EVE Search - Missiles need to change

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Missiles need to change

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jarkovii YTiRi Directorate CORPVS DELICTI	Posted - 2008.06.18 05:01:00 - [1] If a missile impacts a target, regardless of speed, It should do its intended "damage". If I have an interceptor charge say a kestrel of mine, and I fire a volley of light missiles at him and they impact. They should do more than just 0 lousy damage. The draw back of having missiles chase down MWD users and to avail they hit and still do zero damage. Its a serious let down for a specific weapon system forcing people to look to gunnery for the instant hit benefit or abandoning their skirmish. EW is not an alternative if the webber range is 12km max with out the bonus's of other ships radial benefits. And target painters barely increase the signature radius of small ships with the benefit being 30% bonus to a signature radius of 20? Whoopdeedoo for its use. If its as easy to fit an MWD and orbit at range with enough speed to escape the explosion velocity then there should be tracking modifiers for missiles as well or force missiles to do damage to struck targets while allowing people to out run missiles. This is no rant, its merely a suggestion and a realistic counter to the missile problem. --------------------- "It's better to know what not to do than to think you know what to do.
Jarkovii YTiRi Directorate CORPVS DELICTI	Posted - 2008.06.18 05:01:00 - [2] If a missile impacts a target, regardless of speed, It should do its intended "damage". If I have an interceptor charge say a kestrel of mine, and I fire a volley of light missiles at him and they impact. They should do more than just 0 lousy damage. The draw back of having missiles chase down MWD users and to avail they hit and still do zero damage. Its a serious let down for a specific weapon system forcing people to look to gunnery for the instant hit benefit or abandoning their skirmish. EW is not an alternative if the webber range is 12km max with out the bonus's of other ships radial benefits. And target painters barely increase the signature radius of small ships with the benefit being 30% bonus to a signature radius of 20? Whoopdeedoo for its use. If its as easy to fit an MWD and orbit at range with enough speed to escape the explosion velocity then there should be tracking modifiers for missiles as well or force missiles to do damage to struck targets while allowing people to out run missiles. This is no rant, its merely a suggestion and a realistic counter to the missile problem. --------------------- "It's better to know what not to do than to think you know what to do.
Opertone SIEGE.	Posted - 2008.06.18 10:47:00 - [3] agreed, missiles are designed to hit there is no logic or purpose behind thousand ton ships outrunning fast and lightweight missiles boost all missile explosion velocities or introduce a module which gives +30% to explosion velocity, it should go in high slot or low slot. this can't be... mmm, i want a low grade implant set which will give me 45% to missile velocity and 45% to missile explosion velocity... just like the low grade snakes give you 45% speed increase. seriously missiles must be fixed, they don't hit above 5 km/s...
Jaketh Ivanes 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.06.18 11:30:00 - [4] Edited by: Jaketh Ivanes on 18/06/2008 11:31:42 Missiles don't impact on ships, they explode in proximity, meaning a light missile will detonate at 50m and a torpedo at 500m. A fast ship will be able to out run the blast wave and a small ships will not be hit by the full wave. I think it is explained in the missile guide, but I know that is the explanation CCP have given us previously. EDIT: Turrest don't hit over 5 km/s either, so I need an implant that increases turret tracking by 45% (or what ever amount is needed for my small turrets to hit ).
Matalino Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.06.18 16:38:00 - [5] Edited by: Matalino on 18/06/2008 16:44:22 Assuming no rigs on your Kestrel: in order for him to take zero damage from your light missiles, he needs to be moving atleast 5,625 m/s. The fastest that your missiles can go is 5,625 m/s. Is it fair then that if he is moving faster than your missiles, he takes no damage from them, even if he is in range? Or are you suggesting that range be the only factor in deciding if missiles hit? Math section: Zero Damage Speed = 1,750 Explosion Velocity * 1.5 for Target Navigation Prediction V + 2 x 1,500 Explosion Velocity Falloff = 5,625 m/s Max Missile Speed = 3,750 Base Speed * 1.5 for Missile Projection V = 5,625 m/s BTW - as a counter to speed tanks there are ships with bonuses to web range to catch them at a distance and sensor dampeners to force them to engage closer in. There are other tactics and means available. But a 1v1 with a Kestrel vs Interceptor, the Kestrel shouldn't have a chance basic factors being equal.
Hatch Bug-Blatter Beasts of Traal	Posted - 2008.06.18 19:33:00 - [6] web range should be expanded from 10 to 15-30k, but that is another topic all together.
Marlenus Ironfleet Towing And Salvage	Posted - 2008.06.18 21:27:00 - [7] Naw, just give us webbing missiles. Stickybomb warheads for the win! ------------------ Ironfleet.com
KingOzar Brute Strength THORN Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.19 01:43:00 - [8] If the missile can't reach the speed as the ship is going, why should it do damage to it? It can't fully catch up to it and have it's explosion hit it properly.
Artemis Rose Eleckrostatik	Posted - 2008.06.19 01:57:00 - [9] WTB: Game balance. A ship outrunning light missiles in general would be moving too fast to be tracked by turrets anyhow. __________________________________________________ Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine. WTB Purple Nerf Bat.
Matrixcvd Rionnag Alba	Posted - 2008.06.19 13:03:00 - [10] All you guys are doing is role playing stop thinking about how you want missiles to work and start learning how they work if you fight fast ships, you need to slow them down if you are in a big ship you can tank and out Cap them if you cant figure out which ships need to die first you dont WTB Game Balance, you WTB an FC

John McHauler	Posted - 2008.06.19 13:12:00 - [11] The Problem is, people don't want to adapt to the situation. Caldari already have it easy, It's easier to out-track Turrets then it is to outrun missiles. Not to mention you can still do DPS albeit light, when Jammed. Have you tried interrupting their Orbit with Sharp Direction changes? You'd be surprised at how many people don't manually pilot their 'Ceptors.
Typhado3 Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium	Posted - 2008.06.19 14:22:00 - [12] some ships are speed tanked. speed tanked. tanked speed tank is a form of defense. Just saying that that sorta defence shouldn't work because you don't have good ships to counter it isn't gonna work. these little ships do have their weaknesses, very low sensor strength means a single scorp can lock down up to 6 tacklers easy. and if you have a decent tackler or a ship with strong webs to hold it in place for a split second gunnery ships or even cruise missile ships can take it out easy.
Resamo	Posted - 2008.06.19 18:31:00 - [13] The problem for me that i find very annoying is that if a ship is flying straight at me at full speed my missiles do nothing to him... how? he is not outrunnign them he is not doing anything? And your turrets will hit, you have to worry about transversal speed... missile users have to worry about full speed. a target at 100km away can move fast enough to reduce my missile damage considerably and it takes a while for my missiles to get there. while a turret ship probably hits ok. Yes missiles and turrets are differnt it just makes no sense that a ship going straight at my at full speed gets reduced damage to my missiles? how?
Ulstan State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.19 19:29:00 - [14] It's obvious that missile explosion velocity (particularly heavy precision missile explosion velocity) needs boosting to be able to hit nano ships. However, missiles should suffer a reduction in damage against nano ship just like turrets do. I'm ok with normal missiles being 100% useless agianst nano ships like they are now as long as precision missiles can reliably hit for decent (though still reduced) damage ships of the appropriate class. Current situation means nanos go fast enough to be immune to every type of missile shot by everyone on the battlefield.
BhallSpawn	Posted - 2008.06.20 02:50:00 - [15] Originally by: John McHauler The Problem is, people don't want to adapt to the situation. Caldari already have it easy, It's easier to out-track Turrets then it is to outrun missiles. Not to mention you can still do DPS albeit light, when Jammed. Have you tried interrupting their Orbit with Sharp Direction changes? You'd be surprised at how many people don't manually pilot their 'Ceptors. caldari have it easy? sence when? not in pvp my friend.
Merroki	Posted - 2008.06.20 04:26:00 - [16] Originally by: John McHauler The Problem is, people don't want to adapt to the situation. Yep. The Problem is, people don't want to have to adapt to the situation when everyone else wakes up and balances the game. So, they try to prevent that from happening at all cost.
Opertone SIEGE.	Posted - 2008.06.20 06:54:00 - [17] Originally by: Marlenus Naw, just give us webbing missiles. Stickybomb warheads for the win! i want cap neuting missiles
Internet Knight	Posted - 2008.06.20 09:42:00 - [18] Originally by: Resamo The problem for me that i find very annoying is that if a ship is flying straight at me at full speed my missiles do nothing to him... how? he is not outrunnign them he is not doing anything? That's the problem in a nutshell. There's something called transversal velocity. That is, the speed at which something is increasing or decreasing distance from yourself. Missiles' explosion velocity should be compared against a ship's radial velocity of the missile (compared against the target), not the velocity of the missile. So, if the target's radial velocity is high (the target is moving away from the missile), damage is reduced. Whereas, if the target's radial velocity is low (the target is moving towards the missile), damage is increased. This would allow you to still do damage to something orbiting you (but not full damage, as the ship orbiting you is likely not going towards you full on). It would allow you to do full damage to someone that's coming towards you full on. And it would allow you to do no damage to someone in full retreat. Problem solved. Get to work, CCP. --- How to resolve Singularity character syncing
Angelonico Series of Tubes	Posted - 2008.06.20 09:58:00 - [19] Edited by: Angelonico on 20/06/2008 09:59:24 Originally by: Typhado3 some ships are speed tanked. speed tanked. tanked Thread over. Every other race has to web/neut the nanotarget somehow in order to hit, so do you. Stop whining.
Ulstan State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.20 14:48:00 - [20] Edited by: Ulstan on 20/06/2008 14:51:17 Edited by: Ulstan on 20/06/2008 14:48:24 Quote: Every other race has to web/neut the nanotarget somehow in order to hit Wrong. Maybe in 1vs1 when he's orbiting you and you decided to leave your ACs, pulses, and drones behind. Anyway, even assuming you were correct, we'd have a problem Webbing is a minmatar specialty, minmatar have the best nanos. Neuting is an amarr specialty, amarr have some superb nanos. Gallente have drones, which allows them a superb nano in the ishtar. Caldari neither have good nano boats of their own, nor good counters to them.

Grim Vandal Burn Proof	Posted - 2008.06.20 17:25:00 - [21] missiles are totally fukced up in this game ... Live with it, there are things even devs cant change. The MAIN reason why it is so difficult to get "eve-missiles" working like a missile is: caldari an all out missile ship in a space mmo is PURE FAILURE destiny eves physic engine cant handle a miss The easiest thing would be to remove the caldari race and tada missiles suddenly work in their intended niche role. But since caldari use all out missile ships which NEED to be balanced to gunnery ships = BIG HUGE FAIL I remember those days when TomB tried his best to balance missiles. They once did full dmg on impact. Yep one torpedo was enough to kill even 10 frigs (aoe ftw). TomB tried to let missiles MISS THEIR TARGET which is NOT AT ALL POSSIBLE in eve. (reason destiny sucks). The conclusion he came to is the current HORRIBLE dmg forumla which "emulates missile behavier". So missiles cant AND never will be fixed in eve. clicking f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 to shoot torpedos non stop is AGAIN totally fukced up imo. The torpedo eg. should be useable by every BS but limited to say 0 to maximum of 3 launchers. AND the torpedo should more work like the current bombs do. Caldari would then simply be the race who uses more launchers but giving a ship launchers only = awful I am really glad caldari get their ass kicked in FW. They need to die cuz their imbaness needs to vanish. btw. im caldari specced and playing since beta, all missile skills at lv 5 of course Greetings Grim
Slade Hoo	Posted - 2008.06.20 18:00:00 - [22] Edited by: Slade Hoo on 20/06/2008 18:03:51 Edited by: Slade Hoo on 20/06/2008 18:03:28 if missiles get their explosion velocity boosted, turrets have to be boosted for tracking speed too. but that would be a great imbalance...imagine ceptors with activated MWD orbiting will die to medium guns. missiles depend from velocity and signature radius. turrets depend on angular velocity and signature radius. Its a very good concept of CCP. If you don't want to be affected by speed itself, just use guns...it's that easy. btw. Target painters are awesome Raven isnt a "missile only" ship. it has 4 turret hardpoints
Gypsio III Bambooule	Posted - 2008.06.20 18:31:00 - [23] IMO, the only generic missile change that might be interesting would be to increase the falloff on explosion velocity. Currently it's at 1500 m/s, meaning that a missile with an explosion velocity of 1500 m/s does 50% damage (sig excepted) to a target travelling at 3000 m/s, and almost 0% damage to a target travelling at 4500 m/s. This is a very blunt mechanism - over a speed range of just 3000 m/s missiles go from dealing full damage, to no damage. A speed range of 3000 m/s is nothing in modern Eve combat. Even a small change to, say 2000 m/s would be interesting, increasing somewhat the range of speeds that a ship could take some damage, while preventing situations where a ship might receive "too much" damage, as might be caused by an across-the-board increase in explosion velocities. A more substantial increase in explosion velocity falloff could be even be accompanied by a general decrease in base explosion velocities, making the whole relationship between missiles and speed rather more forgiving on both sides. Of course, the devil is the detail...
S'pht'Kr h'Narhl	Posted - 2008.06.21 03:19:00 - [24] Originally by: Internet Knight Missiles' explosion velocity should be compared against a ship's radial velocity of the missile (compared against the target), not the velocity of the missile. I think this might work...
Italian Wedding Soup Of The Day	Posted - 2008.06.21 04:02:00 - [25] BUMP. I have been saying Missiles need aa explosion velocity buff for a LONG time now. Buff explosion velocity!
I SoStoned	Posted - 2008.06.21 12:51:00 - [26] A: Quadruple the speed on rockets and their explosion velocity & radius. B: Double the speed on Light, Heavy, & HAM missiles & increase their explosion velocity/radius. C: Increase the explosion radius on Torps & Cruise. D: Remove the stacked nerfs on T2 missiles (or increase their damage by 15% to make them preferable and viable alternatives to faction). Heck, do that for all T2 ammo. E: Cause missiles to have a mass effect... explosions rock the impacted ship. Big ship hit by small missile - not much affect. Small ship hit by big missile - gets 'bumped'. Not enough to prevent aligning, but at high velocity enough to throw an orbit wide.
CrestoftheStars Recreation Of The World	Posted - 2008.06.21 13:25:00 - [27] old issue, still needs help ___________________________________________ Whoever appeals to the law against his fellow man is either a fool or a coward. Whoever cannot take care of himself without that law is both. For a wounded
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.21 13:30:00 - [28] Edited by: James Lyrus on 21/06/2008 13:32:21 Originally by: Angelonico Edited by: Angelonico on 20/06/2008 09:59:24 Originally by: Typhado3 some ships are speed tanked. speed tanked. tanked Thread over. Every other race has to web/neut the nanotarget somehow in order to hit, so do you. Stop whining. Tanks don't typically include 100% immunity to anything. If you can clear 5km/sec, you can have 200 heavy misssile ships firing at you, and not have to worry. Spread out some turret ships though, and you'll be able to hit the nanoer. And actually, a MWD has about the same effect on tracking as an afterburner does, in terms of tracking - the signature bloom offsets the difficulty hitting it somewhat, where this isn't the case with missiles. Edit: Mostly happy with how missiles are. Would like to see precision heavys become actually vaguely relevant given speeds of cruisers. Their 1000m/sec explosion velocity is the same as that of precision cruise, and a mere 250m/sec faster than their 'normal' or faction alternatives. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Sentinal One	Posted - 2008.06.22 05:12:00 - [29] Allow Large, Simple Torpedo's to exist still but limit them, and replace the other highslots with a special highspeed, higher damage forum of rockets. Higher in damage then a Ham but lower then a cruise missle.. Make the speed freaking spooky enought it will keep vaga's out of 30km range and bring back the torpedo slow arse, long range attack. I know.. It sounds like the best of both worlds.. But I guess we can put the " Cruise rockets " as a longer reload then turrets. 8s - 9s
theteck	Posted - 2008.06.23 00:23:00 - [30] you are near or far the missle hit ... my hybrid gun cant do it missile to good lowering the missile hit its good

FORD ESC0RT State War Academy	Posted - 2008.06.23 00:42:00 - [31] It would be nice to be able to kill those super annoying fast tacklers in my drake. right now it's Inty > drake. There's something wrong with this. bump
Hatch Minmatar Bug-Blatter Beasts of Traal	Posted - 2008.06.27 17:10:00 - [32] Originally by: Matrixcvd All you guys are doing is role playing stop thinking about how you want missiles to work and start learning how they work if you fight fast ships, you need to slow them down if you are in a big ship you can tank and out Cap them if you cant figure out which ships need to die first you dont WTB Game Balance, you WTB an FC AMEN BROTHA
FlameGlow Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.27 17:57:00 - [33] Originally by: theteck you are near or far the missle hit ... my hybrid gun cant do it missile to good lowering the missile hit its good You can hit fast targets from distance or when target makes error in maneuvers, and if it comes close you can neut and web it and hit it. Missile can't damage fast target at all. Medium guns hit nanoships quite reliably, medium missiles(heavy/heavy assault) can't do a thing. So there is obvious disbalance - there is a range of speed where T1 guns of small and medium size can harm ships but only T2 small missiles can harm them while medium and T1 missiles cannot.
Opertone Caldari SIEGE.	Posted - 2008.06.29 10:07:00 - [34] explain how can 10 thousand tons' Heavy assault ship with 80 000 m3 volume move faster than 0.03 m3 lightweight missile? (less than 100 kg) what kind of engines fit on the heavy assault ship that allow the assault ship to be faster and more agile than a missile with a warhead? how were missiles designed to be unable to hit the targets? why can the heavy ships be faster than the missiles designed to hit targets of this class? (how do projectiles travel instantaneously?)
TheTerribleTerryTate	Posted - 2008.06.30 12:07:00 - [35] "I'm the Professor, why does nobody listen to me? LAVA, HOT!" --Farnsworth, Futurama Missiles, much smaller, more manoeuverable relative to ships, much larger, less manoeuverable. Explosions, extremely fast high-energy event that should in the least, be a concern for sticks-for-structure, massive vessels regardless. shrug?
BhallSpawn	Posted - 2008.07.01 04:46:00 - [36] bump buff missles
Ghostwarden	Posted - 2008.07.01 16:01:00 - [37] I have a simple (at least I think its simple) fix here. New missile types. Speed missiles. Increased Velocity by 100% (This is a rough guess) Increased Explosion Velocity by 50 to 100% (Another rough guess) Decrease Damage by 50-75 %. Then the Caldari would have to carry yet more ammo to deal with the nanno ships. (and this is all these missiles would be good for). Ghost
swoj The New Order.	Posted - 2008.07.01 19:06:00 - [38] Originally by: Internet Knight Edited by: Internet Knight on 20/06/2008 09:48:36 Originally by: Resamo The problem for me that i find very annoying is that if a ship is flying straight at me at full speed my missiles do nothing to him... how? he is not outrunnign them he is not doing anything? That's the problem in a nutshell. There's something called radial velocity. That is, the speed at which something is increasing or decreasing distance from yourself. Missiles' explosion velocity should be compared against a ship's radial velocity of the missile (compared against the target), not the velocity of the missile. So, if the target's radial velocity is high (the target is moving away from the missile), damage is reduced. Whereas, if the target's radial velocity is low (the target is moving towards the missile), damage is increased. This would allow you to still do damage to something orbiting you (but not full damage, as the ship orbiting you is likely not going towards you full on). It would allow you to do full damage to someone that's coming towards you full on. And it would allow you to do no damage to someone in full retreat. I'd agree with this, would definitely be the right way to go (well, possibly part of the solution, probably would not be a whole solution in itself, but one thing at a time). Would make it very dangerous for speed ships to make their approach and would require both sides to out think their opponent to get the tactical advantage rather than just 'Orbit at xx'
SDragoon	Posted - 2008.07.02 06:10:00 - [39] Allow target painters to also reduce the effective speed of the target for comparison to missile explosion velocity. The missile is detonating closer to the target, thus the target is closer to the blast center and subject to the blast wave when it is at it's fastest. For example, a 30% target painter would increase the target signature by 30% and decrease it's effective speed vs explosion velocity (or effective explosive velocity of missile hitting the painted target) by 30%(Number subject to balancing) So if a vagabond is cruising around at 6k/s and you put a 30% target painter on him, he'd have an effective speed of 4,200. Which is still fast enough to nullify damage from almost anything but precision light missiles, but you get the idea. Right now Target painters aren't used very much, and missile are hurting since you can't damage anything going over 3k/ms short of light precision missile. Guns have tracking computers, give missiles target painters!
FlameGlow Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.02 07:39:00 - [40] Originally by: SDragoon Edited by: SDragoon on 02/07/2008 06:19:03 Allow target painters to also reduce the effective speed of the target for comparison to missile explosion velocity. The missile is detonating closer to the target, thus the target is closer to the blast center and subject to the blast wave when it is at its fastest. For example, a 30% target painter would increase the target signature by 30% and decrease it's effective speed vs explosion velocity (or effective explosive velocity of missile hitting the painted target) by 30%(Number subject to balancing) So if a vagabond is cruising around at 6k/s and you put a 30% target painter on him, he'd have an effective speed of 4,200. Which is still fast enough to nullify damage from almost anything but precision light missiles, but you get the idea. Right now Target painters aren't used very much, and missile are hurting since you can't damage anything going over 3k/ms short of light precision missile. Guns have tracking computers, give missiles target painters! You realize guns also benefit from painters? With your suggestion guns will benefit even more - +30% signature and -30% speed equals +69% tracking bonus for everyone, nice huh? Who needs a tracking computer after that? No, the changes should be on missiles only, or new modules that affect missile velocity & explosion velocity.

reaping miner Loving Pirates United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.02 18:48:00 - [41] well guns dont hit ceptors either.. if u dont like 12Km webber buy a domination webber or something like it. and i bet CCP is not going the boost the missles in this case (if they do something) they will prlly just nerf MWD's or ceptors or something in that direction.
SDragoon	Posted - 2008.07.03 00:43:00 - [42] Edited by: SDragoon on 03/07/2008 00:43:43 Originally by: FlameGlow Originally by: SDragoon Edited by: SDragoon on 02/07/2008 06:19:03 Allow target painters to also reduce the effective speed of the target for comparison to missile explosion velocity. The missile is detonating closer to the target, thus the target is closer to the blast center and subject to the blast wave when it is at its fastest. For example, a 30% target painter would increase the target signature by 30% and decrease it's effective speed vs explosion velocity (or effective explosive velocity of missile hitting the painted target) by 30%(Number subject to balancing) So if a vagabond is cruising around at 6k/s and you put a 30% target painter on him, he'd have an effective speed of 4,200. Which is still fast enough to nullify damage from almost anything but precision light missiles, but you get the idea. Right now Target painters aren't used very much, and missile are hurting since you can't damage anything going over 3k/ms short of light precision missile. Guns have tracking computers, give missiles target painters! You realize guns also benefit from painters? With your suggestion guns will benefit even more - +30% signature and -30% speed equals +69% tracking bonus for everyone, nice huh? Who needs a tracking computer after that? No, the changes should be on missiles only, or new modules that affect missile velocity & explosion velocity. Train reading to level 1 and try again.
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.07.03 18:30:00 - [43] No one ever discusses the differences in training time length between missiles and gunnery when the 'balance' subject comes up...
schneirder GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.03 20:40:00 - [44] Originally by: Internet Knight Edited by: Internet Knight on 20/06/2008 09:48:36 Originally by: Resamo The problem for me that i find very annoying is that if a ship is flying straight at me at full speed my missiles do nothing to him... how? he is not outrunnign them he is not doing anything? That's the problem in a nutshell. There's something called radial velocity. That is, the speed at which something is increasing or decreasing distance from yourself. Missiles' explosion velocity should be compared against a ship's radial velocity of the missile (compared against the target), not the velocity of the missile. So, if the target's radial velocity is high (the target is moving away from the missile), damage is reduced. Whereas, if the target's radial velocity is low (the target is moving towards the missile), damage is increased. This would allow you to still do damage to something orbiting you (but not full damage, as the ship orbiting you is likely not going towards you full on). It would allow you to do full damage to someone that's coming towards you full on. And it would allow you to do no damage to someone in full retreat. Problem solved. Get to work, CCP. ninjaedit This is probably the best post I've seen on Eve-O, because it's COMPLETELY CORRECT. It makes no sense to blabber about ships 'outrunning' missiles when they are flying directly towards them. I just feel sad because CCP won't pay any attention.
Chris Sharp	Posted - 2008.07.03 20:51:00 - [45] Originally by: Christari Zuborov No one ever discusses the differences in training time length between missiles and gunnery when the 'balance' subject comes up... Basically a great idea! Some new Skills for missiles! Advanced Hypercharge (3) I-V * 10% explosion Velo per level to all Missiles and Torpedos * Requires Warhead Upgrades V * Requires Missile Launcher Operation IV Advanced Rocket Fuel Composition (5) I-V * 15% more Velocity per level to Missiles and Torpedos * Requires Missile Bombardment IV * Requires Projection IV Condensed Combustion Fields (3) I-V * 5% reduced Explosion Radius of all Missiles and Torpedos * Requires Guided Missile Precision IV there you go. More Skillpoints needed for Missiles, and Missile boosts for all others. XD
SDragoon	Posted - 2008.07.04 07:09:00 - [46] I think he's referring to the fact that you don't need to get level 5 in like 6 different skills before you can start training for tech 2 weaponry on battleships...
Wemo	Posted - 2008.07.04 20:09:00 - [47] It's not that the ship heading right at you is out running the missile. It is outrunning the missiles explosion. If the missile was 'smart' enough to compensate for the closure rate it could detonate prior to reaching the target and the target would then fly into the blast. That would obviously require some intelligence that even our ships navigation system couldn't accomplish. Warping to a gate should execute an 'approach' gate, not fly into the middle of it and get hung up and unable to get out. But that's another discussion.
Zeph Solaris DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.05 05:27:00 - [48] I've brought this up before. The solution is to rework missiles to determine whether the target will fly through the explosion radius or not. This will mean that ships flying towards missiles will be vulnerable while ships flying away from missiles will be able to tank them. :ccpeffort:
Slade Hoo Amarr	Posted - 2008.07.05 07:35:00 - [49] Edited by: Slade Hoo on 05/07/2008 07:47:47 "If you whine enough, they will change it", thats the correct description of this Thread. Missiles are fine. Two examples: Missiles (with 2000 explosion velocity) hit a target orbiting with 2000m/s for 100% dmg Turrets don't. It's a tracking issue. Turrets (with 0.1 tracking) hit Ships with 10km/s if angular fits tracking Missiles don't, cause explosion velocity is too low. It's a tracking issue you see? each weapon has its benefits and disadvantages. Missiles have weaknesses to high raw speed, turrets are weak against high transversal. That's their difference. If you don't like missiles...don't use them. The game mechanic CCP made is very good. If missiles would hit any target at any speed...where would be the counter? you can't evade them...your signature radius can not be smaller than base value (halo imps excluded), defender missiles are utterly crap. So if missiles don't have any "tracking" problems...they aren't balanced with turrets anymore. But one thing I am missing...Turrets have Tracking enhancers, Tracking computers and tracking rigs. Missiles only got rigs. Adding explosion velocity/radius mods for low- and midslots would be great. edit: I don't like this idea with increased damage when target approaches you and less damage while flying away. It's too turret-like
FlameGlow Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.05 08:16:00 - [50] Edited by: FlameGlow on 05/07/2008 08:17:46 Originally by: Slade Hoo "If you whine enough, they will change it", thats the correct description of this Thread. Missiles are fine. Two examples: Missiles (with 2000 explosion velocity) hit a target orbiting with 2000m/s for 100% dmg Turrets don't. It's a tracking issue. Turrets (with 0.1 tracking) hit Ships with 10km/s if angular fits tracking Missiles don't, cause explosion velocity is too low. It's a tracking issue you see? each weapon has its benefits and disadvantages. Missiles have weaknesses to high raw speed, turrets are weak against high transversal. That's their difference. If you don't like missiles...don't use them. The game mechanic CCP made is very good. If missiles would hit any target at any speed...where would be the counter? you can't evade them...your signature radius can not be smaller than base value (halo imps excluded), defender missiles are utterly crap. So if missiles don't have any "tracking" problems...they aren't balanced with turrets anymore. But one thing I am missing...Turrets have Tracking enhancers, Tracking computers and tracking rigs. Missiles only got rigs. Adding explosion velocity/radius mods for low- and midslots would be great. No, missiles are not fine: 1) 2000 m/s explosion velocity you say? Light missiles only, anything bigger requires 3 explosion velocity rigs to get there, T2 missiles & lvl 5 skills are not enough. 2) Your turret with 0.1 tracking will hit target just outside web range 30% of the time if signature is same as gun's signature resolution(and it's probably bigger because of MWD) 3) Now pretty much everyone fits MWD. Downsides of high target speed are reduced by signature increase for turrets, missiles get nothing from increased signature(because damage reduction for speed is greater) 4)Missiles don't have critical hits turrets get sometimes even at 0% hit chance 5)No modules to boost velocity, flight time or explosion velocity of missiles, only rigs.

Elsinaril CHON	Posted - 2008.07.05 09:21:00 - [51] Originally by: FlameGlow No, missiles are not fine: 1) 2000 m/s explosion velocity you say? Light missiles only, anything bigger requires 3 explosion velocity rigs to get there, T2 missiles & lvl 5 skills are not enough. 2) Your turret with 0.1 tracking will hit target just outside web range 30% of the time if signature is same as gun's signature resolution(and it's probably bigger because of MWD) 3) Now pretty much everyone fits MWD. Downsides of high target speed are reduced by signature increase for turrets, missiles get nothing from increased signature(because damage reduction for speed is greater) 4)Missiles don't have critical hits turrets get sometimes even at 0% hit chance 5)No modules to boost velocity, flight time or explosion velocity of missiles, only rigs. QFT, also add 6) Only 1 ship got missile explosion velocity bonus ... compared to turret tracking speed bonus, which is applied to about 20+ ships there.
Jim Raynor Caldari Shinra Shinra Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.06 11:26:00 - [52] Originally by: Jarkovii If a missile impacts a target, regardless of speed, It should do its intended "damage". If I have an interceptor charge say a kestrel of mine, and I fire a volley of light missiles at him and they impact. They should do more than just 0 lousy damage. The draw back of having missiles chase down MWD users and to avail they hit and still do zero damage. Its a serious let down for a specific weapon system forcing people to look to gunnery for the instant hit benefit or abandoning their skirmish. EW is not an alternative if the webber range is 12km max with out the bonus's of other ships radial benefits. And target painters barely increase the signature radius of small ships with the benefit being 30% bonus to a signature radius of 20? Whoopdeedoo for its use. If its as easy to fit an MWD and orbit at range with enough speed to escape the explosion velocity then there should be tracking modifiers for missiles as well or force missiles to do damage to struck targets while allowing people to out run missiles. This is no rant, its merely a suggestion and a realistic counter to the missile problem. The problem really isn't missiles. In some ways missiles are better than turrets. Missiles aren't broken, nanofibers are. The problem is polycarbs, nanos, overdrives, and MWDs. I strongly believe that ships are way way too fast and nanoing really has to get toned down. The guns and missiles in EVE just aren't designed to keep up with the speed ships are moving at. I don't think nanos should be completely nerfed but right now it's the only way to PvP in EVE right now, there are counters to nanos, yes but they're not always practical. I don't really wanna go into a nano-whine because I'm sure it's all been said and done at this point and if CCP wants to fix it they will (and I hope they do). Your missiles don't really suck, it's just nanofibers and microwarp drives make them appear to suck dude. ------ I'll make a sig later.
Alak D'bor Viper Squad Souls of Vengeance	Posted - 2008.07.06 11:51:00 - [53] You appear to be lost. This forum is about what's on the test server RIGHT NOW. Since your fantasy world doesn't really exist, take it to features and whines.
Zaintiraris Caldari Archon Industries The ENTITY.	Posted - 2008.07.06 20:52:00 - [54] Missiles behave properly. If I'm moving 1000m/s, and a missile has caught up to me doing 1100m/s, and explodes 100m behind me, then because of the way explosions work (they explode OUTWARD) then the amount of energy that reaches the back of my shields is likely to be very small. Think of a shockwave - it is an expanding circle, where the surface of the circle contains mass - particles from the explosion. Each impact of one of these particles transfers the explosive energy to the target - but the particle density is diminishing with distance, so few particles will catch up to me, and I won't recieve much of the energy from the explosion. --- Originally by: CCP Hammer This game was so much better back before people knew math.
Ferocious FeAr THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2008.07.07 00:17:00 - [55] Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 07/07/2008 00:22:54 tech 2 missiles in general are a complete mess. There is no reason to use rage torps, faction torps do what it does and better. There is no reason to use precision missiles, they aren't fast enough and when they do hit the target it does nothing. There is no reason to use fury missiles, faction heavy, heavy assault missiles do what it does and better. There is no reason to use tech 2 rocket and light missile ammo, they do more bad than good on a tank that relies solely on speed tank. As a caldari character I can say I'm very disappointed at CCP for neglecting the issues. I find myself piloting with hybrids almost 100% of the time now. The issues with missiles have swayed my interest. If that was your intention CCP you have done an exceptional job, keep up the great work. Don't hate me, learn to love me
FlameGlow Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.07 12:26:00 - [56] Originally by: Zaintiraris Missiles behave properly. If I'm moving 1000m/s, and a missile has caught up to me doing 1100m/s, and explodes 100m behind me, then because of the way explosions work (they explode OUTWARD) then the amount of energy that reaches the back of my shields is likely to be very small. Think of a shockwave - it is an expanding circle, where the surface of the circle contains mass - particles from the explosion. Each impact of one of these particles transfers the explosive energy to the target - but the particle density is diminishing with distance, so few particles will catch up to me, and I won't recieve much of the energy from the explosion. Please don't post such nonsence, there are children here who might actually beleive you. If you talk about reality - explosion has missile's movement vector added to it actually(it cannot just disappear like in EVE). So if a missile moving at 1000 m/s explodes right behind you with explosion speed 1500 m/s then relatively to immobile observer shockwave towards you will be moving at 2500 m/s and shockwave in opposite direction is moving at 500 m/s. Not to mention that explosion velocity is usualy higher then missile speed by tens of times.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.07.07 14:43:00 - [57] Originally by: Christari Zuborov No one ever discusses the differences in training time length between missiles and gunnery when the 'balance' subject comes up... Are we referring to the fact that missiles have the "benefit" of being able to train for t2 of a specific weapon more easily or the fact that all our skills are 1x higher than their equivalent gunnery skill AND we have to train an extra skill to get the long range and short range guns for the same ship class? In terms of skill training I think it balances out. Easier to spec, more difficult to be good at everything.
Fabrezio Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.07.07 21:10:00 - [58] Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes Edited by: Jaketh Ivanes on 18/06/2008 11:31:42 Missiles don't impact on ships, they explode in proximity, meaning a light missile will detonate at 50m and a torpedo at 500m. A fast ship will be able to out run the blast wave and a small ships will not be hit by the full wave. I think it is explained in the missile guide, but I know that is the explanation CCP have given us previously. EDIT: Turrest don't hit over 5 km/s either, so I need an implant that increases turret tracking by 45% (or what ever amount is needed for my small turrets to hit ). You realize, that the missile exploding within proximity takes us back to 1960's technology, yes? Missiles have been hitting their targets directly for several decades now. You are telling me that in the future, in a place far, far away, that they haven't figured that out? Please do not remove moderator edits from your signature. It has been removed because it doesn't reflect your ingame persona. If you have comments or questions please email us at [email protected]. Thanks, Hango
Fabrezio Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.07.07 21:12:00 - [59] Let me also add to that, when something explodes (depending on what is exploding), lets say, something atomic. What it is releasing are waves, which travel at the speed of light. Nothing is moving that fast to escape the blast wave (as it would require you to travel faster than the speed of light). Please do not remove moderator edits from your signature. It has been removed because it doesn't reflect your ingame persona. If you have comments or questions please email us at [email protected]. Thanks, Hango
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.07.07 21:50:00 - [60] Originally by: Fabrezio Let me also add to that, when something explodes (depending on what is exploding), lets say, something atomic. What it is releasing are waves, which travel at the speed of light. Nothing is moving that fast to escape the blast wave (as it would require you to travel faster than the speed of light). Actually, various explosives and materials have differing rates of explosion travel. The concussive wave of a detonation in literal terms is caused by a rapid expansion of gas, and the rate of expansion is a function of both the physical properties (the stored chemical energy) of the explosive and the relative atmosperhic pressure in the vicinity of the detonation. Only a portion of the energy of an explosive is transferred into kinetic energy (explosive damage is, in all reality, kinetic damage), some is transfered into various parts of the EM spectrum (heat, visible light and so forth). Other, less conventional explosives are sufficiently powerful that the amount of non kinetic energy generated is sufficient to be cause for concern. Modern Nuclear weapons for example generate incredible amounts of EM energy (visible light alone is sufficent to cause 3rd degree burns). As such, different parts of the energy of the explosion traves at different rates. The EM component travels at the rate of light in it's current medium, along with the rate of expansion of the kinetic component. To that end it would seem that the "nuclear" versions of missiles ought to do a fair amount of EM and thermal damage along with kinetic and explosive, and at least portions of that damage would be transferable to a target no matter what their speed (an interceptor traveling at 12k/s is, for all intents and purposes standing still relative to the speed of light). Lets not also forget that an explosion of a missile is relative to the projectile launching it. If Eve WERE to attempt to simlate reality a missile actually explodes at it's velocity + explosion velocity at the edge of the wave traveling in the direction of the missile and explosion velocity - missile velocity at the trail edge. As such, a 12km/s interceptor traveling directly towards a Heavy missile launched by a max skilled cerb should be hitting a blast wave traveling at a relative 17km/s or so, and rather than evading damage completely as it does now would actually enhance the damage immensely (I'm not sure if the rate of blast wave travel increase the damage potential in a linear, exponential or logarithmatic fashion, but my guess is logarithmatic given that the destructive area of a blast doubles for every 10 fold increase in power) While I'm sure an algorithm could model this very well, the sheer number of calculates of this sort the server would be doing would probably cause terrible lag.

Andreya Direct Intent	Posted - 2008.07.08 12:28:00 - [61] Originally by: Hatch web range should be expanded from 10 to 15-30k, but that is another topic all together. tell that to a taranis pilot.... they and myself will tell you to **** off _________________________________________________________ Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected])
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.07.09 04:47:00 - [62] Originally by: Andreya Originally by: Hatch web range should be expanded from 10 to 15-30k, but that is another topic all together. tell that to a taranis pilot.... they and myself will tell you to **** off I tend to agree. Pure speed isn't the issue, and it's not a lack of counters that's an issue. That an interceptor can brech invulnerable speed is not unreasonable - afterall the only thing standing between them and instant doom is the simple fact that they fly REALLY fast. It's not like an Inty is going to be able to kill a battleship solo (unless it's piloted by a noob with no PVP gear whatsoever - a single heavy neut cycle sends the thing packing). If there was a range boost to some anti speed weapon maybe it ought to be to the neutralizers. Only the Heavy Neut has the range to really make a difference, and if a ship can't fit a heavy neut it probably doesn't have the cap to think about using one anyway (I'd really like to be able to fit one on a Drake but what can ya do?). This isn't advocating a boost, simply my view that if a module WAS to be boosted, the range of one that fits in a high slot seems like the way to go since you sacrifice firepower for them (except on ships with utility highs like the Raven. . . )
Z Hawk	Posted - 2008.07.09 05:09:00 - [63] Edited by: Z Hawk on 09/07/2008 05:09:27 Well i was wondering about what if 2 same fitted rifter were chasing after each other with a MWD... could the turrents hit that because there at the same and/or similar speed :)... just a thought
Karl Luckner	Posted - 2008.07.09 08:57:00 - [64] Edited by: Karl Luckner on 09/07/2008 08:59:33 We would have to calculate with radial velocity. An approaching target would been hit with an insane amount of damage, if the radial velocity is high enough. Instant death to approaching fast movers. Don't think many people would like that. And having ceptors in mind, I don't like it either. Considering the workload for the server, well, would make no difference to turrets, since turret damage gets angular velocity calculated in. Just fix the goddam heavy precision missiles and be done with it.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.07.09 15:44:00 - [65] Originally by: Z Hawk Edited by: Z Hawk on 09/07/2008 05:09:27 Well i was wondering about what if 2 same fitted rifter were chasing after each other with a MWD... could the turrents hit that because there at the same and/or similar speed :)... just a thought Turrets don't care about how many meters a second you move, the ONLY care how many radians a second you make them shift. Thus if a ship is going 12 km/s directly towards you guns will handily hit the target. On the other side of the coin, guns can be evaded at fairly low speeds at close ranges (at 500m only a few hundred meters/second are necissary to completely evade battleship class guns). Missiles on the other hand only care about absolute speed and sig radius - and even then it only cares about which is worse. In certain circumstances this gives missiles an advantage but generally it is really a disadvantage since it means there is very little you can do to increase your chances of dealing damage.
PhreakinSyco	Posted - 2008.07.09 18:22:00 - [66] Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. Shouldn't explosion velocity be added to the missiles current velocity to determine damage? If a missile traveling 2km/s comes up behind a ship going 2km/s and its explosion velocity is 2km/s, shouldn't it do damage at 2km/s? Currently damage is figured something from a percentage based on: explosion velocity - target velocity If thats less than zero then no damage is done. Shouldn't it be: (explosion velocity + missile velocity) - target velocity I mean when a missile explodes the explosion continues on with the velocity of the device that exploded.
FlameGlow Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.09 19:08:00 - [67] Edited by: FlameGlow on 09/07/2008 19:08:48 Originally by: PhreakinSyco Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. Shouldn't explosion velocity be added to the missiles current velocity to determine damage? It should, but eve physics model is nowhere near realism. Leaving aside everything unrelated to weapons we still have projectiles hitting with no time delay, missiles and bullets flying through solid objects, sudden disappearance of missile's momentum just before it explodes and that explosion spreads slower then missile flys. It's not as drastic as you think though - damage doesn't disappear suddenly if target velocity is greater then explosion velocity, if target is 1500m/s faster you do about 40%, if target is 3000m/s faster 1% or so of damage is dealt.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.