Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shereza
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 15:25:00 -
[1]
What was the rationale behind having their base explosion velocity 85m/s?
I ask because:
Cruise missiles are at 69 while torpedoes are at 79. Heavy missiles are at 81 while heavy assault are at 101. Rockets are at 85 while light missiles are at 170.
Also: Light missiles pre-QR: 1750m/s Rockets pre-QR: 2250
It really seems absolutely insane that the explosion velocity for rockets goes from higher than light missiles by 28% to slower by 50% so what is the rationale for this decision?
Furthermore why are rockets the only short-ranged missile that has an explosion velocity lower than its long-range counterpart? ____________________
Minmatar in Fantasy or Duct Tape Goes Medieval. |
Lana Lanee
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 15:33:00 -
[2]
rockets are fireworks. why would you use them anyway
|
Mara Kell
Steel Beasts Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 15:38:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Lana Lanee rockets are fireworks. why would you use them anyway
Because you have no other choice? Malediction, Vengeance, Heretic jut to give an example.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 15:39:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Shereza What was the rationale behind having their base explosion velocity 85m/s?
I ask because:
Cruise missiles are at 69 while torpedoes are at 79. Heavy missiles are at 81 while heavy assault are at 101. Rockets are at 85 while light missiles are at 170.
Also: Light missiles pre-QR: 1750m/s Rockets pre-QR: 2250
It really seems absolutely insane that the explosion velocity for rockets goes from higher than light missiles by 28% to slower by 50% so what is the rationale for this decision?
Furthermore why are rockets the only short-ranged missile that has an explosion velocity lower than its long-range counterpart?
Hmmm. That does sound pretty insane.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 15:58:00 -
[5]
How large is their explosion radius? That compensates for explosion velocity
|
Shereza
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 16:05:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Furb Killer How large is their explosion radius? That compensates for explosion velocity
Explosion radii have not been changed in Quantum Rise.
Cruise: 300 Torpedo: 450 Heavy/Heavy Assault: 125 Standard: 50 Rocket: 20
I can understand the explosion radius having an effect on the changes to explosion velocity but not one as massive as what we're talking about with rockets. ____________________
Minmatar in Fantasy or Duct Tape Goes Medieval. |
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 16:42:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Shereza
Originally by: Furb Killer How large is their explosion radius? That compensates for explosion velocity
Explosion radii have not been changed in Quantum Rise.
Cruise: 300 Torpedo: 450 Heavy/Heavy Assault: 125 Standard: 50 Rocket: 20
I can understand the explosion radius having an effect on the changes to explosion velocity but not one as massive as what we're talking about with rockets.
See the sig of the second poster? Yeah that one? Thats why. But seriosuly, rockets arent too bad, as their often used in conjunction with webs, so ussually hit for full damage. However, one small smartbomb on an af cld make a rocket users life hell, so thats a tad unfair.. EVE history
Missiles post-nerf |
MyOwnSling
Gallente RONA Corporation RONA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 16:49:00 -
[8]
The missile damage formula has changed to emphasize sig radius.
Read: There is a NEW missile damage formula. ------------- Stop whining.
Originally by: Puupuu dude... your face...
Originally by: MooKids I have an elite rating in HULL TANKING! That is like saying I can block punches with my face.
|
Shereza
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 17:50:00 -
[9]
Originally by: MyOwnSling The missile damage formula has changed to emphasize sig radius.
Read: There is a NEW missile damage formula.
And your point is?
Torpedoes, higher radius than cruise missiles and higher explosion velocity.
Heavy assault missiles, equal radius (higher with any guided precision training), higher velocity.
Rockets, lower radius (50% lower compared to lights at precision 5), significantly (50%) lower velocity.
Take another look at the actual values. There's a 150m difference between torpedo and cruise missile base radii at spec. 0 and a 225m difference at spec. 5. At the same time torpedoes have a base explosion velocity exactly 2m/s faster than cruise missiles.
Heavy missiles, both brands, tie at 125m base though standard heavies can drop to 93.75m explosion radius while heavy assaults stay at 125m. Heavy assaults also have an explosion velocity of 101m/s while heavies are at 81m/s.
Rockets, on the other hand, have a radius of 20 compared to 50 (40) for light missiles and an explosion velocity of 85m/s compared to 170m/s.
#1 Rockets have a lower explosion velocity than heavy assault missiles and barely higher than heavy missiles.
#2 At up to a 100% higher explosion radius than cruise missiles torpedoes only got a 2m/s boost over them in terms of explosion velocity.
Basically what it looks like is that on battleships long-range missiles are supposed to hit small targets and short-range missiles are supposed to hit fast targets. Same thing on cruisers really, especially with the near equallity of explosion radii which is not present with frigate or battleship launchers. Frigate launchers, on the other hand, seem to now be geared up so that rockets can hit small targets while light missiles hit fast targets, a complete role reversal.
I simply want to know the rationale behind this and the title reflects my astonishment over the whole light missiles go from 1750 to 170 and rockets go from 2250 to 85 explosion velocity thing. ____________________
Minmatar in Fantasy or Duct Tape Goes Medieval. |
MyOwnSling
Gallente RONA Corporation RONA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 17:53:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Shereza
Originally by: MyOwnSling The missile damage formula has changed to emphasize sig radius.
Read: There is a NEW missile damage formula.
And your point is?
Torpedoes, higher radius than cruise missiles and higher explosion velocity.
Heavy assault missiles, equal radius (higher with any guided precision training), higher velocity.
Rockets, lower radius (50% lower compared to lights at precision 5), significantly (50%) lower velocity.
Take another look at the actual values. There's a 150m difference between torpedo and cruise missile base radii at spec. 0 and a 225m difference at spec. 5. At the same time torpedoes have a base explosion velocity exactly 2m/s faster than cruise missiles.
Heavy missiles, both brands, tie at 125m base though standard heavies can drop to 93.75m explosion radius while heavy assaults stay at 125m. Heavy assaults also have an explosion velocity of 101m/s while heavies are at 81m/s.
Rockets, on the other hand, have a radius of 20 compared to 50 (40) for light missiles and an explosion velocity of 85m/s compared to 170m/s.
#1 Rockets have a lower explosion velocity than heavy assault missiles and barely higher than heavy missiles.
#2 At up to a 100% higher explosion radius than cruise missiles torpedoes only got a 2m/s boost over them in terms of explosion velocity.
Basically what it looks like is that on battleships long-range missiles are supposed to hit small targets and short-range missiles are supposed to hit fast targets. Same thing on cruisers really, especially with the near equallity of explosion radii which is not present with frigate or battleship launchers. Frigate launchers, on the other hand, seem to now be geared up so that rockets can hit small targets while light missiles hit fast targets, a complete role reversal.
I simply want to know the rationale behind this and the title reflects my astonishment over the whole light missiles go from 1750 to 170 and rockets go from 2250 to 85 explosion velocity thing.
Somebody somewhere has the missile formula worked out. You need to take things into account like damage reduction factor and sig radius. Explosion velocity means abolutely nothing in certain situations. It may be that rockets need the low explosion velocity to be balanced. Have you tried running any numbers? ------------- Stop whining.
Originally by: Puupuu dude... your face...
Originally by: MooKids I have an elite rating in HULL TANKING! That is like saying I can block punches with my face.
|
|
Gavin DeVries
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 17:55:00 -
[11]
My guess would be a 1 was left out during data entry. I think it's supposed to be 185. ______________________________________________________ Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr Shadow Company Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 18:28:00 -
[12]
Basically with the new formula we have a case of
((Ev/Er)*(sig/V))*loads of other factors that are fairly identical between the various missiles.
Sig= Signature V = Velocity Ev = Explosion Velocity Er = Explosion Radius
85/20 = 4.25 170/50 = 3.4
Which means that with Guided Missiles at max they both end up at 4.25 modifier. In effect they're with max skills JUST AS GOOD against targets with a base signature radius of more than 50 (destroyers+ as well as frigates with MWD or anything hit by a target painted) while the rockets maintain a better performance against Sig <50 targets (as I understand it). Precision lights will of course be better than rockets against fast MWDing targets, but I guess that's why they're T2 precisions (T2 and made for that purpose) while rocket T2s have a different purpose.
Also if I remember correctly rockets are an anomaly in terms of fitting. HAM and Torp launchers have in some ways higher fitting requirements (torps are all out higher, HAMS have higher PG but lower CPU). Rocket Ls have lower fitting requirements across the board.
Overall, as far as I can tell it's a plus for balance and a minus for forum warriors and that's all good in my book. Now, go out with your rocket and your light missile ships and give them a freaking test run. If all maledictions are now utter utter crap and the Vengeance is (against all likelyhood) even more useless than it used to be while the Crows and Hawks rocks peoples socks and pwn people all across the universe. Then you can come back and whine. Until then... ______________________________________________ -My respect can not be won, only lost. It's given freely and only grudgingly withdrawn. |
Koryvarn
Infusion. G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 19:47:00 -
[13]
Guided missile precision does not apply to rockets FYI. Personally, rockets are for getting on the mail above Falcons. No other other use.
|
chrisss0r
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 20:00:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Koryvarn Guided missile precision does not apply to rockets FYI.
which does not kontradict his post in any way
|
K1RTH G3RS3N
Roflcoptorz Coptorcorp
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 20:06:00 -
[15]
talking about explosion speed and size.... i couldnt break a punishers tank in a 420dps sacrilege........
WHAAATT THE FFAAARRRRR******K!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
Mara Kell
Steel Beasts Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 20:13:00 -
[16]
Originally by: K1RTH G3RS3N talking about explosion speed and size.... i couldnt break a punishers tank in a 420dps sacrilege........
WHAAATT THE FFAAARRRRR******K!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have experience the same, it even has problems to kill signature reduction bonused cruisers. Looks like the Sacrilege is now an anti BS ship as which it works pretty well just that the DPS are not enough for good tanked BSs....
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |