EVE Search - turrets and missles

All Channels

Ships and Modules

turrets and missles

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:12:00 - [1] why would anybody use turrets over missles? - far fewer skills needed - missile ship velocity has no effect on dmg it does - precise dmg type selection - longer range - no need to use mids for tracking comps and the argument that ships can outrun missiles is only in very extreme cases. even in those cases, if it is a turret ship, it can't do any dmg. maybe not in the case of bs but in any of the smaller ships, a missile boat just needs to keep at speed and then shoot missiles with little to no chance of turrets tracking and doing any dmg.
Kiviar Caldari Vice-Presidential Action Rangers	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:17:00 - [2] Missles have travel time which makes them near worthless in fleet pvp, or for sniping. Also until Trinity comes out, missiles have no short range high dps variant. --- Forums are what?
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:23:00 - [3] worthless in pvp? hardly. at just beyond web range time is nothing and assaults have a similar rof as turrets so that argument fails.
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:27:00 - [4] Originally by: Kiviar Also until Trinity comes out, missiles have no short range high dps variant. Rockets, heavy assault and torps are deleted from the database? _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
KarGard	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:30:00 - [5] Originally by: bellass worthless in pvp? He said worthless in fleet pvp, I'm assuming he means big blob fights, which missiles are in fact completley worthless at. The target is dead well before missiles are even half way there. Missiles also do crap damage compared to turrets. Even with the damage boost torps will still pale in comarison to blasters.
Compendium	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:34:00 - [6] Turrets>Missiles except for specific circumstances.
Kiviar Caldari Vice-Presidential Action Rangers	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:35:00 - [7] Originally by: madaluap Rockets, heavy assault and torps are deleted from the database? Guess i should have said, no battleship sized... yadda yadda. I also did mean in blob fleet pvp, which I figured was self explanitory.... Guess it wasn't. --- Forums are what?
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:36:00 - [8] Edited by: Incantare on 27/11/2007 00:36:23 Quote: - far fewer skills needed More skills needed for the whole tree. While for turrets you have to train the smaller size versions, doing so unlocks both t2 long and short range spec skills. For missiles you need to train both close and short range base skills before unlocking the t2 versions. Quote: - missile ship velocity has no effect on dmg it does With a few notable exceptions, missile ships have incredibly high mass. Quote: - precise dmg type selection But only a few ships that can freely chose damage types, most lose 25% damage bonus to do so on top of the reload time. Quote: - longer range Long range missiles suffer from flight time. See a lot of cruise "snipers" in fleets? Didn't think so. At shorter range their high mass (again, there are exceptions) means they cannot maintain range and at short range missile dps is low, though that'll change for torps soon. A good thing. Quote: - no need to use mids for tracking comps Innefective at sniping. Quote: and the argument that ships can outrun missiles is only in very extreme cases. even in those cases, if it is a turret ship, it can't do any dmg. A nanoship doesn't need to outrun missiles to be immune to them. Read about explosion velocity (and radius). A hit for 0.01 or so might as well be a miss if it can't break the nanoship's natural shield regen. Quote: maybe not in the case of bs but in any of the smaller ships, a missile boat just needs to keep at speed and then shoot missiles with little to no chance of turrets tracking and doing any dmg. There are only a few missile ships that can effectively nano: the crow, the flycatcher, the sacrilege, the malediction. The others have such high mass that although they can be nanoed they are still relatively slow and have low dps (few los). None of the ships mentioned above are the fastest in their class, they can still be tackled, webbed, and killed.
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:40:00 - [9] Originally by: KarGard Originally by: bellass worthless in pvp? He said worthless in fleet pvp, I'm assuming he means big blob fights, which missiles are in fact completley worthless at. The target is dead well before missiles are even half way there. Missiles also do crap damage compared to turrets. Even with the damage boost torps will still pale in comarison to blasters. your missing the point, they still do full dmg at speed and it is not crap. the turret dmg will drop a lot if either ship is moving.
KarGard	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:45:00 - [10] Originally by: bellass your missing the point, they still do full dmg at speed and it is not crap. the turret dmg will drop a lot if either ship is moving. You have obviously not seen a ship warp off before several volleys of crusie missiles hit it.
Fuazzole	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:50:00 - [11] at optimium range, against larger sig radius, turrets will be doing higher then normal dps as 1/2 all shots will be inflictings doing double dmg
Paulo Damarr	Posted - 2007.11.27 00:50:00 - [12] A lot of it is just the perception people have from using to much EFT its a case of MOAR DPS RAWR!! If you watch the alliance tournament missiles dominated it and the alliance tourney was in all intents and purposes small gang pvp. Although missile DPS is lower the figures for gun DPS are just paper figures and dont factor in tracking and fall off and in a lot of cases turret ships engage in fall off range which reduces the damage dealt. Missile use is also largely eschewed because of the limitations of the ships as well such as the lack of effective mid slots on shield tankers as its impossible to fit EW and a tank and tackle but hopefully the damp nerf will help change this. Originally by: Tortun Nahme CCP also condones thinking, I suggest you try it from tiem to time
Sirius Problem Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.11.27 01:01:00 - [13] People have tried to explain it, but you choose to discount their explanations and, perhaps more importantly, their experience. The very fact you've asked this question, along with some of the assertions you've made, indicates your PvP experience is likely somewhat limited. That's not a bad thing. We all started at the beginning. Missiles can be, and are, used successfully in PvP, but the vast majority of PvPrs select turrets over missiles. Why? Because missiles, and by extension missile specialized ships, just do not perform as well as their turret-based counterparts. It may look otherwise on paper, but that's the difference between theory and actual application. As noted, some changes coming to missiles in the Trinity update will make some missile boats more viable PvP platforms, but the turret ships will likely still dominate the game. Use missiles if you like. A lot of people do. That's what's great about Eve. Lots of choices and diversity. ---- Some people say I have a bad attitude. Those people are stupid.
KarGard	Posted - 2007.11.27 01:02:00 - [14] Originally by: Paulo Damarr If you watch the alliance tournament missiles dominated it and the alliance tourney was in all intents and purposes small gang pvp. I'm sorry did you just say that the alliance tournament was anything like real pvp? yes, in a field were nobody warps off, where you can sit infront of someone and pound them to dust, long range missiles are great. Except that is not how it works in real world pvp. Many of the advantages missiles tout are not. Their ability to choose what damage school to use is great in PvE, but in pvp, most everyone is flying with an 80% across the board resist. Not having to worry about tracking dosnt really matter when someone can outrun your explosion. Furthermore their extended range is moot as pointed out by Incantare.
Paulo Damarr	Posted - 2007.11.27 01:15:00 - [15] Originally by: KarGard I'm sorry did you just say that the alliance tournament was anything like real pvp? yes, in a field were nobody warps off, where you can sit in front of someone and pound them to dust, long range missiles are great. Except that is not how it works in real world pvp. Many of the advantages missiles tout are not. Their ability to choose what damage school to use is great in PvE, but in pvp, most everyone is flying with an 80% across the board resist. Not having to worry about tracking dosnt really matter when someone can outrun your explosion. Furthermore their extended range is moot as pointed out by Incantare. If a ship is outrunning a missile the chances are good turrets wont hit it either, I agree about damage types the 10 seconds to change ammo is not worth it plus with caldari ships anything other then kinetic and you loose your damage bonus. Neither do I quote long range as an advantage due to travel time but the consistent damage across the whole of the missiles range certainly is useful. In every other aspect they share pretty much the same basic characteristics, like problems hitting speed tanks and the fact that if they hit something webbed they do more damage. And with drones being nerfed missiles will be even more relevant. Originally by: Tortun Nahme CCP also condones thinking, I suggest you try it from tiem to time
Kamen SRBI Circle 0f Two	Posted - 2007.11.27 01:42:00 - [16] Edited by: Kamen on 27/11/2007 01:43:43 Originally by: Paulo Damarr A lot of it is just the perception people have from using to much EFT its a case of MOAR DPS RAWR!! A lot of it is just the perception people have from watching the alliance tournaments. It's a case of: NERFZORZ TEH CALALADARI AND MISSOLZ!! Originally by: Paulo Damarr If you watch the alliance tournament missiles dominated it and the alliance tourney was in all intents and purposes small gang pvp. Although missile DPS is lower the figures for gun DPS are just paper figures and dont factor in tracking and fall off and in a lot of cases turret ships engage in fall off range which reduces the damage dealt. If you watch the alliance tournament missiles dominated it and the alliance tourney was in all intents and purposes small gang pvp. Although missile DPS is lower, fitting guns was not quite adequate due to the fact that fights started off at 70km (am I right?) and gangs teams knew that dampening EW would most likely be used, rendering turret ship's damage to zero (as opposed to FoF). My assumption would be that close-range turret ships would be used much more if tournament was set up for real-eve situations, which would mean 20km gate-range. The figures for gun DPS are just paper figures and don't factor in tracking and fall off and in a lot of cases when close range ships are setup, turret ships engage in fall off range which reduces the damage dealt. However, even close-range fittings do significantly more (even triple) the theoretical damage of Missle ships, which oten boils down to about double the damage of equivalnet Missle ships. Long-range turret ships DO full damage instant danage to most ships - even MWDing nano ships of equal or larger size, where missles hit for 0.01, 50% of the time, and 0.0 damage, (the other) 50% of the time (depending on target ship's player's skill). Originally by: Paulo Damarr Missile use is also largely eschewed because of the limitations of the ships as well such as the lack of effective mid slots on shield tankers as its impossible to fit EW and a tank and tackle but hopefully the damp nerf will help change this. Caldari missile boats is also largely eschewed because limitations of the ship's powergrid and medium slots to cap inject, mwd, tackle and tank effectively, so caldari pilots tend to fit propulsion and dampening EW in their medium slots to maximize on their long-range ability, but the damp nerf will help change this. ------------------------------------------------ (Recruiting ad) SRBI regrutuju! Dodjite na nas javni SRBI kanal.
Yukisa	Posted - 2007.11.27 05:30:00 - [17] Originally by: KarGard Missiles also do crap damage compared to turrets. Even with the damage boost torps will still pale in comarison to blasters. How will they pale in comparison.. Have you looked at the new numbers?
Jaro Brutus La Isla del Mono	Posted - 2007.11.27 07:46:00 - [18] Forgive me, I'm pretty new to the game but.. when talking about close to medium range engagements (IE: not sniper setups) -Turrets have greater raw DPS but are heavily affected by tracking, transversal velocity, optimal and falloff. You need little transversal to ruin your foes tracking. Also there is a lot of EW modules to counter turrets (Dampeners, ECM, Tracking Disruptors...). My point is that raw DPS is finally vanished by lots of factors and finally you end with "barely scratches" and "glances" type of hits. So the difference in raw DPS (EFT) and real DPS (actual pvp) is high. -Missiles are affected by less factors (it seems to me at least): barely target speed and signature radius. While you can be almost invulnerable to missiles by having a great speed, it turns that you need a ceptor o a nanoship in order to build enough speed to evade missiles explosion velocity (its easy to put transversal to a turreted ship (any ship can do it regardless of fittings), than to put high speed against missiles (only naturally fast ships or specific fittings -nano- can do it). Also, missiles get affected by less e-war mods (dampen, ECM) than turret ships, as nobody carries defender missiles. So my point is that is real DPS is closest to raw DPS on missile ships. Is my argumentation wrong? Thanks
Ogul Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.11.27 08:57:00 - [19] Originally by: Jaro Brutus My point is that raw DPS is finally vanished by lots of factors and finally you end with "barely scratches" and "glances" type of hits. So the difference in raw DPS (EFT) and real DPS (actual pvp) is high. On the other hand you get excellent hits that do more than average damage. Originally by: Jaro Brutus -Missiles are affected by less factors (it seems to me at least): barely target speed and signature radius. While you can be almost invulnerable to missiles by having a great speed, it turns that you need a ceptor o a nanoship in order to build enough speed to evade missiles explosion velocity (its easy to put transversal to a turreted ship (any ship can do it regardless of fittings), than to put high speed against missiles (only naturally fast ships or specific fittings -nano- can do it). Turrets are affected by optimal range and falloff, while missiles have a maximum range and flight time, turret tracking issues are very similar to explosion velocity issues, the difference isn't as big as you might think. The missile explosion radius directly reduces damage to smaller targets while the turret signature radius is just a modifier to tracking calculations (i. e. for a target that is not moving, the turret's sig radius does not matter). Originally by: Jaro Brutus Also, missiles get affected by less e-war mods (dampen, ECM) than turret ships, as nobody carries defender missiles. So my point is that is real DPS is closest to raw DPS on missile ships. No one uses tracking disruptors either. And yet they get nerfed in trinity. --- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec.
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.27 10:04:00 - [20] i actually do pvp a lot and the fact remains that in the field many people use missiles, that they don't and that they do less dmg is a myth put out there by both amarr and caldari pilots. it is ironic how you read setups recommendations from ships and how great they are but when someone points out they take less training and do far more dmg, people come back with, 'no, no they suck'. fleet engagements that consist of two opposing sniper groups and support ships around doing there stuff is not the norm of pvp. it is 2 groups meeting up at a gate or a station in various small to medium sizes with 20km of each other. in these engagement missle travel time is not an issue, bring the most dmg to targets and staying alive is. missile ships only need to target and fire and then move around to protect there ship. no need to get into range. missile short range dmg is within that 20km starting range and do full dmg there. a turret ship needs to get into with 5km to start doing any dmg and then constantly fly to maintain that dmg. the other big bonus of missiles is this huge surge of dmg they do with every volley. turrets only slowly chip away ( accept at the rare time they get a wrecking shot). the missile fire surge can break a targets tank between repping cycles, especially with armor tank and their long rep cycles. this is more an issue with med and smaller ships but still a factor.
MalVortex	Posted - 2007.11.27 10:10:00 - [21] They are both unique weapon systems and both bring something different to the table. Both can be used to great effect in most combat situations, and both will offer a few scenarios that one has a significant advantage over the other. Pick your race/weapon by your personal preference, your talking about very minor differences in group combat.
Phoenicia Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.11.27 10:16:00 - [22] Originally by: bellass Edited by: bellass on 27/11/2007 10:06:30 i actually do pvp a lot and the fact remains that in the field many people use missiles, that they don't and that they do less dmg is a myth put out there by both amarr and caldari pilots. it is ironic how you read setups recommendations from ships and how great they are but when someone points out they take less training and do far more dmg, people come back with, 'no, no they suck'. fleet engagements that consist of two opposing sniper groups and support ships around doing there stuff is not the norm of pvp. it is 2 groups meeting up at a gate or a station in various small to medium sizes with 20km of each other. in these engagement missle travel time is not an issue, bring the most dmg to targets and staying alive is. missile ships only need to target and fire and then move around to protect there ship or get ready for the next target. no need to get into or keep range. missile short range dmg is within that 20km starting range and do full dmg there. a turret ship needs to get into with 5km to start doing any dmg and then constantly fly to maintain that dmg and then move to get to the next target. the other big bonus of missiles is this huge surge of dmg they do with every volley. turrets only slowly chip away ( accept at the rare time they get a wrecking shot). the missile fire surge can break a targets tank between repping cycles, especially with armor tank and their long rep cycles. this is more an issue with med and smaller ships but still a factor. I do pvp a lot too, and I see more turret-ships than missile ships, even relatively speaking. Missiles DO suck, in long-range engagements, and when engaging targets smaller than the missile's radius and/or faster than the missile's explosion velocity. If you don't encounter those situations, then missiles don't suck. Furthermore, I find it ironic that you ask a question, and then proceed to disagree with the answers. After all, why ask the question if you are already adamant about what answer applies to your personal situation?
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.27 10:38:00 - [23] Originally by: Phoenicia Originally by: bellass Edited by: bellass on 27/11/2007 10:06:30 i actually do pvp a lot and the fact remains that in the field many people use missiles, that they don't and that they do less dmg is a myth put out there by both amarr and caldari pilots. it is ironic how you read setups recommendations from ships and how great they are but when someone points out they take less training and do far more dmg, people come back with, 'no, no they suck'. fleet engagements that consist of two opposing sniper groups and support ships around doing there stuff is not the norm of pvp. it is 2 groups meeting up at a gate or a station in various small to medium sizes with 20km of each other. in these engagement missle travel time is not an issue, bring the most dmg to targets and staying alive is. missile ships only need to target and fire and then move around to protect there ship or get ready for the next target. no need to get into or keep range. missile short range dmg is within that 20km starting range and do full dmg there. a turret ship needs to get into with 5km to start doing any dmg and then constantly fly to maintain that dmg and then move to get to the next target. the other big bonus of missiles is this huge surge of dmg they do with every volley. turrets only slowly chip away ( accept at the rare time they get a wrecking shot). the missile fire surge can break a targets tank between repping cycles, especially with armor tank and their long rep cycles. this is more an issue with med and smaller ships but still a factor. I do pvp a lot too, and I see more turret-ships than missile ships, even relatively speaking. Missiles DO suck, in long-range engagements, and when engaging targets smaller than the missile's radius and/or faster than the missile's explosion velocity. If you don't encounter those situations, then missiles don't suck. Furthermore, I find it ironic that you ask a question, and then proceed to disagree with the answers. After all, why ask the question if you are already adamant about what answer applies to your personal situation? in long range engagements against other ships they do suck but in taking down of pos they are used because of the much higher dmg they inflict. but both of these are not the daily norm. in a gang engagement your not going to have cruise and torps going after frigs, heavies and assaults will do great in a few shots to take them out. same as you would not use lrg turrets to take on frig i ask a real question but am surprised at the answers that come back, either inaccurate that experience shows not to be the case, or answers that only want to look at extreme cases of extreme long range combat or ships traveling at very high speeds. the fact remains that missle ships can travel as fast as they want hitting for far greater dmg than turrets. turret ships are getting nerfed again with tracking computer scripts (there goes the missle ship argument of reduced mids for tackling, you don't need tc to hit) while torps are getting a boost.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.11.30 13:40:00 - [24] Edited by: welsh wizard on 30/11/2007 13:42:53 Yes bellass everyone in Eve is wrong. Missiles are actually far better than turrets for pvp. Well done, you've single handedly put a stop to whine threads. We can all train missiles and be better at pvp now. Also they're so much easier to train for! I don't need heavy missiles or standard missiles or cruise! All I need is torpedoes! I'll stick some torp launchers on my Crow and away I go! Much better than getting all the lower tier tech II turrets while training for large tech II turrets! Who wants to fly those smaller ships anyway? Also now that everyone has stopped whining because missiles are clearly better than turrets we can organise a gentlemans agreement! No warping off EVER again! This way we won't have to use those irrtating disruptors & scramblers! Clearly every moving ship takes full damage from missiles too so who need webs!? This gets better by the second! bellend for president \o/ [Balance] The Caldari problem.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.11.30 13:49:00 - [25] Originally by: bellass your missing the point, they still do full dmg at speed and it is not crap. the turret dmg will drop a lot if either ship is moving. no if you fly towards your targed at 100000000000000m/s in a straigh line you DONT suffer from any tracking penalties.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.11.30 13:54:00 - [26] Originally by: d026 Originally by: bellass your missing the point, they still do full dmg at speed and it is not crap. the turret dmg will drop a lot if either ship is moving. no if you fly towards your targed at 100000000000000m/s in a straigh line you DONT suffer from any tracking penalties. No! Can't you see? he's right! I've started podding myself repeatedly with no clone seeing as all my gunnery skills are useless! I suggest you do the same right away! We must be clean off the tainted gunnery skills if we are to become true pvp masters! In other news scientists officially concluded that sarcasm IS infact the highest form of wit! Apparently all those wise old people claiming otherwise are just miserable gits! [Balance] The Caldari problem.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.11.30 14:00:00 - [27] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 30/11/2007 13:56:19 Originally by: d026 Originally by: bellass your missing the point, they still do full dmg at speed and it is not crap. the turret dmg will drop a lot if either ship is moving. no if you fly towards your targed at 100000000000000m/s in a straigh line you DONT suffer from any tracking penalties. No! Can't you see? he's right! I've started podding myself repeatedly with no clone seeing as all my gunnery skills are useless! I suggest you do the same right away! We must be clean of the tainted gunnery skills if we are to become true pvp masters! In other news scientists officially concluded that sarcasm IS infact the highest form of wit! Apparently all those wise old people claiming otherwise are just miserable gits! did you use missile to pod you? i mean guns clearely dont hit pods..
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.30 15:20:00 - [28] comments from caldari pilots not really taken seriously. 'our missiles suck!' the biggest whiners in eve. there were far many more things that needed 'balanced' than giving caldari another buff. again, caldari online.
Ogul Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.11.30 15:53:00 - [29] Originally by: bellass comments from caldari pilots not really taken seriously. 'our missiles suck!' the biggest whiners in eve. there were far many more things that needed 'balanced' than giving caldari another buff. again, caldari online. To find out why missiles are not better than turrets you need roughly 3 things: 1) a brain 2) the ability to read 3) a very basic understanding of numbers (called mathematics by the professionals) I don't know which of the 3 you are lacking, but you can find out by going through that list. P. S. The last three letters of your name fit well, but I would replace the first two by "tro" though. --- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec.
bellass	Posted - 2007.11.30 16:28:00 - [30] actually my brain and mathematic skill are excellent, masters in physics ftw . again, the only argument given to negate the obvious higher base dps is sig radius and velocity on a smaller target ship. nothing said about equal are larger ships. larger ship are not going to have the velocity where explosion radius makes as much as a difference as turret tracking that has both firing and target trajectory component. even your own turret ship standing still but spinning on it's axis sends the transversal high. and sorry this is not just based on eft, it is based on more than a bit of tq pvp, testing on sisi, looking at logs, and examining killboards. rather than just flaming, come back with some real arguments that say a bit more (or less in this case) about missles on th points i posted.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.