These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Opinions on missiles?

Author
Banor Garsk
Valkyrie Heavy Industries
#1 - 2012-09-14 12:59:59 UTC
Hey folks. I've been reading up a lot on missiles lately, and the general opinion is that they're excellent for PVE, but largely outmatched in PVP. My question is this: for those that use missiles in PVP, why? Do you enjoy them? Do you hold out hope and use them, hoping they will be on-par with instant damage weapons someday?

For myself, I use them because I have no problem adjusting my fits ant tactics so make up for the strengths and weaknesses of missiles.

Anywho, share your thoughts!
Fluffi Flaffi
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2012-09-14 13:38:24 UTC
I like the visual effects ;)

And besides this I tend to fly different ships once and a while. And especially for close-range combat or in Fleet I don't care if it's missile launchers or guns. I just want to have fun. That's what a game is made for. :)
Princess Nexxala
Zero Syndicate
#3 - 2012-09-14 13:48:43 UTC
The only people who claim missiles are not good in PvP are either complete noobs, mildly ********, or a bit of both.

nom nom

Meditril
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#4 - 2012-09-14 13:56:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Meditril
As always missiles have their pro's and cons.

Pro's:

  • Usually best range of all weapon systems, if you have all necessary skills at level 5.
  • No cap usage.
  • Free choice of damage type if you are not flying Caldari with 5% boost to kinetic.
  • Can load auto targetting missiles in case you are ECMed.
  • Imune to tracking disruptors.


Con's:

  • Need a lot CPU and grid.
  • Can be out run by target, this is especially an issue if you are fighting fast stuff and you are not flying a missile speed bonused caldari ship.
  • Damage is really bad. And it gets even worser if target is small (even if stationarly) or fast.
  • 10 seconds reload time.
  • auto targetting missiles are really crap, even lower damage + you can't choose the target.


The main difference between turret based and missile based weapons is: Turret based weapons hit much harder (almost twice that hard) than missiles if they are used under good/optimal conditions, furthermore under optimal conditions signature of target doesn't play any role. However, turred based weapons suffer from the problem that once the conditions get bad (e.g. someone is under you guns or tracking disruptors) they significantly drop in damage often towards no damage at all. Missiles also drop in damage if conditions get worser, however they always do at least a protion of damage regardless how worse the conditions are.

In summary: Turrets are much better as long as you are in control of the conditions and you are able to keep them optimal. High risk / High reward. Missiles are more forgiving under bad conditions, however you might end up in a situation where you damage output applied on the target is too low to break targets tank. Low risk / Low reward.

As you see it's your choice and it is nicely balanced.
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2012-09-14 18:56:59 UTC
range is also a con due to flight time
Cynthia Nezmor
Nezmor's Golden Griffins
#6 - 2012-09-14 22:51:48 UTC
Seeing that frigate in structure running away from your last missile volley is equally as disheartening as not hitting that frigate that is orbiting you at 500 m.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#7 - 2012-09-18 02:13:01 UTC
The biggest pro to missiles is that they don't care about range.

The next best pro is selectable damage type.

Biggest con is that missiles have flight time. So damage is never applied instantly like turrets.

Another big con is that fast ships can outrun missiles.

They can also be destroyed in-flight ala defenders (lol) or firewall smartbomb ships.

In summary, missiles have their pros and cons as stated above. They apply consistent though delayed damage across their entire range, and are immune to weapon disruption. FoF missiles are available. Though they pretty much suck.

There is one big issue that needs to be pointed out: stealth bombers.

Bombers are ALL torpedo-slingers. This is imo the biggest single selling point to missiles.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

BadAssMcKill
Aliastra
#8 - 2012-09-18 04:12:05 UTC
HAMs are pretty cool on Drakes.

Torps could use a buff
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-09-18 07:51:11 UTC
You should ask those that been kyted to death by.

Hookbills/Hawks/Caracals/Navy Caracals, Tengu's and Nano Drakes, how easy it's to get in your optimal range.

Rocket Frigates are exremly nasty.

and if you request a search with key words (Drake, Tengu and Heavy Missles) you'll find quite soe people seem to beleve they are O.P.

Personaly I think they are very good for certain situations, just like every other weapon.

jjohnpaul xvii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-09-18 09:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: jjohnpaul xvii
Pro's and cons listed above - am sure others will add. I use both, one minor point i would add is that personally i fund turret ships/guns, far more engaging and therfore interesting to use as you need to be thinking a lot more about tracking, positioning and alignments. Auto-cannons/arties give you more to think about with ammo choice as well as typically missile based ships are bonused to kinetic damage (exceptions would be SBs, Sacrilige and rockets on some AFs), and Lazors will be doing some combination of EM/Themal, Blasters will be doing Kinetic and Thermal etc......

Some links that may/may not be enlightening on this:

http://www.rifterdrifter.com/2011/04/rock-paper-scissors/
http://www.evealtruist.com/2012/02/damage-types-in-pvp.html

Becoming familiar with turrets and considering range/tracking/relative velocities/ammo types etc will allow you to consider more complex PvP situations. Nothing wrong with starting with missiles but eventually, you need/will want to use and understand both.

Hope that helps.....

o7
jjohnpaul xvii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-09-18 12:38:54 UTC  |  Edited by: jjohnpaul xvii
Meditril wrote:
As always missiles have their pro's and cons.

Pro's:

  • Usually best range of all weapon systems, if you have all necessary skills at level 5.
  • No cap usage.
  • Free choice of damage type if you are not flying Caldari with 5% boost to kinetic.
  • Can load auto targetting missiles in case you are ECMed.
  • Imune to tracking disruptors.


Con's:

  • Need a lot CPU and grid.
  • Can be out run by target, this is especially an issue if you are fighting fast stuff and you are not flying a missile speed bonused caldari ship.
  • Damage is really bad. And it gets even worser if target is small (even if stationarly) or fast.
  • 10 seconds reload time.
  • auto targetting missiles are really crap, even lower damage + you can't choose the target.


.


......

TLDR : It's swings and roundabouts.

Am sure i've missed some more but.....

Pro's:
- Missiles have better damage projection > i.e they will do fuller damage (minus signature/speed/resistances etc) to maximum range. Missiles will hit a ship with the same sig/speed/resistances for roughly the same damage (allow for some minor random 'hit' variation) whether that ship is at 10k or 40k range. Turrets don't work in this way and will generally suffer a reduction in damage at greater distances (presuming everything else is equal). A turret wont hit the target at 40k range as hard as it will hit the target at 10k range (presuming everything else is equal).

- Rocket graphics look AMAZING > Pure space game P * rn. Just look at them. Pew, Fizz, Boom!!! (Explosion coloured to damage type!) Just thinking about the lil beauties makes me wanna quit my job and go log in for some pew. (IMO *The* single best game change in the last 3 years.)

- Auto-targetting missiles - These dont require a lock on your target to fire and are therefore usable if/when your ship is jammed. As medi says, you cant choose your target and they are not *amazing* but at least its an option, and an advantage that turrets don't have. I try to carry some (although in practice am too busy ECM raging to bother to reload).

Cons:

- Delayed damage > Missiles have a flight time. It takes time for your missile to reach the target (you can see this with the missile graphics) and it takes time for your damage to be applied. They don't hit and apply damage instantly as guns do.

This has two side effects:
i) You have wasted/ineffective damage > If your in a gang the target might be dead by the time your missiles actually get to it .You can counteract this to some degree by judging when to stop firing and switch targets yourself. This is not fool proof and should be avoided solo/small gang.
ii) Your enemy knows your missiles are coming. They will have additional time to react (activating hardeners, de-activating MWDs, aligning out, calling for reps, etc) and generally to appraise the situation. You have less 'surprise factor', particularly compared to Artillery turrets that have instant damage and a high Alpha (see link below). Unaware enemies will make a lot more mistakes than aware enemies will.

(This is why missile ships are generally considered sub-optimal for sniping. )

Am sure someone will have all the maths on this available. To my simple mind, its the principles that are important primarily to understand. When you understand the principle, a feeling for applying that principle and the underlying formulae (nerd mode) and its practical application to teh game will be easier to develop.

Some links that may/may not prove useful to you:

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Alpha_damage
http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Missile_Launchers
http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Missile_Launchers#PvP:_The_Delayed_Damage_Problem
www.google.com

o7
Banor Garsk
Valkyrie Heavy Industries
#12 - 2012-09-18 13:07:13 UTC
Thanks guys. I'm really excited to play with missiles in PVP, and I'm interested to see id CCP does anything to make them a bit more viable in general combat.
terzslave
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#13 - 2012-09-19 05:53:17 UTC
Well as of today missiles are planned on being nerfed to hell so looks like you won't be playing with missiles in pvp.
Banor Garsk
Valkyrie Heavy Industries
#14 - 2012-09-19 15:33:17 UTC
terzslave wrote:
Well as of today missiles are planned on being nerfed to hell so looks like you won't be playing with missiles in pvp.



Oh? Are there any links I could read?
Rexorol
Gallentian Legitimate Businessmen
#15 - 2012-09-19 18:33:32 UTC
Banor Garsk wrote:
terzslave wrote:
Well as of today missiles are planned on being nerfed to hell so looks like you won't be playing with missiles in pvp.



Oh? Are there any links I could read?



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=155029
Banor Garsk
Valkyrie Heavy Industries
#16 - 2012-09-20 02:34:58 UTC
Rexorol wrote:
Banor Garsk wrote:
terzslave wrote:
Well as of today missiles are planned on being nerfed to hell so looks like you won't be playing with missiles in pvp.



Oh? Are there any links I could read?



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=155029



hm... thanks.
Ensign X
#17 - 2012-09-20 02:56:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Ensign X
terzslave wrote:
Well as of today missiles are planned on being nerfed to hell so looks like you won't be playing with missiles in pvp.


Missiles are not being nerfed to hell. Heavy missiles are being nerfed to hell, and Tracking Disruptors will now be effective against missiles, but every other missile type besides Heavies are getting a huge buff in addition to the penalties being removed from T2 missiles. Light missiles get the biggest buff, and Tracking Enhancers and Tracking Computers will work on Missiles, so there's that.

Overall, this will be a substantial buff to missile users. Well, except for people who fly Drakes, TengusCry, Caracals, Cerberus, Rook, Onyx, Nighthawk and any other ship that uses (used) Heavy missiles.
Yuri Intaki
Nasranite Watch
#18 - 2012-09-20 09:26:49 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
Caracals and any other ship that uses (used) Heavy missiles.


Why would anyone fly HML caracals since with new upcoming changes you can have a cheap-ass RLM caracal with TE and shooting well over 70km range with them. Some eft warrior will of course laugh about "Lol, 200 dps" but they forget it always hits for maximum damage, even against smallest of target at this range due to TE bonuses and most likely outruns most other similiar sized ships out there anyway.

As for fleet drakes, if they swap tackle mod for TC, I dont foresee much changes coming to them in terms of "new player friendly blob ship"
Ensign X
#19 - 2012-09-20 21:15:43 UTC
Yuri Intaki wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
Caracals and any other ship that uses (used) Heavy missiles.


Why would anyone fly HML caracals since with new upcoming changes you can have a cheap-ass RLM caracal with TE and shooting well over 70km range with them. Some eft warrior will of course laugh about "Lol, 200 dps" but they forget it always hits for maximum damage, even against smallest of target at this range due to TE bonuses and most likely outruns most other similiar sized ships out there anyway.


I would assume people fly HML Caracals because Light missiles and Rapid Lights as they are now are awful and HMLs are not. However, the buff to Light Missiles coupled with the nerf to Heavies means that Caracals fit with RLMs will be very deadly especially to Destroyers and Frigates and should get a lot more use.

Yuri Intaki wrote:
As for fleet drakes, if they swap tackle mod for TC, I dont foresee much changes coming to them in terms of "new player friendly blob ship"


HAM Drakes with Precision missiles and a TE + TC or 2x TE will be miles and miles away better than HML Drakes if this change goes live as planned. They'll have nearly the same range as an HML Drake with significantly more DPS at long range and the ability to switch to Faction or T2 Fury at near range for an even bigger DPS advantage.
Christy D Floyd
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2012-09-20 21:28:26 UTC
I just have to say this post is a good read thank you op and contributors!

Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.

12Next page