Ships & Modules

Personally I only think torps need a few fixes.

First: Fitting. Now I'll state that my opinion is that the fitting on torps should be reduced making them easier to fit, but I am open to things happening the other way. But my reasoning for this is this:
Torpedo Launcher II: 88 CPU, 1838 PG
Cruise Missile Launcher II : 66 CPU, 1513 PG

It takes 22 more CPU (33%) and 325 more PG (21%) to fit a Torp launcher than a Cruise launcher. In every other instance the longer range weapon is harder to fit than the short range, so why is the exception here. Fitting Torps is a nightmare, especially when Cruises are so damn good in comparison.

Second: Application. With max skills we get the following:

Mjolnir Cruise Missile: 103.5m/s Explosion Velocity, 247.5m Explosion Radius
Mjolnir Torpedo: 106.5m/s Explosion Velocity, 337.5 Explosion Radius

So the application on large targets is only slightly better on torps, but is worse on smaller targets at all ranges. This is contrary to most other weapon systems where the close range weapon has better application, but a long range weapon at appropriately long range can compensate for the application by being way out and tracking. Now of course tracking doesn't apply to missiles, but even in rockets and HAMs, the application is superior to LMLs and HMLs.

I am of the opinion that outright nerfing cruise launchers isn't the way to go. I'd try and meet halfway. Bring cruise explosion radius up to ~300m with perfect skills, and compensate Torps with ~280 with perfect skills, while having the velocity increased somewhat (maybe 10%). I think this would be an acceptable level of nerf for cruises while keeping the buff on torps relatively low so they don't become ridiculously broken.


Lastly: I might increase the range 10-20%, but that's just maybe. I'd probably see how they perform after these first two changes before jumping in with the range.

......so TPs are going to make torps useful on battleships? Or are you basing your assesment on bombers alone

Being a short range weapon, i dont think we can hope for any incrrease for range. Most would not even support this. What we can at least hope for is to increase the travel velocity and decrease flight time . I find the wait to be the most annoying. also the 18rounds to be way to small. Again i think we have to blame the bombers on this as increasing the number of missiles per reload would make them OP. maybe the real problem is bombers sharing the same weapon system as the BS.

Because it should be a viable Lvl 4 weapon platform, instead of the pathetic joke it currently is - obviously! Because a Golem with Torps should be the pinnacle of Caldari Missile Skill training. Instead it's sad. There are practically no missions I can think of where the majority of NPCs are within the range of T2 Rage Torps. Torp range on a Golem is pathetic, it should have far more range. Look at the range on a Stealth Bomber FFS!

Torp range on a Golem ought to be 60KM for T2 and 80KM for T2 Javelin.

I seriously doubt they're going to buff torpedoes when half the point of the cruise missile changes was to make them competitive with torpedoes.

(https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=226046&find=unread : "The result is a situation where Cruise Missiles have pve applications, but otherwise torpedoes become the only available weapon system for missile focused battleships. We want to change that!")

They're more likely to nerf CMs, if everyone is using them over torps now.

Level 4 missions don't matter.

I'll sway this start to different road: T2 torp launchers are so CPU hungry, that you are deciding between faction torps + T1 launchers and BCU and/or rigs vs. T2 torp launchers. T2 torp launchers open up T2 ammo and have higher rate of fire due to specialization, but still don't beat T1 launchers + BCU and T1 torps dps-wise (maybe with Rage torps by tiny margin). You just don't have CPU left to fit BCUs or rigs.

Now with T2 cruises, you fit it easily, lose max 15% dmg, but have ammo vs. small ships, faction ammo and furies. T2 torps you have range ammo (but it cuts dps way too hard imo) and ammo valid only for supertackled targets and faction ammo, which is better off beiong fired from T1 launchers for abovementioned reasons.

Where they fail miserably.

Hello

A lot of good points in here. I don't think we're ready to make a big change to torps or cruise right now, but I agree that we need to think about it. The point that cruise are so good for pve that torps are difficult to justify makes sense, but as Malc says, we can't necessarily just make a change based on that situation when both torps and cruise are trying to compete in the pvp environment and for now are still beat out by turrets in most situations.

One of the ideas that I agree most with is that the rof feels very long which can make torps harder to manage, and the ammo capacity is very low so it feels like you have to reload too much.

I'll make sure we talk about this in the near future and see if any adjustments are necessary.

Indeed, and their major problem aside the ammo amount and rof is mostly dmg application.
Decrease a bit base ammo explo radius is an option, imho a good one but carefully because as always: bombers

Any change done to ammo it self, launchers or skill tree will exponentially benefit to Bombers that are already way too good.