EVE Search - Rhen Ayases Ideas to fix Rockets

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Rhen Ayases Ideas to fix Rockets

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.04 09:54:00 - [1] Hey, its not really new that rockets are pretty weak for now. with 10 km range on 2 frigs mwding the real range gets to like 2km. and even if they hit the damage is so low you shieldtank it with a 2 shield/sec rate sometimes. So here are some ideas to tweak them: Changes to Rocket Launchers: Half the RoF to make it possible to spam rockets really hard (4.0 -> 2.0 on unbonused t1 launcher) Double Capacity to also load double the rockets inside the ship (0.15 -> 0.3 on t1 launcher, 0.2->0.4 in t2 launcher) Change the overload to 15% missile damage instead of rof (as we already got enough with that change) Changes to Rockets: Lower damage by 40% (25 to 15 on unbonused t1 rockets) with the rof bonus it already results in a 20% damage boost double their speed (2250 to 4500 on unbonused t1 rockets) give them quite a range boost, but more: they can catch up with frigs lower the flighttime by 25% (2 to 1,5 on unbonused t1 rockets) to compensate the range boost on speed a little half their volume (0.005 to 0.0025 on t1 rockets) with the already bigger vault on the launchers, and the greater rof, this gives them a reasonable capacity overall triple the explosion velocity (85 to 250 on t1 rockets) i mean really... what frigs fly with 85 m/s? with mwd or ab it even gets worse, thats why most rockets just suck ass against frigs, as a frig weapon you hardly can fit 2 webbers to pin the other one down... Rocket Ship Bonus: [list] Anathema change the 5% rocket damage bonus into 15% em rocket damage, to get the amarr specific bonus more in front and boost the damage a little better Heretic with the new rockets this ship should be a reasonable rocket destroyer, so i dont think it need much tweaks Vengeance change the 5% damage bonus into a rof bonus, Macross Missile Massacre incoming, and if we ever get a 4th assault frig bonus, make it 10% bonus to explosion velocity Malediction change the rocket bonus into a speedbonus of 10% per level, interceptors are fast... the rockets need to be faster other ships like caldari get most bonus for all missiles or rockets and standard ones anyway, so with the general tweaks i think they are pretty much strong enough -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Kara Sharalien	Posted - 2009.11.04 09:56:00 - [2] this thread gets my 100% complete approval. rockets do need a boost, and i would love to see that boost take the form of ROF and range rather then just plain damage. i sadfased ages ago when the t2 javlin rockets range dropped from 20km to 12. would be good to see it go up a bit again. Originally by: Thuul'Khalat WHY YOU VIOLENCE MY BOAT?!
Azheri Amarr TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2009.11.04 10:38:00 - [3] The numbers im not to sure about since i havent done any calculations but i can agree on that rockets need a real boost and are subpar as they are in their current state. Ayases suggestions seems good at first glance though and have my support.
Helicity Boson Amarr The Python Cartel.	Posted - 2009.11.04 10:43:00 - [4] As per the other (long ignored) threads in the assembly hall and test server feedback PLEASE FIX THE ROCKETS ALREADY
Khalin Gwah	Posted - 2009.11.04 10:49:00 - [5] Again, not sure on the figures but fixing rockets might mean I use them again. Good post :)
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.04 14:04:00 - [6] the speed bonus on the malediciton is meant to missile velocity, not the ship :> and i think explo velocty should be enough at 150-200 (so kinda 2-2,35x of the actuall base) because with the skills it already get pretty good, with 250 on a heretic you dont get issues against 1km/s frigs on ab or 4km/s on mwd intis. so a little to much maybe jsut to summarize: * 20% overall dps (double rof while lowering base dmg by 40%) * 4x amount of rockets in the launcher (to compensate the really low clipsize now and the even greater rof) * 50% more range (lowering flighttime a little but double speed) * 2-2.5x explosion velocity: so that this anti frig weapon already can hit moving frigs! -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Grarr Bexx	Posted - 2009.11.04 14:06:00 - [7] CCP doesn't like it when they have stuff go below 2s ROF. No Macross missile barrage, server has to cope in some way
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.04 14:29:00 - [8] with t2 all lvl5 and 1 bcu i already can hit 1.97 :> add another bcu and it is below 1.8... now overload it and we hit 1.5 :p i never heard of such a problem... but if so its up to ccp anyway. maybe leave the rof and raise the damage by 20% instead or something like that. its a suggestion and not a "take this as it stands or leave it alone" -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Raeni Le'sex Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.11.04 14:48:00 - [9] Rather than increase the rocket bonus on anathema, remove it. Also give the tristan a rocket bonus so rockets dont loose one ship. Reasoning, probe ships done need bonuses to weapons they wont use, tristan is a dual weapon platform, might aswell get a bonus.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.05 07:41:00 - [10] well, then please make another post, i just focuse here on rockets and on ships with a rocket bonus. that covops mostly dont even got a slot to fit something offensive (2 high, with probe launcher and covops cloak) is another story. noone say i want this ideas 1:1 used by ccp. but at least rockets need to be fixed and some bonuses too (malediction for example really needs some range for example). but this thread is for rockets now :> -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Dharh Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2009.11.05 08:04:00 - [11] Edited by: Dharh on 05/11/2009 08:05:07 I think you need to re think your numbers. The standard rockets should stay 2250m/s with 2s flight time, but the advanced anti-ship rockets should bump up to 3375m/s 2s flight time. While the long range rockets should drop down to 2250m/s with 4s flight time. Other than that methink you are missunderstanding what rockets are for and instead should be using missiles if you want to fire at further than 3-4km. Rockets are meant to fired at much closer range than any of the other types. Maybe the explosive velocity needs to be upped as well, dunno, would need to see test to tell if changing the speed and flight times wasn't a good enough improvement.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.05 08:10:00 - [12] the explosion velocity is the mainthing why rockets suck and they need far more speed, my idea gives them 50% more range (from 10 to 15) the way missiles work, the real range is still under 10km if not both frigs play sitting ducks. -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Dharh Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2009.11.05 08:13:00 - [13] Then make your idea less complicated and just focus on the speed/flight time and the explosive velocity. Everything else just confuses the issue.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.11.05 08:22:00 - [14] those are just two main problems, clipsize is a problem too -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.10 19:35:00 - [15] still in need! :> -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2009.12.10 22:05:00 - [16] I actually kinda like this idea, but the RoF might get a bit, I dunno, excessive? Not saying it wouldn't be pure awesome to see them streaming out of my ship like that but 2s on an unbonused unnamed? With my skills and a BCU T2 launchers fire off a rocket every 2 seconds , if they got that kind of RoF reduction... ow. Besides that petty issue - supported! I really like the changes you've made and can't see any real fault with them.
Sanctus Maleficus Lambent Enterprises	Posted - 2009.12.10 22:56:00 - [17] Love the idea. I've always loved the idea of the Vengeance, but with one AF having only 1 mid slot (which is fantastic, in certain situations), and the other being useless for dps, Amarr AFs leave much to be desired.
Drajh Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2009.12.11 00:55:00 - [18] +1 from me
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.11 13:56:00 - [19] Originally by: Sanctus Maleficus Love the idea. I've always loved the idea of the Vengeance, but with one AF having only 1 mid slot (which is fantastic, in certain situations), and the other being useless for dps, Amarr AFs leave much to be desired. at least the vengeance is a bulky tackler that can take a few shots for now, and the retri is a neat fast mission ship for lvl1-3, but yeah its one of the ideas to make them more useful. -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Stygian Knight Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.12.11 14:11:00 - [20] +1 make rockets a weapon
Vuoto	Posted - 2009.12.11 15:43:00 - [21] why do not make them fire 2-3 rockets at time?
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2009.12.11 17:15:00 - [22] Originally by: Vuoto why do not make them fire 2-3 rockets at time? Because tripling the damage would do the same thing with less lag.
Ebanni Ebanni Mercantile	Posted - 2009.12.11 18:12:00 - [23] The real fix is to just get rid of rockets altogether and make Standards a bit easier to fit on frigs by giving the frigs a bonus to handle the fitting. Hell, CCP made it easy to put torpedoes on SB's (and cruise missiles, before that, if you've been playing that long) so it's not like such tweaking hasn't been done before to allow for unconventional launcher fits on frigates. Sure, some folks have highly researched rocket BPO's, maybe even a rare T2 BPO... oh well.
Pan Dora Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.12.11 19:12:00 - [24] Looks like a ressonable ideia, at least it adress all the issues with rockets now. Personaly I disagree with the proposed anathema bonus (weapons in a covert ops frigate?) since it dont scale well with the other rocket ships and malediction bonus because missile velocity bonus its 'caldari thing' IMO, if the rocket its not enough for that ship role raise it or change the ship weapon system(i prefer the former opff course) Doubling the speed of rocket its a bit problematic since it will be faster than lights, maybe a smaller increase coupled a increase (or no change) in fligth time wold be a better aproach. (or just ignore the 'patern' and fix the damm weapons system :P) And whille we are at this if nescessary remove the only advantage rocket have rigth now: small fitting requirments. I prefer to have to use fitting modules, like i usually have if I want to fit standard (hint, hint), than using a weapon sytstem that suck without it. _ I like to play this game because it make my in-game actions and archievments to mean something in-game.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.12 00:17:00 - [25] Originally by: Ebanni The real fix is to just get rid of rockets altogether and make Standards a bit easier to fit on frigs by giving the frigs a bonus to handle the fitting. Hell, CCP made it easy to put torpedoes on SB's (and cruise missiles, before that, if you've been playing that long) so it's not like such tweaking hasn't been done before to allow for unconventional launcher fits on frigates. Sure, some folks have highly researched rocket BPO's, maybe even a rare T2 BPO... oh well. rockets should be the short range missile equivalent to heavy assault/torps. so faster shooting as the long range variant, for more dps and no option to change their sig radius. so i doubt taking out rockets is "the idea" :p and for pan dora: doubling the speed istn much, cruise missiles are already that fast, but they should be able to catch frigs too. its a anti frig weapon after all and in pvp you rarly fight ab frigs (i dont say never! just rarely...). missile velocity is caldari thing? so the heretic is a caldari ship now? its a rocket ship with velocity bonus to rockets, think about it ;p and rockets the advantage of the low fitting requeriments isnt enough, you still rarley fitted them... as they just dont have any use at all. last but not least: the anathema is a covops and dont need fighting bonus, thats true, but that would count for all the covops anyway, still they got bonus -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Lady Australia	Posted - 2009.12.12 16:17:00 - [26] everyone including CCP know rockets/(missiles in general) need looking at in certain areas, namely explosion radius/velocity for smalls and pure flight time for capitals (in which phoenix have become next to useless for anything other than shooting large towers) call it a gut instinct, but im really hoping the reason CCP have held back on fixing rockets is because they are planning a whole new fix for missiles in general, but maybe thats just my caldari fanboi radar on....
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.12.13 04:40:00 - [27] Originally by: Rhen Ayase ... I was going to reply to your less-than-perfect proposal point by point, but it's easier just to say it's a very bad idea to come up with solutions when you clearly don't understand the mechanics of the problems. Do your research as to why your solutions are flawed, then try again. However, if you do enough research (like I have) you will find out two things: 1. Fixing missiles (not just rockets) would require a significant overhaul, nearly a re-write of the entire system. 2. People will be extremely opposed to this, as they're ignorant of how deep the problems really go (they choose not to find out why), and they don't want the game to change by such a degree. By putting the above into practice, it's best to just save the effort and never suggest anything. It will fall upon deaf ears, and it will drain you of all your energy. So for your own good, just play the damn game and accept the fact that missiles will be broken until such a time when the whole of the playerbase realizes what needs to be done. ____________ I'd make a forum signature that didn't suck, but I'm restricted by a character limit that does.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.13 23:36:00 - [28] well, missiles are fine they have advantages and disadvantages, and they are the most used weapon against rats. so i am ignorant? or maybe you are the ignorant one? whoever knows. but what most people aggre: rockets just suck, even with 25% ship bonus you are better off just fitting autocannons or if your cap can handle it blaster/pulses. because its just near impossible to hit other frigs with them and they do less damage too. so this are ideas from me, noone said the wholeconcept must be all or nothing. its up to ccp what they do, if they say rof is fine they dont need to change it, if they say clipsize is fine, they dont need to change it. but what we aggree: rockets need a change to have some use at all! -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.12.14 03:24:00 - [29] Originally by: Rhen Ayase well, missiles are fine they have advantages and disadvantages, and they are the most used weapon against rats. It's not about advantages and disadvantages, it's about fundamental flaws. Them being by far the most used against rats is but one symptom of it. Quote: so i am ignorant? or maybe you are the ignorant one? whoever knows. Your comments regarding explosion velocity and practical range tell the tale quite well. Whether you educate yourself or not is not my concern, but logic dictates you must understand the problem before you can make an attempt to correct it. Quote: but what most people aggre: rockets just suck, even with 25% ship bonus you are better off just fitting autocannons or if your cap can handle it blaster/pulses. because its just near impossible to hit other frigs with them and they do less damage too. Not only do most people agree on this, but simple logic agrees as well. A 50% raw damage increase is almost indisputable, and the missile velocity is indeed too low. However, your proposals on how to fix them both bring in yet even more complications, and are not plausible. ____________ I'd make a forum signature that didn't suck, but I'm restricted by a character limit that does.
Halycon Gamma Caldari The Flying Tigers	Posted - 2009.12.14 05:42:00 - [30] Originally by: Allen Ramses Originally by: Rhen Ayase ... I was going to reply to your less-than-perfect proposal point by point, but it's easier just to say it's a very bad idea to come up with solutions when you clearly don't understand the mechanics of the problems. Do your research as to why your solutions are flawed, then try again. However, if you do enough research (like I have) you will find out two things: 1. Fixing missiles (not just rockets) would require a significant overhaul, nearly a re-write of the entire system. 2. People will be extremely opposed to this, as they're ignorant of how deep the problems really go (they choose not to find out why), and they don't want the game to change by such a degree. By putting the above into practice, it's best to just save the effort and never suggest anything. It will fall upon deaf ears, and it will drain you of all your energy. So for your own good, just play the damn game and accept the fact that missiles will be broken until such a time when the whole of the playerbase realizes what needs to be done. Okay, I'll bite. Whats broken about them, the whole long winded explanation, and why does that require a ground up rewrite. Keep in mind, I'm not saying I don't think missile mechanics are beyond messed up; for the record, they are. But, hey.. if you're going to trash an idea, either tell him exactly why or give him a counter idea, along with why you think yours is better. Also, I'm genuinely interested. I've read some of your ideas before, and while I don't agree with some of it.. I must have missed your idea for a completely rewritten missile system.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2009.12.14 07:24:00 - [31] Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 14/12/2009 07:27:16 Originally by: Halycon Gamma Originally by: Allen Ramses Originally by: Rhen Ayase ... I was going to reply to your less-than-perfect proposal point by point, but it's easier just to say it's a very bad idea to come up with solutions when you clearly don't understand the mechanics of the problems. Do your research as to why your solutions are flawed, then try again. However, if you do enough research (like I have) you will find out two things: 1. Fixing missiles (not just rockets) would require a significant overhaul, nearly a re-write of the entire system. 2. People will be extremely opposed to this, as they're ignorant of how deep the problems really go (they choose not to find out why), and they don't want the game to change by such a degree. By putting the above into practice, it's best to just save the effort and never suggest anything. It will fall upon deaf ears, and it will drain you of all your energy. So for your own good, just play the damn game and accept the fact that missiles will be broken until such a time when the whole of the playerbase realizes what needs to be done. Okay, I'll bite. Whats broken about them, the whole long winded explanation, and why does that require a ground up rewrite. Keep in mind, I'm not saying I don't think missile mechanics are beyond messed up; for the record, they are. But, hey.. if you're going to trash an idea, either tell him exactly why or give him a counter idea, along with why you think yours is better. Also, I'm genuinely interested. I've read some of your ideas before, and while I don't agree with some of it.. I must have missed your idea for a completely rewritten missile system. Basically he's a fool that thinks just because he lacks the ability to even fit a Caracal right missiles need a complete overhaul. He's not really worth listening to. I have my suspicions that he bought his character but can't really be bothered to go and have a look through the bazaar history. Allen, please stop trying to make us suffer for your ineptitude. The OP has at least identified the explosion velocity issue and damage issues, which are really the big two that make rockets so useless. There are far worse fixes around.
Lady Australia	Posted - 2009.12.14 11:54:00 - [32] /off topic but... Missiles for PVE are fine, mission battleships are slow, and you drones can take out anything sub bs with relative ease Missiles in PVP are **** majority of the time, and absoloutely useless for capital vs capital engagements. obviously there are a few exceptions, but this is a general rule. The major problem however is that CCP care far more about their PVE fanbase then their PVP, so missiles remain crap no matter how much all us caldari pilots pray for change.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2009.12.14 13:19:00 - [33] Originally by: Lady Australia /off topic but... Missiles in PVP are ** majority of the time, and absoloutely useless for capital vs capital engagements. obviously there are a few exceptions, but this is a general rule. With the exception of the bolded part, wrong on so many levels. Try training your skills past level 3? I think you'll find it's rockets and cruises that are broken, the rest are just fine. Oh also: Quote:** The major problem however is that CCP care far more about their PVE fanbase then their PVP, so missiles remain crap no matter how much all us caldari pilots pray for change. Yes. This is why PVE in EVE worse than virtually every other MMO out there. CCP totally favours them and no pvp stuff gets buffed or reviewed, in the world, ever. Thanks for giving me a good laugh at least.
Halycon Gamma Caldari The Flying Tigers	Posted - 2009.12.14 13:30:00 - [34] I know all that, I was just wondering how everyone thinks it should be fixed. Missiles Mechanics in general, that is. I've read and reread info on capital class, which i don't care about cause I hate capitals. I've read even more about frigates, which i care about a great deal. Cruisers seem to be mostly okay. And battleships are well.. not broken, but hamstrung. As for pve, blah. After enough time is spent training, other weapons systems start to vastly outstrip the thunder of missiles at lower SP levels. Which even then I've never been certain that its missile mechanics which make caldari the choice of PVE, or if its shield mechanics and the fact that everyone created Achura for the stat bonuses. Even assuming its simply because of missile mechanics alone, we can't really balance the game around a perceived bonus that only applies for the first few months of character life, after which its all a wash. Personally I still use caldari for ratting/missioning because of shield mechanics, and I assume that its the same for a lot of people at higher SP levels. But that's a whole nother soap box, in how only one pure shield tanking race ruins PVP for it; if freak'n Mini were also shield mains.. maybe.. maybe.. half our ships wouldn't be useless in fleets. Needless to say.. I think Caldari has "issues", and missiles are only part of it. :)
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2009.12.14 13:34:00 - [35] Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 14/12/2009 13:34:34 Originally by: Halycon Gamma Needless to say.. I think Caldari has "issues", and missiles are only part of it. :) Fair point. Personally I find rails and shields to be a bigger problem. Rails are outdone by the other turrets and shields, while not by any means bad have the misfortune of being the minority in an armour RR world. If those issues were fixed (with a few tweaks to a couple of types of missile) Caldari would be a perfectly well rounded race, but for now at least they're workable.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.14 23:32:00 - [36] this is a thread for rockets, because rockets are broken in any case, they are useless with low sp, with high sp (the other weapon systems outrun them even more)m in pve (against rats the range and damage is just not uificent, you simply fit an autocannon, even on rocket bonused ships like the vengeance) and also in pvp (nothing fights in the rocket range or simply outrunning them on mwd or make the silly low explosion velocity useless with an ab) then its also to fast to empty your launcher while you ned endless ammo in the cargo (well, if you dont die. as most of the time you are reloading anyway :>) -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Halycon Gamma Caldari The Flying Tigers	Posted - 2009.12.15 03:25:00 - [37] Sorry for the hijack of your thread. Just a lot of us think missiles in general are slightly busted. Rockets in particular get the short end of the stick, yes. I don't know btw, if clip capacity is a worthwhile idea though. Depends if they can get the silly explosion velocity and range right. If they do that, we could find out that damage is fine, just a lot of it is lost through missile mechanics. Even then, I'd rather bump the base damage a bit than expand the clip size. But hey, whatever CCP thinks works.. as long as they understand that whats going on now simply doesn't work.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.17 22:36:00 - [38] thats what i am saying, rockets are currently to broken. they just got use in lvl1 missions, and even here you are better off with using ac on a rocket bonused ship :> -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.12.18 03:44:00 - [39] Originally by: Rhen Ayase thats what i am saying, rockets are currently to broken. they just got use in lvl1 missions, and even here you are better off with using ac on a rocket bonused ship :> Here's the deal. Rockets aren't any more broken than other missiles overall, but I suppose that is beside the point. Most, if not all, issues have to do with how rockets were originally intended to be used and the way missiles work as a system. Fact is, rockets were not designed to be anti-frigate, but anti-drone. After CCP changed their role, they didn't change the rules behind them. They seem to have a habit of leaving things unfinished. The most notable problem (and the only real problem) is raw DPS output. If we were to compare them against HAMs (possibly the most balanced missile in the game), it is plainly evident that it needs a 50% increase in DPS output. Your solution of halving fire time and slightly decreasing rocket damage will do nothing but put more strain on the server. 35 damage @ 3.75s would be much more appropriate. The second most notable problem is rocket velocity. Tripling the velocity and quartering (yes, quartering; the possible range is obscenely long) the flight time would be wonderful in theory, but it will not work because of the way Destiny handles acceleration, flight time, and guidance. This needs to be addressed before any changes can be made, or else things will become even more broken. The third most notable problem is explosion velocity. The explosion velocity is 85m/s, which is OK for practical purposes (learn how explosion velocity works to see why). However, the methods used to apply and modify it were never fully thought through. Just like missile velocity, this needs to be corrected before making any changes, or else things will become even more broken. And there it is. Rockets aren't broken, the game is. Aside from increasing the DPS, there is nothing that can be done until god knows how many game mechanics are revised. No amount of 'fix rockets' whining from anybody will change this fact. ____________ I'd make a forum signature that didn't suck, but I'm restricted by a character limit that does.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.18 06:10:00 - [40] well you say ham are balanced, torps are popular too, hm and cruise are most used weapon for mission runners... but now downgrading to frigs you either fit a standard launcher because they actually can hit something. or simply go for the turret slots. i think your revision is way over the top. and 85m/s with the 20 sig radius sounds on paper not that bad. but it is, a frig with 400 base speed without ab and 40 sig radius is already in the damage decrease range. no fit an ab and you are way out. fit an mwd and the frig will outrun. antidrone seems to never was a real thing anyway. leaving rockets behind without any use, beside looking cool. so simple tripling explosion velocity will make it more viable, the thing with halfing rof but decrease damage is just one option (in my opinion rockets should be really really fast loaded weapon). if ccp say its to much, so simply increase damage output without touching rof, same thing... noone ever said (and i wonder why people always rip single parts out that can be ignored) you have to take the whole or nothing of my ideas. its just a collection of ideas. the thing with flight time, is you need just about 20km range. so double the speed and we can maybe catch faster frigs and are in ham and torp range (so all 3 main assault types got the same range). so if you really tune it down: triple explosion velocity, double velocity, add a little dps (if however its plain make 25 to 40 or doule rof and lower to 20 whatever) and half cargo use per ammo... and rockets are viable again compared to the other. so without a total revision they are on par with the other missiles again and got some uses. and still if they make a revision later: why not. but its not like "dont change rockets, because missiles suck, even they are the only one that you really cant use" which seems to be your opinion and i cant agree with that :p -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.
Halycon Gamma Caldari The Flying Tigers	Posted - 2009.12.18 13:11:00 - [41] Edited by: Halycon Gamma on 18/12/2009 13:12:14 The problem with dropping rate of fire is that you really can't. Somewhere, I'm too lazy to look it up, there is a quote from CCP about rate of fire not being able to go below once per second or it causes eve to do very bad things. Its currently 3.2 seconds. Half of that is 1.6, skills and equipment can bump that under the 1 second threshold, and at that point... well, it doesn't really matter at that point. Its why I said up above that I'd rather you bump damage than RoF. And trust me, in general I'm anti a straight damage bump. Bumping damage every time you hit a roadblock leads to crap gameplay, all the weapons end up being the same. I'd much rather there was another way to do it. But, extending range too much causes rockets to not really be what I think of as rockets; boosting rof breaks Eve; missiles already are capless so you can't balance against that; and at the distances we're speaking about speeding it up doesn't do a dang thing in practice, flight time is remarkably fast compared to how long some of my cruise spend in the air; which brings us to only being able to bump base damage.
Helicity Boson Amarr The Python Cartel. The Jerk Cartel	Posted - 2009.12.18 13:25:00 - [42] Halcyon: mostly it's the explosion velocity that is borked on rockets, it mostly appears someone typoed it when they entered it and forgot to put a 3 in front of 85 (or sth like that). Meaning that you can't hit a same-sized target for poo-poo unless you triple web it or something similarly ridiculous. So fix explo velocity, add a bit more base damage (because it really is too low) and increase clip size to something RATIONAL for such a high ROF weapon and we're gonna be peachy.
Rhen Ayase Imperial Crusade Syndicate	Posted - 2009.12.19 13:18:00 - [43] just as i said before... the main thing is "add dps" the thing with more rof was to make them more interesting (as really fast rof would be something new) if its not doable add a little base damage but not to much, else standard missiles get obsolete, which isnt a good thing either... so please dont hang on just one thing... rockets are clearly broken with explosion velocity, kinda broken with own velocity, could use a little more dps (else we just end up with AC on rocket ships, because they deal more damage in that short range... without both the velocity disadvantages) and maybe increased clipsize in launchers would be nice too. nothing more nothing less. no complete missiles overhaul needed, no "i want fast rof or else i want nothing" or whatever it looks like. -------------------------------------- Slave and Property of Kathryn Dougans.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.