EVE Search - Shouldn't missiles be a tad more like turrets?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Shouldn't missiles be a tad more like turrets?

» 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)
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.11.29 22:55:00 - [1] I know some of you are a little tired of hearing about missiles, and it's been done to death, but instead of just moaning, I'll give you an example of how I would have liked missiles to work. It's complicated going into the formula and stats and noone would bother reading all the details so just to give a general jist: I'd have just had missiles to have damage based on velocity, no not of the ship they hit, based on the velocity of the missile itself. I'd significantly reduce the difference the velocity the target ship makes. I don't find it realistic unless it's the sort of ship thats passing 1000m/s due to the ship powering from the centre of the explosion radius, if missiles are launched out they are out, they aren't constantly trying to track a target like turrets. Say you just launched a torpedo. Let's say it came out the launcher travelling at 200 m/s, I'd have the projectile pick up speed and accelerate towards its target (say a battleship) and make the missile impact damage relative to the speed it managed to reach before reaching its target. If it reached a top speed of 500 m/s at 15km say, doing maximum damage relative to the signal radius. But if the ship had moved closer to say 10km, then the projectile hitting at 383m/s doing 15% less damage or such and so on. This gives missiles an optimal range like turrets. As they may only peak in velocity at say 15km for a lumbering slow projectile like a torpedo, but then continue on that max speed for the completion of their max range, such as 60km. Frigates and cruisers can get in close and orbit battleships and not get wiped out still. Can make fof missiles that don't destroy the projectile to slow it down instead, making it do less damage on impact and making them more useful. Of course that leaves issues like how to damage other battleships in your face or just make them ships that have to keep their distance, who knows, it can coincide with the supposed support role caldari ships slip into, and create interesting chess like battles betteen blaster ships. Also allowing the certain specialist weapon types that break the rules to allow ships out of certain situations. But I just wanted to put the point across. I think missiles suck at the moment, I don't think they fit or are very realistic for that matter, I know realism is rubbished and doesn't mean anything for game balance, but what I think what I mean is missiles don't convince me that they are what they're supposed to be.
Karille Gallente Lordless	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:01:00 - [2] There is absolutely nothing wrong with missiles and the solution you're asking for would make them far worse than you can imagine.
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:02:00 - [3] Missiles and turrets are compleatly differen. And should remin so as well. I was not to fond of the change tehy made now. The explosion velocity is too low. and sig radius ha a bit of too big impact. This is way in the future, and they are bound to usespace age explosives that should have a very high explosion velocity to bring most damage. The sig radius thing do make sense however. a large explosion delivers energy over a large aerea, and a small traget will not recive all the damage it its is a bit way form teh exploson center. but dead cente it should ge the full punch. It in here explosion velocity and sig radius AND targets speed comes in. The ne orumla they got needs a tweak is all I am trying to say ^^
Rhaegor Stormborn Pestilent Industries Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:02:00 - [4] Edited by: Rhaegor Stormborn on 29/11/2008 23:04:36 No.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:10:00 - [5] lazy race is lazy race, missiles suck when compairing to damage over a period time as you have to remember that it takes time for the damage to travell to reach yoru ship gun are instantmeaning your damaging over the time of your gun firing for example you gun firing is 5 sec you damaging every 5 sec although with missiles your firing every 5 sec but might not damage for 10 - 15 secs but that what the caldari s****get for using a technology that thousands of years into the future your still using as technology of today hybrids and lazors is where it is at so come over to the party
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:20:00 - [6] Originally by: Armoured C but that what the caldari s****get for using a technology that thousands of years into the future your still using as technology of today hybrids and lazors is where it is at so come over to the party Lasers yes, projected enery is the way of the future. Projectile and hybrids I doubt, maby some kind of plasma gun, but still doubt it. Missile is also the way of the future. Weapons that can guide themself to the target and can carry explosive devices that far surpasses anything a gun can provide, or any toher kind of payload for that matter. "gamma pulses" from nights dawn ring a bell for anyone? :). Of course in a game like EVE it need to be balanced, and thats why missiles and guns are on par here. And for that "easy mode" crap. Missile is easy to fire, as tehy should be, they are missile aster all. But teh damage potentil for guns is still bigger for missiles as we can not manouver ships to hit better, and that mkaes it unbalnced.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:27:00 - [7] of course it bigger your hitting more damage over a small peroid time at the beggining of firing with turrets than missiles because of flight time , over a long seiege peroid missiles damage possibly equals but turret still would have done more damage due to that begging cycles where the missiles have to catch up as it isnt damage because you dont have to do anything just make sure you sit in range and spam F1 turret users have to work for the damage with alod of varing factors so we may do slighly more damage we have to work for it hey arnt you late for work stacking shelves in caldari provisions ( im sorry i have a history of passion for hatred towards caldarians) viva la \o/ admiral noir
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:39:00 - [8] lol Armoured C. That's why I posted this in the first place. I don't like people saying missiles are supposed to suck in the first place because they are easy mode. I'd rather have less easy mode missiles that don't such as much. Whatever differences people bring up, it's not rocket science or taxing on the brain using turrets effectively. Missiles still have 4 damage types to cycle though and are a reloading weapon. In a real world there would be possibly dozens of physics laws affecting a missiles outcome, and not just they all work the same like in Eve. I think just possibly I would like CCP to somehow bring some factors of that into the game for missiles?
Anubis Assassin Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:45:00 - [9] Are you all out of your f***ing minds? The only difference in damage would be: a) the first hit b) rate of fire A: Firing at the same time, the turret would hit its target first as the missile has to travel there. After that, the point is moot. Even as the first salvo is traveling to its target, the next salvo would be either ready or already being launched. So just because that first turret shot hit first, doesn't mean that it's going to get its second shot off any faster than the launcher will. B: 5sec RoF is 5sec RoF. -turrets fires, turret hits, 5 seconds later, a second shot is fired, repeat. -launcher fires, missile travels, 5 seconds later (missiles are on their way or have hit), launcher fires again, repeat. --------------------------- I have to make my own sig break? WTF? These forums suck CCP, fix 'em or get something better... I'm tired of reading Khraunus' sig every single time I read one of his
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:48:00 - [10] first this isnt RL so take that right out of the equasion , secodly you cant escape that missiles are always going to be easy mode, and yes while turrets are not brain science it determins you ship movement with other ship movement to ensure you are optiomal for max damage ( i swear to god if this turns into a max campign thread this will suck this isnt CAOD) you will just have to face it that because of the easyness of missiles you will suffer damage done by your turret counterparts and considering most of eve is caldari the rest of eve picked wisely to be a different race and not follow the crowd once falcon get nerfed by jamming distance to be in line with the arazu and other recons who all engage with in 100km as at that range even if they skip a jam most to all thing smaller than a battleship still wont be able to shoot which still cuts the emelemt of risk unlike others recons where you have risk with being in range of damps, then caldari will have nothing left except pve ships then the empire of caldari will be nothing except the new face of carebears united
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:51:00 - [11] Originally by: Anubis Assassin Are you all out of your f***ing minds? The only difference in damage would be: a) the first hit b) rate of fire A: Firing at the same time, the turret would hit its target first as the missile has to travel there. After that, the point is moot. Even as the first salvo is traveling to its target, the next salvo would be either ready or already being launched. So just because that first turret shot hit first, doesn't mean that it's going to get its second shot off any faster than the launcher will. B: 5sec RoF is 5sec RoF. -turrets fires, turret hits, 5 seconds later, a second shot is fired, repeat. -launcher fires, missile travels, 5 seconds later (missiles are on their way or have hit), launcher fires again, repeat. yeah one salvo off if the target is right infront of you , what about those target 10's of km away , you could get well more that 2 salvo off before the missiles even reach or even sniping , have you seen how pathetic missiles are at doing that ? espically if they arnt pointed and webbed in say sniper fleet battles .... oooh noes there a large stream of missiles heading my way i better warp off and come back again i laugh at caldarians
Anubis Assassin Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.11.29 23:59:00 - [12] Originally by: Armoured C yeah one salvo off if the target is right infront of you , what about those target 10's of km away , you could get well more that 2 salvo off before the missiles even reach or even sniping , have you seen how pathetic missiles are at doing that ? espically if they arnt pointed and webbed in say sniper fleet battles .... oooh noes there a large stream of missiles heading my way i better warp off and come back again i laugh at caldarians I laugh at gay Gallentians wearing "do me in the butt" vinyl outfits, but that's besides the point Distance really doesn't matter all that much either. Too far, sure, the missiles will take some time to get there, but it could be well out of your turrets optimal anyway. Say they are 40km away (can Gallente shoot that far?), the turrets' shots will hit first, but they have to wait say another 7 seconds to fire again anyway. Meanwhile, the launchers have fired their missiles and are on their way and will be ready to fire again at the same time as the turrets. So your shots may reach their target first, but you wont be shooting any faster than the launchers. Once the missiles start hitting their target, your point is moot. --------------------------- I have to make my own sig break? WTF? These forums suck CCP, fix 'em or get something better... I'm tired of reading Khraunus' sig every single time I read one of his
AkRoYeR Amarr	Posted - 2008.11.30 01:10:00 - [13] Originally by: Karille There is absolutely nothing wrong with missiles and the solution you're asking for would make them far worse than you can imagine. Hear hear! OP needs to definitely learn how to use them and drones.
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.11.30 01:54:00 - [14] Edited by: OffBeaT on 30/11/2008 01:56:19 Edited by: OffBeaT on 30/11/2008 01:54:56 In truth of life the only way you can out ditch a missile is by range (i.e.) by them running out of fuel or out running them till they run out of fuel or by out manoeuvring them or by jamming them. So we should have counter messieurs mods to missiles. Depending on the type of missiles used in the setup of a ship. Umm.. Something like this I guess. Heat tracking missiles decoy with flare mods Rader or types of missiles use ecm jamming mods. Cam tracking missiles damper types of mods. Skills would determine how effective theses mods would counter & of course some missiles types could be more able to resist these mods. I say for the turret whiners you have tons of mid slots to use new types of missile jamming mods/anti missile mods. Unlike the raven or other missile teck ships who canÆt fit many mid slots without losing a real tank. I say itÆs time for eve to start making real types of anti missiles mods instead of turning missiles into bullets because they got to be joking... missiles think and i would say bullets don't.. I know my spelling sucks whatever!
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.11.30 01:56:00 - [15] hybrid cruise missile t2 firing at every 9 seconds it would take 15 second for the cruise missile to reach the opitiomal of the 425 which upon hitting the target will deal 474 damage . during that time the turret would of fired 3 time at it opitiomal using long range t2 ammo doing 209 a shot meaning it is 627 of course since a raven only have 6 slot well a mega has 7 the mega is hitting for 4383 (1461 per volly ) per total volley compaired to the 2482 ( same per volley) volley of the same opitiomal by the time that first volley get to the target dealing almost double damage but over time the raven will out damage it until it has to reload and as i believe the launchher cant hold as much ammo i tiwll loose damage and same with hybrids but can catch back up with the damage done while the new salvo starts to arrive at the target lasers t2 laser would of shoot twice during that time and dealt 4372 (2186 volly damage ) and has the same firing rate as launchers so as it fires at the same time every time a cruise missile hit the target ship the laser are matching it damage delt meaning the laser are going to be on top as the volley damage is the same as missiles roughly hitting per volley 2186 with the added bonus of ever hardly having to reload meaning during that 10 second peroid and the aditional 15 second for the new salvo to reach the lasers would have fired a additional 3 times dealing 6k damage artys on a tempest out of them all cant reach out at 100km at opitiomal while every other weapon has a much higher optiomal firing every 12 seconds only hitting for 2749 means that that every other race is out powering them over damage in the shorter run and longer run aswell, during 2 volley of the artys you pull off 5498 where as in the mega you pull off 5844 and the laser can almost fire 3 times during the arties 2 shot cycle dealing a much better 6558 what i suggest is you train a new race :P espically now since all the whiners think missiles are dead might aswell make then right ? since over time most of new eden weapon technology can out damage through long range engagments obvisioulsy this was odne on eft since i am not on a computer with eve ='( missiles are on par with laser technology with damage but travelling and reloading make laser the best choice of weaponary in the universe.... start you FOTM training naow :P
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.11.30 02:00:00 - [16] Originally by: Armoured C hybrid cruise missile t2 firing at every 9 seconds it would take 15 second for the cruise missile to reach the opitiomal of the 425 which upon hitting the target will deal 474 damage . during that time the turret would of fired 3 time at it opitiomal using long range t2 ammo doing 209 a shot meaning it is 627 of course since a raven only have 6 slot well a mega has 7 the mega is hitting for 4383 (1461 per volly ) per total volley compaired to the 2482 ( same per volley) volley of the same opitiomal by the time that first volley get to the target dealing almost double damage but over time the raven will out damage it until it has to reload and as i believe the launchher cant hold as much ammo i tiwll loose damage and same with hybrids but can catch back up with the damage done while the new salvo starts to arrive at the target lasers t2 laser would of shoot twice during that time and dealt 4372 (2186 volly damage ) and has the same firing rate as launchers so as it fires at the same time every time a cruise missile hit the target ship the laser are matching it damage delt meaning the laser are going to be on top as the volley damage is the same as missiles roughly hitting per volley 2186 with the added bonus of ever hardly having to reload meaning during that 10 second peroid and the aditional 15 second for the new salvo to reach the lasers would have fired a additional 3 times dealing 6k damage artys on a tempest out of them all cant reach out at 100km at opitiomal while every other weapon has a much higher optiomal firing every 12 seconds only hitting for 2749 means that that every other race is out powering them over damage in the shorter run and longer run aswell, during 2 volley of the artys you pull off 5498 where as in the mega you pull off 5844 and the laser can almost fire 3 times during the arties 2 shot cycle dealing a much better 6558 what i suggest is you train a new race :P espically now since all the whiners think missiles are dead might aswell make then right ? since over time most of new eden weapon technology can out damage through long range engagments obvisioulsy this was odne on eft since i am not on a computer with eve ='( missiles are on par with laser technology with damage but travelling and reloading make laser the best choice of weaponary in the universe.... start you FOTM training naow :P you have to get with in 10 to 20kms to mark a worp jam then kill it so whats with this long range fighting crap.. dude will just worp out on yea so fight over.. long range solo fighting sucks and is a joke in eve.. so what if the missiles can do long range its only good for ai..
SirMoric Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.11.30 03:28:00 - [17] Missiles, easy mode?? How can missiles be any easier than rails, lasers, and cannons? All you do with all of them are locking target, wait until within range, press F1-6. Oh well, maybe not the multi-F-pressing anymore, but saying they are easier then other weapons?? What I would like is some sort of target trajectory calculation done by the missile after it has been fired, this odd concept about missiles chasing a target looks odd, it's supposed to intercept a target, not chase it. If it was set up in some sort of intercept it would actually strike crafts in other areas than their butt, thereby transferring more damage to the target, except if it's a shot in the rear. Fly straight towards a missile, and it hurts, turn when they're incomming and it hurts less. Just my thought. Oh, I still use missiles, and they're still very nice. Better than guns, but that's because I really haven't trained them yet. rgds
Karille Gallente Lordless	Posted - 2008.11.30 09:22:00 - [18] Originally by: SirMoric Missiles, easy mode?? How can missiles be any easier than rails, lasers, and cannons? All you do with all of them are locking target, wait until within range, press F1-6. Oh well, maybe not the multi-F-pressing anymore, but saying they are easier then other weapons?? [SNIP] Oh, I still use missiles, and they're still very nice. Better than guns, but that's because I really haven't trained them yet. rgds Your cluelessness betrays you. If you fly a turret boat like I'm sure you fly a missile one be prepared to miss a lot.
ShardowRhino Caldari Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2008.11.30 10:24:00 - [19] Originally by: 5pinDizzy I know some of you are a little tired of hearing about missiles, and it's been done to death, but instead of just moaning, I'll give you an example of how I would have liked missiles to work. blahblahblahblah You do realize the destructive power of a missile isn't due to the speed it can reach between the launcher and the target. Most anti-air missiles, less im forgetting something, are proximity based. They don't need to actually hit the target before exploding. they will explode in the proximity of the target. The detonation of the warhead(the explosive thing FYI) is what causes the damage. Unlike slugs or sabot rounds where the transference of kinetic energy between the round and the target is where the destructive force is generated.
Terraform Gallente Recreation Of The World	Posted - 2008.11.30 10:26:00 - [20] I find it funny how a lot of people are whining about explosion velocity. If it was "realistic" there wouldn't be any explosion at all, or atleast a far smaller one... well i guess CCP must be aiming for realism now ^_^
Misina Arlath Amarr	Posted - 2008.11.30 10:31:00 - [21] Originally by: AkRoYeR Hear hear! OP needs to definitely learn how to use them and drones. This is kinda amusing, comming from an Amarr and all. -------------------------------------------------- "Every complex problem has a solution which is easy, neat and wrong!"
ShardowRhino Caldari Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2008.11.30 10:39:00 - [22] Originally by: Terraform I find it funny how a lot of people are whining about explosion velocity. If it was "realistic" there wouldn't be any explosion at all, or atleast a far smaller one... well i guess CCP must be aiming for realism now ^_^ are you suggesting that an advanced civilization wouldn't find a way to develop explosives that would work in space? strange since i always thought the explosion had everything to do with the detonation of the warhead and subsequent violent expansion of energy as opposed to ignition of the surrounding atmosphere. funny thing is ccp can bs all they want as they haven't really said how big the missiles are, the exact specs and what kind of explosives are being used.
Tippia Caldari Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2008.11.30 11:03:00 - [23] Edited by: Tippia on 30/11/2008 11:03:27 Originally by: ShardowRhino i always thought the explosion had everything to do with the detonation of the warhead and subsequent violent expansion of energy as opposed to ignition of the surrounding atmosphere. Weeeell… the tricky thing about explosions is to transfer all the energy. That becomes a whole lot easier if you have a medium to help you. Then again, from an ≡v≡ pseudo-science perspective, I'd imagine that kinetic warheads are just good old fragmentation bombs (explosion just drives the submunition); EMs are collapsed-coil magfield generators (no medium required); thermals are just EM with another wavelength… which leaves the Minny-favoured explosive stuff, which, come to think of it, is appropriately backwards No sig for me, thankyouverymuch.
Yakia TovilToba Halliburton Inc.	Posted - 2008.11.30 14:54:00 - [24] Originally by: Terraform I find it funny how a lot of people are whining about explosion velocity. If it was "realistic" there wouldn't be any explosion at all, or atleast a far smaller one... well i guess CCP must be aiming for realism now ^_^ You are a moron.
Ripcha Headov Art of War Exalted.	Posted - 2008.11.30 15:20:00 - [25] no, no, and more NOOOO. missiles are fine as they are. imo ccp did a gerat job in the rebalancing of missiles with the speed nerf. Torps got enough of a beating anyway with their range nerf. now u want to make it so they only do max damage at the outer limit of their range? What you are suggesting really doesn't make any sense at all.
Lady Karma	Posted - 2008.11.30 15:40:00 - [26] Originally by: Yakia TovilToba You are a moron. What a good point, well argued. Don't you have your own missile whine thread you can post some more of your gems of wisdom in.
Yakia TovilToba Halliburton Inc.	Posted - 2008.12.01 11:59:00 - [27] Originally by: Lady Karma Originally by: Yakia TovilToba You are a moron. What a good point, well argued. Sometimes the truth is plain and simple and doesn't require detailed arguementation.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.12.01 12:00:00 - [28] Yeah, make missiles work like turrets and then listen how many caldari we got running about screaming "why don't my missiles hit every time?!" My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Bartholomeus Crane Gallente The Crane Family	Posted - 2008.12.01 12:11:00 - [29] No, next question ... -- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Schalac Caldari Apocalypse Reign	Posted - 2008.12.01 12:52:00 - [30] I think that missiles should do the full damage to any target they hit. To make this work though they would actually have to hit the targets and not just explode in the vicinity as they do now. Though smart bombs would have to be rebalanced to where at the range of the smart bombs pulse is where the missile explodes. Considering that say a 6km smart bomb emits from the ship using it in an outward fashion, if the missile was intercepted by the smart bomb at 3km away from the target in the smart bombs pulse the damage would be reduced accordingly. As for smaller ships that can't equip smart bombs big enough to handle a torp or cruise coming for them, flares and chaffs could also be added in conjunction with defender missiles. Defenders would work the same possibly given a boost to handle large groups of torps and cruise missile more effectively. The way flares could work is sort of like an ECM pulse shot that affects the targeting function of the inbound missiles and draws the missiles to them by replicating the signature of the ship they were fired from. These would be used same as defenders where they can only fire if the ship using them has an inbound salvo on them. Unlike defenders though these would be more effective against single missiles instead of groups as they are fired in rapid succession for up to a total of 8 flares at skill level 5. Chaffs on the other hand could be an AOE defensive system that does not need incoming missiles to be fired, at a slower rate than flares, that would affect all missiles within a certain radius to the ship that fired them, causing any incoming or outgoing missiles to lose target and act as friend or foe warheads. These would have a longer life span than flares and would be target able by the missiles that are affected by them. The skill for them would add duration and range of effect, for a max of 20 seconds at 25km. This would never be put into game though because it would involve completely changing the missile system, again, and considering that CCP only does that once every 2.5 years EVE would probably actually be dead before they even got around to looking at better missile defenses. Let alone rewriting the way missile collision is detected.

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.