Player Features and Ideas Discussion

It becomes even more short sighted when you think that the improvements for missiles are mostly made to bring them in balance in PVP. Cruise missile main concern in PVP is damage apply time NOT damage! Cruise missile velocity bonus with these changes would increase the travel time for 20% do you think that will be enough? I do not think so. We still speak of rather long times.

So in the end these changes do ease a bit but especially the damage buff for cruises simply imbalances things more. These changes should be considered and scrapped.

Main concern for PVP is damage apply time so they should look not only into travel time of the missiles but in general the whole damage apply time. Such large ships as BS lock long time with missile base system ships travel time loss could be compensated by giving them more speedier locking time.

Since the overall damage buff outweighs the explosion radius nerf by just that little bit, it'll still be a buff.

The signature radius bloom caused by MWD more than off sets the damage reduction from the speed. This is why afterburners are so popular, no sig bloom. This is why you see cruisers with 100mn afterburners, more speed without the sig bloom of a MWD. In practice a cruise missile will do more damage to a battleship that has an active MWD than it will to one running an afterburner.

A 100mn Micro Warp Drive II increases signature radius by 500%.So a tempest with a MWD would have a signature radius not of 340m but over 2000m. Even a rage torp will hit that for full damage. Afterburner has 0% increase to signature radius. The speed of an afterburner directly mitigates damage, while a MWD has the opposite effect. MWD is effective damage mitigation against slow tracking turrets, but not missiles.

The strange thing here is CCP is talking about something, but they complete do the opposite.
Okay the new modules may come soon (in about 6 months), but who will ever use it?

I dont need any of this modules in PvE, my RAVEN is FINE at the moment. So they will be propertly used in PvP, but wouldnt that be OP, since Cruise do a lot of dmg now? Anyway i dont see Raven of any use in PvP with or without the modules, because Typhoon is better.

Not quite that simple...

On paper, the MWD sig bloom less than offsets the damage reduction from speed, because the sig bloom of 500% is considerably less than the 625% speed bonus from MWD (there's a further influence of mass on MWD speed increase but the general principle holds). However, big ships in particular take a while to accelerate up to that top speed, so until they hit the break-even speed then the MWD sig bloom does cause them to take more damage.

MWD is less effective at mitigating damage from turrets, because you have to maintain high transversal, rather than merely high speed, enough to outweigh sig bloom. Hence MWDing your Bhaalgorn directly at a Moros is unlikely to end well...

Even with this correction to the cruise missiles this will still be below what they currently were when the Cold War missile nerfs were introduced. 8 years it has taken to just get to this level. For 8 years a lot of us have been waiting. Will have to see if this really plays out. Still not impressed.

this sentence is just soo wrong in any way imaginable..

Is it just me or do ROF bonuses to long range weapons with delayed damage just make no sense at all?

Increase the damage bonus and remove the ROF bonus.

It would make logical sense for cruise missiles to have more hitpoints, they are much larger than heavy missiles.

I think if they were equal to torpedoes in hp that would be cool