Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I'm gonna reply to each point indiviually.. I'm in agreement with you in most of this, I just wanted to further push the point.

1) Personally, I think fof's need to be removed from the game entirely. However, if they remain, I think they need to be replaced with a turret type module, and moved into the ewar catagory.
these would, instead, become an applied to target ewar module that has a chance to essentially cause turrets and launchers to "misfire". Basically, there's a chance you could cause a launcher/turret to miss a cycle.
Now, this new type of ewar could be given to Minmatar as their ewar, while target painters can be moved into the catagory where webs, scrams, and warp disruptors fall.
You can have your specific ships that are bonused to target painters, such as the Golem, but ultimately they would become a fleet support item, as opposed to a race specific ewar.

2) If missile velocity was essentially doubled flight time halved, this would greatly increase missile use in pvp, and would also negate the purpose of this conversation being needed, which is TPs. If we could apply damage faster, we wouldn't be as worried about damage application.

3) With my suggestion of TPs being moved into the same category as webs, in order to make them competitive, they would need to be given a flat max range, with no chance of missing a cycle. If i take a laser pointer and aim it at something, it's not like it's just going to randomly shut off for a short duration. They should essentially act just like webs and scrams, but at greater range. 100km max range with no fall off. Anyone will argue that this is OP, but when you factor that 9/10 people would rather use webs and be in close range, due to higher potential dps and webs giving higher potential application over TPs, this means TPs will typically be used for long range engagements.
Now, you can give certain ships bonuses to TPs, much like webs. IE, they either get increased range, or increased effectiveness. With how TPs work, they would fall perfectly in line with webs and scrams because they are modules that increase fleet potential on target, where as other forms of ewar don't...

Yeah, that would be a t2, and then a specialty TP.

I honestly feel that the first of the two should be somewhere along the lines of what the current t2 should be.
there's currently no reason to get a t2 over a PWNAGE.
Increase the ranges to what he's suggesting in the first option, reduce fitting requirements compared what he's suggesting, leave cycle at 5 with slightly higher cap usage than PWNAGE, and it's balanced.

As far as the second of the two... That should be reserved for maybe a pirate faction TP?
Though, also with no as deep on the fitting requirements.

The increase would make them have to dedicate the ship due to it taking a slot from their range, a prop mod, or some other fit. Unless they used the Golem which any fit will include at least 1 Target painter. But the point then would be at least the Golem would be used. It is a 1B+ hull , the fact that they'd then be considering utilizing missile based ships in a major pvp platform would be amazing.




The proposed changes would make missiles viable in long range fights, and interesting options for close range brawls, and would help other fleets. Could you imagine a fleet has say 2 or 3 Golems and they flag ships as a primary with target painters? And with the missile speed changes they'd be able to hit near the end of their cycle time, making it possible to waste 1 volley instead of 2, and be able to be seen after the next cycle is done. It would make the ships with the bonuses already to be even more desired. It would make me seriously think between a Barghest and a Golem and it'd probably boil down to solo- I use Barghest, group I'd use Golem for the tp bonus.


I do seriously think that ships that have missiles but fewer actual launchers need to increased missile hp to compensate for increased risk of loosing a portion of their dps. That or give each missile based ship 4 launchers and somehow get them to the same effective equivalent, while reducing damage to missile based systems by half (to compensate for decreased incoming missiles) . This would allow Missile ships to have less high slots and less strain on servers (less math on the server for missile flights). I know personally a 10 second till hitting a target I can live with... 20 seconds in pvp seems like insanity that is a full 2 cycles unless things changed since I actually flown missiles (I don't anymore because I thought other platforms instant damage is very nice but the change would make me certainly change).


Another gripe/ unbalance about some of the missile ships- don't trap them into a single damage type that is SUPPOSED to be the advantage to compensate for non instant damage. They loose a lot of their dps by switching their damage type, as such they need to either get ROF bonus or a damage to all damage types. Could you imagine loosing up to 25% of your dps because you dealt Thermal damage instead of Kinetic? The disadvantage of missiles (non instant damage) needs to be offset by them being capable of equal dps in all damage types. They take longer to load, they take up the most space, they don't do instant damage. The ships that get a bonus to only 1 type of damage for missiles needs to be changed.

What about the Drake? It doesn't do its full dps doing thermal damage. Granted a Drakes dps is sad, but the point is their alleged benefit of damage type is backhanded in a lot of ships. The only time they are worth changing types is when the 25% bonus to their respective damage type is negated by resists, which would quite easily happen.

I think there are still issues with how long it can take cruise missiles to reach their target when used for long range sniping, but the cruise missiles themselves are great at shorter ranges, too. The single damage type bonus is an extra strong bonus so that it puts the net DPS more similar to a normal weapon system, you know, those things that don't have selectable damage.

A ship shouldn't need a friend in a Vigil to do normal damage to appropriately-sized targets.

The Golem gets a decent bonus to TPs, your problem here with damage application isn't because of explosion radius, its the explosion velocity that is making you lose damage. I do agree that TPs might need some work, and missiles definitely need some work, but knowing how the missile damage formula functions can at least mitigate some issues until such a time comes.

If you hit an angel BS with two tps and fire fury cruise at it while its moving at 200 m/s+ you will lose a lot of damage. Stacking every explosion radius bonus you can onto the ship will not help that. Explosion velocity on cruise missiles is terrible, especially on Furies. If the enemy is moving 50% faster than your explosion velocity you need your sig radius to be 50% smaller than the targets. It sounds easy, but when you're firing cruise missiles with a base sig of 567, that's not easy to do, and Angels can go almost 300 m/s in some cases, and strip 25% of your dps at random intervals with defenders.

Just as an example, if you fired missiles with a sig of 400 and a exp velocity of 100 (Not that much different from max skilled Furies on a Golem) and your target was moving at 250m/s (Easy for Angels) you'd need to make their sig 1000m to still fully apply damage.

This is part of the reason I still use Torps on my Golem, because a single republic painter nets a 50% bonus without even having full TP skills or marauder V, sig radius is great on cruise, but torps have a better base explosion velocity over everything except precision. If you can't get TPs to hit then use rigor rigs instead, or use a Navy Issue Raven.

There are solutions to application issues, just gotta look at everything at your disposal.

I agree with all the aspects, except that my TP really misses some cycles! I can see it missing! I swear! :P

Adressing what am I doing, doesn't improve the situation.

You wouldn't put target painter rigs on a pve missle bs hull, because when you're bored with the setup, you may want to just replace cruise missile launchers with torpedo launchers or HAMLs. Flight time, velocity and (explosion velocity rig or explosion radius rig) is mandatory for everyday fit-changes.

Yet, "huge problem" I describe is about missiles, and yes, their problem is huge.

There is an easy fix though: Increasing max cruise missile flight speed to much more than current and greatly slowing down acceleration, while increasing explosion velocity and decreasing explosion radius proportionally as missiles go faster and farther. This way, at max range, target you hit would receive more damage than same target you hit close. This will ensure that outside of TP ranges, cruise missiles will start to compansate.

Tradeoff is travel time at extreme ranges, but hey, if your target is smart enough they'll just warp off if possible!
If it is pve environment, then tp problem solved with fixing missiles already ^.^

Edit: Oh and I mistakenly quoted Joe's reply instead of original post. Sorry m8. Too exhausted after work >.<

Yes, TPs do increase damage for everyone.... So do webs and at a greater extent...
Most fleets prefer close range combat, for the use of webs and scrams.
This is within 50km... Rarely are entire fleets built around long range dps, unless they're trying to alpha snip.
Sure, a TP would help them, but odds are they've brought so much damage, the target ship likely won't last more than one volley, even without TPs.




Precision missiles don't reach nearly as far as fury, so you're limited to fury in long range engagements.
As i mentioned, it takes at least two TPs for fury to do more damage against BS's at all ranges, even with the BS sitting still.
For years players have been coming on missile threads saying that they have the same applied damage at all ranges. Now that TP threads are coming out, players are saying, why should missiles have the same applied damage at all ranges?
Seems like these particular ppl just don't want missiles in pvp combat....



Agreed.