These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Missiles Not Prefered For Pvp?

Author
Hibibu
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-06-16 04:31:35 UTC
A few days ago I was reading a guide to fitting ships which stated that missiles were less preferred for pvp because of the time delay between firing and damage being inflicted.
Are missiles less preferred because of this or was the advice misguided?
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
#2 - 2013-06-16 05:25:07 UTC
Light missiles strongly dissagree with this thread.

To explain, light missiles are one of, if not THE top weapon choices for small scale pvp. They do massive volley damage, have great range, and reach their targets quickly. They are most commonly fitted on Condors (tech 1 Caldari frigate) and used to kite enemy ships at a range they cannot respond.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone

Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-06-16 05:32:00 UTC
missiles have their advantages and disadvantages in pvp just like any other weapon system.
Zero Sum Gain
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2013-06-16 07:57:23 UTC
That is a downside but it's not any less prefered
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#5 - 2013-06-16 09:05:30 UTC
My dual-prop armour Cyclone has a disagree with this thread's premise. My Bellicose also. Can't say what my Drake thinks, as I keep it locked in the gimp dungeon.
Ovv Topik
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2013-06-16 13:25:49 UTC
Generally speaking, missiles/Rockets are lower damage than turrets, but much better range.

Even the short range rockets on a Condor, Kestrel or a Breacher can hit out to around 10km doing around 100dps .

And because tracking becomes an issue for turrets at higher range, they are therefore the preferred kiting option.

"Nicknack, I'm in a shoe in space, on my computer, in my house, with a cup of coffee, in't that something." - Fly Safe PopPaddi. o7

Plato Forko
123 Fake Street
#7 - 2013-06-16 17:27:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Plato Forko
The only problem with missiles is they won't help a bit in x-training to other weapons. The time delay used to be a factor when nano drake gangs were spewing HMLs to crazy range but it's a non-issue if the target's in range and tackled. HAMs deal heavy damage consistently with strong range and are immune to TD and neuting, so if you put something like a Cyclone right in the middle of a fleet fight there's a good chance of nailing top damage on a lot of kills. As mentioned, rockets and light missiles also have their place. The only missile type not preferred for PvP would be cruise
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#8 - 2013-06-16 18:51:06 UTC
Hibibu wrote:

Are missiles less preferred because of this or was the advice misguided?


The advice assumes a very particular context and has a lot to do with the personal preferences of the person who wrote it.

To me your question looks like asking for a "rule". There are none. Every ship can kill. it just depends upon what you're attacking!

For 1 vs 1 you'll make different choices than you will for 200 vs 200. It's all PVP.

Hibibu
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#9 - 2013-06-17 01:10:50 UTC
Nice work lads. Thanks for your pearls of wisdom.
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
#10 - 2013-06-17 19:57:08 UTC
Ovv Topik wrote:
Generally speaking, missiles/Rockets are lower damage than turrets, but much better range.

Even the short range rockets on a Condor, Kestrel or a Breacher can hit out to around 10km doing around 100dps .

And because tracking becomes an issue for turrets at higher range, they are therefore the preferred kiting option.

1) Lower damage? only if you compare the close range ammo on close range guns v the missiles. Would you rather do 300dps at 50km in a BC or 600 at 5-10km? Try fitting a long range gun even with tech II long range ammo missiles lose nothing in the dps dept. Or would you rather your 100 or so dps in a frigate at the edge of tackle range where that 200 dps of blaster damage is hardly being applied? No I think you would rather be the missile boat doing enough damage to kill at a range and with range dictation ability to not receive hardly any damage from the turret ship (possibly also suffering from armor brick problems).

2) Precisely, and with more mids you can keep the other ship at that 10km sweet spot (double web hookbills, etc) such that you really don't need any tank. The range advantage and range dictation ability are better than any dps tank.

3) Radial tracking is not an issue at long range, it is whether that range is within optimal or at least the first falloff that is the problem for turrets. Missiles typically slightly out range turrets. So then add the ability to fit a TD for optimal on a mid slot blessed missile boat and of course it's suckville for turret boats.

You are looking at outdated information if it is saying missiles are bad for pvp. If anything they are too advantaged atm.

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Marc Callan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-06-18 09:48:46 UTC
In close-range light-ship combat, missiles are a perfectly viable weapon system. Ships like the Condor, Hookbill, and Hawk can give opponents gibbering fits. As ship sizes and engagement ranges grow larger, though, missiles become more problematic. Cruisers and battlecruisers can use missiles effectively, but at least through Retribution, battleships and capital ships were advised to avoid missiles if engaging in PVP. Odyssey's buff to cruise missiles may well change that, making them a viable PVP weapon platform, but it's only been a few weeks; doctrines still need to be tested, shaken down and settled on.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." - Kurt Vonnegurt

Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#12 - 2013-06-18 15:00:16 UTC
I believe the threshold is between medium and large missiles. Outside of bombers, you don't see alot of fleets with large+ missiles roaming around. But for small and medium weapons, they seem to maintain some popularity, so they can't be in that bad of a place.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

JAF Anders
Adenosine Inhibition
#13 - 2013-06-18 18:23:07 UTC
You were misinformed. Time-on-target is considerably less important than effective application.

Some incursion communities favor turrets over missiles in certain sites, just so you know.

The pursuit of excellence and stabbed plexing alts.

Glathull
Warlock Assassins
#14 - 2013-06-19 07:27:30 UTC
I think the idea is more important in fleet composition. You don't want to be the only missile boat in a hybrid gang. The target will be dead before your missiles get there. I think the same applies to incursion fleets.

But as a general principe, missiles are a viable weapon platform just like almost all the others.

I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon

Joan Greywind
The Lazy Crabs
#15 - 2013-06-19 07:40:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Joan Greywind
JAF Anders wrote:
You were misinformed. Time-on-target is considerably less important than effective application.

Some incursion communities favor turrets over missiles in certain sites, just so you know.



Missiles are complete trash in incursions.

Now back to pvp. We are going to start with blob warfare. Guns apply the damage instantly which is very important in blob warfare, where alpha counts for a lot and targets die in seconds. Now with missiles it will take multiple seconds for the missiles to actually hit the target delaying the kill by a huge percentage. Another advantage of guns, is in big scale pvp you usually have free slots (no webs, scams etc..). With guns you can use these slots to fit mods that increase tracking, such as the tracking enhancer and tracking computer. With missiles you have none (tp have diminishing returns and are as good for gun and they are for missiles), .

That doesn't mean you won't find missile ship doctrines in large scale pvp, examples include tengu doctrines, caracel, cyclone etc. But in EVE, the options of gun ships is much wider and has better application in more situations than missile ships.

Now in small scale PVP it doesn't really matter much, as you aren't relying on alpha that much. But even here,missile ships (imo) still are less beneficial than gun ships, solely for the reason that there isn't a lot of options. A lot of missile ships by their nature are geared towards pve (thank you carebear caldari) and you just have a lot more options with gun ships (and much easier to actually cross train to the other gun systems).

Also another small advantage of guns is, with the right piloting (and the stupidity of the other pilot) you can actually kills smaller targets, but a torpedo battleship can never kill a frigate.

Another thing, in brawler fits, missiles usually have less damage than their guns counterparts. They do have a bigger range, but range isn't a big factor in brawling fights.

Missiles look cooler so there is that.
If you want to PVP but still don't have your mind set on which ships or style you are going to fly, I recommend you go for guns.
Princess Nexxala
Zero Syndicate
#16 - 2013-06-19 15:18:41 UTC
Missiles rawk, anyone who says they are bad for pvp is bad @ pvp

nom nom

JAF Anders
Adenosine Inhibition
#17 - 2013-06-19 18:56:34 UTC
Joan Greywind wrote:

Missiles are complete trash in incursions.


You don't fly many HQs, do you?

The pursuit of excellence and stabbed plexing alts.

Grandma Squirel
#18 - 2013-06-20 04:06:41 UTC
In addition to the delay in application of alpha mentioned above with regards to blob warfare, missiles are at a major disadvantage when it comes to breaking reps. In the large gang environment, both sides are likely to have sufficient logi to tank the theoretical incoming DPS from the opposing side. To counter this, FCs will try to kill a target before the logi have a chance to land reps. Giving someone 10 seconds of warning from when you fire your missiles to when they land can give their logi a huge advantage if they are paying attention and broadcast early.

Obviously, this disadvantage is irrelevant once you hit gang sizes where you either don't have logi, or you have too few logi to hold reps.
Joan Greywind
The Lazy Crabs
#19 - 2013-06-20 04:18:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Joan Greywind
JAF Anders wrote:
Joan Greywind wrote:

Missiles are complete trash in incursions.


You don't fly many HQs, do you?


I only fly hq's with 15m lp to my name. I fly with the most efficient incursion group, and even the less efficient one's dont use missiles anymore. Even for as snipers they are bad since in hq's the most efficient way to do them is actually by primarying the targets. For long range targets the flight time is 10-15 secs. How many volleys of that is wasted after the target dies?

If you use missiles in incursions, even in vg's you need to up your game, just a friendly advice.

I didn't mean to go off topic with the carebear talk.
Taoist Dragon
School of Applied Knowledge
#20 - 2013-06-20 06:06:55 UTC
Ultimately the preference of missiles for use in pvp is very personal or fleet doctrine orientated.

The actual effectiveness of missiles in pvp is just as good as guns when used in the right manner. Correct tools for the job etc etc

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

12Next page