These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

The Missile Problem

Author
Void Weaver
R-isk-Y
#1 - 2013-12-03 01:44:58 UTC
Hi there people,

A little Background:
There is a problem with missiles as a whole these days...in fact I can remember when I started playing this game almost 2 years ago there was a problem with missiles then... Caldari were never good ships for PVP except for a few that were usable. However it feels like these days that there is just too few options for Caldari missile users in PVP beyond frigates.

What I would like to discuss here are some of the core reasons why missiles are not competing overall with turrets. I know most of the points I will make have been discussed in other threads however i believe the real core issues keep getting diluted amongst the pile...

1. The Graph is way off
I believe the formula used to calculate missile damage is not producing the desired results. To me what this formula should do is limit the effectiveness of the missile in a situation which the missile should be at a disadvantage.

The Disadvantageous Situations
1. Engaging a ship in a smaller class
2. Engaging outside the defined effective range of the missile
3. Engaging a ship in the same class but with a low signature and high speed(i.e. afterburner without web)

So according to that:
Cruiser missiles should not apply as much effective damage to frigs as to cruisers...basic

Missiles could be given a value similar to falloff which could reduce damage if the missile goes beyond that point, giving more options to give missiles range without making them fire and forget win all style weapons.

The missile should apply reduced damage to any unwebbed afterburning ship in its class. So base damage more on speed when the signature is below a certain point.

But key, in all other situations missiles should apply near full or full damage to the target.

In all I believe the damage curve should be more of an "ease in out curve" based more on signature radius instead of what it currently is. I know this is general but with the right tweaks maybe this could provide a base to balance from.

2. More Choice Please
This is simple really, even with the new RHML I don't believe there is enough options for missile users. This can be seen by the amount of people complaining about the RLML launcher nerf... for the most part there is simply no other options and it has resulted in a lot of frustration from players who feel this.

I believe the Heavy missile class needs to be split into 2 and totally overhauled, A long range version and a Med range version each with corresponding damage multipliers/fitting. This could also go for Cruise missiles as well.

Conclusion
Ya i know another missile moaning thread... but I would like to know if others feel this is the direction CCP should take on this matter instead of all the minor duct tape and machete cuts Roll



Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2013-12-03 01:49:56 UTC
i think what would really help this, specifically for caldari ships, would be bonuses focused more on damage application instead of range. So, rather than having a really long range ship that doesnt apply well you could have a closer range ship with better application. Just my take.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3 - 2013-12-03 02:39:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
The problem with missiles... is that they keep f**king around with them. And by f**king, I mean nerf. And by around, I mean buffing every other weapons system.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#4 - 2013-12-03 03:07:11 UTC
i some how disagree.. missles seem to work for frigs and dessys(mostly) but yes other then those ships turrets seem to be better over all :|

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#5 - 2013-12-03 04:12:09 UTC
Seranova Farreach wrote:
i some how disagree.. missles seem to work for frigs and dessys(mostly) but yes other then those ships turrets seem to be better over all :|

Frigates and destroyers... that's it? So basically you mean rockets. That's 1/8 missile systems.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#6 - 2013-12-03 04:21:42 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
i some how disagree.. missles seem to work for frigs and dessys(mostly) but yes other then those ships turrets seem to be better over all :|

Frigates and destroyers... that's it? So basically you mean rockets. That's 1/8 missile systems.


And light missiles. Such a wealth of choices...
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#7 - 2013-12-03 04:33:03 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
And light missiles. Such a wealth of choices...

How many Hawks or Coraxs have you seen running light missile launchers? Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#8 - 2013-12-03 05:09:47 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
And light missiles. Such a wealth of choices...

How many Hawks or Coraxs have you seen running light missile launchers? Lol


I don't measure quality by use. That's CCP's schtick. Light missile launchers are quite good at their intended purpose.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#9 - 2013-12-03 05:19:10 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I don't measure quality by use. That's CCP's schtick. Light missile launchers are quite good at their intended purpose.

Yes, convincing players they should've trained into rockets intead. Twisted

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#10 - 2013-12-03 05:46:13 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I don't measure quality by use. That's CCP's schtick. Light missile launchers are quite good at their intended purpose.

Yes, convincing players they should've trained into rockets intead. Twisted


Please, keep muddying the waters by calling one of the few decent missile systems bad. It really helps the greater missile problem when you do that. It doesn't at all create the impression that missile users are ingrates that are never happy with anything. Not at all...
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2013-12-03 05:51:49 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
i some how disagree.. missles seem to work for frigs and dessys(mostly) but yes other then those ships turrets seem to be better over all :|

Frigates and destroyers... that's it? So basically you mean rockets. That's 1/8 missile systems.


Welcome to how it was being Gallente trained a few years back. Now you Caldari guys get to spend some time in the wilderness....good luck.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#12 - 2013-12-03 06:00:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Teckos Pech wrote:
Welcome to how it was being Gallente trained a few years back. Now you Caldari guys get to spend some time in the wilderness....good luck.

I've been playing EVE for less than a year as Caldari, so I'm still lost in the wilderness...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#13 - 2013-12-03 06:04:20 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
i some how disagree.. missles seem to work for frigs and dessys(mostly) but yes other then those ships turrets seem to be better over all :|

Frigates and destroyers... that's it? So basically you mean rockets. That's 1/8 missile systems.


Welcome to how it was being Gallente trained a few years back. Now you Caldari guys get to spend some time in the wilderness....good luck.


Is it so much to ask to have every faction be viable for the most part?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2013-12-03 06:20:36 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
i some how disagree.. missles seem to work for frigs and dessys(mostly) but yes other then those ships turrets seem to be better over all :|

Frigates and destroyers... that's it? So basically you mean rockets. That's 1/8 missile systems.


Welcome to how it was being Gallente trained a few years back. Now you Caldari guys get to spend some time in the wilderness....good luck.


Is it so much to ask to have every faction be viable for the most part?


Seen anyone flying a Deimos (aka Diemost) recently? That should answer your question.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Void Weaver
R-isk-Y
#15 - 2013-12-03 10:55:25 UTC
Rowells wrote:
i think what would really help this, specifically for caldari ships, would be bonuses focused more on damage application instead of range. So, rather than having a really long range ship that doesnt apply well you could have a closer range ship with better application. Just my take.


Yes I believe this would help a lot. The Caldari ships atm seem to have too much range and crap damage application. It was this engagement range that made the Drake overpowered in large fleets I believe. Still tho maybe the way in which the damage is calculated could do with an overhaul I think, just adding damage application bonuses could be more like a duct tape fix Ugh but it would help small gang and solo a lot.
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-12-03 11:41:08 UTC
I copied this from my post in the Rapid missile launcher thread, it might be more at home here.


Quote:
think CCP should start with the Basic problems, before patching the wounds of induvidual missile problem.

The Basic problem is that missiles are static.

Turrets and Drones can easier adapt to changes, through a great choice of amunition, modules, rigs and even modules that are not directly turret related. (more agilty will make it easier to get your tranversal right) and piloting.

Missiles lack these modules /ammo choices (they "have"selectical damage, though most ships have there bonus on a speciic damage type, so in quite some occasions that is a paper bonus)/ and they will not profit from any form of damage aplication through launcher related modules (I consider the Web and TP directly related to the launchers)

So with every ballance adjustment it's much harder to adapt to changes with launchers/missiles that is is with turrets based weapons, due to the lack of options.

this works both way's they have the tendency to become very fast either O.P. or useless.

My sugestion to the Ballance Crew would be the following:

for now, finish ballancing the ships.

Then start redesigning missiles as a whole, so users can adapt to changes in the future.

Untill then please return the old RLML or make it a system next to the currrent system.


damage projection ballancing/the lack of adaptablility and the insane SP cost compared to turrets and drones are at this moment the biggest problems for making missiles a useful system.

Radhe Amatin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2013-12-03 11:54:26 UTC
what missiles needs is higher velocity and less flight time..that will make the delay dmg application a bit more reasonable at long ranges.
HML needs their raw damage buffed...since they got nerfed to hell and other medium guns got a huge buff.
And ofcourse more hulls with damage application bonuses, all other empires have ships that have tracking bonuses except for caldari that gets none besides the navy ships.

And hawk as light missile platform is quite good in fleets....but for small gangs/solo better go rockets because light missiles implies kiting and hawk is not the fastest AF out there.And with rockets u can take advantage of that shield boost bonus.
jiujitsutou
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2013-12-03 11:57:54 UTC
Void Weaver wrote:
Rowells wrote:
i think what would really help this, specifically for caldari ships, would be bonuses focused more on damage application instead of range. So, rather than having a really long range ship that doesnt apply well you could have a closer range ship with better application. Just my take.


Yes I believe this would help a lot. The Caldari ships atm seem to have too much range and crap damage application. It was this engagement range that made the Drake overpowered in large fleets I believe. Still tho maybe the way in which the damage is calculated could do with an overhaul I think, just adding damage application bonuses could be more like a duct tape fix Ugh but it would help small gang and solo a lot.


First of all drakes were never overpowered. The HM Range was nerfed to bring tengus back into balance (a ship flying 1x00 m/s at friagte sig and shooting you from 100 + km is / was a littlebit to good) .
but back to the initial post: you claimed that missles were in an disadvantage compared to turrets vs ab cruiser / frigates if they are not receiving help in form of webbing support :

turrets are more likely to miss if the targets siganature is below the weapons resolution (eg 425 for large guns) , missles loose damage , same applies for speed (transversal) . So imo missles are just perfectly fine on that part , if you want to land full damage and your enemy is using fast/ lowsignature ships you will need webs and targetpainter no matter what weapon you fire (with the rule of thumb : the smaller the weapon the smaller the troubleof landing full damage).

I dont think missles need a falloff distance (and it would really make sense to be honest if your missle burned its fuel it canot go any further ( canot keep tracking its target for the physic nerds)
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#19 - 2013-12-03 12:52:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Gimme more Cynos
Personally, I think the missile dmg concept is fine, with just one exception:

Low-slot modules for missile-tracking plx.

Edit: not too much, balance with the ammount of damage mitigation speed-increasing low-slot modules provide.
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard
#20 - 2013-12-03 13:14:06 UTC
http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20

3 Tengu 5,256
7 Manticore 3,086
6 Prototype 'Arbalest' Torpedo Launcher 1,770

No skill?
123Next pageLast page