These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Torpedos being fixed anytime?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#1 - 2013-04-23 18:55:37 UTC
so ... where is my torpedoes topic where they get buffed to some sensible range and damage application?
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#2 - 2013-04-23 19:17:56 UTC
back when they changed heavy missiles and the first cane nerf.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-04-23 19:38:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonas Sukarala
They need to nerf the range of rockets and HAMS then torp range looks good ... and in line with battleship weapons
I suspect the TD change is the main thought of CCP on buffing missile tracking but they will have to nerf their range to implement them anyway

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

DeLindsay
Galaxies Fall
#4 - 2013-04-23 19:57:25 UTC
Quote:
so ... where is my torpedoes topic where they get buffed to some sensible range and damage application?


I'm guessing you haven't played Eve all that long (few years or less) since Torps USED to be like what you want. CCP nerfed them down in range to fall in line with other close range weapon systems, i.e. Blasters. Torp Ravens/CNRavens were ridiculously OP back then which is in part what lead to the nerf and imho it's a good one. There is NO REASON Torpedoes need to have the same range as Heavy/Cruise missiles. They have HUGE damage application, on the right targets, just like other BS sized weapon systems. This was also part of the weapon system sig nerf way back when. It used to be a Blaster Hyperion/Megathron would rip through ANYTHING that came at it, Frigs included because sig meant nothing to weapons, Torps included. Frigs would be hit for FULL damage if they weren't moving above the speed of the explosion velocity, which is terribly wrong, so CCP changed it to also be based on sig radius.

The Operative: "There are a lot of innocent people being killed in the air right now".

Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: "You have no idea how true that is".
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#5 - 2013-04-23 20:01:00 UTC
DeLindsay wrote:
Quote:
so ... where is my torpedoes topic where they get buffed to some sensible range and damage application?


I'm guessing you haven't played Eve all that long (few years or less) since Torps USED to be like what you want. CCP nerfed them down in range to fall in line with other close range weapon systems, i.e. Blasters. Torp Ravens/CNRavens were ridiculously OP back then which is in part what lead to the nerf and imho it's a good one. There is NO REASON Torpedoes need to have the same range as Heavy/Cruise missiles. They have HUGE damage application, on the right targets, just like other BS sized weapon systems. This was also part of the weapon system sig nerf way back when. It used to be a Blaster Hyperion/Megathron would rip through ANYTHING that came at it, Frigs included because sig meant nothing to weapons, Torps included. Frigs would be hit for FULL damage if they weren't moving above the speed of the explosion velocity, which is terribly wrong, so CCP changed it to also be based on sig radius.



and its a VAST improvement too.
made frig wars viable. AF squads roaming, kill at will. thats when the zealot really gained in popularity. a zealot, with a good burner on, orbiting an anchor with logi doing the same is a BEAST!!!
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#6 - 2013-04-23 21:01:23 UTC
DeLindsay wrote:
Quote:
so ... where is my torpedoes topic where they get buffed to some sensible range and damage application?


I'm guessing you haven't played Eve all that long (few years or less) since Torps USED to be like what you want. CCP nerfed them down in range to fall in line with other close range weapon systems, i.e. Blasters. Torp Ravens/CNRavens were ridiculously OP back then which is in part what lead to the nerf and imho it's a good one. There is NO REASON Torpedoes need to have the same range as Heavy/Cruise missiles. They have HUGE damage application, on the right targets, just like other BS sized weapon systems. This was also part of the weapon system sig nerf way back when. It used to be a Blaster Hyperion/Megathron would rip through ANYTHING that came at it, Frigs included because sig meant nothing to weapons, Torps included. Frigs would be hit for FULL damage if they weren't moving above the speed of the explosion velocity, which is terribly wrong, so CCP changed it to also be based on sig radius.


Applied damage from torps is a whole other story.
Gun ships can absolutely **** a frig if not moving, or webbed/scrammed. On the other hand Torps and cruise will not.

In fact torps are weak against on everything below Battle cruisers, while large guns can still be effective and if a BC is moving, it will also null a ton of damage from the torp.

They do not need to be Cruise missile range, but the ships that can use them, need a bonus to be able to hit better with them.
Like the Phoon does.

I wouldnt care if the raven lost the range bonus if it could hit better.
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#7 - 2013-04-23 21:22:26 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
They need to nerf the range of rockets and HAMS then torp range looks good ... and in line with battleship weapons


Please stop with this argument.

It does nothing to address the real problem. What you're saying is that the problem does NOT lie with torp range but with HAM and Rocket range, which... This idea didn't make sense to me when I read it sober, and I'm somewhat buzzed right now and the idea STILL doesn't make sense to me. Why are you pissing on rockets too? I thought it was just the weird 'HAM range = Torp Range' thing.

Missiles have, at every size, had more range than guns of similar size (I don't see the problem with that; they already have to deal with flight time, damage reduction from target size and mobility, complete and total lack of crit possibility, and the possibility of being outrun by the target ship if they fly out of missile range), and trying to bend them into having the same range as guns can have two outcomes. Either they will be utterly crippled by the lack of range and comparatively less damage at similar ranges to more painful turrets, or they will need to be buffed into a state where they're simply too strong for a variety of reasons. The logical fix of this problem is to increase torp range, not decrease HAM range, because HAM range as it stands is not a serious problem. IIRC, most battleship guns have ~20km optimal, for short range operations, and I'm fairly sure that includes blasters though I MIGHT be wrong. Unbonused torpedoes get a rather piddly 14 kilometer range. And torpedo ships are slow. Which means it's difficult for them to even USE the damn things. There's also no reason for torpedoes to be competing with heavy missiles or cruise missiles in terms of range; somewhere between heavy missiles and HAMs would be a nice spot for them I think (when using T2 range torps, even.)
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#8 - 2013-04-23 21:29:40 UTC
Ager Agemo wrote:
so ... where is my torpedoes topic where they get buffed to some sensible range and damage application?

SOON™

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Johann Rascali
The Milkmen
Sedition.
#9 - 2013-04-23 21:35:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Johann Rascali
I still think the fact that guns deal a minimum of 50% of their base damage no matter what as long as they register a hit is part of what makes missiles so unloved, since they don't have that sort of mechanic. Missiles more directly follow the math, whereas turrets have the ability to blap things with low HP as long as they an manage to get a scratching hit on it.

Blanking signatures doesn't seem to work, so this is here.
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#10 - 2013-04-23 21:46:40 UTC
maybe the damage prollem lies in the fact that torp explosion radius is so large.

maybe they should have a huge reduction in radius...maybe all close in missiles should.

keep the same explosion velocity meaning your faster moving ship will negate some damage, but if you slow, you're going to take a huge chunk out with whatever they volley at it. if you stop, you take full damage.

maybe missiles shouldnt take into account sig radius, but should instead factor speed?
i mean launch a mk 48 at a small boat sitting there and youll roast it. they blow modern destroyers in 1/2. get that boat moving though and youd be lucky to hit it.

now, fit a VA-111 Shkval and i dont care how fast you are going, its 200 knot under water speed will catch anything on top of the water and anhilate it (providing it has descent guidance..)

maybe the damage taken should be in comparison to the speed of the explosion velocity?
750 m/s explosion velocity hits a 375 m/s cruiser and does 1/2 damage. the missile flies to its target and pops. if you arent moving, you just sat through a nasty bomb and you are going to take all damage. but if you take off and are going 740 m/s, then you will slowly ride the compression wave and itll just push you along and burn the outside of the ship for a 99% reduction in damage?

i mean if the wave isnt pushing you, then it isnt damaging you. the faster the explosion velocity, the more damage itll do to smaller targets because they wont be able to outrun it.

thoughts?
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#11 - 2013-04-23 22:54:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ines Tegator
Hagika wrote:

Gun ships can absolutely **** a frig if not moving, or webbed/scrammed. On the other hand Torps and cruise will not.

In fact torps are weak against on everything below Battle cruisers, while large guns can still be effective and if a BC is moving, it will also null a ton of damage from the torp.


Guns can track perfectly at extreme range, or against unmoving targets. They never have 100% damage selection, are buffed by local mods (TE's and TC's), benefit moderately from tackle, and can be countered by good piloting. Guns can miss and do 0 damage if the tracking situation is poor. They can be completely countered, with 100% success, by the proper ewar (TD).

Missiles have perfect damage selection, have no falloff penalty, and never miss regardless of the tracking situation. Their damage is unnavoidably reduced by target size and movement, they are buffed by remote mods (target painters), benefit extremely well from tackle, and can only partially be countered by piloting. There is no 100% effective ewar counter to them.
-Also, damage application at long range has a long delay, but CCP is addressing this in Odyssey.

Overall, the balance is rather good I'd say. They have strengths and weakness in opposing areas and each benefits from a different kind of local fit and fleet composition. If torps don't do enough applied damage for you, fit your ship properly. Guns have tracking computers, webs and Metastasis rigs, missiles have webs, target painters and Flare rigs. Guns can completely miss, or perfectly hit. Missiles never perfectly miss, and rarely perfectly hit. Tradeoffs.

Overhaul Dscan!
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#12 - 2013-04-23 22:59:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ines Tegator
Mole Guy wrote:

maybe the damage taken should be in comparison to the speed of the explosion velocity?

Missiles already account for target's speed, at roughly the same proportion as target size. This is what explosion velocity is for. You can test this yourself using HAM's against frigate rats with and without webs.

Overhaul Dscan!
DeLindsay
Galaxies Fall
#13 - 2013-04-23 23:17:27 UTC
Quote:
Guns can track perfectly at extreme range, or against unmoving targets. They never have 100% damage selection, are buffed by local mods (TE's and TC's), benefit moderately from tackle, and can be countered by good piloting. Guns can miss and do 0 damage if the tracking situation is poor. They can be completely countered, with 100% success, by the proper ewar (TD).

Missiles have perfect damage selection, have no falloff penalty, and never miss regardless of the tracking situation. Their damage is unnavoidably reduced by target size and movement, they are buffed by remote mods (target painters), benefit extremely well from tackle, and can only partially be countered by piloting. There is no 100% effective ewar counter to them.
-Also, damage application at long range has a long delay, but CCP is addressing this in Odyssey.

Overall, the balance is rather good I'd say. They have strengths and weakness in opposing areas and each benefits from a different kind of local fit and fleet composition. If torps don't do enough applied damage for you, fit your ship properly. Guns have tracking computers, webs and Metastasis rigs, missiles have webs, target painters and Flare rigs. Guns can completely miss, or perfectly hit. Missiles never perfectly miss, and rarely perfectly hit. Tradeoffs.


Absolutely CORRECT! This is the problem with Eve (or any MMO), people can't be bothered to actually learn how the game works, they just want THEIR stuff buffed and everyone ELSE nerfed so THEY feel like a god. The way CCP has current guns -vs- missiles works pretty close to perfect. Sure they could tweak a little more here and there but it's good now. The point is, Battleship sized weapons should barely hit very small targets or targets moving very fast. This is true with all Guns (unless they're stupid and fly directly at you) where as Missiles (incl Torps) can and do still hit for pretty high damage up to the point that the ship is moving faster than the missile's explosion velocity. Anything not moving, no matter how small, is going to be wrecked by just about any weapon system within it's range, the way it should be.

The Operative: "There are a lot of innocent people being killed in the air right now".

Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: "You have no idea how true that is".
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#14 - 2013-04-24 00:27:29 UTC
Torps applying full damage to battleships is bullshit, even for a golem its impossible to apply full damage on another battleship unless its dual webbed and double target painted, also Torp range currently its the same as HAM which itself is completely ridiculous.



i m well aware of how torps were before, when they had pretty much impossible range and AOE, but thats not the case anymore, problem is right now i can use any turret ship to kill stuff on any range size, but if using torps i can forget about trying to kill anything smaller than a small planet.


And their range is not in line with other short range weapons, autocannons can hit up to 100kms for acceptable damage on basically any ship with 2 tracking computers with any ammo.

Null on large hybrids hits to 40kms pretty easily and as well large hybrids will **** small stuff. with 2 tracking computers.
scorch hits with an optimal of ******* 48 kilometers. 2 tracking computers.


Torps using javelin on a triple T2 rigged bonused battleship with dual target painters will hit a battleship at 50kms for 30% or so of their damage... assuming they hit at all.

i have tested this a lot in game NOT EFT, with both a vargur, a golem, and compared it to other T1 battleships as well. torps currently are pretty much unusable unles your enemy is completely standing still not using afterburners and has the signature of a planet.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#15 - 2013-04-24 00:47:57 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
They need to nerf the range of rockets and HAMS then torp range looks good ... and in line with battleship weapons


Please stop with this argument.

It does nothing to address the real problem. What you're saying is that the problem does NOT lie with torp range but with HAM and Rocket range, which... This idea didn't make sense to me when I read it sober, and I'm somewhat buzzed right now and the idea STILL doesn't make sense to me. Why are you pissing on rockets too? I thought it was just the weird 'HAM range = Torp Range' thing.

Missiles have, at every size, had more range than guns of similar size (I don't see the problem with that; they already have to deal with flight time, damage reduction from target size and mobility, complete and total lack of crit possibility, and the possibility of being outrun by the target ship if they fly out of missile range), and trying to bend them into having the same range as guns can have two outcomes. Either they will be utterly crippled by the lack of range and comparatively less damage at similar ranges to more painful turrets, or they will need to be buffed into a state where they're simply too strong for a variety of reasons. The logical fix of this problem is to increase torp range, not decrease HAM range, because HAM range as it stands is not a serious problem. IIRC, most battleship guns have ~20km optimal, for short range operations, and I'm fairly sure that includes blasters though I MIGHT be wrong. Unbonused torpedoes get a rather piddly 14 kilometer range. And torpedo ships are slow. Which means it's difficult for them to even USE the damn things. There's also no reason for torpedoes to be competing with heavy missiles or cruise missiles in terms of range; somewhere between heavy missiles and HAMs would be a nice spot for them I think (when using T2 range torps, even.)



You see each size of weapons is doubled so rough figures
-rockets 8km
-HAMS 16km
-Torps 16km
so therefore its unbalanced and out of sequence so in order to address torps range you have to address the sequence.
blasters have 6km optimal with void/T1 antimatter infact all guns short range ammo is under 20km... lasers are supposed to be the longest range weapon and its optimal is 15km granted it has 10km falloff but thats guns advantage and you don't really use falloff on most turrets besides projectiles.

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Pan Dora
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-04-24 01:57:12 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:

Guns can track perfectly at extreme range, or against unmoving targets. They never have 100% damage selection, are buffed by local mods (TE's and TC's), benefit moderately from tackle, and can be countered by good piloting. Guns can miss and do 0 damage if the tracking situation is poor. They can be completely countered, with 100% success, by the proper ewar (TD).

Missiles have perfect damage selection, have no falloff penalty, and never miss regardless of the tracking situation. Their damage is unnavoidably reduced by target size and movement, they are buffed by remote mods (target painters), benefit extremely well from tackle, and can only partially be countered by piloting. There is no 100% effective ewar counter to them.
-Also, damage application at long range has a long delay, but CCP is addressing this in Odyssey.

Overall, the balance is rather good I'd say. They have strengths and weakness in opposing areas and each benefits from a different kind of local fit and fleet composition. If torps don't do enough applied damage for you, fit your ship properly. Guns have tracking computers, webs and Metastasis rigs, missiles have webs, target painters and Flare rigs. Guns can completely miss, or perfectly hit. Missiles never perfectly miss, and rarely perfectly hit. Tradeoffs.


I really want to use these missiles of you. Mine can be 100% countered by smartbombs and defender missiles, they perfectly miss in those cases, they perfect miss when outrun, they perfect miss when there is no target because guns already killed it.

Granted that my missiles are aided by target painter and webs but so are guns.

Nonetheless there is still some balance between guns and missiles. What don't means there is no need to some adjustments.

-CCP would boost ECM so it also block the ability of buthurt posting.
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#17 - 2013-04-24 02:14:43 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:



You see each size of weapons is doubled so rough figures
-rockets 8km
-HAMS 16km
-Torps 16km
so therefore its unbalanced and out of sequence so in order to address torps range you have to address the sequence.
blasters have 6km optimal with void/T1 antimatter infact all guns short range ammo is under 20km... lasers are supposed to be the longest range weapon and its optimal is 15km granted it has 10km falloff but thats guns advantage and you don't really use falloff on most turrets besides projectiles.


Ok. How about we address the sequence by boosting unbonused torpedo range to the neighborhood of 22 kilometers or something? Then the Raven's range bonus will actually come in handy. Oh also, here's another thing I'm going to point out, about the ships that would be using torpedoes.

The Typhoon would not suffer at all from this change because it's a slow armor boat and otherwise would have trouble staying in range. The new Raven has easily the worst tank out of ALL the battleships at this point in time (compounded by horrifically large sig radius and necessity of having a MWD on you to try and keep range). If you try to brawl in a Raven, you will die. It will not be a fight.

Slashing the range of HAMs and rockets in half to fit 'the sequence' continues to not address the initial problem, and cause MORE problems (much like most of the Raven tweaks, actually) for other ships that shouldn't be having them.
Pan Dora
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#18 - 2013-04-24 02:32:30 UTC

When comparing gun range vs missile ranges one need to consider that guns have a effective range greater than [optimal] and missiles have a effective range lower than [missile speed]x[flight time]. Also that guns trade damage for range with tech 1 ammo while missiles don't.

That said Torps effective range right now sucks. Even then I hope CCP don't give a simple range increase for torps, its the boring fix that turn each wepon system more equal. Better if torps start to shine at that sucky range.

-CCP would boost ECM so it also block the ability of buthurt posting.
Scorpionstrike
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2013-04-24 03:18:18 UTC
I know what you are trying to say Ager Agemo,

i did enjoy the stealth bomber but i don't use it instead i use an attack cruiser as the bomber is too limited and it is a shame as i enjoy cloaking / stealth gameplay, i like yourself tried to explain to people that every other ship class out there can work around its weakness eg Blaster range with speed etc., but it all falls on deaf ears and your ice skating up hill with this, they don't get that it is not just about the torpedo damage application its about having more options if torp's wont suit the situation, but hang on cloaking is an "overpowered" specialization that will end EvE forever ! because the ship becomes OP when the cloak comes off lol. to be honest they do not want to get ambushed by a cloaker full-stop.

like i said your Ice skating up hill, unfortunetly.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2013-04-24 08:47:05 UTC
Rockets and HAMs have low DPS compared to other short range weapons, but they have range similar to pulse lasers and they virtually always hit. They also have a relatively small explosion radius and high explosion velocity. Seems balanced to me.

Torpedoes have slightly higher DPS than even large neutron blasters, but do not follow the trend of larger weapons having double the range of their smaller counterpart, and instead have about the SAME range as HAMs. They also have a LARGER explosion radius and LOWER explosion velocity than cruise missiles.

I wouldn't mind seeing torpedoes have their range doubled, but it'll have to come at the cost of reducing their DPS significantly (which also means cutting the explosion radius and boosting explosion velocity). As it is, torpedoes seem to be a highly niche weapon, as they are extremely effective when used properly but they can barely hit anything when fit to a slow battleship. I find I can't make them work at all, and I got rid of my cruise missile Raven when I discovered that almost every other battleship can beat it in DPS.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
12Next page