| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Raven LeSage
   |
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:17:00 -
[1]
Ok, this is probably a newbie question but ... what is a missile weaknes?
Now from my beginer POV missiles are very powerfull. You can choose damage, good range, they dont miss no matter the range, and do good damage.
So what is their weaknes?
|
Ooger Rubicon
Weekend Warriors Inc
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:25:00 -
[2]
Missile weaknesses:
- Damage is not instant. I target is far away you can be ganked before your missiles reach your target.
- Missiles have a set velocity that you can sometimes outrun.
- Can be shot down by defender missiles (and by smartbombs?)
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:28:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Ooger Rubicon
Missile weaknesses:
- Damage is not instant. I target is far away you can be ganked before your missiles reach your target.
This is missiles' only real weakness. They have no other weaknesses that other weapons don't have. And they do lack many weaknesses that other weapons do have. Most notably, missiles have superior range in any given class, and do not miss. Even oversized missiles can hurt smaller ships in many circumstances, which is a massive plus in their favour.
Quote:
- Missiles have a set velocity that you can sometimes outrun.
Sometimes. Generally not, though.
Quote:
- Can be shot down by defender missiles (and by smartbombs?)
Defender missiles are buggy at best, don't react fast enough to shoot down any missiles fired too close or which travel too fast, and are next to useless versus Torpedoes because they require more than one defender to destroy.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
Rafein
Eye of God
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:31:00 -
[4]
slow ROF,long travel time to targets, so the can warp out before the missiles ever get to them. greatly reduced damage if using over sized missile, no matter if long range (turrets can still hit frigs for full damage at long range) or webs (a turret can hit a close frig for full damage if webbed enough).
|
Lain Khazar
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:32:00 -
[5]
Missiles aren't that uber as you may think.
First of all: they don't do instadamage. They have a flighttime until they hit. So in longrangefights missileboats are nearly useless (pvp) because the target is already dead when the missiles reach it or it warped away.
If the target is fast enough missiles don't do much damage or will not hit. If a stupid interceptor-pilot is approaching a sniper-bs (turrets) with zero transversal speed it will pretty sure instapop. Missiles are not affected by transversal speed at all, so they will do much less damage.
Two missiles will always hit for the same damage if the target is doing exactly the same. Two turrets will do different hits. Maybe a very good one, maybe a bad one.
Missiles aren't that uber as it seems. Yes you have advantages (e.g. choose the damagetype), but also several disadvantages.
A alternative way of living...
WTB: avatar-pic (this char is about 6 month old and still doesn't have a avatar-pic -.-) |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:39:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 20/09/2006 09:39:03
The disadvantages of missiles are absolutely TINY, and its really only the instant damage argument that holds water. Missiles are fast, and will still hit the enemy within a few seconds unless he is 160 km away or something extreme like that.
Thats why caldari ships are excellent in a group when they can hide behind massive shield tanks or ecm, and just spam missiles at any range.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Raven LeSage
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 09:46:00 -
[7]
Ok. Someone mentioned using smartbombs for defense. How?
I havent used them yet so I dont know how they work.
Do they create a field around the ship? Wouldnt it be hard to time it?
|
Lucian Corvinus
Gallente
Expert Systems
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 10:31:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Lucian Corvinus on 20/09/2006 10:31:12
Originally by: Raven LeSage
Ok. Someone mentioned using smartbombs for defense. How?
I havent used them yet so I dont know how they work.
Do they create a field around the ship? Wouldnt it be hard to time it?
If the missile is fast enough it will be pretty hard to use smartbombs but it is possible, actually just fit 3 smartbombs, and you won't get hit by a single citadel missile from a phoenix
Also missiles have explosive velocity and explosive radius to consider. using cruise or torps against a frig for instance, will severely cut the damage.
|
welsh wizard
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 12:14:00 -
[9]
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
|
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 12:18:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Lain Khazar
Missiles aren't that uber as you may think.
First of all: they don't do instadamage. They have a flighttime until they hit. So in longrangefights missileboats are nearly useless (pvp) because the target is already dead when the missiles reach it or it warped away.
If the target is fast enough missiles don't do much damage or will not hit. If a stupid interceptor-pilot is approaching a sniper-bs (turrets) with zero transversal speed it will pretty sure instapop. Missiles are not affected by transversal speed at all, so they will do much less damage.
Two missiles will always hit for the same damage if the target is doing exactly the same. Two turrets will do different hits. Maybe a very good one, maybe a bad one.
Missiles aren't that uber as it seems. Yes you have advantages (e.g. choose the damagetype), but also several disadvantages.
try flying at a precision raven in an inty---> intyinstapop
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 12:34:00 -
[11]
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
Actually, I fly Amarr, Gallente, and Caldari, as well as Minmatar. I'm not anti anything. I'm pro balance.
Missiles very definitely do not do less damage, if you're talking about using the correct missiles for the correct targets.
Also, for people saying that missiles doing less damage against smaller targets is a drawback, because turrets can hit for full damage against smaller ships - you realise that's a completely flawed argument, Im sure. In practice (I realise a lot of people who frequent this forum don't actually understand this game at all, but bare with me), missiles are the superior weapon type because they hit consistently. They may hit for significantly reduced damage, but they're a large-sized weapon to begin with, so even their significantly reduced damage is plenty enough to lay the hurt on cruisers and frigates.
It amazes me how people can still argue that missiles are not superior to turrets. Sure they have drawbacks - the only real one being flight time - but that's nothing compared to the advantage they gain.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
welsh wizard
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 12:45:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
Actually, I fly Amarr, Gallente, and Caldari, as well as Minmatar. I'm not anti anything. I'm pro balance.
Missiles very definitely do not do less damage, if you're talking about using the correct missiles for the correct targets.
Also, for people saying that missiles doing less damage against smaller targets is a drawback, because turrets can hit for full damage against smaller ships - you realise that's a completely flawed argument, Im sure. In practice (I realise a lot of people who frequent this forum don't actually understand this game at all, but bare with me), missiles are the superior weapon type because they hit consistently. They may hit for significantly reduced damage, but they're a large-sized weapon to begin with, so even their significantly reduced damage is plenty enough to lay the hurt on cruisers and frigates.
It amazes me how people can still argue that missiles are not superior to turrets. Sure they have drawbacks - the only real one being flight time - but that's nothing compared to the advantage they gain.
It's all situational.
Claiming one is 'superior' is flawed and fails to take into account inumerable different situations thrown at a pvp'er every day.
Play the game more, analyze stupid threads and numbers less.
|
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 12:51:00 -
[13]
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
missiles actually do more damage than proj
a torp can easilly outdamage, outrange, outtrack an AC cannon
the only situation when AC do more damage is using hail are very close range (not really a valid option imo)
then ACs do also way more damage than arty.
the only real drawback is the initial damage delay... in close and mid range is almost ininfluential, in long range (fleet battle) is an issue...
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 13:40:00 -
[14]
Missile weakness  
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 13:42:00 -
[15]
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
Tell this to all bs pilots that i killed in 3 volleys from torpraven.
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
inSpirAcy
The Solopwnmobiles
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 13:52:00 -
[16]
If I could choose between a turret Prophecy and a missile Prophecy, even with an EM bonus, I'd take the missile boat every single time.
Losing the ability to fleet fight (yeah, right) while gaining the ability to destroy BCs, cruisers, AFs and inties with the same weapon and my choice of damage type is not something I'd spend even a moment thinking about.
Roll on Khanid rethink! 
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Worms Corp
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 13:58:00 -
[17]
Missions are where the missle shines. however in pvp there is the weak and unexpected FOF missle to suprise that ECM freak.
|
Lucian Corvinus
Gallente
Expert Systems
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 14:05:00 -
[18]
Originally by: LUKEC
Tell this to all bs pilots that i killed in 3 volleys from torpraven.
hmmmmm.. ok.. and you should tell that to all the dreadnaught pilots I killed with a single shot from my Tachyon apoc
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
Missions are where the missle shines. however in pvp there is the weak and unexpected FOF missle to suprise that ECM freak.
especially if they made a version to fit in the siege launcher
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 14:25:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Raven LeSage
Ok, this is probably a newbie question but ... what is a missile weaknes?
Now from my beginer POV missiles are very powerfull. You can choose damage, good range, they dont miss no matter the range, and do good damage.
So what is their weaknes?
But the REAL question is...who's ALT are you? This just looks like another "Hey, it's been 24 hours since we last posted that missiles were overpowered" thread.
"You can choose damage"
Two flaws here...you can choose ONE type of damage. Don't make me laugh about changing ammo mid-fight, it just doesn't happen. Is it really an advantage to do ONLY one type of damage, rather than doing a few type in one shot? And that brings us to flaw no.2. THe damage you choose is Kinetic. Why? Because most missile ships only get a damage to kinetic bonus, so for anything else you are throwing away 25% DPS.
"good range"
Yeah, but takes an age to get there. And anyway, what DOESN'T have good range these days...Tempests can easily snipe at 250km, so where's the advantage?
"they dont miss no matter the range"
No, but they do get up to 99.9% damage reduction against small targets. This is a MUCH greater reduction than the "chance to hit" reduction that turrets get for small targets, and is unavoidable - there is no equivalent ot a "wrecking hit" for a Torp.
"and do good damage."
DPS is not the highest, even allowing for Tech II ammo (which gimps the firing ship far more than any penalties on tech II turret ammo)
At the end of the day, if you're a genuine noob and not just some missile-hating whiner's alt...by all means train for missiles. You'll soon learn that the grass is NOT so green on the other side.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 14:37:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
Also, for people saying that missiles doing less damage against smaller targets is a drawback, because turrets can hit for full damage against smaller ships - you realise that's a completely flawed argument, Im sure.
Why? one system has a POSSIBILITY to down small targets in a single volley, the other does not. Where is the flaw in that argument?
Originally by: Testy Mctest
In practice *snip* Trolling insult removed *snip* missiles are the superior weapon type because they hit consistently.
Hooey. The consistency is the exact reason they suffer so much. Less modules to affect damage, less implants to affect damage, and less effect on damage from your actions in combat. Going in to combat against a missile ship you can pretty much calculate what DPS you will have to tank to within a 1 or 2% accuracy. You can't do that with a turret ship because you don't know what other mods he has fitted, and how both you and he behave in combat will have a much greater effect on the outcome.
And unfortunately, that's why missiles have to STAY nerfed...they are an on/off weapon...you either ALWAYS win, or ALWAYS lose. CCP should seriously think about broadening the range of available missile launchers, mid slot modules for missiles and implants for missiles to give missile users more CHOICE, and thus more variability in combat outcomes.
Originally by: Testy Mctest
It amazes me how people can still argue that missiles are not superior to turrets. Sure they have drawbacks - the only real one being flight time - but that's nothing compared to the advantage they gain.
I'd like to think you're amazed by this, but I really don't think you are. Secretly you know that missiles and turrets are just about as balanced as any two such wildly disparate systems can ever be. You're just addicted to missile whines is all...
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Goca
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 14:39:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Raven LeSage
Ok, this is probably a newbie question but ... what is a missile weaknes?
Now from my beginer POV missiles are very powerfull. You can choose damage, good range, they dont miss no matter the range, and do good damage.
So what is their weaknes?
But the REAL question is...who's ALT are you? This just looks like another "Hey, it's been 24 hours since we last posted that missiles were overpowered" thread.
"You can choose damage"
Two flaws here...you can choose ONE type of damage. Don't make me laugh about changing ammo mid-fight, it just doesn't happen. Is it really an advantage to do ONLY one type of damage, rather than doing a few type in one shot? And that brings us to flaw no.2. THe damage you choose is Kinetic. Why? Because most missile ships only get a damage to kinetic bonus, so for anything else you are throwing away 25% DPS.
"good range"
Yeah, but takes an age to get there. And anyway, what DOESN'T have good range these days...Tempests can easily snipe at 250km, so where's the advantage?
"they dont miss no matter the range"
No, but they do get up to 99.9% damage reduction against small targets. This is a MUCH greater reduction than the "chance to hit" reduction that turrets get for small targets, and is unavoidable - there is no equivalent ot a "wrecking hit" for a Torp.
"and do good damage."
DPS is not the highest, even allowing for Tech II ammo (which gimps the firing ship far more than any penalties on tech II turret ammo)
At the end of the day, if you're a genuine noob and not just some missile-hating whiner's alt...by all means train for missiles. You'll soon learn that the grass is NOT so green on the other side.
/signed
|
Sandra Tseng
THE MISPHIT'S
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 14:45:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Sandra Tseng on 20/09/2006 14:45:59
well BOHOO to all yall missile users out there.
In ever post the missile users ever posted they always get it to sound like they are on the defensice all the time. Always explaining the disadvantages their chosen weapons have.
My question? Why are you stil using missiles with all their drawbacks?
Do you like being at disadvantage or are you just trying to protect the weapons you use because you do not want them to get nerfed?
Every single argument I have seen here si completly bogus.
As one guy said: Play the game more and you will see.
Missiles are always at advantage and that is why we se a gazillion new Caldari Achura's every other day.
Imune to all kinds of EW (yes FoFs are imune to sensor damping - try it if you do not believe me, and claiming that FoFs do no damage is BS too - they do very similar damage to normal missiles with the right skill - and anything is better than NOTHING - which you get from a jammed/damped turret ship)
Imune to transversal velocety, tracking, optimal range, fallof.
Defenders does not work for sheit and gimping you ship with a smartbomb to try to catch a missile or two is harldy a good defence.
PPL cried over the missile overhaul - what they failed to see is that with the skills trained they actyally made them even more powerful.
I do not even know why I am getting myself involvedin this again.
[edit: oh and plz tell me what ship save an interceptor couold outrun any missile? Outrun as in it will fail to hit at all)
_
Killed my sig AGAIN! :p
http://www.ninc.org/krubarax/images/2d/verydisco.jpg |
Doxs Roxs
White Wolves Defence league
E.R.A
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 14:53:00 -
[23]
Missiles do have one major drawback that is associated with the flight time.
If you get jammed before the missile hits the target it will simply fly off in a random direction and you will not do any damage at all. Thus missiles are best used in close range engagements where as turrets are best used at range or with proper support (webs) up close.
In general, short range weapons such as Autocannons and Blasters will outdamage missiles.
However, those weapon systems suffer from tracking problems and often force the attacker to try and keep his target from moving and at the same time avoid to much movement of the own ship. This is a limitation that missiles dont have.
No cap use when firing is another thing that favours missiles, of the turrets its only Projectiles (including Autocannons) that also have this benefit.
Personally Im specialized in rails, and I would recommend that you think about what ship and what type of weapon you are going to use. If you only run missions and pve then missiles are generally superior, however, if you are to pvp then I think that you will find the need for a turret based weapon sooner or later.
Regards
/Doxs
After almost half a year, why is my face just a '!' ?
And please fix the Javelin T2 rail ammunition... |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:00:00 -
[24]
Originally by: welsh wizard
It's all situational.
Claiming one is 'superior' is flawed and fails to take into account inumerable different situations thrown at a pvp'er every day.
Play the game more, analyze stupid threads and numbers less.
This is the typical response thats always given when someone points out imbalance in the game. Which is why these discussions are pointless. One can only hope that Tuxford at least reads the threads and that its not up for a majority vote if it gets changed or not.
Testy is right, but people will never admit it.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:08:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Grey Area on 20/09/2006 15:10:00
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
My question? Why are you stil using missiles with all their drawbacks?
My answer - at the time of the missile nerf, I had all the basic missiel skillsto level 5, none of the gunnery skills past level 1. Everyone said "train the skills it will make you better". Well I have over 11 million SP in missiles now, and I'm still waiting for it to get better. But it also means there's no sensible way back...I might just as well create a new character.
And anyway...we only focus on the negatives because of idiot posts like this one (the Op's not yours) which imply that they don't HAVE any. Truth is that turrets and missiles are currently about as balanced as they could possibly get.
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Missiles are always at advantage and that is why we se a gazillion new Caldari Achura's every other day.
That's about the attributes, nothing to do with missiles.
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Imune to all kinds of EW (yes FoFs are imune to sensor damping - try it if you do not believe me, and claiming that FoFs do no damage is BS too - they do very similar damage to normal missiles with the right skill - and anything is better than NOTHING - which you get from a jammed/damped turret ship)
And a swarm of small drones is immune to FOFs...FOFs still have the stupid targetting rules that drones USED to have, meaning they target drones (and structures) before ships. And because drones are small fast targets, they take next to no damage from FoF cruise...and everyone knows this. FoFs won't help you survive ANY combat that you wouldn't have survived without them anyway.
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Imune to transversal velocety, tracking, optimal range, fallof.
Yes you're quite right. Which means I can't INCREASE my damage by controlling any of the above in the way that a skilled turret user can.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
inSpirAcy
The Solopwnmobiles
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:13:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
This is the typical response thats always given when someone points out imbalance in the game. Which is why these discussions are pointless. One can only hope that Tuxford at least reads the threads and that its not up for a majority vote if it gets changed or not.
It's actually a cop-out response, which people use when the factors involved in a discussion exceed their capacity to analyse it. Words like "innumerable" try to cloud the situations that people encounter in-game, rather than try to qualify or quantify them, in an attempt to throw off further discussion or challenges to a point.
For example, we mostly agree that missiles aren't much use in fleet combat because it tends to take place at extreme ranges. However no attempt is made to quantify how much of PvP is fleet-based (it varies between players for one) and thus how badly at a disadvantage missiles are in general. I've never fought in a fleet in my life and I never plan to. Missiles offer immense advantages for me because all of my fights take place within disrupt range, where flight time is negligible and tracking dominates fights.
One can't hope to please everyone, but it's an injustice to say that balancing is futile as a result. There clearly are a lot of players skilled in both missiles and turrets who could tell you, on the whole, which system offers more advantage to them. From that, the finer aspects of the game can be balanced indirectly.
|
Doxs Roxs
White Wolves Defence league
E.R.A
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:14:00 -
[27]
I just find your post so hilarious I have to respond a bit:
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Missiles are always at advantage and that is why we se a gazillion new Caldari Achura's every other day.
Or perhaps it is becouse that bloodline gets the best stats, with only 3 in charisma and high perception and willpower?
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Imune to all kinds of EW (yes FoFs are imune to sensor damping - try it if you do not believe me, and claiming that FoFs do no damage is BS too - they do very similar damage to normal missiles with the right skill - and anything is better than NOTHING - which you get from a jammed/damped turret ship)
Imune to transversal velocety, tracking, optimal range, fallof.
Id just like to add one little point here, FOF cruise do 225dmg instead of the normal 300dmg (25% less), FOF heavies do 120dmg instead of the normal 150dmg (20% less), FOF light do 40 instead of the normal 75dmg (~47,7% less).
Also bear in mind that there are no T2 FOF missiles, so when comparing damage with T2 missiles you are missing out even more dmg.
It might also be interesting to know that there are no FOF rockets or torpedoes, thus if you have rockets or torpedoes you cannot use FOF missiles.
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Defenders does not work for sheit and gimping you ship with a smartbomb to try to catch a missile or two is harldy a good defence.
Yes, defenders do need a boost, perhaps heavy and cruise eqvivalent could be an idea?
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
[edit: oh and plz tell me what ship save an interceptor couold outrun any missile? Outrun as in it will fail to hit at all]
Do you want me to name them all or is it enough to just point you to the Space Speed Records thread?
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=228304
If I am not wrong the top speed of any missile with max skills should lie around 9km/s.
Technically, most ships cannot reach those speeds, but alot of ships can go faster then average joes missiles and can still fit weapons, this requires alot of skills and good implants though so it is really not a strategy worth aiming at.
I think you should whine less and try and help the new guy with facts instead. In my opinion both turrets and missiles are situational and you will have a higher chance to win if you can get in a situation where your weapon system is at an advantage.
Regards
/Doxs
After almost half a year, why is my face just a '!' ?
And please fix the Javelin T2 rail ammunition... |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:24:00 -
[28]
Doxs, its time to wake up. Space speed records? You think thats the typical pvp setup or something? What good is a ship that is fitted for super speed so it can outrun missiles but cant do damage back? If thats the disadvantage of missiles, ill take it! :)
Also, while you arent "immune" to ECM, you can fire FoF missiles with 75% of the damage of the t1 version. Compare this to turrets... how much is 0% of the damage? :)
This thread sucks. You cant possible aim for balance in the game when you are using arguments like that....
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Kunming
Amarr
adeptus gattacus
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:35:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
Edited by: Sandra Tseng on 20/09/2006 14:46:20
well BOHOO to all yall missile users out there.
In ever post the missile users ever posted they always get it to sound like they are on the defensice all the time. Always explaining the disadvantages their chosen weapons have.
My question? Why are you stil using missiles with all their drawbacks?
Do you like being at disadvantage or are you just trying to protect the weapons you use because you do not want them to get nerfed?
Every single argument I have seen here si completly bogus.
As one guy said: Play the game more and you will see.
Missiles are always at advantage and that is why we se a gazillion new Caldari Achura's every other day.
Imune to all kinds of EW (yes FoFs are imune to sensor damping - try it if you do not believe me, and claiming that FoFs do no damage is BS too - they do very similar damage to normal missiles with the right skill - and anything is better than NOTHING - which you get from a jammed/damped turret ship)
Imune to transversal velocety, tracking, optimal range, fallof.
Defenders does not work for sheit and gimping you ship with a smartbomb to try to catch a missile or two is harldy a good defence.
PPL cried over the missile overhaul - what they failed to see is that with the skills trained they actyally made them even more powerful.
I do not even know why I am getting myself involvedin this again.
[edit: oh and plz tell me what ship save an interceptor couold outrun any missile? Outrun as in it will fail to hit at all]
_
First off complete agreed!!
Alright from an objective point of view I have to make these comparisions:
- Turret DPS > Missile DPS (most of the time, then I remember about the Raven though)
- Turret Wreaking shot > Missile Standart dmg
- Turret vs Tracking << Missile no-tracking
- Turret vs speed < Missile vs speed (yes you can outrun missiles at insane speeds but those ships can be counted with the fingers on one hand only)
- Turret vs sig radius < Missile vs sig radius (low sig radius ofc, turrets wont hit while missile still hit, even with very low ammounts they still hit)
- Turret vs range < Missile vs range (yes blaster will wtfpwn you if in range but they will never hit above that lil area they do, missiles do the same dmg at 100km they do at 0km)
- Turret insta dmg > Missile delayed dmg (considering missiles dont have an optimal or a rather long optimal its balanced)
Overall turrets and missile are pretty balanced, turrets are a more specialized tool where you have to bring the right turret for the right situation (blasters in a long range fight will get you killed), while missiles are tactically more vestile (though make their comprimise in DPS). Anyway I'm not finished yet, I saved the most crucial arguement to the last :
- Turret counters >>> (bugged/ineffective) missile counters (gimme missile tracking disruptors, chaf/flare sorta thing and I'll STFU for the rest of this everlasting debate)
|
Doxs Roxs
White Wolves Defence league
E.R.A
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:36:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Doxs, its time to wake up. Space speed records? You think thats the typical pvp setup or something? What good is a ship that is fitted for super speed so it can outrun missiles but cant do damage back? If thats the disadvantage of missiles, ill take it! :)
I need to wake up? Why dont YOU start reading the posts you respond to instead?
Originally by: Doxs Roxs
Technically, most ships cannot reach those speeds, but alot of ships can go faster then average joes missiles and can still fit weapons, this requires alot of skills and good implants though so it is really not a strategy worth aiming at.
As you can see from my post I already said its not a viable strategy.
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Also, while you arent "immune" to ECM, you can fire FoF missiles with 75% of the damage of the t1 version. Compare this to turrets... how much is 0% of the damage? :)
Yes, after reloading that takes 10 seconds, not to mention the FOF missile targeting are all messed up and will attack enemy drones, structures and generally everything except what you want them to fire upon. Apart from that they do have their uses.
Originally by: Jim McGregor
This thread sucks. You cant possible aim for balance in the game when you are using arguments like that....
Ok...
I dont know if you are talking about my post or some other post. I tried to help the new guy with some information about the different weapon systems, not propagate for one over the other.
Regards
/Doxs
After almost half a year, why is my face just a '!' ?
And please fix the Javelin T2 rail ammunition... |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:41:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Also, while you arent "immune" to ECM, you can fire FoF missiles with 75% of the damage of the t1 version. Compare this to turrets... how much is 0% of the damage? :)
As said earlier, launching 5 small drones will achieve 05 damage...FoFs always go for drones first, and Cruise FoFs do hardly any damage to small drones. You will be dead long before you have killed even one of them.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Raven LeSage
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 15:59:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Raven LeSage on 20/09/2006 16:00:01
Ok, before you get carried away I am not an alt.
Hell I just started eve 1 month ago. To be precise yesterday was 1 month.
And this isnt nerf missiles. I am simply looking for tips in flying missions agains missile carriers.
I am doing Human Cattle and at phase 3 I pop in and get so badly pounded by missiles I have to warp out. Now I dont have that problem with laser or gun missions so I am wondering HOW TO AVOID MISSILES. Thats the point of the topic title "missile weaknes" as in - what is their weakness I could use. Big lasers? Get close and be fast. Rapid canons? Keep distance. Missiles? I dont know.
My observations were made by a new player still learning eve.
Besides - if you dont trust me just check my previous topics. And if you cant see from them that I am a newbie then you must be a bigger newbie then me.
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 16:02:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Raven LeSage
I am doing Human Cattle and at phase 3 I pop in and get so badly pounded by missiles I have to warp out. Now I dont have that problem with laser or gun missions so I am wondering HOW TO AVOID MISSILES. Thats the point of the topic title "missile weaknes" as in - what is their weakness I could use. Big lasers? Get close and be fast. Rapid canons? Keep distance. Missiles? I dont know.
There is no way you can avoid them tbh. You have to tank their damage. Use shield hardeners for the damage type the missiles use, and you will most likely be fine.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Kunming
Amarr
adeptus gattacus
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 16:08:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Doxs Roxs
...
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Also, while you arent "immune" to ECM, you can fire FoF missiles with 75% of the damage of the t1 version. Compare this to turrets... how much is 0% of the damage? :)
Yes, after reloading that takes 10 seconds, not to mention the FOF missile targeting are all messed up and will attack enemy drones, structures and generally everything except what you want them to fire upon. Apart from that they do have their uses.
...
Regards
/Doxs
Ah thx for pointing that out:
- Turret vs EW <<< Missile vs EW
Btw "WTB structures", I'll place them around gates and stations so ebil-FoFs will hit them instead of me.
You also seem to miss the fact that most heavy jammers are either missile boats them self (which means there are no drones to hit) or are gallente drone boats in which case you WANT TO hit the drones as its gonna castrate the opponents dmg and leave him with a sore thumb!
|
Raven LeSage
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 16:08:00 -
[35]
Thanks Jim.
So basicaly with missiles its "shields up and take it like a man!" ?
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 16:11:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Raven LeSage
Thanks Jim.
So basicaly with missiles its "shields up and take it like a man!" ?
Yes. And dont drop the soap.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Lirt
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 17:54:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Lirt on 20/09/2006 17:54:47
Only drawback of missiles is the flight time.
IMHO fleet battles are the new fashion of EvE. Once this fashion is over no more drawbacks for missiles.
One more advantage of missiles noone mentioned is that they are not dependent to the capacitor, let them take it all with neutralizers-vampires who cares, even if your cap is empty you can still do FULL damage.
But imo there something unfair between turrets and missiles.
Missiles have only 1 module to enchance them while turrets have 3. One module that will increase missile speed and decrease explosion radius is needed. So if missiles get that they can minimize the flight time factor. Turrets have an equilevant and that is tracking computer-tracking enchancer, so they can hit from far away...
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 18:32:00 -
[38]
Lirt - you're right about the modules...now go take a look at the implants situation too....
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 18:42:00 -
[39]
example from today afternoon: 3 long range bs vs hac... miss miss, miss, miss, miss, miiiiiiiiissss
Torpraven: javeling torpedo hits ishtar for 45% damage = 340 dmg b4 resists. Add painter to equation and you get 60%. Funny?
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
Tasty Burger
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 18:55:00 -
[40]
lol caldari whiners.
|
Azerrad InExile
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 18:58:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Lirt
Missiles have only 1 module to enchance them while turrets have 3. One module that will increase missile speed and decrease explosion radius is needed. So if missiles get that they can minimize the flight time factor. Turrets have an equilevant and that is tracking computer-tracking enchancer, so they can hit from far away...
There is no module that reduces turret signature resolution, so there shouldn't be any module that reduces missle explosion radius.
Turret Range = Missle Flight Time x Missle Velocity
Turret Tracking = Missle Explosion Velocity
Turret Signature Resolution = Missle Explosion Radius
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 19:01:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Tasty Burger
lol caldari whiners.
Yeah... i enjoy my caldari alt more than gallente... about blasters joy to fly crap etc.
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
Kimotoro Directive
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 19:19:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 20/09/2006 09:39:03
The disadvantages of missiles are absolutely TINY, and its really only the instant damage argument that holds water. Missiles are fast, and will still hit the enemy within a few seconds unless he is 160 km away or something extreme like that.
Yes, (t1)Torpedos are uber fast.
Sorry you can't afford a dev so you get me instead ^^ - Xorus
I hear Xorus is only 50 isk an hour - Immy
Oooh that could get Suvetar for the day! - Cathath
For 50, you can have my goat:P- Tirg |
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 19:30:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 20/09/2006 09:39:03
The disadvantages of missiles are absolutely TINY, and its really only the instant damage argument that holds water. Missiles are fast, and will still hit the enemy within a few seconds unless he is 160 km away or something extreme like that.
Yes, (t1)Torpedos are uber fast.
Railthron with iron ammo and t2 guns does 200dps
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
Doxs Roxs
White Wolves Defence league
E.R.A
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 21:47:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kunming
Originally by: Doxs Roxs
...
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Also, while you arent "immune" to ECM, you can fire FoF missiles with 75% of the damage of the t1 version. Compare this to turrets... how much is 0% of the damage? :)
Yes, after reloading that takes 10 seconds, not to mention the FOF missile targeting are all messed up and will attack enemy drones, structures and generally everything except what you want them to fire upon. Apart from that they do have their uses.
...
Regards
/Doxs
Ah thx for pointing that out:
- Turret vs EW <<< Missile vs EW
Btw "WTB structures", I'll place them around gates and stations so ebil-FoFs will hit them instead of me.
You also seem to miss the fact that most heavy jammers are either missile boats them self (which means there are no drones to hit) or are gallente drone boats in which case you WANT TO hit the drones as its gonna castrate the opponents dmg and leave him with a sore thumb!
While I can understand that some dmg is better then nothing, but you should also bear in mind that there is nothing that ensures your missiles hit the same target. For all we know they might hit one drone each. It might work better with heavies or lights, but Im still not to convinced you will do much. Dont forget your missiles might go for any neutrals nearby as well. If the enemy has no drones and there is nothing else nearby then I might understand reloading to FOF.
But if you do, do you reload back to normal missiles as soon as you are no longer jammed or do you continue the fight with less dps, and a chance that your missiles will hit other things then your enemy?
Regards
/Doxs
After almost half a year, why is my face just a '!' ?
And please fix the Javelin T2 rail ammunition... |
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 22:02:00 -
[46]
well i started the game flying gallente ships because my idiot friends chose gallente when they signed up. when i tried out the celestis i discovered that i really loved the visual effects of missiles and on the spot decided to change over to caldari missile boats.
uberishness was not a consideration just the simple glee in watching the missiles heading downrange.
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Worms Corp
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 22:41:00 -
[47]
watching missles fly is fun and imo the dps from them is just fine, however if you want to live the game in a spreadsheet go with your blasterthrons.
|
Heloise ChateauBriande
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 23:50:00 -
[48]
Originally by: LUKEC
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
Tell this to all bs pilots that i killed in 3 volleys from torpraven.
How many interceptors have you killed with your Torp-Raven.
I didn't think so...
- Helo
|
Heloise ChateauBriande
|
Posted - 2006.09.20 23:55:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
My question? Why are you stil using missiles with all their drawbacks?
Do you like being at disadvantage or are you just trying to protect the weapons you use because you do not want them to get nerfed?
Missiles are the best weapons in PVE (in my opinion) and I run missions. I flew Amarr for 6 months and if I go do some PVP it will be in a Geddon... but I will run my missions with the Raven.
- Helo
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 00:22:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Raven LeSage
Thanks Jim.
So basicaly with missiles its "shields up and take it like a man!" ?
Another really useful thing is getting your damage/range/accuracy up. Dead missile spammer = 100% missile damage reduction.
For close range setups, consider getting your velocity up for the same reason. It will hardly ever result in technical damage reduction, but it does get you out of simple "take it like a man" range and into "dishing it out" range sooner.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Sorja
E X O D U S
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 00:22:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Sandra Tseng
My question? Why are you stil using missiles with all their drawbacks?
I can answer that: because when you train for a race you have to live with it, and when you are Caldari your turret ships choice is very limited.
Besides the Harpy (which doesn't outclass the other AFs mind you), the Caldari turret ships are not exactly nber...
I trained for large rails II in hope the millions invested in gunnery wouldn't be wasted
Now, to be honest, if I were to start from scratch, I'd go Minmatarr.
It would probably be harder for PvE, but their PvP ships are just too awesome
____________________
Darko1107 > does anything in ascn space have tech II fittings?
Quillan Rage > Iron ships |
Vladimir Norkoff
Crimson Knights Trade Federation
Thundering Mantis
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 00:33:00 -
[52]
NO!!11!!!1!11 No!!! No1 No!! No1111.. Missiles hav no weakness!!.. Missiles r too uber!!.. Fix now please!!.. Missiles always hit! Do most damage!! Do instahit! Wrecking shot!!!!11 All missile ships r T2 Torp Ravens!!.. All PvP uze missile frigs, cruiser, and bs!! Is too best 2 beat!!.. Nerf all now please!!.. Mak short range & miss 90%.. kthnxby..
|
Frools
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 00:44:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Frools on 21/09/2006 00:47:39
this whole thread is great but this one really jumped out at me
Originally by: Grey Area
"You can choose damage"
Two flaws here...you can choose ONE type of damage. Don't make me laugh about changing ammo mid-fight, it just doesn't happen. Is it really an advantage to do ONLY one type of damage, rather than doing a few type in one shot? And that brings us to flaw no.2. THe damage you choose is Kinetic. Why? Because most missile ships only get a damage to kinetic bonus, so for anything else you are throwing away 25% DPS.
hi, you can put different types of missile in each of your launchers, omg
Originally by: Grey Area
"good range"
Yeah, but takes an age to get there. And anyway, what DOESN'T have good range these days...Tempests can easily snipe at 250km, so where's the advantage?
compare the 3 turret races sniping battleship: pest, geddon and thron
all with 3 damage mods and 4 tracking mods
at 250km they do (respectively): 5, 129 and 17dps
falloff is fun \o/
200km sniping is pretty easy for turret ships, 250km is not
note: a jav torp raven does 619dps at 250km, albeit with about 20s before any damage is done
Originally by: Grey Area
"they dont miss no matter the range"
No, but they do get up to 99.9% damage reduction against small targets. This is a MUCH greater reduction than the "chance to hit" reduction that turrets get for small targets, and is unavoidable - there is no equivalent ot a "wrecking hit" for a Torp.
precision cruise raven does comparable damage to a sniper bs shooting at an inty, until he puts his mwd on and gets some transversal up, then the raven outdamages it massively
anything > misses
true if the inty pilot is asleep and stops moving completely theres a good chance you'll pop him in a turret ship
any competent frig pilot isnt going to get hit by battleship turrets
there arent any 'lightly scratche' hits for missiles either
Originally by: Grey Area
"and do good damage."
DPS is not the highest, even allowing for Tech II ammo (which gimps the firing ship far more than any penalties on tech II turret ammo)
doesnt need to be the highest, consistant unstoppable but slightly lower damage is better than slightly higher damage with misses, scratches etc generally
oh and the people whining that fof missiles suck, they're still better than having absolutely nothing like turrets do
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 00:48:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Frools
this whole thread is great but this one really jumped out at me
Originally by: Grey Area
"You can choose damage"
Two flaws here...you can choose ONE type of damage. Don't make me laugh about changing ammo mid-fight, it just doesn't happen. Is it really an advantage to do ONLY one type of damage, rather than doing a few type in one shot? And that brings us to flaw no.2. THe damage you choose is Kinetic. Why? Because most missile ships only get a damage to kinetic bonus, so for anything else you are throwing away 25% DPS.
hi, you can put different types of missile in each of your launchers, omg
Originally by: Grey Area
"good range"
Yeah, but takes an age to get there. And anyway, what DOESN'T have good range these days...Tempests can easily snipe at 250km, so where's the advantage?
compare the 3 turret races sniping battleship: pest, geddon and thron
all with 3 damage mods and 4 tracking mods
at 250km they do (respectively): 5, 129 and 17dps
falloff is fun \o/
200km sniping is pretty easy for turret ships, 250km is not
note: a jav torp raven does 619dps at 250km, albeit with about 20s before any damage is done
Originally by: Grey Area
"they dont miss no matter the range"
No, but they do get up to 99.9% damage reduction against small targets. This is a MUCH greater reduction than the "chance to hit" reduction that turrets get for small targets, and is unavoidable - there is no equivalent ot a "wrecking hit" for a Torp.
99.9%? what are you doing shooting citadels at an inty? :\
precision cruise raven does comparable damage to a sniper bs shooting at an inty, until he puts his mwd on and gets some transversal up, then the raven outdamages it massively
anything > misses
true if the inty pilot is asleep and stops moving completely theres a good chance you'll pop him in a turret ship
any competent frig pilot isnt going to get hit by battleship turrets
there arent any 'lightly scratche' hits for missiles either
Originally by: Grey Area
"and do good damage."
DPS is not the highest, even allowing for Tech II ammo (which gimps the firing ship far more than any penalties on tech II turret ammo)
doesnt need to be the highest, consistant unstoppable but slightly lower damage is better than slightly higher damage with misses, scratches etc generally
I smell someone who hasn't finished pre-Algebra yet.
|
welsh wizard
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 02:08:00 -
[55]
Edited by: welsh wizard on 21/09/2006 02:10:34
Originally by: inSpirAcy
Originally by: Jim McGregor
This is the typical response thats always given when someone points out imbalance in the game. Which is why these discussions are pointless. One can only hope that Tuxford at least reads the threads and that its not up for a majority vote if it gets changed or not.
It's actually a cop-out response, which people use when the factors involved in a discussion exceed their capacity to analyse it. Words like "innumerable" try to cloud the situations that people encounter in-game, rather than try to qualify or quantify them, in an attempt to throw off further discussion or challenges to a point.
For example, we mostly agree that missiles aren't much use in fleet combat because it tends to take place at extreme ranges. However no attempt is made to quantify how much of PvP is fleet-based (it varies between players for one) and thus how badly at a disadvantage missiles are in general. I've never fought in a fleet in my life and I never plan to. Missiles offer immense advantages for me because all of my fights take place within disrupt range, where flight time is negligible and tracking dominates fights.
One can't hope to please everyone, but it's an injustice to say that balancing is futile as a result. There clearly are a lot of players skilled in both missiles and turrets who could tell you, on the whole, which system offers more advantage to them. From that, the finer aspects of the game can be balanced indirectly.
Spot on!
Unfortunately given the subject matter of this particular 'discussion' it really isnt possible to quantify and qualify the data. Our best hope is to simpily play the game and hope that our knowledge and understanding of the mechanics advance through experience.
I can tell you right now that its a very thin line Tuxford treads with regards to any missile alterations. We're on the brink of an ECM nerf and now the community is screaming for negative alterations to the Caldari flagships only truly powerful weapon system.
If both things happen the Caldari race is going to be reduced to 'pathetic' overnight. Surely they won't make the same mistake twice?
Either way I hope all of these 'anti-Caldari' posts are paid no due what so ever. Tuxford needs to concentrate on real issues like the majority of Amarr ships, stabs, nos and ECM.
Great post btw Grey Area.
|
Philip Sterling
GALAXIAN
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 05:35:00 -
[56]
funny thread. people sure seem to have some strong feelings about missiles. keep it comming.
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 05:44:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 20/09/2006 09:39:03
The disadvantages of missiles are absolutely TINY, and its really only the instant damage argument that holds water. Missiles are fast, and will still hit the enemy within a few seconds unless he is 160 km away or something extreme like that.
Yes, (t1)Torpedos are uber fast.
Meh. This is exacly why its so useless to discuss these things. You pick the slowest missile in the game as representative for how fast missiles are...
Funny thread, but useless. :)
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 07:51:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Heloise ChateauBriande
Originally by: LUKEC
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
Tell this to all bs pilots that i killed in 3 volleys from torpraven.
How many interceptors have you killed with your Torp-Raven.
I didn't think so...
- Helo
More than with 425mm railguns. You miss cruisers at 30km. Also there are drones on raven, too.
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 08:38:00 -
[59]
Originally by: welsh wizard
Either way I hope all of these 'anti-Caldari' posts
See - that's the problem with you people. You see everything in the nerf/buff spectrum. It's not about being anti one race or pro another. It's about balance.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
welsh wizard
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:03:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
Originally by: welsh wizard
Either way I hope all of these 'anti-Caldari' posts
See - that's the problem with you people. You see everything in the nerf/buff spectrum. It's not about being anti one race or pro another. It's about balance.
Right back at ya!
What you're asking for is not balance. You're just too stubborn to look beyond the edge of your own bias.
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:08:00 -
[61]
Originally by: welsh wizard
Originally by: Testy Mctest
Originally by: welsh wizard
Either way I hope all of these 'anti-Caldari' posts
See - that's the problem with you people. You see everything in the nerf/buff spectrum. It's not about being anti one race or pro another. It's about balance.
Right back at ya!
What you're asking for is not balance. You're just too stubborn to look beyond the edge of your own bias.
As I've tried to explain to you (obviously unsuccessfully) I have no bias. I fly characters of every race, and my corp contains primarily Raven pilots. I have no reason to want missiles nerfed into oblivion. That's not what I want. Arguments, nit-picky reasons, and numbers aside, missiles are better than every other weapon system in the game. You know it as well as I do. You're arguing simply for the sake of it, and because you're worried that your precious overpowered weapon system will be balanced, or even worse, overnerfed. Overnerfing is a valid concern; pretending that there's nothing overpowered about missiles is just idiotic.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
welsh wizard
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:20:00 -
[62]
Well you're clearly the authority on the matter so matter resolved.
|
Critta
Black Omega Security
E.R.A
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:22:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Doxs Roxs
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Also, while you arent "immune" to ECM, you can fire FoF missiles with 75% of the damage of the t1 version. Compare this to turrets... how much is 0% of the damage? :)
Yes, after reloading that takes 10 seconds, not to mention the FOF missile targeting are all messed up and will attack enemy drones, structures and generally everything except what you want them to fire upon. Apart from that they do have their uses.
Just my 2p on this subject.
Missiles aren't effected by tracking disruptors at all and there is no equivalent system for using as an EW tool against missiles.
You can use FoF's even when damped/ECM'd. Granted they may not be very effective if the opponent happens to be using light drones, but to be honest, it's a lot more of a chance than turret users have, I'd rather go down trying to fight that sitting there trying to get a lock on something until I die.
Also - turrets (especially the larger ones) can be countered by simply flying your ship with enough skill, keeping your transversal up, getting under your opponents guns etc. No matter the player skill, missiles will always hit you, always damage you.
Finally - to the person who stated that blasters and AC's have a higher dps than missiles... these weapons have a *very* short range, missiles have double or even triple this range the majority of the time.
Personally I still think missiles could do with some tweaking, maybe all it needs in an EW mod which specifically effects missiles (reducing explosion velocity, flight speed/flight time, precision, or a mixture of any 2 of these).
At least then if someone wanted to specifically fit a ship to counter missiles, they could. At the moment there is no way to cut down the damage you take from a missile besides using target jamming, there should be another more specific counter to them.
|
kill0rbunny
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:35:00 -
[64]
Edited by: kill0rbunny on 21/09/2006 09:39:10
Most significant disadvantage of missiles is in my opinion the ships they are fitted on.
You have to have a AF/HAC/Inty/Battleship with T2 Missiles to be effective in PvP with Caldari.
You can go for a much cheaper and more effective PvPing Setup by just using a Thorax/Vexor with Med T2 Drones or a Stabber/Rupture.
EW is not an Argument. You end up as the primary target in Group PvPing an turn to dust before even activating your Jammers.
|
Sissy Missy
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:46:00 -
[65]
My two cents.
All the facts are presented in numerous threads about the weapons (and ships) - read them and use/skill what best suits to you.
Why don't you all whiners train missiles if they are so uber? Is there anything in eve to prevent you that? I'm really tired to read all this arguments because the main stream of the topic is just to whine.
Personally, I'm training skills from all races, except Ammar, because every race have something special that I want - being weapon or particular ship - and I'm trying to use what best fits to the job I'm planning to do.
I would understand whiners, if there would be no chance to train skills which aren't in domain of the particular race - but hey people, that's not the case - just train the damn missiles and use them (it's faster to learn torp missiles specialization than getting guns to that level).
Cheers
|
Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:47:00 -
[66]
Let's see if I can bring some sensibility into the thred.
There are a few types of frigate sized ships that a turret battleship can kill:
1. Stationary.
2. Stupid. (Moving straight for the battleship)
3. Slow and large. (Assault frigates that do not move perpendicular)
A missile battleship can not kill an interceptor, but can kill the larger and slower frigates and assault frigates given a bit extra time.
In the cruiser category we find that a turret battleship is quite capable of killing:
1. Slow and weak (T1 cruisers that are far away or webbed and that do not travel perfectly perpendicular)
2. Stationary.
Missile battleships, however, kill just about any cruiser sized rather more quickly, it is but a matter of getting the missiles to actually hit the target.
In the battleship category, well there's been enough threds about it, and suffice to say that tracking/hitting isn't much of an issue except for ACs and blasters. The only thing that, on large, matters in this category is time-to-damage and range.
For this matter, one can rank the different weapon systems for long and short range (not taking the ships' other modules into account!)
Long range worst to best:
Drones
Missiles
Turrets
Short range worst to best:
Very, very, difficult to say.
So, as far as missile drawbacks and advantages go, there's only a few ones that matter. Also note that while they do not do wrecking hits, they also do not do barely misses.
Pros:
Hit at any range for consistent and predictable damage
Hit even at 0m range (a turret cannot, regardless of target size)
Selectable (not reselectable) damage type
Cons:
Long time-to-damage
I cannot truely say that missiles do low damage, considering that they are such far reaching weapons that when compared to turrets the images given are always screwed because missiles reach much further with no damage deteroation.
If I were to judge missiles, I'd say that they are rather fine in their current state. That turrets give greater reward due to tracking issues when these issues are overcome, I can only comment that this is fine. One cannot concievably argue that a weapon that is very easy to use at high efficiency should be competative with weapon systems that require vast amounts of skills to get to high efficiency.
Something that can be said about TURRETS, however, is that the way SENSOR BOOSTERS and TRACKING COMPUTERS work is not good for the game. A Sensor Booster increases both lock time AND range while a Tracking Computer boosts both long range hitting potency as well as short range. In essence, both of these modules widens the efficiency area of the ships they are fitted on in both directions, a long range battleship is given short range potency for free.
This is wrong. Tracking Computers should give only optimal range and not tracking. A 240km optimal battleship with tracking nearly the same as a pulse armageddon, is wrong and bad for game balance. Getting close to a long range battleship should mean a tactical advantage, not only a necessety for yourself to do damage.
-
Three years old |
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 09:53:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Sissy Missy
My two cents.
All the facts are presented in numerous threads about the weapons (and ships) - read them and use/skill what best suits to you.
Why don't you all whiners train missiles if they are so uber? Is there anything in eve to prevent you that? I'm really tired to read all this arguments because the main stream of the topic is just to whine.
Personally, I'm training skills from all races, except Ammar, because every race have something special that I want - being weapon or particular ship - and I'm trying to use what best fits to the job I'm planning to do.
I would understand whiners, if there would be no chance to train skills which aren't in domain of the particular race - but hey people, that's not the case - just train the damn missiles and use them (it's faster to learn torp missiles specialization than getting guns to that level).
Cheers
We have caldari alts with 15mil sp less than mains and it hurts our eyes when they are better than mains.
---------------------
Looking for frentix? Mail me.
|
Sissy Missy
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 12:30:00 -
[68]
@Lukec: What a mistakea to makea. :D You just didn't do your investigation job when you were creating a character. :P
Where is the problem? Train your main to be able to use torps, now you have a super duper main with 45mio SP he he he
Aftermath, I don't see a problem here if the alt has "only" 15mio SP less, it's even better - clones are cheaper! :D
Now, what I want to say is: use the best tools for the job if you can afford it (just takes time).
cheers
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 13:01:00 -
[69]
Originally by: LUKEC
Originally by: Sissy Missy
My two cents.
All the facts are presented in numerous threads about the weapons (and ships) - read them and use/skill what best suits to you.
Why don't you all whiners train missiles if they are so uber? Is there anything in eve to prevent you that? I'm really tired to read all this arguments because the main stream of the topic is just to whine.
Personally, I'm training skills from all races, except Ammar, because every race have something special that I want - being weapon or particular ship - and I'm trying to use what best fits to the job I'm planning to do.
I would understand whiners, if there would be no chance to train skills which aren't in domain of the particular race - but hey people, that's not the case - just train the damn missiles and use them (it's faster to learn torp missiles specialization than getting guns to that level).
Cheers
We have caldari alts with 15mil sp less than mains and it hurts our eyes when they are better than mains.
That is a normal thing I'd say. After all you know exactly what you want to do with the alt and specialise on things for that purpose. Your main otoh had to learn in the process and has skills in other areas as well.
At least when I would make an alt, he would not have all the industry and social skills.
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls.... 
|
Varrakk
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 13:38:00 -
[70]
No matter how you twist and turn this matter, missiles got low DPS. What people ignores is the Raven's slots (this is the #1 whine target)
8/6/5
With 6 midslots, 1 has to be spent on a Signal Booster.
2 in fleet battles. This leave 4 slots for tanking!
No ECM..
I dont see any other BS's that has to settle for 4-5modules for tanking.
|
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 14:33:00 -
[71]
and think to the turret ships that have to use tracking comp/enh for range, and still sensor boosts... what tank you think they have?
also you can tank with 4 slots and put damage mods in lows... or you can even go tank armor and put tons of ecm in mid.
as turret ships need (at least 3) more modules for long range their versatility is way more gimped.
even at close range, turret ships generally need a webber and/or AB to fight in its optimal range... i don't say that a raven have no use for them, but for sure it doesn't need these mod as much as a turret ship.
and about the poor dps of missiles... again i use a lot the phoon and to decide wich weapons to use the most i use NB spreadsheet and ran some tests on the field...
now phoon have 4/4 split (bad bad bad) setup and 5%/level to rof for both missiles and proj
so the 2 weapons on that ship are equally boosted... the result is that missiles (torps) do around 20% more dmg than ACs (and if i remember right 50-60% than arty).
and for my char missiles are indeed more effective, even if i have more SP in guns...
so plz stop to say that missiles have the lowest DPS
about long range...
drone
missiles
turrets
it can be true in fleet battles but in other situations it really depends... also consider that an AC or Blaster boat is still a turret ship and it can't fire past 40km... a missile boat can do that whitout any prob and still for full damage, with the only drawback in the delay
again, to be able to shot at someone, with full damage but delay is better than to have someone out of range.
another thing not yet mentioned is that missiles are not influenced by your velocity so missile boats can use velocity for defence whit no impact on their damage output (as crow or even nanophoon)
the only thing i can say in "defence" of missiles (other than dmg delay that is mostly situational) is that defenders atm are not working as intended and tux alredy stated that he is going to look at them.
we can also discuss how defenders use a slot and that instead, you can counter turrets just with maneuvering (range, transversal), but i think the important thing is that actually the main counter to missiles is pratically not working and this create a huge umbalance.
|
Pascale Guyon
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 16:58:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Lirt
Edited by: Lirt on 20/09/2006 17:54:47
But imo there something unfair between turrets and missiles.
Missiles have only 1 module to enchance them while turrets have 3.
I dont fly caldari. I know nothing about missiles. I know nothing about combat. I only trade. But even I know there is more then 1 module to enhance Your missiles.
1) BCU
2) painter
3) web
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:02:00 -
[73]
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Lucian Corvinus
Gallente
Expert Systems
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:03:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Pascale Guyon
I dont fly caldari. I know nothing about missiles. I know nothing about combat. I only trade. But even I know there is more then 1 module to enhance Your missiles.
1) BCU
2) painter
3) web
I think he means dedicated for missiles. Painter and web also aid turret users, and they also have tracking enhancers, tracking computers and tracking links where missiles users have no such modules.
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:15:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Frools
hi, you can put different types of missile in each of your launchers, omg
Why would I want to do that if doing ONE type of damage is such an advantage? Originally by: Frools
note: a jav torp raven does 619dps at 250km, albeit with about 20s before any damage is done
The rest of your post is just meaningless numbers compared to this bit...comparing DPS when talking about sniping is pointless. It's the Alpha Strike that matters, and the Raven or any other missile ship simply doesn't have one - exactly because of that 20s delay to target.
Originally by: Frools
precision cruise raven does comparable damage to a sniper bs shooting at an inty, until he puts his mwd on and gets some transversal up, then the raven outdamages it massively
Whoa, so now we have to compare T2 missiles to a T1 sniper? Nice fair comparison then . And any Inty pilot who turns on his MWD against a missile ship has forgotten to install a module in the "Brain" slot...
Originally by: Frools
anything > misses
. Wrong - if "anything" is lower than what the target can tank, then it might as well be a miss.
Originally by: Frools
any competent frig pilot isnt going to get hit by battleship turrets
Everyone seems to assume I only fly missile ships. I also fly an Apoc with good (though not uber) large laser skills, and i can hit moving frigs (and occasionally inty's) at any range over 50km. between 30kmj and 50km I miss more than I hit, but still hit, and below 30km I don't hit at all. To say that "turrets can't hit frigates" is as much a lie as "missiles sometimes miss". Be more honest.
Originally by: Frools
there arent any 'lightly scratche' hits for missiles either
This is a simple one to answer. Give me wrecking hits for missiles, and I will accept misses at the same ratio as turrets receive them. The advantage of Wrecking shots, particularly when sniping, far outweighs the disadvantage of misses.
Originally by: Frools
doesnt need to be the highest, consistant unstoppable but slightly lower damage is better than slightly higher damage with misses, scratches etc generally
the ONLY time that consistent damage is better than varying damage is for missions against NPCs. For PVP, knowing what your opponent can do to you, and knowing that it cannot change, is a MASSIVE advantage. You know that you can either tank it, in which case you engage, or you can't, in which case you evade. That means the only combat missile pilots ever win is if the opponent has been taken completely by surprise. If they have ANY chance to prepare, you are toast.
Originally by: Frools
oh and the people whining that fof missiles suck, they're still better than having absolutely nothing like turrets do
Actually, when they work so badly, and have zero net effect, FoFs ARE about as good as absolutely nothing. See my above comment about DPS...if they can tank that, then they can sure as hell tank 75% of it as well - and they don't even have to do that if they know the drone trick.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:18:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Lucian Corvinus
Originally by: Pascale Guyon
I dont fly caldari. I know nothing about missiles. I know nothing about combat. I only trade. But even I know there is more then 1 module to enhance Your missiles.
1) BCU
2) painter
3) web
I think he means dedicated for missiles. Painter and web also aid turret users, and they also have tracking enhancers, tracking computers and tracking links where missiles users have no such modules.
Plus, effect of painters for missiles is capped...it gets to a point where more painters has no effect. For turrets, there is no cap...more painters = more hits = more damage.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:23:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
missiles are better than every other weapon system in the game.
For missions, yes. I should rename my Raven "One Trick Pony". I wouldn't rat hunt with it in 0.0, because it will run out of ammo faster than any other BS. I sure as hell wouldn't PVP against any other BS with it because I'll have taken about a thousand points of damage whilst my missiles are still wandering off to the target. I'm stuffed if I encounter an Interceptor because my 950 point warheads just bounce off it.
They are good at missions and nothing else. And that means they can make a lot of money in (comparatively) safe empire space. And that's why people whine to nerf them...pure jealousy.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:34:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Testy Mctest
missiles are better than every other weapon system in the game.
For missions, yes. I should rename my Raven "One Trick Pony". I wouldn't rat hunt with it in 0.0, because it will run out of ammo faster than any other BS. I sure as hell wouldn't PVP against any other BS with it because I'll have taken about a thousand points of damage whilst my missiles are still wandering off to the target. I'm stuffed if I encounter an Interceptor because my 950 point warheads just bounce off it.
They are good at missions and nothing else. And that means they can make a lot of money in (comparatively) safe empire space. And that's why people whine to nerf them...pure jealousy.
you should try an AC pest or even phoon before to whine about ammo shortage...
and think that turret ships can't basically hit any smar frigate (if not cruiser) pilot not just the inty ...
missiles don't suffer from speed and sig radius as bad as turrets everyone knows that.
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 17:39:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Testy Mctest
missiles are better than every other weapon system in the game.
For missions, yes. I should rename my Raven "One Trick Pony". I wouldn't rat hunt with it in 0.0, because it will run out of ammo faster than any other BS. I sure as hell wouldn't PVP against any other BS with it because I'll have taken about a thousand points of damage whilst my missiles are still wandering off to the target. I'm stuffed if I encounter an Interceptor because my 950 point warheads just bounce off it.
They are good at missions and nothing else. And that means they can make a lot of money in (comparatively) safe empire space. And that's why people whine to nerf them...pure jealousy.
You didnt try Javelin torpedoes?
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Raven LeSage
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:06:00 -
[80]
All I wanted was to know how to fly against missiles.
And I started a flame war...
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:10:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Raven LeSage
All I wanted was to know how to fly against missiles.
And I started a flame war...
We are very sensitive to the words "Raven", "missiles" and "caldari" here.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:16:00 -
[82]
Edited by: Grey Area on 21/09/2006 18:16:27
Originally by: Jim McGregor
You didnt try Javelin torpedoes?
I run missions to make money, not spend it.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:17:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Grey Area
Edited by: Grey Area on 21/09/2006 18:16:27
Originally by: Jim McGregor
You didnt try Javelin torpedoes?
I run missions to make money, not spend it.
Yeah well, if you did, you would see what people are complaining about. The pvp'ers anyway. :)
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:22:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Ath Amon
you should try an AC pest or even phoon before to whine about ammo shortage...
OK, I don't fly them...how many shots do you get? And what damage per shot can you achieve? I think you'll find that the Raven's hold full of Torps amounts to signigicantly less in terms of damage dealt than a Tempest or Typhoons hold full of AC ammo...but I'm prepared to be proved wrong.
Originally by: Ath Amon
and think that turret ships can't basically hit any smar frigate (if not cruiser) pilot not just the inty ...
I fly an Apoc, as stated above, and I can down frigs with it quite easily. The blanket "Large turrets can't hit frigates" statement is just a pure lie.
Originally by: Ath Amon
missiles don't suffer from speed and sig radius as bad as turrets everyone knows that.
Just saying that over and over doesn't make it true, and the only people who "know" that are people who predominately fly turret ships. Before you criticise a man, walk a mile in his shoes.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:27:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Grey Area
Edited by: Grey Area on 21/09/2006 18:16:27
Originally by: Jim McGregor
You didnt try Javelin torpedoes?
I run missions to make money, not spend it.
Yeah well, if you did, you would see what people are complaining about. The pvp'ers anyway. :)
So, why all the *****in' about Javelin Torps, as opposed to (for example) Hail L ammo?
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:30:00 -
[86]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 21/09/2006 18:32:59
Originally by: Grey Area
So, why all the *****in' about Javelin Torps, as opposed to (for example) Hail L ammo?
On page 5 in this channel you will have a thread with 8 pages of rabble. But please dont bump it. :)
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Nyxus
GALAXIAN
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:39:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
We are very sensitive to the words "Raven", "missiles" and "caldari" here.
NERF NERF KILL DIE!!!! NERFITNOW~!!!!!
<cough, cough> Excuse me. Dunno what came over me there.
Now honestly, Testy said it best.
Originally by: Testy McTest
missiles are better than every other weapon system in the game.
It's just the simple truth. Outside of sniping, missiles are just better. I can use T2 torps, heavies, rockets as well as T2 large drones and T2 large, medium, and small lasers. Oh ya, I can also use T2 small blaster and rails.
And missiles are just "better by a country mile". More range, only slightly less DPS, never misses unless the target is going 1000m/s+ (which a turret wouldn't have hit anyway), choose your damage type, no reduction of damage anywhere within thier range, no tracking, easy to fit. Whats not to love?
The only downside is travel time. And tbh that is minimal at anything under snipe range.
And thats just the truth. And like Testy, I would like things to be more balanced, and in the meantime I will just use my Raven/Ferox/Caracal/Crow or ECM Domi to pwn people in thier stupid head until things change.
I trained up missile skills in hopes that Khanid ships will become missile spewers. I haven't regretted it yet.
Nyxus
Originally by: Tux
The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
|
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 18:55:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Ath Amon on 21/09/2006 18:58:16
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Ath Amon
you should try an AC pest or even phoon before to whine about ammo shortage...
OK, I don't fly them...how many shots do you get? And what damage per shot can you achieve? I think you'll find that the Raven's hold full of Torps amounts to signigicantly less in terms of damage dealt than a Tempest or Typhoons hold full of AC ammo...but I'm prepared to be proved wrong.
just finished a phoon mission with a 4 cruisers (i do missions for money too so i don't use jav torps :P) and 425mm (for fitting and tracking)
even if used way more the cruisers (due to better range and better performance vs cruiser size of opponent) i used around 2x proj ammos
the dmg x shot probably was around 4x, maybe even more (expecially considering that with missiles all dmg is the most effective against res) in favor of cruisers, and this considering that i have more SP in proj than missiles.
also as said i think above missiles generally do around 20% more base dmg than proj
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Ath Amon
and think that turret ships can't basically hit any smar frigate (if not cruiser) pilot not just the inty ...
I fly an Apoc, as stated above, and I can down frigs with it quite easily. The blanket "Large turrets can't hit frigates" statement is just a pure lie.
ok if the frig/cruiser pilot is afk at a gate you can shot them down, if you are at 200km and such pilot run straight at you with an mwd on then you can hit him whitout so many troubles... but still can do the missile
the big difference is in all the situations where such pilot is closer to you and happy orbiting outside your web range, in such situations a turret can't hit it while a missile can do that whitout many troubles
also whitout considering pvp but even just in for pve...
why so many pilots prefer to use missiles (ravens) for lv4 missions? could it be because missiles do good damage to enemies of many different sizes and that orbit around you while turrets (expecially large ones) have troubles hitting them?
my experience says that i prefer missiles for such reason
Originally by: Grey Area
Originally by: Ath Amon
missiles don't suffer from speed and sig radius as bad as turrets everyone knows that.
Just saying that over and over doesn't make it true, and the only people who "know" that are people who predominately fly turret ships. Before you criticise a man, walk a mile in his shoes.
your opinion is that it is not true... ok then try NB spreadshet or even the missiles/turret guide...
use similar stats for your opponents and look at the damage curve... see if even what you get are lies.
as said i use both missiles and proj, i like missiles and i will like not to see them overnerfed, but for my experience atm they are umbalanced, not really for the damage, but for their versatility.
the fact that the primary missile counter (defender) is not working as intended (Tux said that and not me) is just a proof that something is not right about them.
and for me, as a missile user too, i will prefer to see first the defender working as they should before to say nerf damage, nerf expl radius and so on, as maye revamped defenders will balance missiles.
this to say that i'm really not a missile hater but just that i see a clear umbalance in this weapon system.
|
Fred 104
1st Royal Marines
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 19:04:00 -
[89]
Wow. People are really getting worked up about this.
I fly Caldari and Gallente. I pilot BS's mostly. My favorite two are the Raven and the Megathron. I can use entirely T2 fittings for both, and as far as I can tell they're pretty much equal. I don't fear a Raven when I'm flying a Blasterthron, and I don't fear a Blasterthron when flying a Raven. I could see making an argument for missiles being superior, but in such a tiny way that it's rather insignificant, even in close-range combat. The different slot layouts and drone bay sizes of the ships also even it out more. I have yet to fly Amarr or Minmatar, but so far I really, truly, honestly don't think there's a problem with the way missiles work or their stats. Yes, even jav torps.
|
Farjung
Gallente
TAOSP
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 19:32:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Farjung on 21/09/2006 19:31:48
Originally by: Grey Area
Plus, effect of painters for missiles is capped...it gets to a point where more painters has no effect. For turrets, there is no cap...more painters = more hits = more damage.
Eh? The theoretical max dps you do with turrets is capped at approximately (number of guns *damage mod * ammo / rof). Under perfect chance to hit conditions (transversal 0m/s, range < optimal), you achieve pretty much this. Anything other than perfect chance to hit conditions, and your chance-to-hit, and so your damage, is reduced. By painting up your target more and more, you are making the part of the chance-to-hit equation concerning the effect of tracking and sig vs transversal tend towards 0, coming closer to perfect chance to hit conditions. You will not make a gun that in theory does 50 dps suddenly do 100 dps by painting it, it just doesn't work like that (and has been verified by numerous experiements). All you can do is make it do closer to the 50 dps it can theoretically achieve by reducing the detrimental effects of transversal, signature radius and range.
In addition, increasing a target's sig does not significantly increase the chance of getting a wrecking shot - that little urban myth is precisely that, a myth. This was tested by both Naughty Boy and myself in the past, though feel free to conduct the same test by putting small lasers on your alt's apoc and seeing if they achieve more than the ~1% wrecking hit chance whilst shooting your target painted raven (they won't).
---
Wave of Mutilation 2 |
Durok Torn
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 20:02:00 -
[91]
Missiles certainly do have their good points. I've been playing for 4 months, and am trying to start on L4s, in a typhoon. CUrrently i use 4 AC650mms and 4 cruiser missiles (maybe a torp or 2 if I expect a lot of BS activity. My experience has been that NEITHER is very good for a close orbiting frig unless I have 2 webbers to slow it down. Sure the missiles doe sa bit more damage, but not even enough to break an NPC tank. The guns just miss. If I use 2 webbers, the turrets kill them quicker than the missiles. But with a 20km falloff + opt (assuming I am not using EMP), the missiles are better for anything over 20km.
I think the choice of which depends on the situation. For close range (5-10km) against a cruiser (webbed, but I'd only need 1) or larger ship, my ACs with that nasty EMP ammo will do more DPS, and not really miss to often. I like that my ammo can do 2-3 damage types, which is even better for PVP. EMP does 3 types of damage, so unless the person tanks all 3 some will hit through his tank. If you missile him on an weak resist you'll do more, but you need to know what they are tanking first. I have issues with projectile turrets, esp the low tracking speeds (it drives me totally mad!!), but I like my guns. I like my missiles to. Each has their uses.
For a long range PVP ship, I'll take a sniper tempest over a raven any day. For a short range ship, I'd rather a blasterthon. All that, of course, assuming you can keep the enemy at the range you want.
And yes, at 200km, a tempest with arty can kill an inty, even if it tries not to go strait or it, because at that range transverse veloicity is low anyways, and if they veer to much, you have that much more time to kill them. I think the biggest issue with missiles vs. guns is the SP issue. Guns take a LOT more training to use well. But seriously guys you need to learn to relax about this!
|
Frools
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 20:20:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Durok Torn
And yes, at 200km, a tempest with arty can kill an inty, even if it tries not to go strait or it, because at that range transverse veloicity is low anyways, and if they veer to much, you have that much more time to kill them.
im sorry but thats just not true
to hit at 200k you're using t2 long range sniper ammo with -75% tracking penalty
that penalty isnt an issue when you're shooting at bs but it most certainly is when you're shooting at frigs
you cant do it with tachs at 200km and they have the best tracking of the long range guns so you most certainly cannot do it with arties
|
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 23:29:00 -
[93]
wow... i just found this thread and wow.... Missiles atm are unbalanced, anyone who tells you otherwise is probably a PVE'r, doesn't know what they are talking about, or are incredibly biased. Large turrets will not hit any frig unless they are multiply webbed (or you are shooting at NPCs who havnt yet engaged you so they are stopped... grey area?)
About your argument with changing damage types etc... grey area, missile users can pick their damage types to WHATEVER they want, if they want to do 20% kin 80% explosive, they can, etc. etc. No turret user can do this, and THIS is a HUGE advantage. You arguing against that point just shows how oblivious you are to the situation. If missiles were just peachy, and completely balanced, like you all swear they are, you wouldn't have people like me and LUKEC who have gone and boughten new accounts just to train up another character that can use this overpowered weapons system. To say you would accept being able to miss with missiles and also get wrecking hits... do you even think before you post? 1% chance for double damage but a 10%+ chance to miss... yeah that would help you out a whole lot m8.
As far as comparing DPS between the two weapons systems, the DPS of missiles carries a lot more weight than the DPS of turret users. Just look at the graphs i think Tux (it was tux right?) showing a torp ravens dps compared to a blasterthron with neutrons... that raven did more dps from 1-4km then more from 7-250km due to the fact ravens dont track... there has not yet been 1 good argument as to how missiles are balanced... at ranges you sacrifice lots of damage for insta hitting, while a raven sacrifices about 25 seconds to hit at 250km....
Also to whoever said give ravens tracking comps etc... go ahead CCP implement a mod that boosts jav torps range past the 300km they can already go, i dont think any of us would mind.
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.21 23:51:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Elenath on 21/09/2006 23:53:36
Originally by: Nybbas
Ravens, blah, missiles, cry, Raven again, cry, missiles, whine, I don't understand simple math but I know that I'm about to cry, Raven, blah
Once more... I smell someone who hasn't passed pre-Algebra... and is obviously biased against missiles (as he trolls every missile thread).
Why is it people, when a discussion regarding missiles comes up, *only* cite the Raven as their prime example... ad nauseam? Why is it most emotional anti-missile forum players constantly discuss the untruth that large turrets can't kill frigs... and that torps and cruises can (which is totally untrue)... particularly when you can take a stroll through low sec and gather your own empirical evidence denying this claim... as every gate-camping, shuttle/frigate popping pirate uses a turret BS at precisely the same ranges that fleet battles operate at?
Why is it that most turret users choose not to crunch a few numbers using math that most people learn in grade school in order to understand that for each and every launcher that does not hold a kinetic missile that the pilot is forfeiting a fraction of their ship bonus. The math it takes to understand the benefit that turret ammo (being spread across multiple damage types) has over a binary, kinetic only bonus (which therefore grants either a bonus or a penalty... not a better mean average) is very, very simple math.
If you are going to cry about something... provide numbers (as Grey Area has... which support how closely balanced missiles and turrets are). The simple fact is that missiles and turrets are DIFFERENT. Turrets are far more advantageous in various situations (such as fleet battles and sniping gates, etc)... while missiles are far more effective for those who don't mind a slightly lower base DPS... in trade for situational flexibility and less attention/piloting being required of the pilot.
The stupidity and sheer emotional immaturity of these threads (and many responses) does nothing but provide corporations information as to who they may want to avoid having on board in the future.... simply by doing a search on EVE Search as to who emotionally whines about what... with no real evidence whatsoever.
|
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:01:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 21/09/2006 23:52:28
Originally by: Nybbas
Ravens, blah, missiles, cry, Raven again, cry, missiles, whine, I don't understand simple math but I know that I'm about to cry, Raven, blah
Once more... I smell someone who hasn't passed pre-Algebra... and is obviously biased against missiles (as he trolls every missile thread).
Why is it people, when a discussion regarding missiles comes up, *only* cite the Raven as their prime example... ad nauseam? Why is it most emotional anti-missile forum players constantly discuss the untruth that large turrets can't kill frigs... and that torps and cruises can (which is totally untrue)... particularly when you can take a stroll through low sec and gather your own empirical evidence denying this claim... as every gate-camping, shuttle/frigate popping pirate uses a turret BS at precisely the same ranges that fleet battles operate at?
Why is it that most turret users choose not to crunch a few numbers using math that most people learn in grade school in order to understand that for each and every launcher that does not hold a kinetic missile that the pilot is forfeiting a fraction of their ship bonus. The math it takes to understand the benefit that turret ammo (being spread across multiple damage types) has over a binary, kinetic only bonus (which therefore grants either a bonus or a penalty... not a better mean average) is very, very simple math.
If you are going to cry about something... provide numbers (as Grey Area has... which support how closely balanced missiles and turrets are). The simple fact is that missiles and turrets are DIFFERENT. Turrets are far more advantageous in various situations (such as fleet battles and sniping gates, etc)... while missiles are far more effective for those who don't mind a slightly lower base DPS... in trade for situational flexibility and less attention/piloting being required of the pilot.
The stupidity and sheer emotional immaturity of these threads (and many responses) does nothing but provide corporations information as to who they may want to avoid having on board in the future.... simply by doing look-up on EVE Search as to who emotionally whines about what... with no real evidence whatsoever.
it doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that turret users (Especially close range users) lose lots of dot due to tracking, while missile users do not, you dont need algebra to realize this, (even though it seems you enjoy using that insult to make yourself seem more intelligent)
And your post says it all.... turret users are best in gate ganking (which is something a very small portion of the PVP community takes part in) and fleet engagements (which is something anyone here who is arguing for the balance of missiles will admit is not a strong point for missiles)
If there was not an unbalance you wouldn't have so many people training up caldari alts to pilot ravens.... and the missile imbalance is ALWAYS argued over Ravens, because the Raven is not only the only ship that fully utilizes the overpowered javelin missiles/torpedos, it is completely built around it (and it has a missile ROF bonus not a kinetic bonus) Find out what you are even arguing for before trying to degrade people who just want balance, the child here is you.
(oh and 2 missile threads over the past couple months does not constitute EVERY missile thread, and I STARTED the last thread, the real troll here is you.)
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:06:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:07:04
Originally by: Nybbas
If there was not an unbalance you wouldn't have so many people training up caldari alts to pilot ravens.... and the missile imbalance is ALWAYS argued over Ravens, because the Raven is not only the only ship that fully utilizes the overpowered javelin missiles/torpedos.
This sentence, in itself.... proves entirely how completely out of touch you (and many others) are regarding this issue.
You yourself said it. THE PROBLEM IS NOT WITH MISSILES OR THE RAVEN... IT IS T2 AMMO. And with that I completely agree. STOP CONFUSING THE TWO ISSUES.
Also, the naive forum reader who believes everything they read on these forums is the sole cause of 'so many people training up Caldari alts' (which you also have absolutely no information to back up that claim... you are guessing). Misinformation and anecdotal crap is what creates people training up for a single ship to run missions in because t2 ammo is unbalanced.
|
Thelonius Rat
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:07:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Thelonius Rat on 22/09/2006 00:09:33
Discounting DPS, damage delay, alpha strike, targeting, etc. there is one MASSIVE advantage missiles get, which I don't think anyone has yet thought of. SKILL TRAINING TIME
According to EVEmon, my absolute noob alt with no skills would take 136 days to train for a Ion Blaster Cannon II (thats a T2 battleship blaster by the way). HOWEVER, it would only 44 days for a T2 torp launcher and 62 days for a T2 cruise launcher. The thing is, once you finally do get T2 guns, they do more DPS then missiles, but theres no denying that a noob with missiles will normally beat a noob with guns, since the missile noob probably has T2 stuff and the gun noob is still training for it.
|
GO MaZ
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:09:00 -
[98]
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Member of the Ex-KSC retard-spellers club. |
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:10:00 -
[99]
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:11:21
Originally by: GO MaZ
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
|
Farjung
Gallente
TAOSP
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:13:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:11:21
Originally by: GO MaZ
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
Er, what ammo would you rather he compared it with? (Spike L is on that graph, look harder...)
---
Wave of Mutilation 2 |
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:14:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:11:21
Originally by: GO MaZ
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
well yes everyones biggest problem is *drumroll* JAVELIN TORPEDOS!!! are you just realizing this? While i still do think the other missiles are unbalanced, the biggest problem here is the javeling torps, which everyone still will argue are just fine and dandy.
|
GO MaZ
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:16:00 -
[102]
More graphs here
You're welcome to use the algebra excuse, unfortunately it pretty much favours jav torps every single time
Member of the Ex-KSC retard-spellers club. |
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:16:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Farjung
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:11:21
Originally by: GO MaZ
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
Er, what ammo would you rather he compared it with? (Spike L is on that graph, look harder...)
Spike is listed... but not shown. Secondly... looked at the characteristics taken for this single snapshot.
Velocity - 2.5k
Transversal - 2k
Sig Radius - 150
Could a more skewed test have possibly been created?
|
Frools
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:16:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Elenath
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
spike L (the equivilent of javelin torps) is on that graph, its that line thats exactly ontop of the x axis
looks like someone missed pre-algebra aswell, guess that makes 3 of us
|
Hor Lur
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:18:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Elenath
Originally by: Farjung
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:11:21
Originally by: GO MaZ
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
Er, what ammo would you rather he compared it with? (Spike L is on that graph, look harder...)
Spike is listed... but not shown. Secondly... looked at the characteristics taken for this single snapshot.
Velocity - 2.5k
Transversal - 2k
Sig Radius - 150
Could a more skewed test have possibly been created?
The whole point is that under those conditions the chance to hit with Spike L is precisely 0%...
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:19:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Nybbas
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:11:21
Originally by: GO MaZ
Whoever said sig radius / tracking penalty on missiles and turrets was balanced, I invite you to play 'wheres wally' (waldo for you americans) with this graph: Raven / Mega vs. MWD Interceptor
Notice anything missing?
Please note the large purple square that this thread is whining about is.... (drum roll please)...
T2 Ammo being compared to Iron ammo loaded in a Mega.
More misinformation in graphs 4tL.
well yes everyones biggest problem is *drumroll* JAVELIN TORPEDOS!!! are you just realizing this? While i still do think the other missiles are unbalanced, the biggest problem here is the javeling torps, which everyone still will argue are just fine and dandy.
Then argue about Javelin torps... don't cry about 'missiles'. English has lots of words available so that we might be able to explain ourselves clearly. The constant deluge of misinformation on these forums is spread through people crying about 'something'... and not understanding the problem.
Are missiles and turrets closely balanced? Yes.
Is t2 ammo of nearly all types (with the possible exception of Hail) completely unbalanced? Yes.
Complain about t2... not 'missiles'.
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:20:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:22:25
Originally by: GO MaZ
More graphs here
You're welcome to use the algebra excuse, unfortunately it pretty much favours jav torps every single time
Of course it does... t2 ammo is completely out of whack. However, this thread is about 'missiles'... not t2 ammo.
People have these two issues entirely confused... and I can't say I blame them. The graph posted is a perfect example. It compares t1 turret ammo, t2 turret ammo, and only t2 torps... under conditions that are intentionally designed to skew the results so that an agenda might be proven.... not 'facts'.
|
GO MaZ
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:24:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:22:25
Originally by: GO MaZ
More graphs here
You're welcome to use the algebra excuse, unfortunately it pretty much favours jav torps every single time
Of course it does... t2 ammo is completely out of whack. However, this thread is about 'missiles'... not t2 ammo.
People have these two issues entirely confused... and I can't say I blame them. The graph posted is a perfect example. It compares t1 turret ammo, t2 turret ammo, and only t2 torps... under conditions that are intentionally designed to skew the results so that an agenda might be proven.... not 'facts'.
I have a graph just for you, with t1 ammo. Ceptor sig, ceptor speed & transversal with mwd off.
lolz
Member of the Ex-KSC retard-spellers club. |
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:34:00 -
[109]
Originally by: GO MaZ
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:22:25
Originally by: GO MaZ
More graphs here
You're welcome to use the algebra excuse, unfortunately it pretty much favours jav torps every single time
Of course it does... t2 ammo is completely out of whack. However, this thread is about 'missiles'... not t2 ammo.
People have these two issues entirely confused... and I can't say I blame them. The graph posted is a perfect example. It compares t1 turret ammo, t2 turret ammo, and only t2 torps... under conditions that are intentionally designed to skew the results so that an agenda might be proven.... not 'facts'.
I have a graph just for you, with t1 ammo. Ceptor sig, ceptor speed & transversal with mwd off.
lolz
So you think you are being tricky or something? Or do you simply not have the critical thinking faculties to understand what you are looking at.
Let me explain it for you -
This is a graph showing a VERY small target (25m sig radius) flying at 500 m/s with a transversal of 400 m/s being shot by various large, long range weapons (note: 425s, 1400s, Tachs, and torps) all using t1 ammo at a range of appx 12.5k (WAY inside the optimal for long range turrets). It shows the the torpedo doing the highest mean average DoT.
Explain how this is any surprise? If you think you are being tricky.... you're wrong. If you think you're proving something... you are -
That you can skew results.
|
GO MaZ
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:38:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Elenath
This is a graph showing a VERY small target (25m sig radius) flying at 500 m/s with a transversal of 400 m/s being shot by various large, long range weapons (note: 425s, 1400s, Tachs, and torps) all using t1 ammo at a range of appx 12.5k (WAY inside the optimal for long range turrets). It shows the the torpedo doing the highest mean average DoT.
Range is in meters. Sniper battleships with T1 ammo do negligible damage from 150km against a non-mwding frig
Member of the Ex-KSC retard-spellers club. |
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:39:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Elenath
Originally by: GO MaZ
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:22:25
Originally by: GO MaZ
More graphs here
You're welcome to use the algebra excuse, unfortunately it pretty much favours jav torps every single time
Of course it does... t2 ammo is completely out of whack. However, this thread is about 'missiles'... not t2 ammo.
People have these two issues entirely confused... and I can't say I blame them. The graph posted is a perfect example. It compares t1 turret ammo, t2 turret ammo, and only t2 torps... under conditions that are intentionally designed to skew the results so that an agenda might be proven.... not 'facts'.
I have a graph just for you, with t1 ammo. Ceptor sig, ceptor speed & transversal with mwd off.
lolz
So you think you are being tricky or something? Or do you simply not have the critical thinking faculties to understand what you are looking at.
Let me explain it for you -
This is a graph showing a VERY small target (25m sig radius) flying at 500 m/s with a transversal of 400 m/s being shot by various large, long range weapons (note: 425s, 1400s, Tachs, and torps) all using t1 ammo at a range of appx 12.5k (WAY inside the optimal for long range turrets). It shows the the torpedo doing the highest mean average DoT.
Explain how this is any surprise? If you think you are being tricky.... you're wrong. If you think you're proving something... you are -
That you can skew results.
... learn to read graphs, add an extra zero to each of your numbers...
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:41:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:44:03
Originally by: GO MaZ
Originally by: Elenath
This is a graph showing a VERY small target (25m sig radius) flying at 500 m/s with a transversal of 400 m/s being shot by various large, long range weapons (note: 425s, 1400s, Tachs, and torps) all using t1 ammo at a range of appx 12.5k (WAY inside the optimal for long range turrets). It shows the the torpedo doing the highest mean average DoT.
Range is in meters. Sniper battleships with T1 ammo do negligible damage from 150km against a non-mwding frig
If you believe that... I have a gamble for you. I'll pay you 100 million isk if I can't blow up your shuttle at 125k in my Tempest within 10 shots.
If you lose, and I blow you up, you pay me 100 million.
PS. I 'll extend this gamble to Nybbas as well... since he can't stop running his mouth.
PPS. If anything all that graph proves is the incredible power of tracking computers and tracking enhancers... as missiles have no such equivalent. But most people will just WOW at the graph and say, 'ZOMG!!1! Missiles r sooooooo super duper!'
|
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:50:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:44:03
Originally by: GO MaZ
Originally by: Elenath
This is a graph showing a VERY small target (25m sig radius) flying at 500 m/s with a transversal of 400 m/s being shot by various large, long range weapons (note: 425s, 1400s, Tachs, and torps) all using t1 ammo at a range of appx 12.5k (WAY inside the optimal for long range turrets). It shows the the torpedo doing the highest mean average DoT.
Range is in meters. Sniper battleships with T1 ammo do negligible damage from 150km against a non-mwding frig
If you believe that... I have a gamble for you. I'll pay you 100 million isk if I can't blow up your shuttle at 125k in my Tempest within 10 shots.
If you lose, and I blow you up, you pay me 100 million.
PS. I 'll extend this gamble to Nybbas as well... since he can't stop running his mouth.
PPS. If anything all that graph proves is the incredible power of tracking computers and tracking enhancers... as missiles have no such equivalent. But most people will just WOW at the graph and say, 'ZOMG!!1! Missiles r sooooooo super duper!'
yeah give caldari missile users tracking comps, and watch them whine about having to nerf their tanks (lol) it takes tracking comps to bring the turret users somewhat up to par with the missiles.
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 00:55:00 -
[114]
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:54:51
Originally by: Nybbas
yeah give caldari missile users tracking comps, and watch them whine about having to nerf their tanks (lol) it takes tracking comps to bring the turret users somewhat up to par with the missiles.
More apples and oranges sophistry from you... as armor tanking turret users don't sacrifice anything but a mid-slot for a Tracking Computer.
And I love how you ignore my bet.... lolz @ u.
|
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 01:11:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:54:51
Originally by: Nybbas
yeah give caldari missile users tracking comps, and watch them whine about having to nerf their tanks (lol) it takes tracking comps to bring the turret users somewhat up to par with the missiles.
More apples and oranges sophistry from you... as armor tanking turret users don't sacrifice anything but a mid-slot for a Tracking Computer.
And I love how you ignore my bet.... lolz @ u.
i really dont have time to fly around space just to satisfy my own ego, the charts dont lie, just beacuse you might get a freak hit of 200 damage on a shuttle, doesnt mean thats the norm. 100 mil is not nearly worth my time, and anymore is putting too much to chance that you MIGHT get the off hit. Not to mention who knows what all you might try to fit, I don't trust you.
|
Aleksei Thraddash
Minmatar
Staboholics Anonymous
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 01:25:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Elenath
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 00:44:03
Originally by: GO MaZ
Originally by: Elenath
This is a graph showing a VERY small target (25m sig radius) flying at 500 m/s with a transversal of 400 m/s being shot by various large, long range weapons (note: 425s, 1400s, Tachs, and torps) all using t1 ammo at a range of appx 12.5k (WAY inside the optimal for long range turrets). It shows the the torpedo doing the highest mean average DoT.
Range is in meters. Sniper battleships with T1 ammo do negligible damage from 150km against a non-mwding frig
If you believe that... I have a gamble for you. I'll pay you 100 million isk if I can't blow up your shuttle at 125k in my Tempest within 10 shots.
If you lose, and I blow you up, you pay me 100 million.
PS. I 'll extend this gamble to Nybbas as well... since he can't stop running his mouth.
PPS. If anything all that graph proves is the incredible power of tracking computers and tracking enhancers... as missiles have no such equivalent. But most people will just WOW at the graph and say, 'ZOMG!!1! Missiles r sooooooo super duper!'
And that would prove what? That Javelin Torps are fine because a Tempest with T1 ammo can snipe a shuttle from 125km?
Javelin Torps have the same damage as T1 torps, wheres my Tremor L that does EMP damage at 220km?
They also have higher speed, explosion velocity and lower explosion radius. So wheres the equivalent tracking bonus for T2 long range turret ammo?
What reason is there to fit cruise at all when you can do more damage to anything cruiser size and up from 0-250km with javelin torps?
|
OrangeAfroMan
Suffoco Noctis
Atrocitas
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 01:31:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
Originally by: welsh wizard
As usual the elite "Anti-missile we fly turret ships hit squad" have forgotten the most important one.
Missiles do less damage.
Actually, I fly Amarr, Gallente, and Caldari, as well as Minmatar. I'm not anti anything. I'm pro balance.
Missiles very definitely do not do less damage, if you're talking about using the correct missiles for the correct targets.
Also, for people saying that missiles doing less damage against smaller targets is a drawback, because turrets can hit for full damage against smaller ships - you realise that's a completely flawed argument, Im sure. In practice (I realise a lot of people who frequent this forum don't actually understand this game at all, but bare with me), missiles are the superior weapon type because they hit consistently. They may hit for significantly reduced damage, but they're a large-sized weapon to begin with, so even their significantly reduced damage is plenty enough to lay the hurt on cruisers and frigates.
It amazes me how people can still argue that missiles are not superior to turrets. Sure they have drawbacks - the only real one being flight time - but that's nothing compared to the advantage they gain.
Yup.
Testy is 100% right... They certainly do do enough damage to smaller targets... Today one of my Claws got one-volleyd by a Precision cruise Raven :/ I had a 200mm plate as well
Gronsak is Tux's angry alt. |
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 01:51:00 -
[118]
Edited by: Ath Amon on 22/09/2006 01:52:47
as is quite evident that someone went not past algebra exam here a nice graph that shows what happens on my typhoon with T1 ammos
the graph shows damage dealt in reguard of different sig radius.
i chose as velocity/transversal velocity quite low value, quite possible to obtain by ship orbiting around you.
the distance is also quite good for proj weapons, 18km an usual distance for someone that doesn't want get webbed.
also note that this is probably quite an usual situation in pve, with cruisers that try to orbit at around 20km
graph
as said i consider it quite an ideal situation for the 650mm... so who think that this is balanced?
ah before someone says... you are not using 800mm that do more damage... 800mm have a worse curve and dual 425mm have a very similar curve with a bit less damage.
|
LordZer00
Caldari
Dark Centuri Inc.
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 02:18:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Nybbas
If missiles were just peachy, and completely balanced, like you all swear they are, you wouldn't have people like me and LUKEC who have gone and boughten new accounts just to train up another character that can use this overpowered weapons system.
..... Ok, just because you and LukeC have bought new accounts to train *insert skill here* means that its overpowered.... Wow... Well with that kind of Logic......
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 03:32:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Ath Amon
so who think that this is balanced?
Nerf Ath Amon. He is not lowering himself to forum standards. B)
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
GO MaZ
No Quarter.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 04:30:00 -
[121]
So I got to thinking about the bet, realised I dont have 100m to lose due to random chance (1 in 100 wrecking hit is random chance), so tested it out with frools.
This is amarr shuttle vs. armageddon - same setup: 1 TC II, 3 TE II, tachyon modulated beam (same tracking as t2, slightly less optimal) and anode dual heavy particle stream (t1 guns that were available at the time).
135km Tachyon Modulated Beam Laser, 1 TC II, 3 TE II, Microwave Crystal - 10 Misses, 0 Hits.
120km Dual Anode Heavy Particle Stream, 1 TC II, 3 TE II, Radio Crystal - 7 Misses, 3 Hits.
Bear in mind that Lasers are the best-tracking large BS gun in the game, running a relatively standard-fit sniper setup.
Notice transversal and velocity of both shots, yes I know it's not the same but you can see that a drop in 100m/s transversal and an increase in tracking thru using the smaller gun still only gives you 3 of 10 hits.
Obviously you'll just have to take my word for it, but I honestly dont care enough about the topic to fake crap like this (I care enough to test it out tho  )
Btw frools has motion prediction & gunnery 5 so it's not a matter of skills. Arty probably has 2/3 the tracking of lasers so at 135km with carbonized lead and a half-standard setup (not 5 x TC II and 6 x TE II), you'll get a big fat zero hits.
Keep in mind I sat like this with frools firing at me for a good couple of minutes, didn't see any wreckings but I have no idea where wreckings occur (ie. 1 in 100 of every shot inside optimal + falloff*2, or 1 in 100 whether target is within max range or not).
Sure, there's always a chance of wreckings but how many times do you get to test 100 shots out on every target hoping for a wreck to sort it in one?
PS. Quality of the pics is poor because they're screenshots from fraps (forgot to take em during the test)
Member of the Ex-KSC retard-spellers club. |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 05:24:00 -
[122]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 22/09/2006 05:25:10
Im sure Tuxford realizes he has made a mistake with the Javelins. They are not balanced in any way tbh.
Then when you combine Javelins with the Raven, you have over-overpowered.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Master OlavPancrazio
Einherjar Rising
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 07:09:00 -
[123]
On the same note, javelin rockets gimp most of the ships that use them, and precision heavys have less range then regular heavys.
|
Nybbas
A Place for Valen
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 07:12:00 -
[124]
good to see elenath decided to keep quiet finally...
|
Marjatta Kelohonka
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 07:23:00 -
[125]
Well.. whos trolling now?
anyway, the OP was asking about defensive tactics and weaknesses against missile boats.
You can twist and turn this subject anyway you want it but it doesn't change the fact that missile ships are more versatile than turret ships.
Like many of the posters here have pointed out the missiles really have only 1 disadvantage and that is flight time.
some ppl here think that saying this means that you are bias and therefore lying... c'mon
|
Raven LeSage
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 09:13:00 -
[126]
Hey, out of curiosity ... could you possibly fit a heavy missile bay to a frigate?
Cause a frig would have enough power and CPU.
Just wondering.
|
Tanya Kovacs
SteelVipers
YouWhat
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 09:27:00 -
[127]
Well lets open a petition to CCP! Lets kick out the missiles out of this game! They r teh h4x! 
This whining about stuff what kills you and what you don't use yourself is annoying. "Omg that Raven killed my Shuttle with a single volley of 6 Precision Cruise. H4x!"
Guys I know the balance isn't the best. But thats a general problem ffs. But stop crying about unfair missiles killing you, when you never ever fly Caldari. Have a look at the public killboards. What kills more playerships: Raven, Cerberus, Caracal? Or Megathron, Deimos, Thorax? But well, 50% of the players are Caldari, so they must be uber in general, there can't be any other reason for this. Let's start a whine. Yeah Caldari have an big advantage in PvE, that's true. But PvP? Lol...
--
All my postings reflects just my personal opinion and my lacking knowledge of proper english.
There is no lag in EVE \o/ |
Marjatta Kelohonka
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 10:51:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Tanya Kovacs
Yeah Caldari have an big advantage in PvE, that's true. But PvP? Lol...
so you mean to say that PVP is the only aspect worth mentioning?
Do you think that if there were no pvp and only pve, ppl wouldn't whine about unbalance? Don't you think that ppl would prefer the Caldari because of the missiles?
OP was having trouble in PVE situation and asked if there were a flaw in missiles..
Doesn't anyone think outside the friggin box?
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 11:07:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Testy Mctest on 22/09/2006 11:07:37
Originally by: Tanya Kovacs
Guys I know the balance isn't the best. But thats a general problem ffs. But stop crying about unfair missiles killing you
Im trying so hard to avoid this thread, but this sentiment is doing my nut in.
NO-ONE (well, not me anyway) IS WHINING ABOUT BEING KILLED BY MISSILES. WE'RE SAYING THAT MISSILES ARE IMBALANCED COMPARED TO TURRETS.
Originally by: Tanya Kovacs
when you never ever fly Caldari
I do fly Caldari, and I also fly Minmatar. I'm well aware of how good missiles are BECAUSE I USE THEM.
It IS possible to think that something needs re-balancing for reasons other than 'omfgiwantmyracrtobehax'. I see a huge imbalance between missiles and turrets and, for the sake of THE GAME (not me, or anyone else) I'd like it fixed.
Jesus, this board is so moronic.
Scrapheap Challenge Forums - All the cool kids are doing it!
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 11:15:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Testy Mctest
It IS possible to think that something needs re-balancing for reasons other than 'omfgiwantmyracrtobehax'. I see a huge imbalance between missiles and turrets and, for the sake of THE GAME (not me, or anyone else) I'd like it fixed.
Jesus, this board is so moronic.
Both you and me are trying to stay out of these discussions for the same reasons, but both of us are failing... :p
Its a obvious fact some things arent balanced in this game, but you will always have people defending it anyways. Even if we bring in graphs to show damage, people will say we arent taking every situation into account. And we cant. So if the graphs are disqualified by people, what argument are we going to use? Its just stupid. Better leave these threads alone.
Im glad people are discussing it though, because threads like these are likely read by the good old Mr Tux because of the attention. Im not saying he agrees, but at least he reads it. Thats all people can ask really.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Tanya Kovacs
SteelVipers
YouWhat
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 11:30:00 -
[131]
Edited by: Tanya Kovacs on 22/09/2006 11:31:57
Testy you may be right, I was sarcastic because all this "Missiles are uber!!!!"-threads gives me a headache.
Valid discussion about this topic are fine, but tbh only a few postings are worth a read, because they are balanced, not biased in any way and not constructing ridiculous situations like shooting javelin torps at target >200km away to prove they do to much damage at any distance. (but yes, the explosion speed is an issue)
--
All my postings reflects just my personal opinion and my lacking knowledge of proper english.
There is no lag in EVE \o/ |
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 11:31:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Testy Mctest
It IS possible to think that something needs re-balancing for reasons other than 'omfgiwantmyracrtobehax'. I see a huge imbalance between missiles and turrets and, for the sake of THE GAME (not me, or anyone else) I'd like it fixed.
Jesus, this board is so moronic.
Both you and me are trying to stay out of these discussions for the same reasons, but both of us are failing... :p
Its a obvious fact some things arent balanced in this game, but you will always have people defending it anyways. Even if we bring in graphs to show damage, people will say we arent taking every situation into account. And we cant. So if the graphs are disqualified by people, what argument are we going to use? Its just stupid. Better leave these threads alone.
Im glad people are discussing it though, because threads like these are likely read by the good old Mr Tux because of the attention. Im not saying he agrees, but at least he reads it. Thats all people can ask really.
well it is not obvious. any such discussion ends in raven vs large turrets and boils down usualy to t2 ammo.
while everybody ignores any other missiles/guns, ship slot layout, ship fittings etc.
this is not a discussion about balance and never has been, because it looks at a single small spot in the game. also crying that something is wrong is easy. try to come up with a solution is hard.
and those folks that smack talk Grey Area should try eve-search and look for one particular thread with proposed fixes, graphs etc. he did lot of work there and yet it was ignored.
grass is always greener ... well I started with missiles and now I am training t2 hybrids, guess why. spike is the correct answer.
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 14:40:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
well it is not obvious. any such discussion ends in raven vs large turrets and boils down usualy to t2 ammo.
while everybody ignores any other missiles/guns, ship slot layout, ship fittings etc.
this is not a discussion about balance and never has been, because it looks at a single small spot in the game. also crying that something is wrong is easy. try to come up with a solution is hard.
and those folks that smack talk Grey Area should try eve-search and look for one particular thread with proposed fixes, graphs etc. he did lot of work there and yet it was ignored.
grass is always greener ... well I started with missiles and now I am training t2 hybrids, guess why. spike is the correct answer.
if you look at the graphs i posted it is from a single missle/AC with 25% rof (as in a phoon) with T1 weapons.
it is not about raven or javs and i think that is quite umbalanced as is quite clear that missiles have both more damage and versatility (and we can also add better damage choice that is not shown in graphic)
it can be that AC are underpowered or Missiles overpowered or a bit of both, but the result is the same... (on the naglfar for example the bonuses are 5% rof on missiles and 7.5% rof on turrets to balnce out the damage difference)
then we can say that defender are not working and they will probably get revamped, but this changes not the actual situation and not only for T2 javs, but even for normal cruise/torps compared to ACs
|
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 15:11:00 -
[134]
Originally by: Nybbas
If there was not an unbalance you wouldn't have so many people training up caldari alts to pilot ravens.... and the missile imbalance is ALWAYS argued over Ravens, because the Raven is not only the only ship that fully utilizes the overpowered javelin missiles/torpedos, it is completely built around it (and it has a missile ROF bonus not a kinetic bonus)
For crying out loud just LISTEN will you? The Raven is good at ONE thing...missions. And that means it's good at making money. And it so happens you can run missions in empire space where 80% of the EVE population live. So yes, we get a lot of new characters thinking "I got to get me some of that Raven action". People train Ravens to make money doing missions, not to take over the world in PVP.
For missions, missiles and the Raven are a cut above any other ship. For PVP, unless you can engineer that every combat takes place within 20km range, they are a very dodgy prospect indeed.
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 15:14:00 -
[135]
Originally by: OrangeAfroMan
Testy is 100% right... They certainly do do enough damage to smaller targets... Today one of my Claws got one-volleyd by a Precision cruise Raven :/ I had a 200mm plate as well
What range? What speed were you doing? Did you have your MWD on?
---
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums;
Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?"
Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 15:20:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Ath Amon
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
well it is not obvious. any such discussion ends in raven vs large turrets and boils down usualy to t2 ammo.
while everybody ignores any other missiles/guns, ship slot layout, ship fittings etc.
this is not a discussion about balance and never has been, because it looks at a single small spot in the game. also crying that something is wrong is easy. try to come up with a solution is hard.
and those folks that smack talk Grey Area should try eve-search and look for one particular thread with proposed fixes, graphs etc. he did lot of work there and yet it was ignored.
grass is always greener ... well I started with missiles and now I am training t2 hybrids, guess why. spike is the correct answer.
if you look at the graphs i posted it is from a single missle/AC with 25% rof (as in a phoon) with T1 weapons.
it is not about raven or javs and i think that is quite umbalanced as is quite clear that missiles have both more damage and versatility (and we can also add better damage choice that is not shown in graphic)
it can be that AC are underpowered or Missiles overpowered or a bit of both, but the result is the same... (on the naglfar for example the bonuses are 5% rof on missiles and 7.5% rof on turrets to balnce out the damage difference)
then we can say that defender are not working and they will probably get revamped, but this changes not the actual situation and not only for T2 javs, but even for normal cruise/torps compared to ACs
so you will cry nerf lasers because they have higher base damage (and most amarr ships miss damage related bonuses because of that) ?
now take that AC, slap it on tempest and go compare. and you will get a different picture. same with blasters on domi vs mega.
and that's what I tried to write. do not look on a too narrow picture. you won't see what's the picture about.
you say missiles are versatile. well but you only have 2 launchers per class (well 1 in medium actualy) plus t2. I'd kill for a siege t2 variant with lower fitings that would enable me to fit heavy nos and xl t2 booster on raven. megathron can go full gank with insane damage (neutron t2) or full tank with good damage (electron+lar t2). t2 siege raven can only go weak tank or ECM (and then it is decried as coward setup).
and there's plenty of these issues on every corner. like skill training times. well t large missiles are easy to train, but you only get them, nothing else. t2 large guns require more skill training, but you get small and medium t2 guns in the process.
it's all about choice. you have it with guns in some areas, you have it with missiles in other areas (and they do not necesarily overlap).
and please tell me for example how missile cruisers are overpowered in PvP. I see lots of thoraxes, vexors, rupies and sniper ships. missile cruisers only appear in larger gangs where they do not need to worry about tackling. again you have choices in different areas.
that's why you are not limited to your racial ships and weapons. you can train any race and weapon you wish. balancing is also done with that in mind (but sometimes it fails :-))
many ppl tell you that EVE is not balanced for PvE and then cry why are Ravens such perfect mission running ships. well train for a raven if you'd like. you have to recognize your weakneses and use the right tools for the right job.
imagine mining barges would be labeled as amarr ships. what a lot of whining that would make.
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Gabriel Karade
Office linebackers
Blood of the Innocents
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 16:02:00 -
[137]
Well, I don't know if you would qualify this as a 'weakness' but missiles are a bit naff as secondary weapons.
Both the Apocalypse and Megathron have two launcher hardpoints, the Tempest has four, yet who in their right mind would use two launchers on a Megathron, or an Apocalypse? Better to stick nosferatu on there instead. On the Megathron in particular, if you replace a turret for a launcher you are seriously gimping your setup.
It would be nice if launchers were desirable secondary weapon systems again, it would be nice if torpedo's were a unique weapon system, not simply the close range equivalent for missiles as blasters are to hybrids (re-introduce splash damage?).
If I recall correctly, Tux indicated somewhere he wanted to look into missiles again, I hope so, because they are not *just* a Caldari weapon system...
----------
- Office Linebacker -
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 16:19:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Well, I don't know if you would qualify this as a 'weakness' but missiles are a bit naff as secondary weapons.
Both the Apocalypse and Megathron have two launcher hardpoints, the Tempest has four, yet who in their right mind would use two launchers on a Megathron, or an Apocalypse? Better to stick nosferatu on there instead. On the Megathron in particular, if you replace a turret for a launcher you are seriously gimping your setup.
It would be nice if launchers were desirable secondary weapon systems again, it would be nice if torpedo's were a unique weapon system, not simply the close range equivalent for missiles as blasters are to hybrids (re-introduce splash damage?).
If I recall correctly, Tux indicated somewhere he wanted to look into missiles again, I hope so, because they are not *just* a Caldari weapon system...
it is the same way with raven, it also has 2 unused turret slots (actualy it is a 6l/4t ship). so viability of secondary weapons is a general problem.
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Elenath
Gallente
The Vindaloo Enema Disasters
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 16:20:00 -
[139]
Edited by: Elenath on 22/09/2006 16:20:33
Originally by: Nybbas
good to see elenath decided to keep quiet finally...
Haha... nice trolling there, kiddo.
After cowardly turning down my bet I figured you were all talk and whine... and probably bought this character with isk.
Not to mention... my wife was the voice of reason and told me to stop arguing with folks who are probably younger than our kids.
No one in this thread has presented evidence of anything other than t2 ammo being broken, which is true... and I've already stated such. The rest is people who just want to cry. I'm going to avoid posting in such threads... as CCP has sense enough to balance their game properly while elegantly achieving variation.
|
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.09.22 17:48:00 -
[140]
Edited by: Ath Amon on 22/09/2006 17:48:54
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
so you will cry nerf lasers because they have higher base damage (and most amarr ships miss damage related bonuses because of that) ?
now take that AC, slap it on tempest and go compare. and you will get a different picture. same with blasters on domi vs mega.
and that's what I tried to write. do not look on a too narrow picture. you won't see what's the picture about.
you say missiles are versatile. well but you only have 2 launchers per class (well 1 in medium actualy) plus t2. I'd kill for a siege t2 variant with lower fitings that would enable me to fit heavy nos and xl t2 booster on raven. megathron can go full gank with insane damage (neutron t2) or full tank with good damage (electron+lar t2). t2 siege raven can only go weak tank or ECM (and then it is decried as coward setup).
and there's plenty of these issues on every corner. like skill training times. well t large missiles are easy to train, but you only get them, nothing else. t2 large guns require more skill training, but you get small and medium t2 guns in the process.
it's all about choice. you have it with guns in some areas, you have it with missiles in other areas (and they do not necesarily overlap).
and please tell me for example how missile cruisers are overpowered in PvP. I see lots of thoraxes, vexors, rupies and sniper ships. missile cruisers only appear in larger gangs where they do not need to worry about tackling. again you have choices in different areas.
that's why you are not limited to your racial ships and weapons. you can train any race and weapon you wish. balancing is also done with that in mind (but sometimes it fails :-))
many ppl tell you that EVE is not balanced for PvE and then cry why are Ravens such perfect mission running ships. well train for a raven if you'd like. you have to recognize your weakneses and use the right tools for the right job.
imagine mining barges would be labeled as amarr ships. what a lot of whining that would make.
if you look at graph i posted you can see the versatility i'm speaking about, the curve vs sign radius shows it quite well.
the problem is not by the damage itself, but by dmg + versatility...
if a weapon do more damage than another but... let's say have more troubles to hit the opponent then there is a sort of balance
for missiles is the opposite a weapon (supposed a "low damage" one as prj) that both outdamage and auttrack, outrange ACs bu huge degree.
this is not to look at the bigger picture, and plz stop to point at the tempest, is not that all minnie ships have 2 dmg bonuses and when they have it they have not other usefull bonuses as can be a resist bonus.
also this 3d is not about proj but missiles and i think is quite clear that there is something wrong... again look at graphs or run your tests if you don't belive them.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |