Originally by: Salpad

---

When will missiles get an eye candy upgrade?

The two things that needs doing seem very simple to me, relative to the complex work you've done on the silly gnns that the other races use:

1. Make it so that missiles are launched from specific opening or apertures in ship hulls, with hulls that have many missile hardpoints being defined as having many such potential apertues.

2. Display multiple missiles flying through space for salvos, even if server-wise they're treated as only a single object. Like have a graphic for single-missile, dual-missile, triple-missile and so forth up to 8x-missile, for each of rockets, light missiles, heavies, HAM, cruise and torpedo? When I launch an alpha at someone, I want it to look awesome, and a formation of 7 missiles will look much more awesome than a single missile.

It's not much to ask for. So when will we get it?

---

Originally by: Nevigrofnu Mrots

---

Missile Lauchers?

---

Originally by: Salpad

---

When will missiles get an eye candy upgrade?

The two things that needs doing seem very simple to me, relative to the complex work you've done on the silly gnns that the other races use:

1. Make it so that missiles are launched from specific opening or apertures in ship hulls, with hulls that have many missile hardpoints being defined as having many such potential apertues.

2. Display multiple missiles flying through space for salvos, even if server-wise they're treated as only a single object. Like have a graphic for single-missile, dual-missile, triple-missile and so forth up to 8x-missile, for each of rockets, light missiles, heavies, HAM, cruise and torpedo? When I launch an alpha at someone, I want it to look awesome, and a formation of 7 missiles will look much more awesome than a single missile.

It's not much to ask for. So when will we get it?

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Second the motion for missile love. I recommend looking at '80s Anime for inspiration about how missiles should fly around the battlefield.

IMHO, it is totally OK if the client shows the missiles in a different position from where the server thinks the missiles are, as long as the two locations converge over time (hopefully in an insane set of corkscrews). Any discrepancies due to smartbombs and defender missiles will get lost in the fog of war, and you can just launch the missiles directly out of fixed tubes.

All the cute computations can be done on the client.

---

Originally by: Salpad

---

When will missiles get an eye candy upgrade?

The two things that needs doing seem very simple to me, relative to the complex work you've done on the silly gnns that the other races use:

1. Make it so that missiles are launched from specific opening or apertures in ship hulls, with hulls that have many missile hardpoints being defined as having many such potential apertues.

2. Display multiple missiles flying through space for salvos, even if server-wise they're treated as only a single object. Like have a graphic for single-missile, dual-missile, triple-missile and so forth up to 8x-missile, for each of rockets, light missiles, heavies, HAM, cruise and torpedo? When I launch an alpha at someone, I want it to look awesome, and a formation of 7 missiles will look much more awesome than a single missile.

It's not much to ask for. So when will we get it?

---

1. Deploy on targeting
   
   • Weapon deploy when targeting and starts tracking when target is aquired. If targeting is faster then weapon deployment, the wapon will be ready to fire when deployment is complete
   
   
   • When target is destroyed after firing at it and no other targets are locked, the weapon enteres a cooldown timer of xx seconds before docking again. Allowing the pilot to start locking new targets without the weapon having to dock and then deploy again


2. Dock when warping


• Basicaly the system that is implemented now


3. Manual override


• Adds a toggle button to the right of the command rose where you can toggle "Safe" and "Ready" mode (should also be able assign keyboard shortcut to the toggle command).


• If set to "Ready" turrets will always be deployed unless they are offline or have burnt out.


• If set "Safe" weapons will stay docked up regardless, but can be toggled to "Ready" by trying to activate a weapon.

Originally by: Illectroculus Defined

---

Great work, but if I may make a suggestion regarding deploying guns to the active position:

Move guns to the inactive position when
* Repairing with nanite paste
* Reloading charges (only for Hybrids & Projectile)

---

Originally by: Chribba

---

rainbow mining...

---

Originally by: Elsa Nietchize

---

Great work on this. Looks absolutely beautiful.
any word on when you guys are gunna balance hybrids?
or nerf supers?

---

Originally by: Dev Blog

---

Then one day during another planning meeting our technical artist made the suggestion of why not just deploy when exiting warp, and pack when entering warp. There was a moment of silence as the team looked at each other and realized how simple and obvious it was, and how we had not seen it before.

---

Originally by: Elsa Nietchize

---

Great work on this. Looks absolutely beautiful.
any word on when you guys are gunna balance hybrids?
or nerf supers?

---

Originally by: Minsc

---

Originally by: Elsa Nietchize

---

Great work on this. Looks absolutely beautiful.
any word on when you guys are gunna balance hybrids?
or nerf supers?

---

I'm sure the art department plans to get right on balancing hybrids and supers, right after they complete a few courses on programming.

---

Originally by: CCP Dropbear

---

rofl

edit: ah crap, dev account. Oh well, official rofl at you sir.

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Second the motion for missile love. I recommend looking at '80s Anime for inspiration about how missiles should fly around the battlefield.

IMHO, it is totally OK if the client shows the missiles in a different position from where the server thinks the missiles are, as long as the two locations converge over time (hopefully in an insane set of corkscrews). Any discrepancies due to smartbombs and defender missiles will get lost in the fog of war, and you can just launch the missiles directly out of fixed tubes.

All the cute computations can be done on the client.

---

Originally by: Tommy Blue

---

This could tie into high sec where if you deploy your weapons you are flagged on grid as being a possible danger

---

Originally by: Tommy Blue

---

--> I think having a button/choice of when to online your guns is important.

---

Originally by: Tommy Blue

---

--> I think having a button/choice of when to online your guns is important.

---

Originally by: Cade Windstalker

---

Fantastic job, can't wait to see the turrets in game!

By the way, you were right to leave recoil on lasers, any laser applying enough energy to a target to do significant damage would have as much or more recoil than the equivalent projectile weapon. Good old e=mc^2 states that light leaving an object imparts a force relative to the amount of energy the light contains.

Translation for anyone who doesn't speak physics: Laser guns pack one heck of a kick, Einstein said so.

Before anyone jumps on it, I said "as much or more" because it depends on the attenuation rate of the beam vs the energy lost by the projectile over its travel distance. The reason you never hear about lasers having recoil is because the only ones big enough to have recoil are also, right now, so big they have to have their own building.

---

Originally by: Toshiko Kin

---

Aren't photons massless? And if they do have mass, moving at the speed of light, wouldn't the earth, and all inner planets be pushed from the sun because of this mass? Haven't heard of the orbital calculations taking this force into consideration before...

*willing to admit that i could be wrong, but i would like to see proof that a laser turret would have significant recoil when fired.

---

Originally by: Toshiko Kin

---

Aren't photons massless? And if they do have mass, moving at the speed of light, wouldn't the earth, and all inner planets be pushed from the sun because of this mass? Haven't heard of the orbital calculations taking this force into consideration before...

*willing to admit that i could be wrong, but i would like to see proof that a laser turret would have significant recoil when fired.

---

Originally by: Toshiko Kin

---

Originally by: Cade Windstalker

---

Fantastic job, can't wait to see the turrets in game!

By the way, you were right to leave recoil on lasers, any laser applying enough energy to a target to do significant damage would have as much or more recoil than the equivalent projectile weapon. Good old e=mc^2 states that light leaving an object imparts a force relative to the amount of energy the light contains.

Translation for anyone who doesn't speak physics: Laser guns pack one heck of a kick, Einstein said so.

Before anyone jumps on it, I said "as much or more" because it depends on the attenuation rate of the beam vs the energy lost by the projectile over its travel distance. The reason you never hear about lasers having recoil is because the only ones big enough to have recoil are also, right now, so big they have to have their own building.

---

Aren't photons massless? And if they do have mass, moving at the speed of light, wouldn't the earth, and all inner planets be pushed from the sun because of this mass? Haven't heard of the orbital calculations taking this force into consideration before...

*willing to admit that i could be wrong, but i would like to see proof that a laser turret would have significant recoil when fired.

---

Originally by: Seleene

---

This is fantastic!

At CSM summit we had a long overdue meeting with the leaders of the Art Dept. It was one of the more informative sessions and near the end we made a big point that, "You guys really should blog more. Blog big. Post shiny pics. The stuff you are talking about is interesting and cool."

I love that they not only talked about this feature, but also explained the genesis of it.

---

Originally by: Aeril Malkyre

---

Originally by: Tommy Blue

---

This could tie into high sec where if you deploy your weapons you are flagged on grid as being a possible danger

---

Would make it hard to fight belt rats ;)

Originally by: Tommy Blue

---

--> I think having a button/choice of when to online your guns is important.

---

Heartily agree. I'd much prefer a bit more elegant system than warp popping. But it'll do for now.

---

Originally by: Brendana Fortescue

---

Am i the only one who thinks this is a disaster waiting to happen?

I mean sure it looks nice if someone flies solo in a mission but what happens when to a fleet of 50 jumps another fleet of 50 and on all ships turrets start to point different directions and shoot around and the computer needs to render it all...

I mean this should be given as optional in settings not forced.

---

Originally by: Daesis Wrack

---

Please make graphics and usability improvements to brackets and the overview, not something we only see when zoomed in to the point where we're not playing the game. Thanks.

---

Originally by: skye orionis

---

indeed keep the art department doing artsy things, missile launchers and drone deploying would be nice, but having improved weapons fire, how about working on weapon hits. Weapons hitting another ship tend to all hit in exactly the same boring place every time...

---

Originally by: skye orionis

---

Weapons fire checklist:
* Hit multiple spots on the hull
* Visible shield interaction on ships with shields, the weapons fire should stop just outside the hull and deliver a nice flash of shield energy (blue when the shields are full and fading to red when the shields are about to go)
* Missed shots shouldn't look like they hit
* Autocannons and pulse lasers should strafe across the targets hull

---

Originally by: skye orionis

---

Then of course... it would be great if the art people could come up with a way to visibly show armour damage.

---

Originally by: Soylent Pete

---

They've been planning Solar Sails and laser-pressors (anti-tractor beams?) for years, using photons to push things. The mass is slight enough to be a problem if you're in a hurry, or too big, but if you're willing to wait for it... The thrust is there.

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Second the motion for missile love. I recommend looking at '80s Anime for inspiration about how missiles should fly around the battlefield.

IMHO, it is totally OK if the client shows the missiles in a different position from where the server thinks the missiles are, as long as the two locations converge over time (hopefully in an insane set of corkscrews). Any discrepancies due to smartbombs and defender missiles will get lost in the fog of war, and you can just launch the missiles directly out of fixed tubes.

All the cute computations can be done on the client.

---

Originally by: Soylent Pete

---

They've been planning Solar Sails and laser-pressors (anti-tractor beams?) for years, using photons to push things. The mass is slight enough to be a problem if you're in a hurry, or too big, but if you're willing to wait for it... The thrust is there.

---

Originally by: Rixiu

---

I approve of these.

One question though, why don't 1400mm and 1200mm artillery (or all artillery?) have a single barrel anymore?

---

Originally by: MotherMoon

---

"Then one day during another planning meeting our technical artist made the suggestion of why not just deploy when exiting warp, and pack when entering warp."

yeah... about that. It makes all your work on the new turrets wasted. It would be better if the new turrets didn't dock during warp, it's weird.

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Second the motion for missile love. I recommend looking at '80s Anime for inspiration about how missiles should fly around the battlefield.

---

Originally by: Sylai Leonidas

---

I want this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlAsSyDAWR8 on my Harpy :)
Seriously though the missiles really dont need a launcher per se just have tubes like a WWII sub or have tubes like a modern day ICBM based sub platform. They could have sliding panels with tubes. But I whole heartly agree to have a salvo of missiles not the 1 missile effect. My only concern would be that the Vid-lag and server lag that would create with that many models flying around.

---

Quote:

---

Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done

---

Originally by: Aerieth

---

I know you'd have to reskin the existing missile boats with "texture" launchers but that can't be that hard. The patchnotes say "The Maller, an Amarr cruiser, has had a dramatic makeover and looks fantastic. Go buy one tomorrow and be the envy of all your friends." how hard would it be to give the Drake a "dramatic make over"?

---

Originally by: Daesis Wrack

---

Look at the fanboy buttkissing going on in this thread.

Turrets are about 1-2 meters in size, and EVE is played on a size scale of 1-100 kilometers. We just don't see the turrets. Hell, we rarely see the ships, just brackets.

Please make graphics and usability improvements to brackets and the overview, not something we only see when zoomed in to the point where we're not playing the game. Thanks.

---

Originally by: Salpad

---

CCP appears to recently have tried to solve the problem by automagically zooming in on the currently selected target. I'm not sure why it happens, but it does happen frequently to me in PVE.

---

Originally by: Devblog

---

We needed laser recoil for testing purposes and didn't removed it because this requires effort and we thought it would be ok as it is.

---

Originally by: skye orionis

---

indeed keep the art department doing artsy things, missile launchers and drone deploying would be nice, but having improved weapons fire, how about working on weapon hits. Weapons hitting another ship tend to all hit in exactly the same boring place every time...

Weapons fire checklist:
* Hit multiple spots on the hull
* Visible shield interaction on ships with shields, the weapons fire should stop just outside the hull and deliver a nice flash of shield energy (blue when the shields are full and fading to red when the shields are about to go)
* Missed shots shouldn't look like they hit
* Autocannons and pulse lasers should strafe across the targets hull

Then of course... it would be great if the art people could come up with a way to visibly show armour damage. (And while I personally will be disabling CQ for immersion reasons, I'm sure it would be nice to bask in the glow of your burning ship from the hangar observation balcony, after you dock with a sliver of structure left)

---

Originally by: skye orionis

---

* Autocannons and pulse lasers should strafe across the targets hull

---

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal

---

Out of curiosity, a question for CCP Salvo

Why did you guys choose to do the Salvager/tractor beam graphics over the NOS/Neut/Smartbomb omnidirectional or targetted turrets? NOS/Neut/Smartbombs have more of a tactical importance in PvP, where I could look at a ship to see what it is fitting and adjust my tactics accordingly. Salvager/Tractor beams are nowhere near as important from a tactical point of view, and only provide a little extra eye candy (which NOS/Neut/Smarties/etc would also do).

As such, I'm having some trouble understanding why Salvagers and Tractors got priority in this aspect. Could you explain CCP's reasoning? :)

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Second the motion for missile love. I recommend looking at '80s Anime for inspiration about how missiles should fly around the battlefield.

IMHO, it is totally OK if the client shows the missiles in a different position from where the server thinks the missiles are, as long as the two locations converge over time (hopefully in an insane set of corkscrews). Any discrepancies due to smartbombs and defender missiles will get lost in the fog of war, and you can just launch the missiles directly out of fixed tubes.

All the cute computations can be done on the client.

---

Originally by: Xorth Adimus

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Second the motion for missile love. I recommend looking at '80s Anime for inspiration about how missiles should fly around the battlefield.

IMHO, it is totally OK if the client shows the missiles in a different position from where the server thinks the missiles are, as long as the two locations converge over time (hopefully in an insane set of corkscrews). Any discrepancies due to smartbombs and defender missiles will get lost in the fog of war, and you can just launch the missiles directly out of fixed tubes.

All the cute computations can be done on the client.

---

I agree missiles should fire directly and that any graphical tracking effects can be added on by the client (or not if turned off) as long as it still 'looks right'.



Guided missiles can simly be fixed forward facing tubes that missiles fly out of and then track which will add to the visual effect of this.

They are called missiles because they miss (lol hittiles).. so exact tracking and spiraling issues shouldnt be a problem by simply having explosions somewhere near the target (1km or so). Lack of splash damage can be attributed to smart charged submunitions accuratly striking targets and avoiding damage to surrounding ships (.. this is a shaped charge..). An update to the explosions wouldn't be a bad idea either.

For rockets HAMs and torpedos they shouldn't look like they track at all in flight and they should have a different aimed hardpoint and munition look.

Obviously then the explosion speed and the position of the missile/rocket explosion near the ship can give a nice visual prompt and indication of how well they are/ are not hitting.

---

Originally by: Salpad

---

Originally by: Daesis Wrack

---

Look at the fanboy buttkissing going on in this thread.

Turrets are about 1-2 meters in size, and EVE is played on a size scale of 1-100 kilometers. We just don't see the turrets. Hell, we rarely see the ships, just brackets.

Please make graphics and usability improvements to brackets and the overview, not something we only see when zoomed in to the point where we're not playing the game. Thanks.

---

Yes, this is indeed a problem, that we mostly shoot at targets we can't see.

CCP appears to recently have tried to solve the problem by automagically zooming in on the currently selected target. I'm not sure why it happens, but it does happen frequently to me in PVE.

A much less bad solution would be to introduce a new window, called "currently selected target", which shows something like a 250 by 250 pixels zoom-in of only the one ship or one other object that is currently selected (and only if targetted).

Or maybe 250x250 pixels is wrong. Maybe make the size user-selectable (150, 200, 250, 300, 400, 500, 600, 800). But it has to be "live 3D", not just a still image.

---

Originally by: Wolfgang Grey

---

Will the firing offset mentioned have a effect on ship's Alpha?

Or is it simply a graphics things?

---

Originally by: Cade Windstalker

---

By the way, you were right to leave recoil on lasers, any laser applying enough energy to a target to do significant damage would have as much or more recoil than the equivalent projectile weapon. Good old e=mc^2 states that light leaving an object imparts a force relative to the amount of energy the light contains.

Translation for anyone who doesn't speak physics: Laser guns pack one heck of a kick, Einstein said so.

Before anyone jumps on it, I said "as much or more" because it depends on the attenuation rate of the beam vs the energy lost by the projectile over its travel distance. The reason you never hear about lasers having recoil is because the only ones big enough to have recoil are also, right now, so big they have to have their own building.

---

Originally by: Krutoj

---

You dont have a supercapital? buy PLEX trade it for ISK, buy supers. Just like any other mmo you can use your RL to pimp your character out (or tank for that matter).

---

Quote:

---

And while the artists were adding the additional locators to all the ships, the programmers upgraded the hi-slots so that a turret slot could now occupy any hi-slot. Locator pairs or triads on ships are numbered 1 through 8 (of course not all 8 are present on all ships, there just isn't enough room) and static, and now hi-slots correspond to them left-to-right, so slot 1 is where turret pair/triad 1a,1b,/1c would fit - which means, if you don't like the layout of the turrets, move it to another hi-slot and the turrets will shift their position on the ship. (Prior to this update, turrets used to fill the turret locators numerically regardless of which hi-slot you used.)

---

Originally by: Daesis Wrack

---

Look at the fanboy buttkissing going on in this thread.

Turrets are about 1-2 meters in size, and EVE is played on a size scale of 1-100 kilometers. We just don't see the turrets. Hell, we rarely see the ships, just brackets.

Please make graphics and usability improvements to brackets and the overview, not something we only see when zoomed in to the point where we're not playing the game. Thanks.

---

Originally by: RedClaws

---

The icons are crap. It doesn't fit with the rest of eve, this makes all of eve look amateurish.
Icons are icons, not just a screenshot of the gun.

---

Originally by: Maximus Quintilius

---

PLEASE ROLL BACK TO THE PREVIOUS TURRET ICONS !!!!
The new ones are damn confusing and POORLY designed.

---

Quote:

---

One point the Creative Director was quite insistent upon, was the addition of a slight random timing delay when turrets fire, so that when turrets are grouped and fire together, they don't all fire at the exact same time. When the old turrets fired in perfect unison, the effect produced felt to perfect, and most would agree that it is the imperfections that make things seem more "real".

---

Originally by: Voivod Bathory

---

new turrets: is an improvement,I like it.

new icons: laser icon looks like mushroom,

---

Originally by: Kary Tamona

---

Originally by: Maximus Quintilius

---

PLEASE ROLL BACK TO THE PREVIOUS TURRET ICONS !!!!
The new ones are damn confusing and POORLY designed.

---

This.

---

Originally by: Anij

---

i must say, i really dont get this whine about the icons.

before update, all turrets of the same type/size had the same icons.
i.e medium electron, ion and neutron blasters all had the same icon.

if anything the icons are an improvement, since in many cases you can now tell the difference just from looking at the icon.

---

Originally by: Aerieth

---

CCP: "Sorry we can't do missiles ... that would be too complex and require to great of an over haul to the system, plus for turrets all we have to do is reskin them"
Time passes and CCP feels need to justify work on turrets
CCP: "Look at how much effort we put into making the turrets, and look at how much we overhauled the system to allow new modules that didn't have turrets before to now have turrets. Yay!"

I do appreciate the work on turrets and I really look forward to their beauty. But how did adding "utility" high slot modules that don't require a turret hard point really out weight that of a missile launcher. How hard would it be to add those non-hard point turrets to missile boats?

I know you'd have to reskin the existing missile boats with "texture" launchers but that can't be that hard. The patchnotes say "The Maller, an Amarr cruiser, has had a dramatic makeover and looks fantastic. Go buy one tomorrow and be the envy of all your friends." how hard would it be to give the Drake a "dramatic make over"?

---

Originally by: Nicolo da'Vicenza

---

Yeah, I like a lot of the new graphics and turret firing, along with the tractor/salvager differentiation. That was good.

However, turret icons are dark and hard to see, which is a bit of a pain to see a black artillery cannon superimposed on black space. This is easily fixed though by adding a "glow" around the turret icon .png.

---

Originally by: Ranka Mei

---

Originally by: Aerieth

---

CCP: "Sorry we can't do missiles ... that would be too complex and require to great of an over haul to the system, plus for turrets all we have to do is reskin them"
Time passes and CCP feels need to justify work on turrets
CCP: "Look at how much effort we put into making the turrets, and look at how much we overhauled the system to allow new modules that didn't have turrets before to now have turrets. Yay!"

I do appreciate the work on turrets and I really look forward to their beauty. But how did adding "utility" high slot modules that don't require a turret hard point really out weight that of a missile launcher. How hard would it be to add those non-hard point turrets to missile boats?

I know you'd have to reskin the existing missile boats with "texture" launchers but that can't be that hard. The patchnotes say "The Maller, an Amarr cruiser, has had a dramatic makeover and looks fantastic. Go buy one tomorrow and be the envy of all your friends." how hard would it be to give the Drake a "dramatic make over"?

---

I don't do turrets -- I'm Caldari. :) I've flown missiles boats all my life. So, I'm sure the new turrets look fine. Congrats on that!

I do understand missiles are harder. Nevertheless I hope CCP will make missile launcher animations soon.

---

Originally by: Geksz

---

Edited by: Geksz on 25/06/2011 09:38:40
Ok, some of the turrets are good, some are not that great but they are good overall.
But the icons are not icons anymore. They are more like pictures, wich is bad for recognizeability. They need to represent a genric thing, not an exact item. Pls make them similar to the old ICONs!
And the salvager and tractor beam turret icons need to be more like symbols of what the turrets do, not how they look like!!!
Also strip miner and miner icons need a rewamp to iconic form too! PLS!!!!

And do something with the turret icons next to the selected and locked target if u are at it. They are too dark now!

I have just fitted 425mm ACs on a Fleet stabber and this is what i got: (srsly?)

Have u guys even cheked how these will look like on the actual ships?!?!?!?!?

---

Originally by: Illectroculus Defined

---

Move guns to the inactive position when
* Repairing with nanite paste
* Reloading charges (only for Hybrids & Projectile)

---

Originally by: Leocadminone

---

New icons SUCK.
Mostly Black on DARK GREY makes them impossible to tell apart and makes them LOOK like crap.
They also take FOREVER to load when you're pulling up inventory.

FAIL.


Turrents? Folks actually scroll in WHEN PLAYING THE GAME close enough to see the things, rather than being scrolled out far enough to see what is going on AROUND them? How odd....



IMO this change was a TOTAL waste of time and effort that should have been put into fixing EXISTING issues instead of adding yet MORE visual fluff that does NOTHING to improve gameplay.

YET ANOTHER FAIL.

---

Originally by: akitespero

---

Edited by: akitespero on 22/06/2011 11:58:30
...

Problem is the icons. First it is quite hard to differentiate one turret from the next, and second they do not match the rest of the icons.

An icon is something that represents and item, it doesn't have to be a miniature hyper-realistic picture. An icon is a simplified representation that allows us to differentiate one item from another. This is an instance where more detail is not better.

Other than that, well done CCP.

---

Originally by: Geksz

---

I have just fitted 425mm ACs on a Fleet stabber and this is what i got: (srsly?)

Have u guys even cheked how these will look like on the actual ships?!?!?!?!?

---