EVE Search - Suggestion for changes to T2 missile ammo

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Suggestion for changes to T2 missile ammo

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zanquis Caldari CSS Ltd. FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.02.27 01:40:00 - [1] Edited by: Zanquis on 27/02/2008 01:41:09 Edited by: Zanquis on 27/02/2008 01:40:44 Currently T2 missiles are the most useless forms of T2 ammo out there and are seldom used. Lets look at some Precision missiles: Design This class of missile is designed to hit smaller, faster moving ships. The missiles give a slightly faster explosion velocity and significantly lower explosion radius at the sacrifice at a slight reduction in missile velocity and a significant reduction in missile damage, and a max velocity penalty to your ship. How it worked out On TQ these missiles are of little use sporting large price tags without actually accomplishing their intended job. Heavy precision missiles have little effect against frigates because they all travel too fast for these missiles to deal any damage to them, and they can move out of range quickly of the missile. The explosion velocity bonus did nothing agaisnt the speeds of nano ships because they are all so much faster then what missles where designed to fight, they receive a 100% damage reduction from even light missiles which have the highest explosion velocity in the game. High Damage Fury Missiles Design These missiles where intended to give the missile user the option to receive a high amount of damage at the sacrifice of missile velocity, capacitor recharge, and lower explosion velocity. How it worked out The missile offered too much penalty and a high pricetag for such a small damage gain. The introduction of faction ammo made this ammo useless since it was both cheaper and the same damage. What suggestions do I have for change? I think that T2 ammo should be changed to focus more on flexibility for the class of ship they are designed to be used by. For example frigate class weapons such as Light Missiles can have a missile which resembles the modern concept of an air-to-air combat missile designed to burn fast and furious in order to gain on their target quickly and strike it while battleship class weaponry could include a missile that is designed for long ranged sniping sporting a faster then usual velocity. Of course we need to look into these suggestions with more detail as everything must have a penalty and advantage. In the end I would like to see each class of missile launcher with two forms of T2 ammo which they could use. NOTE: In all cases I suggest in order to use T2 missiles you MUST use T2 launchers like in gunnery. Standard Missiles (Standard Launchers, Assault Launchers) Special Note on Light Missiles I think that light missiles base should be updated to reflect modern day frigate combat. They should have their explosion velocity increased to from 1,700m/s to 3,000m/s which would allow them to actually deal at least some heavily penalized damage to a speed tank traveling 5,000m/s to 6,000m/s Interceptor Missiles Extremely fast missiles with a short burn time, lower explosion radius, and a very fast explosion velocity. However in order to accomplish this they would sacrifice range (though shorter burn time), damage, scan resolution, and capacitor recharge. Regular Missiles vs Interceptor Missiles Velocity 3,750m/s to 6,000 m/s = 60% bonus Flight Time 5s to 2s = 40% penalty (Max natural range from 18,750KM to 12,000KM) Explosion Radius 50m to 30m = -60% bonus Explosion Velocity 1,700m/s to 5,000m/s = 294% bonus Damage 75 to 50 = 66.7% penalty Scan Resolution -10% penalty/launcher Capacitor Recharge 5% penalty/launcher Phoenix Missile Longer range and higher damage at the sacrifice of missile velocity, explosion radius, and ship velocity. Regular Missiles vs Phoenix Missiles Velocity 3,750m/s (no change) Flight Time 5s to 7s = 40% bonus (Max natural range from 18,750KM to 26,250KM) Explosion Radius 50m to 75m = 50% penalty Explosion Velocity 1,700m/s to 2,500 m/s this is less then my suggested change to all light missiles. ie a penalty Damage 75 to 90 = 20% bonus Max Velocity -15% penalty/launcher Continued... ****************************************** CEO of CSS Ltd.**
Spartan dax 5 finger discounteers	Posted - 2008.02.27 02:15:00 - [2] I'm beginning to think that CCP went all wrong with the precisions in general and not just the specs. Basically a precision missile tries to do two things better than the regular ones namely; 1. Smaller sig radius 2. Higher explosion velocity Why not separate the two instead? Have a High explosive Velocity missile (HEV) with a huge stonking sig radius and an explosion velocity that would make all but the fastest ships in it's class wish they were somewhere else. (Please note the following numbers are just for show. Exchange numbers according to amount of whine) Let's say a medium sized HEV has a sig radius of 250m and an EV of 5000m/s. And it's being fired on a cruiser sized target of 125 m sig radius with it's MWD running travelling quite fast taking zero damage from regular cruiser sized missiles. Now he starts taking damage from the HEV and being the skillfull nanopilot thirsting for a kill that he is, he drops the MWD and now takes less damage (in this case half) due to the HEV's crappy sig radius and also starts doing more damage himself thanks to a lower transversal. A weapon with a drawback that directly benefits the attentative target.... Balance?
Zeph Solaris Legitimate Corporation	Posted - 2008.02.27 02:19:00 - [3] You seem to be forgetting that missiles waste time accelerating to track their target. The interceptor missiles would never hit anything within a max range of 12km. There are webs that can reach that far. You'd be better off webbing anything in that range so your t1 missiles could hit. I suggest greatly increasing the velocity of a missile and greatly reducing its damage for your "interceptor" missile. As you present it, these missiles are useless against small fast ships.
Zanquis Caldari CSS Ltd. FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.02.27 02:48:00 - [4] Heavy Missiles Sparrow Missiles High velocity long range missiles at the sacrifice of explosion radius, explosion velocity, and scan resolution Heavy Missiles vs Sparrow Missiles Velocity 3,750m/s to 5,000 m/s = 33.3% bonus Flight Time 10s to 12s = 20% bonus (Max natural range from 37,500KM to 60,000KM) Explosion Radius 125m to 150m = 20% penalty Explosion Velocity 750m/s to 600m/s = 20% penalty Damage 150 (unchanged) Scan Resolution penalty 5%/launcher Torment missiles This is a high damage missile intended to hit battleship class ships or better. You gain extra missile damage above what faction has to offer but sacrifice explosion radius, explosion velocity, range (fight time and missile velocity), and ship velocity. Heavy Missiles vs Torment Missiles Velocity 3,750m/s to 2,750 m/s = 26.67% penalty Flight Time 10s to 8s = 20% penalty (Max natural range from 37,500KM to 22,000KM) Explosion Radius 125m to 200m = 60% penalty Explosion Velocity 750m/s to 600m/s = 20% penalty Damage 150 to 200 = 33.33% bonus Max Velocity Penalty 7.5%/launcher Cruise Missiles Bombard Missiles Long Range high velocity missiles at the sacrifice of explosion radius, and scan resolution. Cruise Missiles vs Bombard Missiles Velocity 3,750m/s to 5,000 m/s = 33.3% bonus Flight Time 20s to 25s = 25% bonus (Max natural range from 100,000KM to 125,000KM) Explosion Radius 300m to 400m = 33.33% penalty Explosion Velocity 500m/s (unchanged) Damage 300 (unchanged) Scan Resolution penalty 5%/launcher Nova Missiles This is a high damage cruise missile with a slightly lower range, and significantly higher explosion radius, explosion velocity, missile velocity, and ship velocity. The intended use of this missile is anti capital warfare as the missile is slow moving and with a big boom that is not optimized for hitting battleship class ships or smaller. Cruise Missiles vs Nova Missiles Velocity 3,750m/s to 2,750 m/s = 26.77% penalty Flight Time 20s to 15s = 25% penalty (Max natural range from 100,000KM to 41,250KM) Explosion Radius 300m to 500m = 33.34% penalty Explosion Velocity 500m/s to 350 m/s = 30% penalty Damage 300 to 450 = 50% bonus Max Ship Velocity penalty 5%/launcher With the above changes we would have useful T2 missiles and encourage people to use the T2 launchers which are harder to fit in order to use them. It would add additional flexibility to each ranged missile class allowing them tailor their missile to a target type if they wish. However unlike gunnery T2 ammo they would come with a bunch of penalties too most noticeably for any missile which receives a damage boost as they pay dearly for it. This would have a direct effect on speed tanking in the game because fast frigs will be able to deal damage to a speed tank consistently but not be able to keep that up for long since using these missiles will hurt the capacitor endurance of the ship as keeping the MWD on will be required to keep these missiles in range of the target. Cruisers could try to use assault launchers and load the heavy missiles to hurt speed tanks, but it would be difficult since they will not have the speed required to keep them in their short range. You also might notice Heavy and Cruise class got T2 sniper missiles which increase flight range and velocity to compensate for the range, but as a drawback they will lock targets slower and experience reduced damage to smaller targets compared to normal cruise missiles due to reduced explosion velocity and explosion radius. ****************************************** CEO of CSS Ltd.**
Zanquis Caldari CSS Ltd. FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.02.27 02:50:00 - [5] Originally by: Zeph Solaris You seem to be forgetting that missiles waste time accelerating to track their target. The interceptor missiles would never hit anything within a max range of 12km. There are webs that can reach that far. You'd be better off webbing anything in that range so your t1 missiles could hit. I suggest greatly increasing the velocity of a missile and greatly reducing its damage for your "interceptor" missile. As you present it, these missiles are useless against small fast ships. The values can be tweeked because they are just a suggestion. However keep in mind these are BASE values and after ship bonus' and skill bonus the range is drastically increased. For example that interceptor missile can get a 100% velocity increase and 50% flight time increase from skills and ship bonus. That would increase its max speed to 12KM/s and range to 36KM. ****************************************** CEO of CSS Ltd.**
Zanquis Caldari CSS Ltd. FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.02.27 03:39:00 - [6] Originally by: Spartan dax I'm beginning to think that CCP went all wrong with the precisions in general and not just the specs. Basically a precision missile tries to do two things better than the regular ones namely; 1. Smaller sig radius 2. Higher explosion velocity Why not separate the two instead? Have a High explosive Velocity missile (HEV) with a huge stonking sig radius and an explosion velocity that would make all but the fastest ships in it's class wish they were somewhere else. (Please note the following numbers are just for show. Exchange numbers according to amount of whine) Let's say a medium sized HEV has a sig radius of 250m and an EV of 5000m/s. And it's being fired on a cruiser sized target of 125 m sig radius with it's MWD running travelling quite fast taking zero damage from regular cruiser sized missiles. Now he starts taking damage from the HEV and being the skillfull nanopilot thirsting for a kill that he is, he drops the MWD and now takes less damage (in this case half) due to the HEV's crappy sig radius and also starts doing more damage himself thanks to a lower transversal. A weapon with a drawback that directly benefits the attentative target.... Balance? I see what your saying here, but lets remember that what looks good on paper needs to be practical too. If you work so hard on balancing it and forget about what you intend them to be used for and weather thats practical, you make something useless. The problem with precision missiles is that they where not designed with realistic circumstances in mind. For example they intended the precision heavy missiles to be deadly to frigate sized ships moving up to about 3KM/s. However I have yet to see a frigate class ship which meets that description because the only ones I see fielded in PvP are moving 5KM/s or faster. Therefore precision missiles not only wouldn't even damage any regular pvp frigate if they did hit, but because of the missile velocity penalty and the flight time penalty they wouldn't even catch them. Thus there where few instances where this missile could ever be used and in all cases random. In order to hit a fast moving frigate and deal damage you need to have an extremely fast missile velocity to catch the target and a very fast explosion radius so that the missile does damage. However your analysis does prove that in the making of an interceptor missile to deal with nano people, we can scale the explosion radius up to maybe 75 so that if the nano pilot slows down they would recieve a damage reduction agaisn't that missile because their size will be significantly less then the missile explosion radius. However you can't make the missiles do crap damage, just reduced damage since it takes 10s to reload a new type of missile. ****************************************** CEO of CSS Ltd.**
Susa Ou	Posted - 2008.02.27 19:48:00 - [7] I agree that percision missles should go faster, and have a smaller explotion radius for less damage overall. Nothing should be able to out-run them. The cost of using these missles is that you move a lot slower - so the enemy ship still has the chance to escape if it so desires. Saddly, percision misses are not quite up to sport these days. All of the T2 ammo have their 'good' variants - Barrage, Scorch, Void. . .missles need something good too.
Ferocious FeAr THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2008.02.27 21:19:00 - [8] Well, being a totally caldari spec pilot I never use precision ammo because the interceptor these days are going much faster then the missile can travel. It's quite pointless to use them. Fury missiles aren't as potent as other races t2 damage ammo. Let's see: Void L - We all can agree is pretty damn powerful Conflag - Great t2 crystal Hail - As much as people don't like to use this, I do not want to be shot by it. It HURTS. Fury missiles pale in comparison. Really. Don't hate me, learn to love me
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.02.27 22:19:00 - [9] I agree that T2 missile ammo is sadly lacking compared to T2 gun ammo. precision, while a fine idea, just seem to not have high enough explosion velocity in most cases, and fury missiles are often just plain outclassed by faction.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.02.27 23:32:00 - [10] Edited by: James Lyrus on 27/02/2008 23:33:44 Given this is a discussion on T2 ammo, may I take a brief moment to point out a current inconsistancy? http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=713494 Precision heavy missiles do 3250m/sec (where precision/normal of all the other missile sizes do 3750). They also only have a 1000m/sec explosion velocity. The same as a cruise missile. I'd like to suggest that the stats of precision heavy missiles should be revised upwards - 3750m/sec base speed, and 2000m/sec explosion velocity. So that there's a velocity progression in missiles, that approximately matches the speed progression in ships. Precision lights remain sadly crippling to use. On anything frigate/destroyer sized, you cannot affort to willfully throw away 7.5% speed, just for loading your launchers. Thing is, precision lights _were_ good, before rigs. Now they cannot reliably hit a ship in the same size class, and that kills them dead. I'd really like to see the AOE falloff of missiles (the hidden explosion velocity falloff stat) vary based on missile explosion velocity. That would make more of a differentiator IMO. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Danjira Ryuujin Caldari	Posted - 2008.02.28 01:51:00 - [11] Originally by: James Lyrus I'd really like to see the AOE falloff of missiles (the hidden explosion velocity falloff stat) vary based on missile explosion velocity. That would make more of a differentiator IMO. Sounds like you want flying caldari ships to be a concordable offense Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005
Zanquis Caldari CSS Ltd. FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.03.02 06:10:00 - [12] Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin Originally by: James Lyrus I'd really like to see the AOE falloff of missiles (the hidden explosion velocity falloff stat) vary based on missile explosion velocity. That would make more of a differentiator IMO. Sounds like you want flying caldari ships to be a concordable offense I am not sure if AOE on missiles would be as useful as you think. Though in any case we need to always remember that missiles are the most reliable source of damage in the game, and while T2 ammo can justify higher DPS we need to always keep in mind the nature of missiles because if you make it too easy to score high dps off a weapon that is so reliable, it would suddenly be the hands down best weapon in the game. ****************************************** CEO of CSS Ltd.**
Felix Dzerzhinsky legion of qui Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.02 06:27:00 - [13] AOE (its called 'splash damage' in EvE) was brought up at fanfest as well as before it and it was clearly said by Ouvre that there will not be splash damage effects from missles because the computing would cause more lag. Even before anyone starts to talk about concorde and high-sec uses, splash damage will not be included into missles for quite a few years (by then of course lag will be fixed and we can do that sort of thing. . .you know 'Soon(tm)' Anyway, missles have FoF which is nice, but I just don't use our T2 missles except maby Rage Torps for PoS takedowns. . .when I don't have my dread. . .and its not a 'proper' fleet fight - which is never. ---- GO BLUE!!
Creh Ester	Posted - 2008.03.02 07:59:00 - [14] Edited by: Creh Ester on 02/03/2008 08:00:37 Preface: T2 missiles are useless. - Agreed. I have specialization in all types of missiles but my only bonus from all those SP is fire rate. I don't use T2 and I don't know of anyone that does. There were people using them, but that was many missile nerfs ago. Further, even if faction ammo didn't exist, and even if T2 wasn't more expensive, and even if they didn't come with any ship penalties, I'm still not sure I'd find much use for todays T2 missiles. It would be interesting to hear from some T2 missile users today (if those exist at all) and hear from them how they use them. I think solutions should concentrate on making them useful. But I also feel that such things as nano frigs etc belong to a different set of CCP-created problems and should be dealt with in another way than adapting a specific T2 missile variety. For one thing I mean that T1 users also should be able to get off a shot at those. IMO that problem area should be tackled by a thorough revision of speeds achievable by stacking and a revision of all missile flight velocities and explosion velocities. So separate this into two different things, each requiring an unconnected solution: 1. Make T2 missiles useful. 2. Deal with senseless speed and their effect on missiles.
Julius Romanus Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.03.02 08:25:00 - [15] Originally by: Ferocious FeAr Well, being a totally caldari spec pilot I never use precision ammo because the interceptor these days are going much faster then the missile can travel. Conflag - Great t2 crystal Hail - As much as people don't like to use this, I do not want to be shot by it. It HURTS. Fury missiles pale in comparison. Really. Really? Conflag is great? Because no one agrees with you.

Pages: [1] :: 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.