These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Idea for a new catagory of Missile's
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Scorpionstrike
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-01-23 05:26:02 UTC
I think you could attach the technology of the Micro jump drive to the missile / missile launcher itself. This would create a missile that would have a short spool up time but the damage would be instant after the spool up time is completed.

* Lesser damage, but suitable for pvp
* Intended for pvp
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#2 - 2015-01-23 09:15:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
... That or just speed up the long range missiles a bit. You know, editing the missile variables rather than coding a whole new one.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#3 - 2015-01-23 11:21:53 UTC
delayed damage is not the problem with missiles in pvp


not all weapon systems need to be the same

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#4 - 2015-01-23 11:40:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
Quote:
delayed damage is not the problem with missiles in pvp

At fleet level it is. It's not the problem, but it certainly is one.

Quote:
not all weapon systems need to be the same

Nobody is saying they should be, here. Perhaps you're confusing "all the same" with "all viable", that's a common mistake.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2015-01-23 12:10:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Howabout a heavy missile that deals 75% EM, 17% explosive, and 8% kinetic damage and teleports to the target, but it has a chance of missing if either the target is in the outer end of its range or the target has a high angular velocity.

It's like 650mm artillery except Drakes get a 4.167% bonus to the damage at max skill.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Tabris Katz
The Forgotten Children
#6 - 2015-01-23 12:47:35 UTC
So let me get this straight, you want to make a missile variant that:


  • does less damage
  • has a longer cycle time (so less time between shots)
  • has no flight time
  • and always hits it's target (because it's a missile)


I'm going to have to say no to this.
Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#7 - 2015-01-23 13:19:14 UTC
i feel ideas like this one are important to the forums as it sets a standard by which people can decide if their own ideas are worth posting

So an idea should be posted if;
it's equal or better in quality to this one if it's written as well as this one is.
the way it's presented is better than this one but the idea itself is worse than this one
the person has also bothered to put no effort at all into finding ideas that are exactly the same
Mornak
Exotic Dancers Union
#8 - 2015-01-23 14:06:06 UTC
Scorpionstrike wrote:
I think you could attach the technology of the Micro jump drive to the missile / missile launcher itself. This would create a missile that would have a short spool up time but the damage would be instant after the spool up time is completed.

if you want your missiles to behave more like turrets... fit turrets. No need to change the game if a change of tactics fixes your problem.

Scorpionstrike wrote:
* Lesser damage, but suitable for pvp
* Intended for pvp


well, most missiles are suitable for pvp as they are now. they're not the best choice for every situation... but that's a good thing! choices should matter.


PS: and when it comes to the technology... MJD's are available for BC's and larger. so fitting them on a missile should work but we're unable to fit them on a frig?
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#9 - 2015-01-23 14:22:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
Quote:
most missiles are suitable for pvp as they are now


Hmm, let's break it down:
Rockets - fine.
Lights - fine, though some argue "op". Neutral on it myself.

Heavies - laughable pile of ****.
HAMs - fine
Rapid lights - fine, in my opinion, but the burst damage mechanic does have its detractors.

Torpedoes - Very situational, so not exactly ideal
Cruises - Not bad on paper but flight time REALLY hurts them and defeats the point of them being long ranged.
Rapid heavies - Very situational, so not exactly ideal

So yeah I agree, most of them are perfectly viable, but you notice an interesting thing happen once you get to BS sized ones. As this thread is related to flight time Issues, let's stick to cruises, which are the ones crippled by it.

So we have a battleship sized missile, and its intended role is pretty clear: long range damage dealing.
It has the damage part down certainly and is in a good place there, but at the ranges it's intended for flight time issues rear their ugly head in a way you don't get so much with the other missiles.

Compounding this is what it competes with in the long range damage dealing department: turrets. And turrets are flat out better at it.

So, either cruise missiles need their role changed, or they need to be fixed to be competitive at the role they're intended for. And the best way to do that would be a dramatic speed increase.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#10 - 2015-01-23 14:54:26 UTC
Can we make a missile that improves the target's knowledge of when to use apostrophes? Roll

Back on topic...no. You'd basically give launchers the ability to function like artillery. If you want to use artillery...use artillery.

I sympathize with wanting to make long flight times (for cruise missiles especially) more manageable, but I don't think this is the way to do it.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#11 - 2015-01-23 14:59:15 UTC
Quote:
I sympathize with wanting to make long flight times (for cruise missiles especially) more manageable, but I don't think this is the way to do it.


Especially when there are so many possible solutions that don't involve coding a new and (probably VERY laggy) new addition to the game.
Mornak
Exotic Dancers Union
#12 - 2015-01-23 15:34:51 UTC
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:
Quote:
most missiles are suitable for pvp as they are now


Hmm, let's break it down:
Rockets - fine.
Lights - fine, though some argue "op". Neutral on it myself.

Heavies - laughable pile of ****.
HAMs - fine
Rapid lights - fine, in my opinion, but the burst damage mechanic does have its detractors.

Torpedoes - Very situational, so not exactly ideal
Cruises - Not bad on paper but flight time REALLY hurts them and defeats the point of them being long ranged.
Rapid heavies - Very situational, so not exactly ideal

So yeah I agree, most of them are perfectly viable, but you notice an interesting thing happen once you get to BS sized ones. As this thread is related to flight time Issues, let's stick to cruises, which are the ones crippled by it.

So we have a battleship sized missile, and its intended role is pretty clear: long range damage dealing.
It has the damage part down certainly and is in a good place there, but at the ranges it's intended for flight time issues rear their ugly head in a way you don't get so much with the other missiles.

Compounding this is what it competes with in the long range damage dealing department: turrets. And turrets are flat out better at it.

So, either cruise missiles need their role changed, or they need to be fixed to be competitive at the role they're intended for. And the best way to do that would be a dramatic speed increase.


i agree that cruise/HM's are not a good choice in most pvp scenarios. flight time is just one aspect of that problem though. when it comes to HM's, damage application is the real problem (i have not enough experience with cruise missiles to say anything about them).
but afaik both missile-systems are widely used in PVE. So they definitely have their place in the EVE-universe. maybe not in mid/small-scale pvp.
but every char can train for every weaponsystem. make use of that. HM's/cruise missiles suck at long-range-pvp, why dont you train for rails/beams/arties?
prior to the big HM/HAM changes, noone would fit HAM's, because they only did marginally more DPS than HM's at a fraction of the range. then HAM's were given a good punsh at close range. and now HM's are rarely used in pvp....

i dont want to de-rail this thread, but flight-time is one of the downsides of missiles, you cant fly "under the missiles" of your enemy. that's one of the up-sides of missiles. both are not true for any turrets. i did not mean to say that missiles are in no need to get a bit rebalanced... but please, for the love of Cthulhu, don't make all weapon-system similar.

missiles are very different from turrets, and that's great. keep them different, give us a meaningful choice!

As long as there's ANY weapon-system that can do the job you want it to. just switch to that weapon system.
Scorpionstrike
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-01-25 05:49:56 UTC
Tabris Katz wrote:
So let me get this straight, you want to make a missile variant that:


  • does less damage
  • has a longer cycle time (so less time between shots)
  • has no flight time
  • and always hits it's target (because it's a missile)


I'm going to have to say no to this.


In response, no the missile shots and time between missile shots, would be very quick because there is no flight time, the spool up would be from the module itself just like the MJD but the cycle would be similar to something like an armor rep, but to balance that you need a small spool up time and a lesser damage, remembering that your target is getting hit from the full volley instantly. missiles don't track already so that would not be anything new.
Scorpionstrike
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2015-01-25 06:07:42 UTC
[/quote]
well, most missiles are suitable for pvp as they are now. they're not the best choice for every situation... but that's a good thing! choices should matter.


An instant hitting missile with slightly lesser damage is a choice over missiles that have a flight time that do more damage.
CW Itovuo
The Executioners
Capital Punishment.
#15 - 2015-01-25 06:25:50 UTC
Regular missiles are contentious enough as is.



I fail to see how adding additional sizes/attributes/gimmickry will add to the overall balance of power.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2015-01-25 10:10:24 UTC
I'd support a similar thing if missiles weren't such long ranged weapons already. Having the missle mjd out to a point and then home in on a target normally would be cool, but considering how long ranged missiles are already its fairly pointless.

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!