails with "terrible" tracking vs HML shooting a high transversal shield MWD cruiser
afkalt wrote:Example: [Caracal, HML] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Reactor Control Unit II Damage Control II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Warp Disruptor I Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Medium Bay Loading Accelerator I Medium Polycarbon Engine Housing I Medium Polycarbon Engine Housing I Warrior II x2 PAPER DPS: 300 Just spotted I had a rogue RCU in there, should have been overdrive but I'm not changing it now [Thorax, Thorax Rails] Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Tracking Enhancer II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Faint Warp Disruptor I Adaptive Invulnerability Field II 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M 200mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Warrior II x5 PAPER DPS: 488/284 [Am/Tu] Here is the thorax shooting the caracal: http://i.imgur.com/c5PfO5m.png And here is the caracal shooting the thorax: http://i.imgur.com/Im9yibr.png Combined chart for visible break points: http://i.imgur.com/WcVXXiJ.png So whilst, yes the HML has a greater range, at a useful engagement range i.e. point range, the rails absolutely smoke it, even at extremely high transversal. You can see yourself it's not even close. Not remotely. And that's HML vs a MWD cruiser. Sure, you may point out that it is antimatter and short range, so lets slap some tunsten in there and see what happens: http://i.imgur.com/aQEb8s3.png It's really pretty damning.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
386
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 18:15:47 -
[10] - Quote
Dear Caleb,
I only have 13.3 million missile skills but I am also not hiding the fact that I used them a while before they got that terrible application thing added to them.
With eight years being here I may also state that I am experienced missile user. So for anyone in doubt, ask someone who is here long enough to have "insight".
I am sure that when CCP removes this utter crap that CCP Xhagen and CCP Tuxford pulled seven years ago we will be much happier. I am not until I get an apology.
CCP Fozzy had nothing to do with it. But if you want details I suggest you read all about it in the old forums archive. I am merely stating facts.
A damage bonus would be the wrong way for heavy missiles since the Drake is not the only missile ship that can field them. But finally ditching that tracking poo they have on them (because one BOB died to a Raven and cried and CCP "had to do stuff")
The volley damage of my favorite example ship is fine as it is. And since there are not tracking enhancers or other modules to help out you have to gimp your ship in a way that it is close to a warcrime by the Geneva Convention.
No turret boat has to do that.
And yes, Alvatore I do know what I am talking about and to your surprise I do have 19 million turret skills in my bookshelf. Assault missiles are the "blaster" version for medium sized missiles and heavy missiles the "railgun" version.
Speaking of medium railguns, my Ferox can muder stuff at 88km while heavy missiles with 75km were so stronnk'hhh that it was believed that Satan came from hell and made goofswarm loose fights.
CCP had to act naow before Satan could do any more harm to the bumblebees.
As I already said to the CSM, removing that missile tracking stuff will not brake EVE.
Nobody needs any sort of f-ing ewar against missiles. You can already shoot them down or energy-pulse them away. The bigger torpedos and citadel torpedos can be outrun by anything that is smaller than a battlecruiser.
Sorry girls, missles with 100% application do only 100% application in a perfect situation. Just like all our turrets are able to hurt you long after the falloff on your fitting screen ran out.
Did you girls ever wonder why most of the ships that got rebalanced used to have those (not so) useless launcher slots in the highs??
signature
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
418
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 18:21:57 -
[11] - Quote
Missiles formula is ok, otherwise shooting down sizes will be ridiculous.
What is not fine, is not being able to get good hits on the same size class (medium) even in a best case scenario i.e. shield tanked MWD. Wait until you try and hit an AB armor ship.... |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
386
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 20:11:12 -
[12] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Missiles formula is ok, otherwise shooting down sizes will be ridiculous.
So it is almost balanced that (whine-) mater and angel boats can do it but totally out of hand that the slowest ships in EVE cannot?
Yeah that sounds almost reasonable.
Good Lord, there is no such thing as a wrecking shot, capable of 3x alpha. Pheeew.
Crisis averted.
signature
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
420
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 20:28:42 -
[13] - Quote
You can get under those guns though, you cannot get under missiles thus the formula needs to stay. |
Yogsoloth
Percussive Diplomacy
159
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 20:51:14 -
[14] - Quote
Fozzie's been on his anti missile crusade for quite some time now, don't expect this trend to reverse anytime soon.
EVE is currently a "game of drones" All you can do is ride the wave. |
NEONOVUS
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
945
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 20:55:23 -
[15] - Quote
We already have missile ewar as defenders (PS defender missile Armageddon with neuts versus pimpgus is funny) So logically we should have the buffing modules as well |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
386
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 21:10:22 -
[16] - Quote
afkalt wrote:You can get under those guns though, you cannot get under missiles thus the formula needs to stay.
You can and you also can shoot missiles down with anti-missile missiles so I am not quit sure where you are going with this?
You can approach a machariel and then a very scawy looking heavy neut will disable you and that would be the end of that approach.
My comparison of missiles to artillery also looks at the ships that would wear them compared to the ships that fit missiles.
Since we got "weapon grouping" one missile volley will start at the same time and can be neutralized by a medium energy-pulse weapon.
When you deal with long range missiles the missiles in flight will stop doing anything when they reach missile speed x flight time, zee end, while a turret can vaporize you from much further away.
Girls,
please read all missile related threads in the old forums archive before you attempt to respond.
I will appreciate it when we are on the same level of education here.
signature
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1628
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 21:27:52 -
[17] - Quote
Defenders suck, Smart Bombs are not viable in smaller fleets. Saying there are counters to missiles currently is BS. When TD's work against normal missiles (FF missiles should be immune) then you have some real counters.
Removing the missile explosion radius & speed also is BS, 100% damage all the time makes them no brain at all, just press F1 and don't care as long as the target in range is silly.
But.... The base explosion radius & speed should be significantly higher on nearly all classes of missile. They should apply 100% damage to an unfitted hull. Take a Thorax, put no fittings on it. And it is already mitigating 25% or so of the Heavy Missile damage. This is before links drop it's sig radius, increase it's speed and before an AB/MWD increase it's speed further. That is where the problem lies. Change all classes of missiles to apply perfectly to an unfitted hull of their target class (So for heavy missiles that would be pirate cruisers), then make the fittings and boosts be what mitigates damage. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
420
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 21:52:03 -
[18] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:afkalt wrote:You can get under those guns though, you cannot get under missiles thus the formula needs to stay. You can and you also can shoot missiles down with anti-missile missiles so I am not quit sure where you are going with this? You can approach a machariel and then a very scawy looking heavy neut will disable you and that would be the end of that approach. My comparison of missiles to artillery also looks at the ships that would wear them compared to the ships that fit missiles. Since we got "weapon grouping" one missile volley will start at the same time and can be neutralized by a medium energy-pulse weapon. When you deal with long range missiles the missiles in flight will stop doing anything when they reach missile speed x flight time, zee end, while a turret can vaporize you from much further away. Girls, please read all missile related threads in the old forums archive before you attempt to respond. I will appreciate it when we are on the same level of education here.
That's crap and you know it. If that happened there would be NO reason to use ANY other system. Cruise ravens/phoons would blot out the skies
I'm all for helping HML, but let's be sensible. |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
interstellar initiative Incorporated
307
|
Posted - 2014.10.25 21:52:53 -
[19] - Quote
Defenders sucking isn't a reason not to fix missiles, it's a reason to fix defenders as well as other missiles. Of course, with good ole fozziebear in charge of balancing, I highly doubt there will be any fixing of missiles. Imagine a small-fleet Dragoon, with Defenders and drones so he is both defending the fleet against missiles and applying damage with drones. As for TD's and missiles, if it's a separate script then maybe. However, I want application mods if someone is going to be able to screw with my application and plugging your ears while screaming "TARGET PAINTERS AND WEBS" is not an appropriate response. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
387
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 00:13:59 -
[20] - Quote
afkalt wrote: ...That's crap and you know it. If that happened there would be NO reason to use ANY other system. Cruise ravens/phoons would blot out the skies
I'm all for helping HML, but let's be sensible.
Let's talk Raven and typhoon another day..(because the battleship "balance" didn't do my Raven any favors and 10x Ishtar will be the sudden end of her).
Currently the Drake (posterchild of heavy missiles) has a missile range of 62km. So my heavy missiles were range nerfed for no reason and application nerfed for even less reasons.
Now those 62km are the end of the power of the heavy missile. A linked Garmur or a nano Garmur only has to fly away from them for (missile flight time) to not get hit at all.
While the Garmur maybe an extreme case, there are not many frigates left that would have to fear heavy missiles because they can simply outrun them.
On the other hand all frigates and destroyers will have a hard time outrunning an insta-pop turret volley.
Your fitting screen falloff is not zee end of your guns firepower but the "at this point you need to divide your damage by 2x not zero".
Keep in mind that no missile will hurt anyone until they have reached their target or their flight time is over and at that point they will stop doing anything but becoming a dead object in space and be removed from the server.
The Ferox will no have issue terrorizing smaller stuff at 90km or more range and the Eagle even at- that's too far you can be probed and warped to at that point.
2x arty hurricanes will vaporize everything that is not a Drake or a tech3 boat and everything below before the pilots involved know what is happening.
Currently no ship below a station is in any danger from a heavy missile, even if those ships are not moving, afk and have their mwds on.
What I am fighting for might shift people to fly missile ships for a while but after that gets old, an Ishtar blob might be refreshing.
No missile needs more ewar until I get my 100% always working boolean ECM modules on a 50.000 EHP + 120km range Falcon.
Missiles have more than enough counters as it is, you can read all about it in the archive but please don't. I want to create some tears before people figure out stuff.
signature
|
|
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow The Revenant Order
4044
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 00:51:36 -
[21] - Quote
Moar tears
I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Demon your parents warned you about.
||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Tug-class Vessel||
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
3883
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 01:09:55 -
[22] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:But.... The base explosion radius & speed should be significantly higher on nearly all classes of missile. They should apply 100% damage to an unfitted hull. Take a Thorax, put no fittings on it. And it is already mitigating 25% or so of the Heavy Missile damage. This is before links drop it's sig radius, increase it's speed and before an AB/MWD increase it's speed further. That is where the problem lies. Change all classes of missiles to apply perfectly to an unfitted hull of their target class (So for heavy missiles that would be pirate cruisers), then make the fittings and boosts be what mitigates damage. Exactly. Missiles should be able to apply 100% base damage to ships within their class, period. If we want to entertain missile counters then have a ship's sensor strength or EECM modules reduce their effectiveness - which means utilizing actual slots as opposed to simply flying around.
Let's not forget that missiles aren't simply "op". There is no opportunity for critical damage and they have the longest delay for actual damage application.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
389
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 01:32:28 -
[23] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:But.... The base explosion radius & speed should be significantly higher on nearly all classes of missile. They should apply 100% damage to an unfitted hull. Take a Thorax, put no fittings on it. And it is already mitigating 25% or so of the Heavy Missile damage. This is before links drop it's sig radius, increase it's speed and before an AB/MWD increase it's speed further. That is where the problem lies. Change all classes of missiles to apply perfectly to an unfitted hull of their target class (So for heavy missiles that would be pirate cruisers), then make the fittings and boosts be what mitigates damage. Exactly. Missiles should be able to apply 100% base damage to ships within their class, period. If we want to entertain missile counters then have a ship's sensor strength or EECM modules reduce their effectiveness - which means utilizing actual slots as opposed to simply flying around. Let's not forget that missiles aren't simply "op". There is no opportunity for critical damage and they have the longest delay for actual damage application. Thank you Arthur!
Yes exactly!
In addition to that there is more than meets the eye on a missile (which everyone is invited to look at if you happen to be in client).
Missles still do have two attributes that are in use that not many are aware of, an armor and shield multiplier.
Now what's this?
A relic at this point but joking aside, those mulitpliers were used when the damage of a missile was calculated.
Every turret user should have figured out that your turrets can one-shot a ship, usually a smaller one but in case of any missile it doesn't work that way.
It is not an insta-gibb 'drop 1970 hp kinetic damage' on your (wind) shield. What happens is that all missiles in flight that manage to impact on a target will have those mulitpliers applied to your shield and or armor resistance.
So in case of a Drake shooting a Deimos with 100% application but with 80% base resist will reduce that 1970hp kinetic damage to 396hp shield damage or a dent. And that is before the multiplier reduce that 'volley' damage even further.
How much more clear do I have to make this?
An arty cane with an alpha of 3000 or 4000hp damage will most likely put that same Deimos into low armor with one shot.
Simply 'not knowing' doesn't change any laws.
I will let that sink in for a minute.
signature
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
167
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 01:46:37 -
[24] - Quote
I can definitely support the fixing of the explosion radius to the average of the size appropriate signature radii of unfitted hulls across the board. I also support raising explosion velocity so that missiles deal full damage to the average speed of size appropriate hulls with nav 3. This means buffer tanked hulls, one way or the other (hull tank not included) will almost always take nearly full damage, with only resists to stop it, but an AB using active tank will be the way to negate missile damage.
Yes, I do incursions. Find out more here
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
391
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 02:06:43 -
[25] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:I can definitely support the fixing of the explosion radius to the average of the size appropriate signature radii of unfitted hulls across the board. I also support raising explosion velocity so that missiles deal full damage to the average speed of size appropriate hulls with nav 3. This means buffer tanked hulls, one way or the other (hull tank not included) will almost always take nearly full damage, with only resists to stop it, but an AB using active tank will be the way to negate missile damage.
Well at that point, they could also ditch the whole thing completely
I know most of the folks against such an outrageous idea believe that I am stupid, take drugs, drink alcohol all day, every day, need brain surgery, new implants or whatever they come up with because it is not a weekday.
But that is not the case.
In 2006 or the uprise of the 'nano-age' all missiles did however have 100% application and despite some Raven pilots roaming the heavens most of the 6000 people that were logged in at that time during the day did not have what we have now.
Be it skillpoints, the ship rebalance, the turrets rebalance 40 alt accounts with cloaked linked ships in all lowsec and nullsec systems, warp to zero, tech3 boats, tier 3 boats, some tier 2 boats, Marauders, Black Ops, viable drones and pirate ships that were worth the name.
So despite an inbuild 100% application (so you don't need to gimp your ship, so it can wear what it is supposed to) that nano thing made missile a boolean weapon system (boolean mean yes or no / true or false).
signature
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
167
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 02:20:11 -
[26] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:James Baboli wrote:I can definitely support the fixing of the explosion radius to the average of the size appropriate signature radii of unfitted hulls across the board. I also support raising explosion velocity so that missiles deal full damage to the average speed of size appropriate hulls with nav 3. This means buffer tanked hulls, one way or the other (hull tank not included) will almost always take nearly full damage, with only resists to stop it, but an AB using active tank will be the way to negate missile damage. Well at that point, they could also ditch the whole thing completely I know most of the folks against such an outrageous idea believe that I am stupid, take drugs, drink alcohol all day, every day, need brain surgery, new implants or whatever they come up with because it is not a weekday. But that is not the case. In 2006 or the uprise of the 'nano-age' all missiles did however have 100% application and despite some Raven pilots roaming the heavens most of the 6000 people that were logged in at that time during the day did not have what we have now. Be it skillpoints, the ship rebalance, the turrets rebalance 40 alt accounts with cloaked linked ships in all lowsec and nullsec systems, warp to zero, tech3 boats, tier 3 boats, some tier 2 boats, Marauders, Black Ops, viable drones and pirate ships that were worth the name. So despite an inbuild 100% application (so you don't need to gimp your ship, so it can wear what it is supposed to) that nano thing made missile a boolean weapon system (boolean mean yes or no / true or false). Not quite. at that point, shooting down a size seriously diminishes the damage done. Some things in the size class, like the stabber, will have a fairly deep natural mitigation, as they fall below the average signature radius and above the average speed. It also would mean that an AB was a rational choice if hunting missile boats, as the higher speed for the same signature would act as a fairly strong source of mitigation. It does however mean that most fits will have either signature or explosion velocity as a partial negation, not both, and this puts it at a reasonable place compared to turrets IMO. Some aspects of their ship (speed, signature) effect how your weapons hit, as well as how they pilot, just like with turrets.
As you propose, a cruiser would have to be permanently orbiting or running away, never closing in order to not be 2 volleyed by a good cruise missile boat, as they would only have resists to mitigate with, and maybe 30k ehp against your damage type if you correctly played guess their weakest resist. This would necessitate a damage nerf, hurting their use in PvE where they already get most of their application to many targets, as they are otherwise the highest damage weapon systems by a wide margin (although the vindi has the highest damage, it has substantially more effective weapons going because of the large damage bonus)
Yes, I do incursions. Find out more here
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
392
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 02:53:26 -
[27] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:... As you propose, a cruiser would have to be permanently orbiting or running away, never closing in order to not be 2 volleyed by a good cruise missile boat, as they would only have resists to mitigate with, and maybe 30k ehp against your damage type if you correctly played guess their weakest resist. This would necessitate a damage nerf, hurting their use in PvE where they already get most of their application to many targets, as they are otherwise the highest damage weapon systems by a wide margin (although the vindi has the highest damage, it has substantially more effective weapons going because of the large damage bonus)
In case of a Raven of today, even with 100% application (that is only 100% if CCP makes a modules that makes you have 0% shield resist, 0% armor resist and 0% hull resist and no links applied to you), you will get upset warping around with one after 2 long range warps.
If you are hunting a cruiser in a battleship that doesn't want to fight you, you won't be fighting that cruiser.
An interceptor with links will just yolo circles around my Raven and cause the cruise missiles to create a space-hurricane (not the boat..) until his buddies arrive and murder my boat.
In case of pve, this has no place in pvp so there is no such thing as too much damage for pve and all missiles have to get there first. I can point you to some Sansha level 4 missions that will make all golem pilots have a bad day. Or a Gurista Maze.. (Yes I lived in Vale of the Silent once upon a time)
signature
|
Claud Tiberius
Fidelas Constans
79
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 09:31:18 -
[28] - Quote
Missiles travel a fine line between over and under powered.
They can apply full damage against the right target, moving at the right speed. Can use any damage type and missile launchers are not effected by its own speed or facing direction, unlike turrets. This makes them very powerful.
However usually the enemy is not the right size, speed and you don't have the correct damage types. Missiles are also delayed damage.
There is no guarantee that the missile is going to be right one for the job. But when it is, it will perform beautifully.
Once upon a time the Golem had a Raven hull and it looked good. Then it transformed into a plataduck. The end.
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
376
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 11:15:53 -
[29] - Quote
Claud Tiberius wrote:Missiles travel a fine line between over and under powered.
They can apply full damage against the right target, moving at the right speed. Can use any damage type and missile launchers are not effected by its own speed or facing direction, unlike turrets. This makes them very powerful.
However usually the enemy is not the right size, speed and you don't have the correct damage types. Missiles are also delayed damage.
There is no guarantee that the missile is going to be right one for the job. But when it is, it will perform beautifully.
So by your own metric missiles are substandard at least 75% of the time. Ok. That's pretty damning evidence.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015
T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346
LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
422
|
Posted - 2014.10.26 11:23:47 -
[30] - Quote
Missiles as a whole are fine, it's heavy (perhaps arguably torps) that are the problem children. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |