Does it really matter? The end result is effectively the same.

The problem is not in the modules or the rigs or the stacking penalties. All these things are fine.
The problem is in the base weapon stats. When 40% of your damage against the same class ship is mitigated BEFORE boosts/prop mods/boosters there is a significant problem.
Change that figure to be 100% with standard missiles against the appropriate sized class, then you have a better match up and you aren't employing all your rigs simply to get any application at all.

I will clarify my previous comment. I see ZERO issue with equal class perfect application. A battleship vs a battleship should be applying its full strike or at the very least within the same damage band of comparable weapon systems.

You are not vocally advertising this. You are advertising perfect application in general. A cruise missile that blaps frigates is not a good thing and never will be. Or do you want a single phoenix to be able to wreck subcap gangs pretty much effortlessly?

Does application need a serious look? Oh hell yes. That's why many of us are baffled by the nerfs to application.

I still want 100% application across the board but I can be persuated to settle for the same size thing.

And the next one who writes about a tracking disrupter for missiles will get disrupted in a way that is to gruesome to write down.

Uh no, that is not what I was saying at all. Go back and read, I very specifically was saying 'same class before any fittings, boosts, implants or boosters'. I am talking about BS vs BS or Cruiser vs Cruiser.
Cruiser vs Cruiser is one of the worst with Heavy missiles down as low as 60% application vs certain unfitted cruisers.
Light missiles/Rockets are fairly good in this regard already so not much would need to change there.

As for 'application issues cause thinking about fitting'. I am talking about UNFITTED HULLS. Caps since you seem to be missing it every time. As soon as they fit a prop mod of any sort, command boosts, implants, or boosters which affect sig, suddenly you no longer have perfect application, meaning you STILL have to think about your fit.
You are just no longer forced into a bunch of application mods just to do any damage at all to a target. Look at your standard gun fit, it doesn't come with 6 application modules. Neither should missiles have to.

But it's not one stat. Links in play, as a fleet will have: Fleet fit eagle WILL outdamage a fleet cerb HML from 22km-116km.

The eagle has 50% more EHP to boot, because it doesn't need to **** away THREE slots to get that damage level. And, hilariously, with THREE damage mods the cerb picks up a mighty 53% of damage applied. THREE mods, barely over HALF paper DPS.

And that's at a 90 degree angle of movement to get transversal up.


Heavy missiles are not at the races. It is not "one stat", it's ALL of them.

Apparently you've overlooked the ludicrous fitting to get there and the fact it STILL only does 53% of paper DPS.

At the end of the day, there are NO missile fleet level doctrines out there for a reason.

And of course this is why Drakes with heavy missiles dominate fleet engagements...

See, here's the problem.

Even outside of optimal, the TPs on a Golem still perform better than MTCs.
Now, on a Raven, I don't know. I think a TP is still better than an MTC, but I don't know by how much.

It seems like the MTC is really only effective for heavy missiles, which have poor application, but also have poor range.
However, I still feel that they're the only missiles that would be more positively effected by MTC than any other missile system.
Rockets and lights don't really need application bonuses, as they're already quite effective, rockets have good enough range for brawling, and lights actually have great range for a frig class weapon.

IDK.. I guess they're broken either way..

Range on missiles is dictated by overtake velocity. Not just paper range. Guns their range is exactly what you see. And missiles have a range with no fall off at all.
So..... Come back with a better argument than the one that missiles range is somehow better than guns.
As soon as you introduce the target ships velocity into the equation missile range can be decreased dramatically simply by flying away from the shooting ship. Or even orbiting around it decreases the effective range.

Missiles do not work at all of their ranges equally well. I would point out the rationale why, but I suspect I would be wasting my time. So if you truly believe this, then feel free to venture solo into low-sec with a Navy Drake. Let us know where to send flowers to next of kin...

Please stop posting alltogether. I was already here when missiles had 100% application and it was percieved as the end of the world because NOBODY had the skills and gear we do have now.

Maybe your mind is not capable of comprehending that missiles are not all weapons in EVE and you can still yolo-swap-Ishtar-sentry everyone the same way you can now.

Missiles come with enough downsides and that people didn't use all the tools we have already is not my fault - it's theirs.

I've also seen a frigate 9km from a BS, using a warp scram, orbit at max speed with a missile volley chasing it, until the missiles ran out of gas.


There's this silly little rumor that has always gone around that missiles always hit...
Yes, the most definitely always hit structures and parked ships.

They just need the application raised so firing inside class (Normal HM's at Cruisers, Rage at BC's) does 100% at a bare unfitted hull. And have a velocity sufficient to sensibly catch a normal MWD'ing cruiser running away with at least 50% real range. Then the weapon systems can actually be balanced after that application change properly.

I'm wondering.... Maybe if you took away the stacking penalty, they might be worth something.

"Why this when a TP just works so much better?"

Not true, TP helps whole gang, MGC just you. Now you have gang-wide assist module stronger then module that helps just to you.

Let's put it this way, you don't need to put any kind of application module on any turret boat and can still hit stuff.

You can troll me all you want but tranversal is a thing, you know..

What limited understanding?

The fact that ships with tracking bonuses and high tracking turrets don't need much tracking module assistance or that fact that no traversal (such as approaching NPCs) don't require tracking at all?

Or are we not understanding how none of this applies to missiles?

It does happen.

Why everybody want range on missiles? They need time to hit target, the bigger the longer. Delayed damage is huge problem, why eveybody using sentries? Range will push missiles into auxilla dps hulls. This is not straight: I lose some tank but gain some range. They started balance from a** side. They need to differ missiles range / launchers/ ammo. Then introduce new modules, maybe even prenerfed. Then tweaking them.

Now here is the bullet point. Your target puts her or himself in a terrible position since the straighter the line between those two dots in space become, the better you track.
In this case the low base tracking of the 1400mm guns is totally irrelevant, only the range is important for calculating damage - devastating damage.

You'll notice his corp is "Say No to Features".

That set aside.
What in the actual F#CK???

If you fly a Merlin straight at a Tornado, you will be blasted into Oblivion.
If that Merlin is also running MWD, you might as well eject, because that Tornado will 1 shot you off the field.

As far as his suggestion of "non-realistic" scenarios.
I have blasted frigs off the field with an Tach fitted Oracle several times.
I can counter tracking issues by countering traversal, I can catch them on alignment, and I can catch them on a turn.
All of this without tracking mods.

Sniper fits rely HEAVILY on catching the target out of traversal.
Not too long back, just about everyone had a Tornado with 1400s sitting 200km off the gate blasting ships as soon as they came out of cloak...
If you came at them, they'd warp to another Snip position and blast you from there.

I would Like Tiberius Heth to name me one time where he has seen a missile boat used for sniping.
If he can, the I'll call him a flat out liar.

http://imgur.com/lQiERIX

Tornado firing 1400mm at a MWD merlin in a straight line with Quake L and no other mods fitted.

Frig is flying slightly towards my right... i'll go right as well to cut traversal.

Either way, you have a LOT better chance of getting a kill shot on that frig than a cruise missile does.
Cruise might hit it, but they'll need to hit it 20 times to kill it.
One shot from your 1400s, and it's gone.

RNI and Ratle shoot the correct missiles (caldari navy because rage would be stupid...) and of course since I proabbly "cheated" by using a tracaking comp on teh nado, I put a guidance computer II on both missile ships with precision script.

Let's put it this way, you don't need to put any kind of application module on any turret boat and can still hit stuff. Missile ships HAVE to put at least two of those on to do any considerable amount of damage if any.

Poking things with one hitpoint cannot be considered as 'they always hit'.

Thank you, akfalt. Actually I meant my Confessor which kills ships just fine without application mods or heat sinks, so my lasers hit just fine and even in a ship like a Nightmare you just need to position yourself in a way that lowers your transversal and even the smallest ships go boom.

May I ask what you're flying in?

I fly a Golem and have tried them with both Torps and cruise.
In both cases, 3 TPs or 2tps and a web always performed better.

I don't need the range for cruise, and if I try to use them to add range to Torps, then I lose application.
That said, my max lock range is 118km, and my TPs seem to still be more effective at that range, dispite being well out of optimal.

finally got off my butt to log in and fit these mods. I like them for my pve. for the same range i get a sub 300 exp radius and 180 exp vel vs 330 and 160. plus i can get more application if I wanted to get closer. Had to change a rig and use implants for fitting to get a low and a mid to fit.


I'm really curious how strong it would of been prenerf. As i like them currently for my needs. and more range and application can only make my pve more effective.

I agree that, yes, the divide between TP's and these modules are far less pronounce with cases where you can neither afford to bring a plethora of TP's nor when there are bonused from the hull like the Golem.

Having said that, I agree with Joe on the sentiment that TP's still have a pretty sizable edge over MGC's 1 to 1, bonuses or not. And, we actually have mentioned the MGE once or twice...even if only to state how they do absolutely bubkiss compared to alternative lows.