EVE Search - [ISSUE] missles are not viable in long range engagements

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[ISSUE] missles are not viable in long range engagements

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.11 07:11:00 - [1] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 11/06/2009 07:12:35 Many people complain about missiles, ever since quantum rise, I will be the first to admit, they were overpowered. But this is not the point. There is a thread for that a few pages back. This problem has been in for a long time now and I regret that it was not fixed with the rest of the missile changes. The simple issue is sniping. Missiles can reach incredible ranges, but the speed at which they get to their targets renders them ineffective in all but a pos or capital bash. Oftentimes the primary target has long since died by the time your small glowing orbs of death reach their shattered wreckage. The sniping raven is quite simply almost a running gag. Every other main weapon system (Projectile, Laser, Hybrid) is viable at long range. I propose a simple change, just one. Increase missile velocity by a factor between 2-6 times their current speed and decrease flight time by the opposite amount.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.06.11 07:38:00 - [2] Sadly long range missile ships were designed to be better at long range than their gunnery counterparts,but because of missile delay they are pretty much unusable atm. For some stupid reason ccp doesnt want to increase missile speeds,it would break their physics engine or what they called it. So you should think out other boosts to make missiles viable at long range. I thought of give missiles a dmg boost in function of time spent in flight. Like +5%/seconds , so still many missiles wouldnt reach the target in time but which do would do awesome dmg to even the average dps out.
Fille Balle Dissolution Of Eternity Ethikos Trade Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.11 07:51:00 - [3] Yup, missiles are pretty failsauce. Imo, missiles have been failsauce for a long time. That's why I never bothered training for them. They're only good on one ship: the SB That's a lot of SP for one ship. /Support Posting in a thread about missiles
Oam Mkoll Caldari The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.11 08:02:00 - [4] Missiles should not be equal to all the remaining weapon systems. EVE is already too unified and homogenous. Missiles select damage types which is already a boost. I like the idea of them hitting very, very hard but the flight time shouldn't be decreased substantially. If someone's stupid enough to miss incoming missiles, he gets his face melted. Thankfully Caldari have railboats and Khanid can use beams. Missiles are a specialized system. It needs a lot of tweaking but not towards making it yet another boring gun type.
Dierdra Vaal	Posted - 2009.06.11 08:52:00 - [5] not supporting this, due to the sheer difference in how the various weapon systems work. There is no module (only rigs) to extend missile range. This basically means when fitting a missile ship you dont need to commit module slots to extending your range. Missiles also dont vary in damage depending on their range. There is no falloff range on missiles. While you need a very specific ship setup to reach 150-180km range on a gun based battleship (sacrificing other aspects such as tank or dps), anyone with caldari battleship 4 and a raven can easily reach that far with cruise missiles. Your proposed change would seriously overpower missiles: giving them nearly the same long range utility as guns without the tracking, fitting and dps commitments that usually accompany sniper setups.
Shade Millith International House of PWNCakes Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.11 09:24:00 - [6] Dispite being a missile *****, I do have to say not signed. Caldari already have VERY good sniping options with railguns, the Rokh easily reaching max targeting range + being double DD proof. And while it sucks that missiles are beyond sub optimal for sniping (unless for POS shooting), it's a trade off for close range effectiveness. --------------------------------------------
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.06.11 09:44:00 - [7] Originally by: Dierdra Vaal not supporting this, due to the sheer difference in how the various weapon systems work. There is no module (only rigs) to extend missile range. This basically means when fitting a missile ship you dont need to commit module slots to extending your range. Missiles also dont vary in damage depending on their range. There is no falloff range on missiles. While you need a very specific ship setup to reach 150-180km range on a gun based battleship (sacrificing other aspects such as tank or dps), anyone with caldari battleship 4 and a raven can easily reach that far with cruise missiles. Your proposed change would seriously overpower missiles: giving them nearly the same long range utility as guns without the tracking, fitting and dps commitments that usually accompany sniper setups. There is no module (only rigs) to extend missile range. This basically means when fitting a missile ship you CANT USE module slots to extending your range. fixed it for u vs turrets which can use both modules and rigs,you dont have to use a module at all if you want to it is an option. Even if missiles fly as far as guns shot there is no point for that as due to delay dmg missiles won't reach the target in time makeing 0 DPS that means you fail in your raven as a dmg dealer in fleets, there is a reason why most 0.0 alliances banned cruise missile from their fleets. Also missile rigs cost a lot more around 15m isk each vs 7m for locus rigs and sub 1m for tracking mods. Your very specific sniper bs fits will easily do a dd tank + acceptable dmg at 180km for the same cost as a missile rigged raven.And those snipe bs would do as much or more dps sub 50-60km than a cruise raven. I see no sacrifice at all. Yeah caldari bs lvl4 ppl could reach sniper range easily and doing 0 dmg ,that is a big help for your fleet, no it is not. Proposed change would make long range missiles viable at long range, where they were intended to be used. Whats the point of their great range if they cant use it out. Ive showed you that gunships dont have less dps or more fitting issues as the cruise raven. And about tracking , most of the time sniper bs can hit and kill cruiser easily especially at 150km+ I see no tracking issue there especially if we compare it to the 50% dmg reduction cruise missiles have against moving cruiser targets.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.06.11 09:50:00 - [8] Originally by: Shade Millith Dispite being a missile *****, I do have to say not signed. Caldari already have VERY good sniping options with railguns, the Rokh easily reaching max targeting range + being double DD proof. And while it sucks that missiles are beyond sub optimal for sniping (unless for POS shooting), it's a trade off for close range effectiveness. So because rokh is useable in snipe fleets raven shouldnt be? Nice reasoning. For close range effectiveness even sniper bs are good at close range more or less especiall against bc/bs class ships, ships which you wouldnt hit would be hard for cruise missiles to do acceptable dmg anyway. Btw do you fly ravens in snipe fleets ? I quess no The point of the boost is to make ravens viable there.
Shigsy Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.06.11 11:26:00 - [9] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Shade Millith Dispite being a missile *****, I do have to say not signed. Caldari already have VERY good sniping options with railguns, the Rokh easily reaching max targeting range + being double DD proof. And while it sucks that missiles are beyond sub optimal for sniping (unless for POS shooting), it's a trade off for close range effectiveness. So because rokh is useable in snipe fleets raven shouldnt be? Nice reasoning. For close range effectiveness even sniper bs are good at close range more or less especiall against bc/bs class ships, ships which you wouldnt hit would be hard for cruise missiles to do acceptable dmg anyway. Btw do you fly ravens in snipe fleets ? I quess no The point of the boost is to make ravens viable there. Scorp AND rokh are viable in fleet fights. Hyperion and domi are substandard. Only the mega isgood in fleet fights. BUFF GALLENTE??? Join "C&P" ingame!
Prexir Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.11 11:54:00 - [10] Instead of changing the missile flight-time for speed why not ask for a mod which you could fit to achieve this effect?
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.06.11 13:10:00 - [11] Even if Raven's Cruise went at 20 km/s, they'd still take 8 seconds to hit a BS 160 km away. That's still too long in when snipers are one-volleying targets. I don't think that this issue is fixable, basically.
Abuta Beki	Posted - 2009.06.11 13:20:00 - [12] The issue is often brought up that missiles don't reach their target before it is dead already. That is not an issue with missiles. It is an issue with fleet command, or rather the lack of good fleet command, fire discipline and player skill. Good fleet command and fleet training needs to minimize overkill, which is damage potential wasted on ships that are already dead. This happens as well to gunnery ships, but they can react faster to such changes and minimize the lost potential damage output. Missile ships need to work entirely different, especially when they work in concert with gunnery ships. The basic concept is to spread out the damage output of the missile ships and use the gunner ships in smaller groups to concentrate fire on already softened targets. This will not kill as many ships in the first wave as a pure gunnery fleet, but it will kill just as many after a few salvos. The reduced alpha strike power is easily offset with a higher rate of secondary kills. All fire control tactics that work against medium groups of enemies also work on large groups, unless lag takes the better of us. That is a tertiary issue, though. Lag needs to be addressed on as a problem of it's own.
Br41n Pinky and the Brain corp	Posted - 2009.06.11 14:04:00 - [13] Add another tech II missile type, long range fast flight and moderate DPS only viable for long range setups ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pinky: Gee, Brain. What are we going to do tonight? Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.06.11 14:20:00 - [14] Not supported. Even if you increase the speed at which they fly... nothing is to stop the target from warping away before impact. You won't be happy with... or without the change. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com ========================= Dependable, Honorable, Intelligent, No-nonsense Vote Herschel Yamamoto for CSM!
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.06.11 17:09:00 - [15] The real issue is range - at the ranges that space battles take place at, missiles are at a disadvantage because that's just the physics. Lasers hit fastest at any given range, followed by projectiles and hybrids, followed by missiles and rockets. At "short" ranges (anything under about 10km) the differences are academic - the ammo typically hits before the weapon can recycle anyway, so it doesn't really matter, tbh. At moderate and long ranges, the differences start to become more pronounced. Even at about 30km, the missile launchers on my Hurricane cycle faster than the flight time to the target - that's just the way missiles are. IMO, they really aren't intended for sniping, they're intended to deliver a lot of damage on the target. The fact that the target was killed before your missiles hit reflects a lack of communication in target precedence between your missile and gunnery boats, tbh. --Vel Experience is what you get right after you need it.
Zxenis Caldari Gladiators of Rage Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.11 18:45:00 - [16] Originally by: Naomi Knight I thought of give missiles a dmg boost in function of time spent in flight. Like +5%/seconds , so still many missiles wouldnt reach the target in time but which do would do awesome dmg to even the average dps out. should be the other way around, the longer it flies, the less fuel it has left at the end of its run to add to its damage.
Becq Starforged Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.11 19:32:00 - [17] Originally by: Br41n Add another tech II missile type, long range fast flight and moderate DPS only viable for long range setups This is a good idea, in my opinion. Guns largely require T2 ammo to be effective as snipers (Rokh being an exception, though with laughable T1 damage), so giving cruise missiles a T2 'sniper' missile seems not unreasonable. Double speed, half duration, reduced damage would make for a good start. Possibly also a minimum flight time (the missile takes time to arm)? Replace the precision missiles with this, since they are largely useless.
Miranda Cho Caldari The First Church of the Azure Carrot The Dominion Empire	Posted - 2009.06.11 19:49:00 - [18] Simple fix there, really; you've got two problems that can solve each other. First, missile targets die before the missiles arrive. Second, missiles do not need range increasing modules to be long range weapons. I propose a fire-control uplink module. Each module can control a single salvo's worth of missiles and allows you to retarget them in flight. Now you've got similar module needs for long-range missile ships as with other snipers, and missiles can be retargetted to the new primary at long range if you have enough fire-control capacity to manage the missiles you have in the air. Of course the course change might give you problems with flight time and range, but that's just another thing to manage; frankly missile combat is dull as it is and that may add enough of a complexity to it to be entertaining. ________________ Miranda Cho, First Church of the Azure Carrot (Reformed), Reconnaissance Division 'To convert, one must discover.'
Alexander Knott Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.06.11 22:49:00 - [19] Missiles ineffective in fleet engagements. Drones ineffective in fleet engagements. ECM now ineffective in fleet engagements (though to be fair, all other ewar was already there). Artillery marginal in fleet engagements. Basically we have lasers and rail guns that work well in modern engagements. To the guy who complained that about lack of diversity, I'm having a hard time figuring out how adding a viable weapon type does that. You could go another way and just ask for a module that allows you to re-target ships in flight. I.e. your target dies or warps off, and whatever you have this module activated on becomes your missiles' next target.
Otin Bison Gallente Bison Industrial Inc	Posted - 2009.06.12 04:09:00 - [20] No Support. Missiles are fine ... just get closer. Nothing especially witty to say at this time.
Kytanos Termek Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.12 18:23:00 - [21] Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 12/06/2009 18:27:19 Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 12/06/2009 18:25:58 In my opinion, all weapons systems could use one good hard revamp, Some are more balanced, and some are less. But that is not the topic. I like that each has it's own unique "style". However, I just want to be able to snipe a target before it can warp off, If a freighter can warp before the first volly hits, something is wrong. I will admit that the proposed changes are very basic in nature, and did not take into account anything but range, I am merely bringing up the issue of missile sniping. I do not doubt that to truly fix and balance it many changes will be required. I also agree that it is a problem with fleet command, but the best option I see is to have two groups, one missile, one everyone else, and call separate primaries for each, remembering to cycle before all the vollies hit, or have someone calling off a list of targets just for the missile users. this pretty much clogs up coms, and confuses the fleet. Otherwise, the missile users might as well just pick their own targets, and free fire. The issue is in fleet command, the issue is that the necessary commands to make missile ships viable in a fleet will confuse and clog the communications or require you to make a seperate ventrilo channel just for the missle useing battleships, fracturing your command structure more, and making it even harder to relay commands to your entire fleet, You dont need your battleship fleet split in two,just makes it harder. Atleast this is my perception. If you doubt that missiles are so bad at sniping, there is one piece of evidence I would like to present, Most alliances have banned long range missile snipers in fleets. The only time your allowed to undock that raven is in a pos bash. If that isnt good enough evidence that it is hard to make missiles viable at sniper ranges, I give up.
Ulstan	Posted - 2009.06.16 00:37:00 - [22] This is not a universal missile problem, it's basically a problem with cruise missiles alone, which are used for long range sniping, and are utterly pointless in PvP because of their horrendously long travel time. I don't know how to fix it, given other missiles are generally performing roughly where they need to be (various T2 ammos excepted) If there's one missile system that needs work it is rockets. Those could be fixed simply by boosting damage and explosion velocity, etc. Making cruise missiles usable at the ranges turret ships snipe at would take a whole lot of work IMO.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.