These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Are missiles getting nerfed again?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cryissa
Caldari Navy Operations
#41 - 2012-04-19 08:44:29 UTC
If missiles were that good that they needed a nerf wouldn't they be used more in PvP situations?

As it stands I get attacked with guns more than missiles.
TotalRapeage
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2012-04-19 12:43:59 UTC
Exploited Engineer wrote:
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Missiles always hit as long as the ship isn't faster than the missiles,


Mr. Defender Missile likes to disagree.

Also, hitting for next to no damage is, for all practical purposes, identical to missing.




Ya, and I bet you always fly with defenders loaded...
Zills
State War Academy
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-04-19 12:50:34 UTC
Meditril wrote:
Why should missiles get nerved? Have I missed something?


So they can feel pain as they explode upon their targets. Serves them right for being used to blow **** up.
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2012-04-19 12:53:26 UTC
Yes, Nova Missiles are being renamed to Hello Kitty Missiles.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#45 - 2012-04-19 13:02:59 UTC
Cryissa wrote:
If missiles were that good that they needed a nerf wouldn't they be used more in PvP situations?

As it stands I get attacked with guns more than missiles.



CFC's Drake blob would like a word with you.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Cryissa
Caldari Navy Operations
#46 - 2012-04-19 13:39:11 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Cryissa wrote:
If missiles were that good that they needed a nerf wouldn't they be used more in PvP situations?

As it stands I get attacked with guns more than missiles.



CFC's Drake blob would like a word with you.



As I said from my point of view.... I get hit with guns more than missiles.

Also I read lots where people say guns over missiles in pvp due to flight time vs hit time.
Luba Cibre
Global Song Setup
#47 - 2012-04-19 13:40:05 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Cryissa wrote:
If missiles were that good that they needed a nerf wouldn't they be used more in PvP situations?

As it stands I get attacked with guns more than missiles.



CFC's Drake blob would like a word with you.

The Drake Blob is only our support fleet, because 6 full fleets of maelstroms is just stupid.

"Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise." 
sidicious reign
State War Academy
Caldari State
#48 - 2012-04-19 14:25:38 UTC
So caldari ships finally become the top dog for something and people cry for pretty much all good caldari missile ships to be nerfed.Seems a bit of a copout to me
Niko Takahashi
Yoshitomi Group
#49 - 2012-04-19 14:51:51 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Celtix Rhineheart wrote:
i hope they arent getting nerfed i just started this game and going down the missile path......

Missiles always hit as long as the ship isn't faster than the missiles, no falloff, no tracking, no capacitor usage, and you can pick your damage type. The raven even has a damage bonus that applies to all missile damage types. Missiles are easy.


You fail even in basic understanding of how they work sorry.

All those nice numbers in EFT usually do not show that on basically any moving target you are doing light hits or barely scratch hits.

Also just to get to those hits the raven needs to have a painter and all rig slots dedicated to applying that damage.
WTB a tracking computer and tracking enhancers for missiles. Oh wait ....

I am not even going to open the can of works with the delayed damage.

If anything the missiles need a slight adjustment to the explosion velocities and explosion radius plus the aforementioned modules to compensate.
Boomhaur
#50 - 2012-04-20 01:03:16 UTC
Vito Antonio wrote:
NATO is building more and more anti missile bases all over the world so yes, missiles are getting nerfed.


Don't worry those defender missiles suck, it's not a nerf at all. Just use torpedos if you have to it takes 2 defender missiles to take down and trust me it never happens like that.

Welcome to Eve. Everyone here is an Evil Sick Sadistic Bastard who is out to get you. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either trying to scam you or use you.
Jesus Rambo
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-04-20 01:16:51 UTC
Dato Koppla wrote:
I think one of the big problems with missile boats is the stupidly long range that's useless in almost every situation in EvE (PvE or PvP)


I... you.. what?

3/10, too obvious.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#52 - 2012-04-20 06:16:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Luba Cibre wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Cryissa wrote:
If missiles were that good that they needed a nerf wouldn't they be used more in PvP situations?

As it stands I get attacked with guns more than missiles.

CFC's Drake blob would like a word with you.

The Drake Blob is only our support fleet, because 6 full fleets of maelstroms is just stupid.

Well, in that Tenal party there were uh 6 drakefleets, at least 4 full, that I remember. But we also send our drakes without any maels (and maels without drakes) so it isn't so rigid like that.

Though I think the DPS wasn't the biggest/best part of the drake that made it get chosen for the doctrine.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Capt Retard
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2012-04-20 09:11:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Capt Retard
So how about missile falloff

Missiles are a mix of fuel and explosives - say 25% solid fuel = therm, range is still the same, but the 'payload'
value is 75% overall. Missiles lose that 25% over their flight distance -s they do more damage the closer they are

T2 variants have a better payload ratio + usual diffs, Faction the same but just payload
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#54 - 2012-04-20 12:43:25 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Cryissa wrote:
If missiles were that good that they needed a nerf wouldn't they be used more in PvP situations?

As it stands I get attacked with guns more than missiles.



CFC's Drake blob would like a word with you.


And new Drake with +rof and missile speed will just make it even better at pvp with just 10 to 20% less shields witch brings it around 65/75K with max dps setup. Difference being that a new drake will see it's dps go over the roof compared with current version.
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#55 - 2012-04-20 12:44:23 UTC
Quote:
Missiles lose that 25% over their flight distance -s they do more damage the closer they are

1. You're implying missiles need a nerf, which they don't. Quite the opposite in some cases.
2. Is that "falloff" in addition to their optimal? In which case it's pretty pointless. If not: nice job breaking all long range missiles there.
Riven Aleem
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#56 - 2012-04-20 12:46:51 UTC
Capt ****** wrote:
So how about missile falloff

Missiles are a mix of fuel and explosives - say 25% solid fuel = therm, range is still the same, but the 'payload'
value is 75% overall. Missiles lose that 25% over their flight distance -s they do more damage the closer they are

T2 variants have a better payload ratio + usual diffs, Faction the same but just payload


Careful about trying to inject logic into a discussion like this.

All that fuel is converted into Kinetic damage (constant acceleration). Kinetic Missiles should do MORE damage the farther away a target is, as they have accelerated for longer.

For all other missile types, the thermal damage is converted to kinetic over the flight time (not 100% converted, but you get the point)
Richard Stallmanu Stallmania
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#57 - 2012-04-20 15:24:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Stallmanu Stallmania
If CCP nerfs missiles im Un-subbing.

With my horrid gunnery skills, lack of Minmatar training, and t1 drones, my rupture pushes similar DPS to my HML 100mn tengu.
So what do I get for training caldari/tengu/hml? I get to dictate range, a COUNTER to guns.

We don't need to worry about tracking, but an afterburning frig that has a small sig can effectuvely pin us down while turreted ships get close and melt us with their far superior damage output.


It seems to me that most of the people crying for nerfs here are the kind who press approach + F1 and pray for a kill, otherwise they would understand that every ship + weapon systems has advantages + disadvantages, which when choosing a target you must consider.

If you are getting kited by fast missile boats, I only ask you one thing, where was your Huginn/Rapier pilot?

Also, making tracking disruptors affect missile damage is stupid, they are a counter designed for turrets, in the same manner that defenders/speedtank counters missiles. The solution isn't to nerf missiles, but buff the counter to them, so smart pilots who fit to counter a certain style of piloting get kills, not those who hit approach+f1 regardless of the enemies ship/fit. Plus, the curse/pilgrim will be so OP. Like uber OP.
Thomas Kreshant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2012-04-20 23:23:31 UTC
It will be interesting to see how tracking disruptors work on missiles and as they're fixing defenders as well how those effect missile use in pvp.
Shea Valerien
House of Valerien
#59 - 2012-04-21 00:34:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Shea Valerien
Missiles definitely don't need nerfing.
Sunviking
Doomheim
#60 - 2012-04-21 11:06:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Sunviking
Missiles are not getting nerfed.

They will be rebalanced alongside the ship rebalancing, which invariably means they will be buffed. But any buff will probably concentrate around Battleship-class missiles (Cruises and Torps), as these are arguably the most broken. Heavies and HAMs are least likely to get buffed, they are good already.

There are a couple of threads out there now about Missiles and their problems, mainly the Battleship-class missiles.

I started a thread here. Feel free to post to it. Smile

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1160901#post1160901