These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Making Missiles more Versatile.

Author
Sigras
Conglomo
#1 - 2015-09-07 19:35:21 UTC
1. Split Missiles into 2 Range Categories:

Short Range
Rockets
Heavy Assault Missiles
Torpedoes
Citadel Torpedoes

Long Range
Light Missiles
Heavy Missiles
Cruise Missiles
Citadel Cruise Missiles

(ok no change here but just for the sake of categorization)


2. Add a Number of "Launch Tubes" to each Missile Launcher Equal to the Number of Missiles it can Currently Hold

Rocket Launcher II - 50 Launch Tubes
Light Missile Launcher II - 53 Launch Tubes
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II - 20 Launch Tubes
... you get the idea

(again no change here but it's all in preparation)


3. Allow Launchers to fit Missiles of their Size or Smaller and use Launch Tubes to Determine Clip SIze
EG cruise launchers would be able to fit 27 of any long range missile except citadel cruise.

  • This will not provide any buff to light missiles/rockets, but that is the size at which they work best IMHO.
  • Rapid Heavy Launchers would still have their place, as they could still unload massive front loaded DPS onto smaller targets.
  • This change would give missiles the flexibility to engage a wide range of targets simply by switching ammo instead of having to dock.
  • Larger launchers wouldnt overshadow smaller ones as they typically have a slower ROF meaning less DPS when firing the same missiles.


Thoughts?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2 - 2015-09-07 19:45:57 UTC
Sigras wrote:
2. Add a Number of "Launch Tubes" to each Missile Launcher Equal to the Number of Missiles it can Currently Hold

Can we fire them all at once then? Twisted

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

unidenify
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2015-09-07 20:28:30 UTC
It was how it used to be long time ago. not sure why they change it.

but mmm to think Golem fire HAM/rocket against pest frigate
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#4 - 2015-09-07 21:24:44 UTC
I have wanted a Battlship sized weapons module that fires ROCKETS for so long... EVE needs a macross missle massacre docterine...

Think of the hilarious Instalock raven stuff you could do... Warp 200 ravens into the middle of their fleet, dump 10000 rockets and warp off...

If you made all those rockets launched count as "one attack" with a fancy graphical effect it wouldnt even be THAT taxing from a server load perspective...
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#5 - 2015-09-08 00:13:50 UTC
So I my torp raven can become anti-frig by merely swapping ammo?

Remember, whilst large launchers may have a lower rof, larger ships carry more hardpoints. And some ships have damage bonuses to all missiles.

Im gonna say no.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2015-09-08 09:32:18 UTC
Going to say no, because it gives missile boats a clear advandage over turrets.
Being able to use different size ammo versus whatever threat you're up against is op.

Turret boats are crippled with tracking speed, somehow missile boats should be too.
Sigras
Conglomo
#7 - 2015-09-08 09:33:51 UTC
unidenify wrote:
It was how it used to be long time ago. not sure why they change it.

but mmm to think Golem fire HAM/rocket against pest frigate

It didnt really used to be quite this way... The way it used to be was much harder to balance. They still used capacity, and didnt limit launchers to only fire smaller missiles.

This meant that if you could fit the missile in the bay you could shoot it which makes for very silly things such as a fleet of kestrals firing 5 volleys of torpedoes each! Or a raven unloading a never-ending magazine of light missiles. This was impossible to balance and was the reason for the change. My idea fixes that problem by limiting the magazine size, and limiting launchers to smaller missiles.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
So I my torp raven can become anti-frig by merely swapping ammo?

Remember, whilst large launchers may have a lower rof, larger ships carry more hardpoints. And some ships have damage bonuses to all missiles.

Im gonna say no.

If a frigate (knowing that this change is live) comes within the 14 km range of your raven's rockets, they deserve to get wasted.

Remember battleships move really really slowly.

Also I did the math and a full rack of rockets coming out at the speed a torpedo launcher can put them out at does less damage than a kestral... A raven has 1.5x the number of launchers, but only fires at 1/3 the speed.
Sigras
Conglomo
#8 - 2015-09-08 09:39:04 UTC
Celthric Kanerian wrote:
Going to say no, because it gives missile boats a clear advandage over turrets.
Being able to use different size ammo versus whatever threat you're up against is op.

Turret boats are crippled with tracking speed, somehow missile boats should be too.

By that logic missiles should be immune to firewalling and do instant damage because that gives turrets a clear advantage over missiles...

Please stop trying to make fundamentally different weapon systems the same... I swear, if you guys get your way the only difference between turrets and missiles will be how the effects look on screen.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#9 - 2015-09-08 10:10:12 UTC
now i like the idea behind this and so long as we are careful not to make the same mistake we did with drones (giving flat bonuses as opposed to bonuses to charge size)


i'm okay with this but RHMLneed to be excluded from this as it could cause balancing problems particularly since RHML fire faster and hold more than RLML

other than that so long as they do less dps than a properly bonused launcher it would not be broken.



it would mean a good number of ships would need to be balanced around this and that may prove to be to much work for what it is worth and i do kinda like the spot missiles are in now(being able to commit to hitting smaller hulls but not being able to switch on the fly)
Iain Cariaba
#10 - 2015-09-08 13:35:51 UTC
No. The current method makes sense. You cannot put a rocket from a Javelin system into the launcher for a Tomahawk and expect to fire it. It doesn't work that way.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#11 - 2015-09-08 14:08:00 UTC
FireFrenzy wrote:
I have wanted a Battlship sized weapons module that fires ROCKETS for so long... EVE needs a macross missle massacre docterine...

Think of the hilarious Instalock raven stuff you could do... Warp 200 ravens into the middle of their fleet, dump 10000 rockets and warp off...

If you made all those rockets launched count as "one attack" with a fancy graphical effect it wouldnt even be THAT taxing from a server load perspective...


I'd be more concerned about them fitting over-sized ammo into an under-sized launcher and then clicking "Fire All". Poof.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2015-09-08 15:31:18 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
No. The current method makes sense. You cannot put a rocket from a Javelin system into the launcher for a Tomahawk and expect to fire it. It doesn't work that way.


Some MLRS do now but that's hardly the norm.
Arla Sarain
#13 - 2015-09-08 19:43:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
It sounds like this is the intuitive design decision.
But in practice it gives an application advantage to missiles that the drones have.

IMO drones should have their application removed, not other weapon systems get it.

upshipping and downshipping seems to be one of the primary combat strategies in this game (even if it's not a great one) and this makes it irrelevant.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#14 - 2015-09-08 19:50:47 UTC
unidenify wrote:
It was how it used to be long time ago. not sure why they change it.

Two words: Torp Kestrel. Old launchers used to be able to fit any missile up to their capacity, OP's proposal limits missiles to launcher-size or smaller, so Torp Kestrels wouldn't be a thing.

Gonna have to go with "nope" here. I like the idea in principle, but it's too complicated and it definitely steps on the toes of existing rapid launchers.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs