These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[December] Missile Disruptors and Tweaks to Missile Guidance Mods

First post First post
Author
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#521 - 2015-12-20 03:29:33 UTC
Uh...wait a minute. Pretty sure last I checked tracking disruption affects both falloff and optimal. That, and maybe I also missed where MD's affect RoF?

Now, you have me confused.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#522 - 2015-12-20 03:56:45 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Uh...wait a minute. Pretty sure last I checked tracking disruption affects both falloff and optimal. That, and maybe I also missed where MD's affect RoF?

Now, you have me confused.


Yeah..'that person's comment is a bit broken...
Vailen Sere
The Pannion Domin
#523 - 2015-12-21 21:59:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Vailen Sere
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:


Fury cruise missiles on a Raven, with all skills 5, has an explosion radius of 425.25.. Rage torps on a Raven, all skills 5, has an exp radius of 580.5.
The Raven itself has a sig radius of 410.
This means a fury cruise Raven needs 1 MGC with precision script to get full application, while a rage torp raven needs 3.. That's against a stationary target.

Fury and rage are your high damage bad application missiles that are meant to be fired at either capitals, or targets heavily webbed and painted.

Please at least understand what missiles you should be using for what target before you try and pull numbers out of the air.
For a better comparison, please use Navy missiles, since that's the PvP standard really. Or at least standard missiles.


No.. Citadel cruises and Citadel torps are meant for caps. They go on dreads.

You cant have High damage and poor application.

Your saying all other weapon systems require this, as well, which is not the case.

Also, the navy missiles should still have lower explosion velocity number closer to sig radius to apply damage. They are lower than T2 missiles, but not by enough. Explosion velicties don't match either.

You are stipulating that missiles are all meant to go "1 up" to apply full damage and every other weapon is at it's level class. So all missile ships are designed to kill ships in higher tiers (a missile frigate/destroyer is meant to kill a cruiser), which is not how it works.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#524 - 2015-12-21 22:13:31 UTC
More Paint guys. Always more paint.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#525 - 2015-12-31 13:30:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
When might we expect Faction and Officer missile guidance computers and missile guidance enhancers?

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

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#526 - 2016-01-06 14:33:24 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
When might we expect Faction and Officer missile guidance computers and missile guidance enhancers?

We're starting off by observing how the initial batch gets used. I expect that we'll add more variations at the same time as a balance pass in the future.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#527 - 2016-01-06 23:15:45 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
When might we expect Faction and Officer missile guidance computers and missile guidance enhancers?

We're starting off by observing how the initial batch gets used. I expect that we'll add more variations at the same time as a balance pass in the future.


That's good news. Thank you.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Wanda Fayne
#528 - 2016-01-06 23:58:18 UTC
Don't forget about the remote missile tracking modules too.

"your comments just confirms this whole idea is totally pathetic" -Lan Wang-

  • - "hub humping station gamey neutral logi warspam wankery" -Ralph King-Griffin-
klana depp
Tr0pa de elite.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#529 - 2016-01-07 13:34:38 UTC
kinda unrelated, but still throwing this idea out there..

can we get a buff to the "firewall" concept?

these disruption modules are probably maybe useful in small scale warfare, but not for 50v50 fights.

what about creating a ship (more like role) that can fit large smartbombs at reduced fitting/cap cost? much like logis can fit large reps, a t2 cruiser that can fit both 3-4 large smartbombs (and ~perma run them) as well as a decent local tank (like a huginn maybe?)..

bring a few of those to big fights and piloting skill becomes a whole new thing....
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#530 - 2016-01-07 19:13:39 UTC
klana depp wrote:
kinda unrelated, but still throwing this idea out there..

can we get a buff to the "firewall" concept?

these disruption modules are probably maybe useful in small scale warfare, but not for 50v50 fights.

what about creating a ship (more like role) that can fit large smartbombs at reduced fitting/cap cost? much like logis can fit large reps, a t2 cruiser that can fit both 3-4 large smartbombs (and ~perma run them) as well as a decent local tank (like a huginn maybe?)..

bring a few of those to big fights and piloting skill becomes a whole new thing....


Doesn't give a boost to piloting skill. Completely wrecks the use of missile boats and lets turret ships carry on without change.

If currently a fleet is anchored on one ship, logi 30km off of them, the direction of missile volley is known. To avoid your entire volley of missiles from being killed, you now have to spread out in a ball, probably 50 km across. Now you have increased the damage delay even further as some pilots have to shoot across an additional 50 km, which could be well over a 5 second increase in damage. This still doesn't work against a group of these ships spread into your fleet, where missiles from any direction will be killed.

The only new dynamic it introduces is that these ships are going to be primaried if there are any missile boats on grid or completely useless if turret ships are shooting you.

A better suggestion is to give missiles a resist bonus to all but one, weakest to its own damage type. So the smart bomber has to decide if he should go disco (all 4 damages) against an unknown fleet comp or carry all 4 damage and refit as you know what is being used.

Final issue is with pipebombs and smart bomb ratting. Battleships aren't stable with 8 bombs going off. If you can use a t2 ship for a lower price, capstable, and a decent tank, cruisers are going to replace battleships, again. For smart bomb ratting, the signature of your ship hurts, as battleship rats will hit a battleship harder than a cruiser. So would I choose a cruiser to smartbomb in if I get the same results? Yes.
Eris Tsasa
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#531 - 2016-01-07 21:39:13 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
When might we expect Faction and Officer missile guidance computers and missile guidance enhancers?

We're starting off by observing how the initial batch gets used. I expect that we'll add more variations at the same time as a balance pass in the future.


When will tracking disrupt drones apply to missiles, or drones for that effect?
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#532 - 2016-01-08 02:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Sobaan Tali
klana depp wrote:
kinda unrelated, but still throwing this idea out there..

can we get a buff to the "firewall" concept?

these disruption modules are probably maybe useful in small scale warfare, but not for 50v50 fights.

what about creating a ship (more like role) that can fit large smartbombs at reduced fitting/cap cost? much like logis can fit large reps, a t2 cruiser that can fit both 3-4 large smartbombs (and ~perma run them) as well as a decent local tank (like a huginn maybe?)..

bring a few of those to big fights and piloting skill becomes a whole new thing....


Don't know how much stock I should put in it, but I'm still really hoping for and holding out for CCP to turning Defenders into a much more reliable and proper AMS with a capacity to operate in fleets. Right now, it's a mortally wounded animal screaming for a merciful end, hoping someone will gut up and shoot it in the head to put it out of its misery.

I wouldn't mind seeing a more dedicated disco boat as well, though, not just for filling the role of fleet missile counter.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Eris Tsasa
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#533 - 2016-01-08 12:37:46 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
klana depp wrote:
kinda unrelated, but still throwing this idea out there..

can we get a buff to the "firewall" concept?

these disruption modules are probably maybe useful in small scale warfare, but not for 50v50 fights.

what about creating a ship (more like role) that can fit large smartbombs at reduced fitting/cap cost? much like logis can fit large reps, a t2 cruiser that can fit both 3-4 large smartbombs (and ~perma run them) as well as a decent local tank (like a huginn maybe?)..

bring a few of those to big fights and piloting skill becomes a whole new thing....


Don't know how much stock I should put in it, but I'm still really hoping for and holding out for CCP to turning Defenders into a much more reliable and proper AMS with a capacity to operate in fleets. Right now, it's a mortally wounded animal screaming for a merciful end, hoping someone will gut up and shoot it in the head to put it out of its misery.

I wouldn't mind seeing a more dedicated disco boat as well, though, not just for filling the role of fleet missile counter.


Didn't they recently give missiles more ehp, to make it a bit harder to blow them up in route to whatever is being shot at?
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#534 - 2016-01-08 14:14:11 UTC
To make it harder to firewall. All the more reason defenders either need to be replaced by something better, scrapped entirely, or given A LOT of attention, arguably more so than anything else related to missiles.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Steve Spooner
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#535 - 2016-01-09 09:29:48 UTC
Would the buffs to missile guidance computers make them better than target painters when scripted for explosive radius/velocity? As it stands a target painter helps apply damage far better than a MGC and if there isn't a noticeable difference than there is no reason to use a MGC over TP.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#536 - 2016-01-09 10:38:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Sobaan Tali
Steve Spooner wrote:
Would the buffs to missile guidance computers make them better than target painters when scripted for explosive radius/velocity? As it stands a target painter helps apply damage far better than a MGC and if there isn't a noticeable difference than there is no reason to use a MGC over TP.


I don't think it will help fits that are not already using them over a TP, as in I don't think it will make them anymore relevant than they already are, which isn't much outside of really niche to begin with. MGE's are still a big fat question mark, since BCU's are still ahead by a long shot unless you have more low slots than you know what to do with.

There's aren't any Caldari boats that I know has that, the Phoon and Navy Phoon are technically armor boats so you could run a gimped shield tank, and the Barghest ha 6 lows. Even then, DDA's would still likely be better for the Phoons or just sticking with an armo fit anyways and the Barghest could get more out of other mods, like overdrives or the such. Even the CNR, which has often a fifth low not filled with a BCU due to stacking, often stands to gain more from other mods much as the Barghest. Especially where MGE's are concerned, I feel like the buff CCP gave them since it's no more than the one the MGC's got is more like the 5% raw damage buff they gave Heavies last year...at best, it serves to acknowledge CCP agrees that a buff is need, though this may not be enough to fix them.

Hopefully, CCP will be able to continue to iterate on them once they hit missiles with an overhaul. As Fozzie stated earlier, their best shot right now is to see where they are at by observing player behavior and continue to tweak things as they go.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#537 - 2016-01-09 21:23:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Poranius Fisc
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
When might we expect Faction and Officer missile guidance computers and missile guidance enhancers?

We're starting off by observing how the initial batch gets used. I expect that we'll add more variations at the same time as a balance pass in the future.


So you ARE planning on an E-WAR mod Tiercide / balance eventually?

Hardest for last?
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#538 - 2016-01-12 14:59:08 UTC
klana depp wrote:
kinda unrelated, but still throwing this idea out there..

can we get a buff to the "firewall" concept?

these disruption modules are probably maybe useful in small scale warfare, but not for 50v50 fights.

what about creating a ship (more like role) that can fit large smartbombs at reduced fitting/cap cost? much like logis can fit large reps, a t2 cruiser that can fit both 3-4 large smartbombs (and ~perma run them) as well as a decent local tank (like a huginn maybe?)..

bring a few of those to big fights and piloting skill becomes a whole new thing....


As soon as we get a damage denial module to counter turrets in the same way.
klana depp
Tr0pa de elite.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#539 - 2016-01-12 21:36:53 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
klana depp wrote:
kinda unrelated, but still throwing this idea out there..

can we get a buff to the "firewall" concept?

these disruption modules are probably maybe useful in small scale warfare, but not for 50v50 fights.

what about creating a ship (more like role) that can fit large smartbombs at reduced fitting/cap cost? much like logis can fit large reps, a t2 cruiser that can fit both 3-4 large smartbombs (and ~perma run them) as well as a decent local tank (like a huginn maybe?)..

bring a few of those to big fights and piloting skill becomes a whole new thing....


As soon as we get a damage denial module to counter turrets in the same way.


sig tanking and actually moving around? i know its not a perfect counter, but neither is firewalling, even if you have good pilots
dont get me wrong im not saying it should be possible to easily kill 99% of the missiles.. thats not what i want either..

then again, yeah, maybe defender missiles could actually do this a lot better...
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#540 - 2016-01-13 00:23:01 UTC
[quote=klana depp
sig tanking and actually moving around? i know its not a perfect counter, but neither is firewalling, even if you have good pilots
dont get me wrong im not saying it should be possible to easily kill 99% of the missiles.. thats not what i want either..

then again, yeah, maybe defender missiles could actually do this a lot better...[/quote]
by sig tanking and moving you can easily dump 30% of the damage and if you have a missile disruptor fiited, they may get to do 25% of their damage to a moving ship.

To counter requires hurting dps or tank to do damage.

So, if you find a missile Pilot hitting you very well, he probably isn't doing as much damage as he could.. its a weird math problem between damage application vs damage #, and its further skewed between missile and turrets with turrets being able to crit and that not even making it on paper dps.