Player Features and Ideas Discussion

10% increase in explosion radius for all Cruise Missiles

Why are you increasing the cruise missile explosion radius, the whole reason why missiles are not used in PvP is not because of missile flight time nor there damage but because the missiles cant apply the damage they are doing in the first place, even hitting a BS you still require a web. So your going to increase damage and ROF at the same time nerfing them?

I guess this change is about PvE, since it doesn't affect PvP at all.

Has for the Boost of cruises... I am thrilled to see them implemented.[/quote]

Honestly, i dont need any new Modules for missiles in PvE. Okay a new modules for a low-slot would be nice, but a Target Painter is almost enough for a Cruise raven. If you want to fit a Torp-Raven, which has 40KM+ Range and use Rage, then its gonna be difficult [you need 2 range rigs, 1 rigor rig, 2 TP's and implantats or you use a Golem with 2 TP's][/quote]


You said it right, in PVE.
Well has far has sleeper go, they are pretty fast and have low sig raidius thus hard to hit with Battleship sized missiles, but the PVE mechanics of the missiles work fine, has medium missiles go, a target painter, and a web can fix the damage application, for the new NERF Heavy missile...
i'm talking in terms of PvP and overall... so, damage application, and true damage from the missile could find a balance, by our own personal choice, depending on what are we aiming to shoot at...
If i chose dps over damage aplication i could get BCU's only... If I wanted precision... I would like to have an alternative with out having to use a weab, or a TP. Even if it meant, that the new module created did not gave 60% of both TP and Web bonus to damage aplication of the missile combined, a TP and web would never lose their additional value for the matter...

Who is the moron? The one complaining about not having 4X BCS or the one trying to show a valid argument based on facts? I am curious.

TP optimal is already kind of a mute point, as TP's work fairly well even out into there 'deep falloff' if you would like to see how effective a non bonused TP is- lets add that too our tests.

Raven, old Cruise missiles, 2 BCS, t2 cruise CN scourge missiles, no heat, implants, boosters.

DPS: 460

Shooting ships with all lv5 skills, and MWD placed, and a non bonunsed TP also on them

Merlin: 33 DPS
Thrasher: 66 DPS
Thorax: 140 DPS
Brutix: 364 DPS
Drake: 460 DPS
Tempest: 460 DPS

Still pretty sad, that the raven struggles against brutix. Even with the TP.

Now try to imagine the new cruise changes. They are going to decrease the explosion velocity on these missiles, making the damage application even worse. Is that something you want?

Please tell me more about your remarkable 384 DPS cruise Typhoon. Add in a bit about why someone as clever as you would use Fury Cruise against battlecruisers.

As some people are mentioning Tracking Enhancers and Tracking Computers I thought I would add my 2 cents.

Lets consider the differences here. Please note however I have left out Optimal / Falloff modules as there are specific rigs for Missile Flight Time and Velocity so these are already equal.


Modules that effect Guns ability to do damage:

Tracking Enhancers (Tracking)
Tracking Computers (Tracking)
Target Painters (Signature Resolution)
Stasis Webifiers (Tracking)
Metastasis Adjuster Rigs (Tracking)


Modules that effect Launchers ability to do damage:

Target Painters (Explosion Radius)
Stasis Webifiers (Explosion Velocity)
Flare Rigs (Explosion Velocity)
Rigor Rigs (Explosion Radius)


Based on all things being equal, Turrets have more help with the dealing damage side of things, this is a fact.

Now, how could you effect change on this for Missiles.

Changing Tracking Enhancers and Tracking Computers could be one option but they both come with issues.

Tracking Enhancers give a bonus to optimal, falloff and tracking. In the case of missiles you would have to make this module have give a bonus to Explosion Velocity and a bonus to Explosion Radius. Reducing these things would help a little bit even if it was only 5% or so.

Tracking Computers could simply be scripted to provide similar benefits, either as above, a bonus to both of 5% or perhaps 10% to either one with a script.

Honestly I don't think this would solve the problem though. Really I think "if" there was to be a new module it would have to be a low slot equivalent of the Tracking Computer.

Please note that the majority of the Missile ships in game are Caldari or Minmatar which for the most part are shield tanked. Adding one of these modules to a mid slot would mean sacrificing yet more tank.

Adding it as a low slot module would make more sense though, you would have to pick either damage or "tracking" as Minmatar shield ships do when they select between Gyro Stabilizers or Tracking Enhancers.

Now if you consider an Armored missile ship. This should would have the mid slots to be able to effectively fit the modules it needs to so it can do DPS. In the case of the new Typhoon you could fit it like this (this is a PVP fit).

On this you have a Web and a Target Painter. The Warp Disruptor is being used so your target still has some MWD bloom if they are stupid enough to leave the MWD on (Explosion Radius), the Target Painter increases the Signature Radius (Explosion Radius) and the Stasis Webifier slows the ship down (Explosion Velocity).

[Typhoon, PVP]
Damage Control II
1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II

Warp Disruptor II
Stasis Webifier II
Target Painter II
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
Prototype 100MN Microwarpdrive I

Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Cruise Missile
Heavy Energy Neutralizer II

Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Anti-Explosive Pump I

---

Slight difference here, you dont have the mid slots to use a TP, the same still applies though.

The Warp Disruptor is being used so your target still has some MWD bloom if they are stupid enough to leave the MWD on (Explosion Radius) and the Stasis Webifier slows the ship down (Explosion Velocity).

[Sacrilege, Solo PVP]
Damage Control II
Medium Armor Repairer II
Armor Thermic Hardener II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II

Warp Disruptor II
Stasis Webifier II
Medium Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 200
10MN Afterburner II

Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Heavy Assault Missile
Medium Energy Neutralizer II

Medium Nanobot Accelerator II
Medium Nanobot Accelerator II

Warrior II x3

---

A low slot module would make more sense in many ways. If you did similar fits to the above for shield ships you would quickly run out of mid slots.

You really couldn't afford to fit a TP, Web, Warp Disruptor and Tracking Computer and still have anything resembling a tank.

If there is to be a new module, it really has to be a low slot. Armor tanked ships with the mid slots to spare already have what they need to help with missile damage projection.

Shield tanked ships do not.

If its going to happen, its low slot or nothing and it really should be an active module like a Tracking Computer so it can be scripted.

As I understand it, current cruise missiles have the same velocity but different flight times depending on their type.

Cruise missile flight times:
Standard/Faction >> Fury >> Precision

As all cruise missiles currently have the same base speed, they then mirror the range progression for missiles within the Light and Heavy missile categories (Standard/Faction >> Fury >> Precision).

Why do the proposed changes quoted above indicate that all cruise missiles will have identical ranges after the patch? Any chance the flight time aspect is an error?

The removal of the normal range penalty from Fury and Precision missiles seems odd and overpowered relative to other missile systems. If 30% flight time was shaved off Fury and Precision missiles (as is done by going from 20s to 14s), Precision would still reach over 100 km when launched by a Raven.

This is the truth yet I can understand this annoance even I am not missile user. Maybe missle mechanism should be either changed or give each ship defender missile (or flares to misguide missile). Mssiles already gain unfair advantadge in damage by being able to be chosen to weakest resistance. That can cut the EHP and repaired hp for that damage type drastically.

Personally I think missile concept is broken.. Its too powerful in pve when used right, yet bullshit in pvp. This would call overhauling whole missile mechanism and damage calculation. People think 30% damage buff is awesome but everyone seem to forget that compared to other damage system this damage buff is higher than 30% in applied damage because you can concentrate damage type into weak point. Truthfully I will change to caldari already before the change.. Since missile ships get out much easier in pve than their turret counterparts

Seriousily some people are comparing missiles to guns?

Ok if you want missiles to have more modules that effect them like guns you must:

- Have massively reduced range for your top damage missiles (talking 20km)
- Miss the target
- Be affected by tracking disruptors

Dont understand why missiles should be more like guns considering they have massive advantages as well as drawbacks!...

/rant over


I personally like these changes and if CCP made this effort on the Amarr weapons I would say good job.