Ships & Modules

And make them mid slot mods.

Using 2 TPs and Rigors you should.

The Golem needs another Rig slot IMHO.

A battleship should be competitive within its own class without the need for gimped fittings, specialised fittings.

The attack battleships should that sub-section ever emerge should be viable against larger/smaller targets as deemed necessary. Combat battleships like the raven should be able to go toe-to-toe with another combat battleship and have a fair chance of winning without needing to gimp the fit or take logi along.

Any ship that cannot compete within its own class is underpowered. The excuse of taking a second person(alt) along is a cop out and frail justification for multiboxing. I have never and will never support the idea of running multiple accounts. If a game can't be done on the shoulders of its playerbase it's a bad game.

Under the current or future rules? Under the current rules I see no distinction. It is a battleship that is good for missions and not a lot else.

Excuse me?

Beyond 4.5km you are seeing a damage reduction with said Neutrons, at 17km you are wasting your time (~40% 'paper' damage).

30km with Iron you may aswell be throwing wet paper towels at your enemy...

Anyhow, back on topic, Torpedoes could do with some clarity of purpose in terms of role - is it really as a short range weapon? Should it be medium range as it once was (84km), should they be high DPS? or would high alpha strike compensate for delayed damage?

One cannot detect sarcasm over the internet. In any case the Raven is the slowest mofo around and you still can't hit it worth a damn.

The reason is that when looking at the Torp system relative the other missiles systems, what stands out is the lack of comparative range.

The advantages of SR missiles is damage and range.

The disadvantages are even further reductions to accuracy.

If you look at Rockets (compared to S-Blasters, S-AC and S-Pulse), and HAM (compared to M-Blasters, M-AC and M-Pulse), you will see that they are quite competetive in range, being able to meet unbonused optimals or single-falloff.

If you look at the Torps you'll realize that those "40km or so" is quite lacking to the 80km or so that L-Pulse and L-AC are capable of pushing with proven results.

Another option would of course be to nerf L-Pulse and L-AC because in a 150km paradigm it's quite noteworthy that bonused L-class ships can hit 100km (or 2/3 the grid) with SR weapons (like the Foxcat Navpocs or the Tourney Vargurs). If you wonder why they're popular, that's it, they are essentially "Sniping" with SR weapons which can only be considered broken at least to some extent.

All in all, what stand out when it comes to Torps is not a lack of potential damage or a lack of accuracy. Those parameters are quite inline with what is intended for the system and how the system compares overall. The thing that stands out is that Torps lack a whopping 50% projection relative Rockets and HAM when compared to their turret siblings. That is quite significant given the possible potential of things like Ravens with HML-range (which is pretty much what Hellcat Abaddons and Nano Pests are capable of relative (the extinct-) Beambingers and Artycanes.


So, once again...

Torps don't need more damage (they already have good damage), they don't need more accuracy (that would be a terrible idea, streamlining weapon systems and further erasing tactical variation) and they definately don't need accuracy modules like TC/TE (which would be beyond horrible, exploitable and long-term devastating for the game).

Improving Torps, as others have put it, is as simple as +50% velocity and removing the Bomber flight-time bonus (letting them keep the velocity bonus, so they have two frigate-bonuses and not three). Makes sense all around, doesn't it?

Or perhaps even better, taking a look at L-AC and L-Pulse and take a hard good pondering on wether it's reasonable to have SR systems that cover 2/3 of any effective grid - as it stands, short appearantly means long .

Point well made.

I should probably have said that Torps should have a slight base-reach advantage to L-pulse optimal.

The examples I blurted out was with common fits (2x TE or 2x TC).

The kind of modules Torps don't have, which I continue to argue that they shouldn't have.



That's also where it becomes interesting.

If you fly a Torp-ship solitarily those slots would probably be represented by webs or painters to cover "racial deficiencies".

Obviously, it's more likely that you'll see someone using an additional support-ship to paint for you (since that is an offensive electronic utility that scales per target) than you are to see someone running a remote TC on you (which is a sheer electronic utility with different scaling, with usefulness limited to a certain medium sized scale).

So indeed, things are not the same. It is tolerably different though, it's similar enough - there's drawbacks and advantages to every system.



That is also what I like and what I argue to preserve in these threads.

Nothing would be more dull than if every weapon in the game had about the same damage output , reach, accuracy and relation to offensive and defensive outside effects.

The fact that there are differences is what used to create flavour, provide margin for imbalances and encourage creativity in the past. That's what encouraged different tactics, and promoted engineering new tactics.

If anything, it's that variety that is becomming more and more sorely missed today, which leads to a stagnation of interaction between wildly different groups. Why? Because when you make the game mechanics similar in the name of balance, you also force the playerbase to interact with similar player groups. The more even, within the definition that even = same, the weapon systems are... the more difficult it will be for fewer players to interact with more players. If you have a more variation-based system there are extremes you can take to (in the rock-paper-scissor of EVE) in order bridge numerical gaps because you brought a really sharp precision scissor to their full block of paper.

That's a quite important lesson to keep in mind in these days of big coalitions competing primarily in player numbers and small themeparks forming everywhere where players of equal age, size and stature look to interact with each other. There is a lack of variation here. There is a lack of small-gang, lowsec, FW, young player in small, high tech ships interacting with large-fleet, nullsec, sovereign, old players in capital, low tech ships. EVE is a sandbox, they're supposed to interact.

In a sandbox game like EVE everything is tied together to some degree, and something as detailed as the balance of weapon systems (like Torpedoes) have intricate splashing effects to something as fundamental as player-player group interaction.

Does this make sense?



When people say "EVE is a complex game", this is what they refer to. Not many people are capable of seeing how it all ties together though.

This is also why introducing something like TE/TC for missiles to enable 80km Torp-Ravens and then rebalance the Torps and Ravens of EVE to behave just like Abaddons is something I am strongly against. Why? Because it would make letting 5 players in Ravens have more trouble interacting with 10 players in Abaddons, or 50 players in Abaddons interacting with 100 players in Ravens. When that happens we see less incentive to up-engage (cross-scale interaction) which leads to allround less interaction in EVE: a game based on said interaction.

This is also why I have been so strongly against the BC3, because they are all extremely poor at cross-scale interaction, since they are all very single-minded and similar (shoot anything anywhere, tank nothing nowhere).

The BC3 have about the same damage output, reach, accuracy and relation to offensive and defensive outside effects.

What Noisrevbus said.

All weapon systems are not equivalent in all situations. Deal with it.

EDIT: That said, torps definitely need something, because it is very evident that they're almost never used except on ships that have such huge bonuses that they're a totally different weapon system.

Probably a horrible idea but ill post it anyways


Could torps be made into anti capship weapons? granting huge dps on caps and structures, but virtually none to other ships?
Basically increase torp damage but increase their explosion radius and decrease eplosion velocity, making it an effective cap killer?

Give the raven and any other torp BS a bonus reducing PG needs for torps



As it stands with all level 5 skills

Explosion radius is 550m
Explosion Velocity is 91.5 m/s

A moros has a sig radius of 3000m
and base speed of 60m/s




[Raven, test]
6x Torpedo Launcher II (Scourge Rage Torpedo)
2x Ballistic Control System II

[Statistics - all level 5]

Volley Damage: 5,997.15
DPS: 1,022.31