These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Cruise Missile Revamp
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-08-28 11:28:01 UTC
Main problem with Cruise is range and probing. With current mechanics, it's very difficult to effectively use range above 150 km, but Cruise Raven DPS in the 100-150 km is deeply unremarkable relative to turret BS. So either fix probing or the on-grid warping system to make ranges above 150 km more meaningful, or cut the range of Cruise and increase damage to compensate.

Another problem is the Raven hull itself. With six medslots, it's really a bit flimsy, particularly if you feel you have to have a painter in one of them to help torps. Maybe move a lowslot to a medslot? As for torps themselves, it's an interesting one. You could argue that they're a good example of a well-balanced weapon system - very effective against BS, weak against other things. Currently, in practice, the "weak against other things" is trumping their ability as a BS whacker. The missile damage formula, with its hard cap on damage of [sig radius]/[explosion radius] is responsible for this. In contrast, turret tracking has sig issues acting as a modifier to tracking - but this can lead to "blapping" problems.

While it's an interesting thought experiment to wonder what would happen if turret tracking got a [sig radius]/[turret res] hard-cap to damage like missiles have, it would be a pretty fundamental change. Simply cutting torp explosion radius to 400 m and seeing what happens sounds more sensible tbh.
Obsidiana
Atrament Inc.
#22 - 2012-08-28 22:28:09 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Another problem is the Raven hull itself. With six midslots, it's really a bit flimsy, particularly if you feel you have to have a painter in one of them to help torps. Maybe move a lowslot to a medslot? As for torps themselves, it's an interesting one. You could argue that they're a good example of a well-balanced weapon system - very effective against BS, weak against other things. Currently, in practice, the "weak against other things" is trumping their ability as a BS whacker. The missile damage formula, with its hard cap on damage of [sig radius]/[explosion radius] is responsible for this. In contrast, turret tracking has sig issues acting as a modifier to tracking - but this can lead to "blapping" problems.

In terms of PvP, I do think moving a slot from low to mid would help. This would put the Raven more in line with the BSs of other races. The conventional wisdom (rule of thumb) is that you need at least 3 tackle slots, 4 tank slots, 2-3 damage mods, and a DCU. If the Raven had 7 mid slots, it would follow that wisdom with room for breaking it.

Another problem is that conventional PvP requires a web, which helps guns far more than missiles. It is both a tackle and damage mod for guns. If webs affected sig and had falloff, it would do more to help missiles. (WMD sig penalty could be reduced to balance that boost.)

There is no conventional long or medium range solution for webs (aside from drones, which makes no sense for Caldari to rely on). Importance has been placed on getting short range ships into range (e.g. increasing the agility of the Sacrilege when it became a close range missile ship), but nothing has been done to help long/medium range ships keep their edge. I would argue that long range PvP is an unconventional tactic in EVE.


In terms of PvE, I also think seven mid/defensive slots would help the Raven. Low SP pilots can fit better cap modules. Medium SP pilots can fit a TP. Passive resistance modules become a better option. Leave the Navy Raven or add a mid slot as that ship is still favored among high SP mission runners. (Note: the CNR and TFI have one less slot than the MNI and ANI.)
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
#23 - 2012-08-29 10:03:55 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
I all honesty all long range weapon platforms need a revamp...
Beams, Rails and Artillery need more dps
and beams and rails also need more alpha (likely twice the alpha)

Cruise missiles could easily have their range cut in half and given a significant dps/apha boost but so could light missiles and to some limited degree also heavy missiles.



i agree with beams and rails needing more dPS but not with the arty, arty does awesomely in its intended alpha role.
Previous page12