| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Steve Spooner
Mordu's Military Industrial Command Circle-Of-Two
45
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 09:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
Torpedoes at this point in time are a mixed bag of doody with bits of skittles and a small niche amongst stealth bombers because that's what they do. I should not have to fit two target painters and/or web to hit a battleship going faster than 160~m/s (which is pretty much all the minmatar battleships) for full damage with rage torpedos, whose sole purpose is to hit hard against big targets, and it can't even do that right because the explosive radius is god awful and you have to get within blaster range for it to even hit. Now the cruise missile buff gave me hope, a small glimmer of hope, that maybe, just maybe, CCP would change torpedoes so that they're viable for PVP outside of ganking mission fit ships and on stealth bombers. |

Mike Whiite
Cupid Stunts. Casoff
176
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 10:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
I all pro looking at torps, though I don't think it's possible without looking at the Stealth Bombers and even the Golem at the same time.
In a strabge way thay got Torps working for Stealth Bombers by giving them insane bonuses, I you buff trops without Looking at the stealth bombers space turns dark with cloaked Stealth Bombers |

Fonac
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 11:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
I had hoped for torpedo changes, right after they posted cruise missilies. .. but i'm getting suspecious, since we haven't heard anything since then.
I honestly think the devs, deem torpedo as balanced. I hope i'm wrong, but i dont think that is the case unfortunaly.
Edit; Oh and i agree with the TP change. I did try a golem after the change they did to explosion radius, but i still found them way inferior to any turrent system regardless.
Torpedo's are simply underpowered, with to little damage application, and to short of a range. |

Dato Koppla
Rage of Inferno Malefic Motives
158
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 11:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
The Stealth Bomber argument doesn't seem to be too massive a hurdle to help Torps damage application, just buff torps range/exp radius/exp velocity and tune down the Stealth Bomber bonuses. |

Mike Whiite
Cupid Stunts. Casoff
177
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 11:41:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dato Koppla wrote:The Stealth Bomber argument doesn't seem to be too massive a hurdle to help Torps damage application, just buff torps range/exp radius/exp velocity and tune down the Stealth Bomber bonuses.
that actualy depends on the changes to Torpedo's and these idea's arround Missiles damage application mods CCP Rise was talking about. |

Josilin du Guesclin
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 11:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
IMO the simple quick-fix for Torps is to give them a 50% flight velocity bonus. The only major issue with this is that it gives Stealth Bombers more range. However, this is limited by their maximum lock range, and if it's a problem despite that removing the flight time bonus would do the trick (or making the velocity bonus 5-10%/level).
|

Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
139
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 12:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Why is everyone talking about range? Torpedos are the short ranged BS missile system and even so 40km (IIRC) is not unacheivable in a PvP fit Raven. Torp range is not an issue. I would also suggest that hitting Minmatar BS (which are generally both the smallest and fastest) with Rage Torps is not intended to yield full damage... I haven't spent any appreciable time in my Torp boats since the modification to GMP so I can't say for certain how much effect that's had but I might be persuaded that the damage application of Torps still needs work, though probably not by direct modification of the missile's stats but rather through modules which would have that effect. |

Steve Spooner
Mordu's Military Industrial Command Circle-Of-Two
45
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 19:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Let me put it another way then; I can't hit another Raven going 117m/s for full damage with rage torpedoes. |

Seraph IX Basarab
Hades Effect
149
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 20:23:00 -
[9] - Quote
I think the advantage of missiles is that they can provide consistent damage. You never "miss" with them as you would with turrets. The downside is perhaps less over all applied damage. If you give missiles the same damage capabilities of turrets while keeping the consistence that missile weapon systems have, you'll make missiles (in this case torps) broken and over powered.
But hey if you want to buff my little SB base corp via torps by all means.  |

Frostys Virpio
Lame Corp Name
387
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 21:19:00 -
[10] - Quote
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:I think the advantage of missiles is that they can provide consistent damage. You never "miss" with them as you would with turrets. The downside is perhaps less over all applied damage. If you give missiles the same damage capabilities of turrets while keeping the consistence that missile weapon systems have, you'll make missiles (in this case torps) broken and over powered. But hey if you want to buff my little SB base corp via torps by all means. 
Consistant damage is countered by wrecking hits. |

Dato Koppla
Rage of Inferno Malefic Motives
159
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 22:31:00 -
[11] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:Why is everyone talking about range? Torpedos are the short ranged BS missile system and even so 40km (IIRC) is not unacheivable in a PvP fit Raven. Torp range is not an issue. I would also suggest that hitting Minmatar BS (which are generally both the smallest and fastest) with Rage Torps is not intended to yield full damage... I haven't spent any appreciable time in my Torp boats since the modification to GMP so I can't say for certain how much effect that's had but I might be persuaded that the damage application of Torps still needs work, though probably not by direct modification of the missile's stats but rather through modules which would have that effect.
Thats with the hefty range bonus that the Raven gets, Mega Pulse gets 45km optimal with Scorch with no bonuses, and 800mm Arties with barrage get better range as well. They also have decent enough application that you don't have to be shooting a moon to do damage. |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 23:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
I haven't used missiles for a while but it's in my estimation that torpedoes would gain the most benefit from a decreased explosion radius. In addition to this you make the missile caldari ships gain explosion speed bonuses as well as their typical damage bonus. In this way ships like the raven and golem are distinct from other racial torpedo ships by having much better damage application even if minmatar get a rate of fire bonus or some other racial bonus. Minmatar already get target painter bonuses to compensate as well as generous low slots for armour tanking. If we hold that caldari are missile specialists and must have shield tanked ships the we should be open minded about providing them an actual reason to be flown that way. |

Steve Spooner
Mordu's Military Industrial Command Circle-Of-Two
47
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 03:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
Any number of things including but not limited to; higher explosive velocity, smaller explosive radius, more torpedo velocity, and other things that are ship specific would help wash the poo off torpedoes. |

Kasutra
Tailor Company Hashashin Cartel
180
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 03:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:I haven't used missiles for a while but it's in my estimation that torpedoes would gain the most benefit from a decreased explosion radius. In addition to this you make the missile caldari ships gain explosion speed bonuses as well as their typical damage bonus. In this way ships like the raven and golem are distinct from other racial torpedo ships by having much better damage application even if minmatar get a rate of fire bonus or some other racial bonus. Minmatar already get target painter bonuses to compensate as well as generous low slots for armour tanking. If we hold that caldari are missile specialists and must have shield tanked ships the we should be open minded about providing them an actual reason to be flown that way. Lowering the explosion radius would help torps a lot. Missile damage formula, yadda yadda.
But it's not the explosion radius that bugs me. We're still in the age of shield extenders making lots of people flying around with huge sig radiuses, and torp boats don't usually have great problems applying painters. In my favorite torp scenario, the one of a torp Raven hammering a Drake - the Drake naturally having 3 shield rigs and at least one LSE, the torps aren't losing damage due to signature radius alone. But you could be losing damage due to the Drake's unmodified speed. Or an Abaddon's unmodified speed. And when unfit Abaddons are speedtanking something, it might be going a bit too slow... |

Josilin du Guesclin
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 05:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:Why is everyone talking about range? Torpedos are the short ranged BS missile system and even so 40km (IIRC) is not unacheivable in a PvP fit Raven. Torp range is not an issue. I would also suggest that hitting Minmatar BS (which are generally both the smallest and fastest) with Rage Torps is not intended to yield full damage... I haven't spent any appreciable time in my Torp boats since the modification to GMP so I can't say for certain how much effect that's had but I might be persuaded that the damage application of Torps still needs work, though probably not by direct modification of the missile's stats but rather through modules which would have that effect. Because a maximum range for a heavy weapon system of 20km (assuming no ship bonuses to range) is horrible, especially when the damage takes nine seconds to land. The realistic range is somewhat less because of target movement, especially as the torps only move at 2.25 km/s. That's why I suggest flight velocity getting a hefty boost as the 'quick-fix' - it extends the engagement range to something a little more reasonable, reduces the damage application delay at shorter ranges, and makes it a little less likely that they'll simply run out of range when attacking fast targets in the 10-20km range band.
You shouldn't have to have a ship bonused for flight time and/or velocity to make a short-ranged weapon system functional.
EDIT: Remember that at this time missile systems have no modules that enhance their range, unlike turret weapons. Until that's changed (if it ever is), the base range of torps could really use a bit of a buff. |

Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
141
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 07:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
Dato Koppla wrote:Thats with the hefty range bonus that the Raven gets, Mega Pulse gets 45km optimal with Scorch with no bonuses, and 800mm Arties with barrage get better range as well. They also have decent enough application that you don't have to be shooting a moon to do damage. And, as you're using T2 long ranged ammo in both examples the Raven can look at closer to 55km with Javs... And a significant boost to damage application stats goes with that.
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:Because a maximum range for a heavy weapon system of 20km (assuming no ship bonuses to range) is horrible, So Blasters (17km on Neutrons with AM) are severely underpowered? The option does exist to extend that to almost 30km using Iron ammunition of course... for a 50% reduction in damage.
Torps are a short ranged weapon system, they suffer the same limitations as other short ranged weapon systems and are adequately compensated (IMHO) with raw damage.
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:EDIT: Remember that at this time missile systems have no modules that enhance their range, unlike turret weapons. Yes, I'm aware of this. As I say, I might be convinced that damage application boosts are required, but in the form of modules rather than base stats. |

Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
250
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 07:38:00 -
[17] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote: So Blasters (17km on Neutrons with AM) are severely underpowered? The option does exist to extend that to almost 30km using Iron ammunition of course... for a 50% reduction in damage.
Torps are a short ranged weapon system, they suffer the same limitations as other short ranged weapon systems and are adequately compensated (IMHO) with raw damage.
Blasters get better damage application stats than rails. Torps get worse than cruise. As well as about 1/3 - 1/5 of the range. With the cruise buff coming I think they have to do something with torps although I concede quite what eludes me for now. |

ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
529
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 08:02:00 -
[18] - Quote
My typhoon would like to have a word with you ;)
... and thats before the new changes... because damn!!... damn i tell you!!! - Nulla Curas |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
174
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 10:21:00 -
[19] - Quote
Mike Whiite wrote:Dato Koppla wrote:The Stealth Bomber argument doesn't seem to be too massive a hurdle to help Torps damage application, just buff torps range/exp radius/exp velocity and tune down the Stealth Bomber bonuses. that actualy depends on the changes to Torpedo's and these idea's arround Missiles damage application mods CCP Rise was talking about.
aaa so they are thinking on a module to make target painters even less relevant? Great! instead of fixing that damm ewar they 321#*!@#*!@# afff |

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
678
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 11:33:00 -
[20] - Quote
Steve Spooner wrote:Let me put it another way then; I can't hit another Raven going 117m/s for full damage with rage torpedoes.
You're crazy if you think you should get full damage against an untackled attack BS using Rage torps. |

Mra Rednu
Black Watch Guard Amarr 7th Fleet
196
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 11:54:00 -
[21] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:. Josilin du Guesclin wrote:EDIT: Remember that at this time missile systems have no modules that enhance their range, unlike turret weapons. Yes, I'm aware of this. As I say, I might be convinced that damage application boosts are required, but in the form of modules rather than base stats.
And make them mid slot mods. |

John Ratcliffe
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
142
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 11:57:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mike Whiite wrote:In a strabge way thay got Torps working for Stealth Bombers by giving them insane bonuses, I you buff trops without Looking at the stealth bombers space turns dark with cloaked Stealth Bombers
I don't think the Stealth Bomber bonuses are outrageous. If they applied the same bonuses to the Golem then I'd be a happy chappie.
Plus +ša change, plus c'est la m+Žme chose |

John Ratcliffe
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
142
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 12:06:00 -
[23] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:You're crazy if you think you should get full damage against an untackled attack BS using Rage torps.
Using 2 TPs and Rigors you should.
The Golem needs another Rig slot IMHO.
Plus +ša change, plus c'est la m+Žme chose |

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
678
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 12:26:00 -
[24] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Steve Spooner wrote:Let me put it another way then; I can't hit another Raven going 117m/s for full damage with rage torpedoes. You're crazy if you think you should get full damage against an untackled attack BS using Rage torps.
I just reread this, it's likely he's referring to the current Raven actually, which isn't an attack BS. Still, the point stands about requiring tackle - or assistance from Rigours or TPs, ofc. |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 13:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
A battleship should be competitive within its own class without the need for gimped fittings, specialised fittings.
The attack battleships should that sub-section ever emerge should be viable against larger/smaller targets as deemed necessary. Combat battleships like the raven should be able to go toe-to-toe with another combat battleship and have a fair chance of winning without needing to gimp the fit or take logi along.
Any ship that cannot compete within its own class is underpowered. The excuse of taking a second person(alt) along is a cop out and frail justification for multiboxing. I have never and will never support the idea of running multiple accounts. If a game can't be done on the shoulders of its playerbase it's a bad game. |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
182
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 14:39:00 -
[26] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:A battleship should be competitive within its own class without the need for gimped fittings, specialised fittings.
The attack battleships should that sub-section ever emerge should be viable against larger/smaller targets as deemed necessary. Combat battleships like the raven should be able to go toe-to-toe with another combat battleship and have a fair chance of winning without needing to gimp the fit or take logi along.
Any ship that cannot compete within its own class is underpowered. The excuse of taking a second person(alt) along is a cop out and frail justification for multiboxing. I have never and will never support the idea of running multiple accounts. If a game can't be done on the shoulders of its playerbase it's a bad game.
Raven is an attack battleship... not a combat one.... |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 14:46:00 -
[27] - Quote
Under the current or future rules? Under the current rules I see no distinction. It is a battleship that is good for missions and not a lot else. |

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
679
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 16:39:00 -
[28] - Quote
Well, under the current rules there's no such thing as an attack BS. 
The future Raven with future cruise will hit BCs and BS very hard from anywhere within useful range, it'll be a hell of a lot more useful than it is now. My main concerns are a) the Typhoon will probably do the same job but better and b) ABCs will probably still be better than both.  |

Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
90
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 16:39:00 -
[29] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:Josilin du Guesclin wrote:Because a maximum range for a heavy weapon system of 20km (assuming no ship bonuses to range) is horrible, So Blasters ( 17km on Neutrons with AM) are severely underpowered? The option does exist to extend that to almost 30km using Iron ammunition of course... for a 50% reduction in damage. Torps are a short ranged weapon system, they suffer the same limitations as other short ranged weapon systems and are adequately compensated (IMHO) with raw damage. Excuse me?
Beyond 4.5km you are seeing a damage reduction with said Neutrons, at 17km you are wasting your time (~40% 'paper' damage).
30km with Iron you may aswell be throwing wet paper towels at your enemy...
Anyhow, back on topic, Torpedoes could do with some clarity of purpose in terms of role - is really a short range weapon? Should it be medium range as it once was (84km), should they be high DPS? or would high alpha strike compensate for delayed damage?
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.24 17:04:00 -
[30] - Quote
How high is high exactly? Delayed damage that can be outrun but you're looking at 10k+ alpha if they land? Should torps really be the artillery of missiles and if so, where do you draw the line? |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |