These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

With missiles getting so much attention lately...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ocih
Space Mermaids
#41 - 2012-05-28 09:34:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Ocih
Tor Gungnir wrote:
Ocih wrote:


Missiles were nerfed out of EVE years ago. They don't even make good PvE weapons.


Totally. That's why nine out of ten Battlecruisers are Drakes. Because Missiles are useless for PvE.


The 5, T2 light Drones do more damage than the missiles. People use the Drake for it's passive tank. You, me and everyone else knows it. Feel free to pretend otherwise though.

And your 9 out of 10 stat is a bit dramatic. I see way more CS than drakes.
Leisen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#42 - 2012-05-28 09:53:28 UTC
Tor Gungnir wrote:
You're all forgetting that Missiles don't miss.

Travel time is the price you pay for that luxury.


Firstly, 9 out of 10 BCs are Drakes? I find that hard to believe, since half of the BCs I see are Hurricanes, if not more.

Secondly, I really can't understand how people claim missiles don't miss. There are ships that can simply outrun them, which is completely unnecessary seeing as how if you have any velocity worth mentioning, you have nothing to worry about, the missile won't hit for ****. Oh and not just transversal, but velocity as a whole. You can be flying straight into us and our volley heading your direction, and come out without a scratch.

Thirdly, let's talk about the damage, even assuming missiles ever, in a pvp situation, hit for 100% damage, or even near it. They do less dps than turrets, and have no chance for wrecking shots (why?). Missiles are most certainly 'balanced' without them taking the entire length of the engagement for the first volley to find its target.

Seems to me like we're paying a lot more than delayed dps for this amazing luxury of 'never missing'.
Tor Gungnir
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-05-28 09:57:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tor Gungnir
Ocih wrote:
Tor Gungnir wrote:
Ocih wrote:


Missiles were nerfed out of EVE years ago. They don't even make good PvE weapons.


Totally. That's why nine out of ten Battlecruisers are Drakes. Because Missiles are useless for PvE.


The 5, T2 light Drones do more damage than the missiles. People use the Drake for it's passive tank. You, me and everyone else knows it. Feel free to pretend otherwise though.

And your 9 out of 10 stat is a bit dramatic. I see way more CS than drakes.


Where-ever did I mention that people only use it for the missiles? The tank+easy-to-use missiles is why it is a winning combination.

Hell, my mates don't even use an Afterburner because there is no need when you can just turtle up with Inv. Fields and kill everything in the mission pocket with your ridiculous-range-missiles-that-never-miss whilst tanking everything like a boss. Could almost do it afk. Almost.

Try doing that in an AC Hurricane. Or even an Art Hurricane.

And yes, of course the 9 out of 10 statistic is something I made up to draw attention to how overused this ship is, and how underused a lot of Battlecruisers are. When was the last time you saw a Cyclone?

Don't embarrass yourself by pointing it out. Also, PvP? Since when were we talking about PvP? The Drake is borderline useless in PvP, it is in PvE it is a monster. In PvE your Missiles never miss and unless you're being stupid and not training your supporting Missile skills, even PvE Frigates are gonna taste the pain from your Heavy Missiles.

Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you.
Degren
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2012-05-28 10:08:41 UTC

Quote:
Actually it would be nice if missiles could miss. If they miss they should detonate close to the target with reduced damage. CCP could even boost the damage (a bit) to compensate. And ships (only frigs?) need decoy flares.


1) Thats what sig radius and movement speed damage reduction essentially are.

2) Also, defender missiles.

Quote:
everyone else saying missiles suck


They are ******* pretty, now. Also, they don't miss. Also, if you're worried about timing, use HAM/Torps/Rockets and get up close to melt faces.

At range...they suck solo, sure. Stop playing solo.

Hello, hello again.
Tifin'a Ach'ing
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2012-05-28 10:30:31 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
:insert techno babble to make sense of a particular game balance mechanic here:
Savage Angel wrote:

It is much easier to hit something traveling at near the same speed. If missiles went 100x as fast as a ship, they could never correct in time to follow any changes in the ship's speed or heading.


Not quite.

Lets say a BS is at 100km, traveling 120ms.
If a missile is traveling 100x faster than a whole battleship for a fair slow mark. the missile is going 12km/s.
8.3 seconds to reach its target who can at best deviate 1 km at best.

Many current day anti-air missiles can already travel 1.2km/s and connect with a target 7km away at mach 2 or pulling a 88 m/s² accelerated turn. A shorter flight in scale to greater possible deviated target distance of 4km.


Current missiles do use some aerodynamic effects to steer with in addition to thrust vectoring. This lets them turn much faster than a real space missile (which wouldn't look like a proper missile anyway).

Space missiles have to provide all their turning force via thrusters on the sides/thrust vectoring.

That said, EvE's a submarine game, so Modern Torpedoes are really the better comparison.


But yeah, the relative speeds don't much matter, it's the relative acceleration capabilities (in submarine terms, turning radius + acceleration) that matter, and so long as the missile can accelerate faster, has a top speed (EvE has atmosphere) faster than the target, and endurance to let it catch a distant target, it'll hit.
The stories of the SR-71's patented evasive maneuver "Punch-It" are spectacular.



Not sure of all the techno babble, but can always +1 a post with an SR-71 reference. Projecting air power since the 50's

Tif
Degren
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-05-28 10:42:58 UTC
Tifin'a Ach'ing wrote:
Not sure of all the techno babble, but can always +1 a post with an SR-71 reference. Projecting air power since the 50's

Tif


Til the 90s

The U2, which it was meant to replace, is still flying. Wink wink, nudge nudge.

Hello, hello again.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#47 - 2012-05-28 10:48:24 UTC
Degren wrote:
Tifin'a Ach'ing wrote:
Not sure of all the techno babble, but can always +1 a post with an SR-71 reference. Projecting air power since the 50's

Tif


Til the 90s

The U2, which it was meant to replace, is still flying. Wink wink, nudge nudge.


The real spectacle of longevity is the B-52. The last airframe was built in the 60s and the Air Force has no intention to replace it until at least 2040. Individual planes will have seen 80 years of service.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Snow Burst
Caldari State
#48 - 2012-05-28 10:50:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Burst
RubyPorto wrote:
Degren wrote:
Tifin'a Ach'ing wrote:
Not sure of all the techno babble, but can always +1 a post with an SR-71 reference. Projecting air power since the 50's

Tif


Til the 90s

The U2, which it was meant to replace, is still flying. Wink wink, nudge nudge.


The real spectacle of longevity is the B-52. The last airframe was built in the 60s and the Air Force has no intention to replace it until at least 2040. Individual planes will have seen 80 years of service.

missles dont miss.... their long range.... do decent damage... with a decent tank their great pve tools and the b-52 is good cuz its basic for what it does and it gets the guys home lol and has about a trillion upgrades since the 60's

There Is A 90% Chance All Of What You Just Read Is Wrong, Inaccurate Or Just Me Being Controversial In Some Way. Or By Some Chance It's Completely Right In Every Way... At Least To Me :3
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#49 - 2012-05-28 11:09:02 UTC
Snow Burst wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Degren wrote:
Tifin'a Ach'ing wrote:
Not sure of all the techno babble, but can always +1 a post with an SR-71 reference. Projecting air power since the 50's

Tif


Til the 90s

The U2, which it was meant to replace, is still flying. Wink wink, nudge nudge.


The real spectacle of longevity is the B-52. The last airframe was built in the 60s and the Air Force has no intention to replace it until at least 2040. Individual planes will have seen 80 years of service.

missles dont miss.... their long range.... do decent damage... with a decent tank their great pve tools and the b-52 is good cuz its basic for what it does and it gets the guys home lol and has about a trillion upgrades since the 60's


The pain... in my... head... from reading.... that... is... Shatnerian... in intensity...

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Snow Burst
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-05-28 13:24:36 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Snow Burst wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Degren wrote:
Tifin'a Ach'ing wrote:
Not sure of all the techno babble, but can always +1 a post with an SR-71 reference. Projecting air power since the 50's

Tif


Til the 90s

The U2, which it was meant to replace, is still flying. Wink wink, nudge nudge.


The real spectacle of longevity is the B-52. The last airframe was built in the 60s and the Air Force has no intention to replace it until at least 2040. Individual planes will have seen 80 years of service.

missles dont miss.... their long range.... do decent damage... with a decent tank their great pve tools and the b-52 is good cuz its basic for what it does and it gets the guys home lol and has about a trillion upgrades since the 60's


The pain... in my... head... from reading.... that... is... Shatnerian... in intensity...

then you should thank god the worlds full of lies cuz thts true :p

There Is A 90% Chance All Of What You Just Read Is Wrong, Inaccurate Or Just Me Being Controversial In Some Way. Or By Some Chance It's Completely Right In Every Way... At Least To Me :3
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#51 - 2012-05-28 13:51:49 UTC
Snow Burst wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:


The pain... in my... head... from reading.... that... is... Shatnerian... in intensity...

then you should thank god the worlds full of lies cuz thts true :p


Has you ever been so far so fast as to decided to want to do look more like as?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Snow Burst
Caldari State
#52 - 2012-05-28 14:05:51 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Snow Burst wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:


The pain... in my... head... from reading.... that... is... Shatnerian... in intensity...

then you should thank god the worlds full of lies cuz thts true :p


Has you ever been so far so fast as to decided to want to do look more like as?

SPREKEN DE ENGLISCHE!!! jees

There Is A 90% Chance All Of What You Just Read Is Wrong, Inaccurate Or Just Me Being Controversial In Some Way. Or By Some Chance It's Completely Right In Every Way... At Least To Me :3
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#53 - 2012-05-28 14:27:10 UTC
Travel time seems one way in which CCP has differntiated missles from other weapon systems. There are 4 such systems and they need to differ from one another in significant ways to present a choice/dilema to the potential pilot about what training direction to take. The 4 systems also need to be similar enough that one choice doesn't have a clear cut advantage...this is where all the arguing about the pros and cons comes from.
Meolyne
Perkone
Caldari State
#54 - 2012-05-29 03:20:58 UTC
too bad they removed the AOE effect of torpedoes.

Dumb, slow, short range, but realistic on one point at least :)

and for ppl playing in drakes, i advise them to move on navy raven... active tank, but... kill before being killed ;)
Suzu Fujibayashi
Happy Dudes
#55 - 2012-05-29 08:08:12 UTC
Degren wrote:

Quote:
Actually it would be nice if missiles could miss. If they miss they should detonate close to the target with reduced damage. CCP could even boost the damage (a bit) to compensate. And ships (only frigs?) need decoy flares.


1) Thats what sig radius and movement speed damage reduction essentially are.

2) Also, defender missiles.


True, missing missiles can be eye candy, though.
Snow Burst
Caldari State
#56 - 2012-05-29 17:41:49 UTC
Leisen wrote:
Tor Gungnir wrote:
You're all forgetting that Missiles don't miss.

Travel time is the price you pay for that luxury.


Firstly, 9 out of 10 BCs are Drakes? I find that hard to believe, since half of the BCs I see are Hurricanes, if not more.

Secondly, I really can't understand how people claim missiles don't miss. There are ships that can simply outrun them, which is completely unnecessary seeing as how if you have any velocity worth mentioning, you have nothing to worry about, the missile won't hit for ****. Oh and not just transversal, but velocity as a whole. You can be flying straight into us and our volley heading your direction, and come out without a scratch.

Thirdly, let's talk about the damage, even assuming missiles ever, in a pvp situation, hit for 100% damage, or even near it. They do less dps than turrets, and have no chance for wrecking shots (why?). Missiles are most certainly 'balanced' without them taking the entire length of the engagement for the first volley to find its target.

Seems to me like we're paying a lot more than delayed dps for this amazing luxury of 'never missing'.

most bc's are canes or drakes

There Is A 90% Chance All Of What You Just Read Is Wrong, Inaccurate Or Just Me Being Controversial In Some Way. Or By Some Chance It's Completely Right In Every Way... At Least To Me :3
Leisen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-05-30 01:41:25 UTC
Snow Burst wrote:
most bc's are canes or drakes


You have ass burgers.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#58 - 2012-05-30 02:05:47 UTC
Snow Burst wrote:

most bc's are canes or drakes


There are 10 BCs that are neither Canes nor Drakes. 83.33% of BCs are neither Canes nor Drakes. Most BCs are neither Canes nor Drakes.

L34RN 2 P3D4N7RY

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mina Hiragi
Perkone
Caldari State
#59 - 2012-05-30 02:44:40 UTC
Tor Gungnir wrote:
You're all forgetting that Missiles don't miss.


Shouldn't they be called Hittles, then? Shocked
Leisen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#60 - 2012-05-30 04:56:50 UTC
Mina Hiragi wrote:
Tor Gungnir wrote:
You're all forgetting that Missiles don't miss.


Shouldn't they be called Hittles, then? Shocked


Load up some EM, Therm, Kin, and Exp.
Taste the rainbow.