Player Features and Ideas Discussion

In fact, railguns Rokh are a fleet comp of a nullsec powerblock.

yeah, best would be if you forgot also where your alt is and stop posting here. Postings like yours simply show you have no clue about Eve. :)

now that I think about it, thats right, but theyre usually used with javelin ammo @ < 50 km

with the new cruise missiles, they'll also have a viable short range option to compete.

I use 5% implants for pvp, and t2 rigs. I'm not even that rich. A t2 damage rig on my nagas, or a t2 damage rig on my stealth bombers. Neither of those are really that rare. That being said, that's not a very good fit for that ship, I'll agree.

even a lot of the ppl in null sec i know, often fly with complete set of implants worth 2bil+

u dnt get podded much in fleet fights, but i couldn't afford it lol

Okay, I know that this thread has been up for a bit now, but I just found out about it.

While I completely agree with CCP in the fact that, at the moment, HML's are overpowered, I believe this is the wrong way of balancing them.

I like the idea of the tracking computers and tracking enhancers now affecting missiles, but I disagree with most of the other changes.

Yes the changes would fix the issues of overpowered missiles in large fleets, where target painters, webs, and other e-war are plentiful, but they will pretty much remove HML fits for things like tengu's and drakes (yes I know they are over used, but right now they are also the only good missile platforms) from small gang and worm hole operations. It will affect both k-space, and w-space combat, in both PVP and PVE.

The thought is to take the HML and change it from competing with the large class weapon platforms, and move it into its proper place of anti-cruiser/battle cruiser medium sized guns.

As it sits in its current state, the HML's damage output is to high compared to all the other medium class long range platforms. so nurfing the damage would be a good idea, but also increasing its explosion radius, moves it from being useful against BC sized ships, to MWD BC/Battleship classes. Removing 25% damage output, places the HML within a reasonable variation on DPS with artillery projectiles loaded with close range t1 ammo, so that is a good start, but that turret can actually land its damage on a target. Yes in a small gang or solo, you may need to pilot your ship to reduce transversal, but you can hit a cruiser that is moving at say 200m/s with almost full damage. Now take that same stat and move it to the HML with proposed changes. While on paper they do close to the same DPS output, it is not possible for a that missile to hit that target for full damage, unless you have a few target painters on it, and that is with it moving at only 200m/s.

The solution I came up with, was redoing the ammo for missiles.

All other weapon types have multiple range ammo types that decrease in damage as they get farther away, why shouldn't missiles. Even if they are similar to projectiles with 4 different damage types, and 2 ranges and damage outputs for each.

If the long range missile had a smaller explosion radius, it would be more effective against smaller ships at longer range, and would also take the place of the precision missile for the possible anti frig/destroyer for larger fleets. Have the closer range missile with a slightly larger explosion radius, so they are more meant to apply damage to a cruiser or a battle cruiser. Much like using EMP in an artillery platform. The longer range missile would also of course do less damage than the close range missile. This change would also allow the T2 versions of the missiles, to be both close range and high damage, and allow the second to be a long range version much to simulate all the other long range T2 ammo's.

The close range missile (fury's) would of course get an explosion radius nurf to be more along the lines of the other T2 charges, but only around 50% perhaps (the turrets lose 25% of their tracking, but that makes them still able to hit a slow moving BC for almost full damage) as well as the given damage increase. This would make them still useful against BC sized ships that are webbed or target painted.

The long range T2 missile would be given a slightly larger explosion radius over the long range T1 ammo, but also output much higher DPS. this would mean that it would be the sniping missile of choice against cruiser sized platforms, and would be able to hit with about 80% of the damage output against that cruiser sized ships compared to the t1 close range missile, but from its long range set up.

This method of change still leaves this weapon as a viable choice for a long range medium sized damage platform, or as a mid range kiting platform, making it still useful in small gang/solo PVP, as well as make them just as useful in PVE as all the other long range, medium class guns.


As for the changes to HAM's, I can say I look forward to them being useful in small gang PVP, and I do like the proposed changes from what I can see. They should also be mainly useful against the cruiser and battle cruiser class of ships, not meant to only achieve full damage against a battleship. So the increase in DPS and the reduction in explosion radius would put them in the same category as the auto-cannons and pulse lasers for useability. The only other suggestion I would make would be increase the velocity to achieve the ranges, not the flight time. As they are, they seem to slow to apply damage to a target and can actually be out run completely by a boosted MWD'ing cruiser if the ship using them has no bonus to velocity of the missiles.

I'm sorry for the very long post on this idea, but if you did read through all of it, let me know what you think of this idea.

Thanks for reading.

- Joe

It lacks tank but then again could you show me tanked sniper.



Pretty much how missiles work in real life.

Or just stop trying to use missiles for sniping. After all you will never see sniper in real life using these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_missile_weapon

Missiles time to target... I'm doubtful about this argument : CML on Raven have the same velocity than HML on a tengu ; tengu work fine in fleets ; hence, CML flight time shouldn't be a problem, at least for range <110km.

Not range, velocity.

A Cruise Missile moves at the same velocity as a Heavy Missile, with the bonus they cover 50% more ground then the Drake hitting targets 50% farther in the same time. Cruise Missiles have a 50% effective range increase over the Drake with an option to go farther.

People who talk about Cruise Missiles should realize they only have one point of reference and that is the Raven and the Raven sucks. That and people wonder why it isn't a Fleet ship when Tier 3 Battleships pretty much rule that area, Abbadon, Mael, Rokh. Raven is the only Cruise Missile Ship and in comparison to the 1-5th the cost Drake...

* Not much more HP then a resist bonused Drake.
* Caps out easy with an MWD, many Drake fits are stable or near so.
* 6 Launchers instead of the 7 the Drakes has and the Drake can use Fury Realistically further pumping up its Dmg.
* 40% the Scan Res of a Drake.
* Same number of Mids.

Yeah Cruise Missiles are the problem. Really though it is the missing launcher that ball kicks it the most.

Honestly if they gave the Raven 7 Launchers, 7 Mids / 4 Lows, Little bit more Scan Res Cruise Missiles would be looked at in a whole new light I guarantee it. The change to Fury and precision was enough, now they just need to fix the one ship that can use these things realistically.

I see Bouh and that other pilot who does not exist are still hanging with the Cruise Raven. Again I tell you, both of you .. train for one if you didnt do so already, buy one, hop into it and go for PvP with it. You will see how those great Pyfa/EFT/whatever numbers will let you perform on the server. If you dont then better stop speaking about how good it is/will be, because you seriously dont have a clue.