These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Buff torpedos please ccp

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
John Ratcliffe
Tradors'R'us
IChooseYou Alliance
#81 - 2013-09-16 09:52:13 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Honestly, just get rid of torpedoes.


No. Keep them, but give ships that can use them sufficient range bonus that they are effective.

Quote:
Cruise missile damage has been buffed to the point that torps are redundant.


Unless my CM fit RNI has gained 400 DPS since I logged last night then you're talking out of your arse.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#82 - 2013-09-16 11:55:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Markku Laaksonen wrote:
Just a little tidbit to drop in here. Take from it what you will.

My Drake Navy Issue is fitted with T2 HAMs and 3 BCS IIs. With perfect skills and CN missiles, EFT says I get some certain DPS. (Don't recall off the top of my head and cant' access EFT now to check. I'll edit later.)

A Ferox fit with T2 250mm Rails and 2 Mag Stab IIs, CN antimatter, and my skills (i.e. not Vs), out DPS the nDrake by about 200.

Does that seem off to anyone else?

Yep, I derped left when I should hav ederped right. Disregard this post. I had T2 rails on my Ferox and m4 HAMs on my nDrake.



Navy Drake is not really meant to dish tons of dps but actually have a huge nasty tank and clean the field of small ships, its bonus are not intended to make it a dps glass tank. You'll get better dps numbers out of the regular Drake if you really want to see how much dps you get out of your Drake vs Ferox.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
To mare
Advanced Technology
#83 - 2013-09-16 12:04:22 UTC
John Ratcliffe wrote:

Quote:
Cruise missile damage has been buffed to the point that torps are redundant.


Unless my CM fit RNI has gained 400 DPS since I logged last night then you're talking out of your arse.

hmm rage cruise? never heard of them?
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#84 - 2013-09-16 12:35:13 UTC
John Ratcliffe wrote:
Unless my CM fit RNI has gained 400 DPS since I logged last night then you're talking out of your arse.



If this is not a buff, please tell me what is a buff.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Drake Doe
88Th Tax Haven
#85 - 2013-09-16 13:33:08 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
Drake Doe wrote:

The fact that one of them apply dps the same everywhere within it's range? Possibly the fact that on those hulls the drake most likely has more range vs antimatter?

:O

250mm rail II with antimatter ferox 27km optimal+15km fallott
ham II navy missile with drake 20km max range
more or less same dps

yeah i can totally see how drake has more range....

HML-s are just overnerfed
and torps are just plain crap ultra short range with terrible dmg appliciation ,high fitting costs and horrible torp volumes/costs

Even though I'm wrong either way, did you check the Drake's or the navy Drake's range? This doesn't have to do with hmls being overnerfed, but medium rails being overbuffed. I agree that torps require too many mods and hull bonuses just to be useful, compared to cruise missiles applying full damage 100km+.

"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! pops more corn" ---Evernub--
Mr Bombastic
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2013-09-16 14:26:14 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
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.


jsut let them be different! we don;t need 6 weapon systems all exactly the same and equally as good as each other but with different visual effects
stoicfaux
#87 - 2013-09-16 16:40:36 UTC
John Ratcliffe wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
Honestly, just get rid of torpedoes.


No. Keep them, but give ships that can use them sufficient range bonus that they are effective.

Which is ridiculous. If you have to rely on hull bonuses to increase range, there might be a problem. If you need to provide a 60 to 100% buff to make a weapon practical to use, then there's almost certainly a problem.

Quote:
Quote:
Cruise missile damage has been buffed to the point that torps are redundant.


Unless my CM fit RNI has gained 400 DPS since I logged last night then you're talking out of your arse.

Compare the DPS between Fury cruse missiles and Rage, CN, and Javelin torps. Then realize that Rage torps aren't practical except against the very largest and slowest of ships and structures. Don't forget to include reload time in your DPS numbers.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2013-09-16 17:46:18 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:

Compare the DPS between Fury cruse missiles and Rage, CN, and Javelin torps. Then realize that Rage torps aren't practical except against the very largest and slowest of ships and structures. Don't forget to include reload time in your DPS numbers.



At 16 rounds a clip you waist a LOT of time reloading.
Kalihira
Ultramar Independent Contracting
#89 - 2013-09-18 10:32:28 UTC
John Ratcliffe wrote:
Kalihira wrote:
You sir, are wrong, torps are a short range weaponn system. Golem is bonused for both the short and long range weapon system, and SBs are an exeption...


How is 38KM short range?

When CCP tell me I am wrong then I'll accept it, I'm not interested in your opinion.



if you dont care about other peoples opinion, dont post on forums. For the rest, see what Onictus has to say
Markku Laaksonen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#90 - 2013-09-18 12:50:54 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Navy Drake is not really meant to dish tons of dps but actually have a huge nasty tank and clean the field of small ships, its bonus are not intended to make it a dps glass tank. You'll get better dps numbers out of the regular Drake if you really want to see how much dps you get out of your Drake vs Ferox.


I misrepresented the numbers in my original post because I didn't have my EFT fits handy, but the point of my post wasn't that a Ferox does more damage than a nDrake. The point was that a long range weapon system out DPSes a short ranged weapon system on two hulls that both lack a damage bonus.

Without having EFT in front of me to look at some DPS charts, I won't say that the Ferox applies its damage better on average than the nDrake, but I'd put money on it.

DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/

EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
John Ratcliffe
Tradors'R'us
IChooseYou Alliance
#91 - 2013-09-18 13:23:34 UTC
Kalihira wrote:
if you dont care about other peoples opinion, dont post on forums.


This is how we interact with CCP, so I'll carry on. Thanks for the interest though.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#92 - 2013-09-18 19:22:41 UTC
Onictus wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:

Compare the DPS between Fury cruse missiles and Rage, CN, and Javelin torps. Then realize that Rage torps aren't practical except against the very largest and slowest of ships and structures. Don't forget to include reload time in your DPS numbers.



At 16 rounds a clip you waist a LOT of time reloading.



16 rounds AND the v-e-r-y l-o-n-g r-e-l-o-a-d t-i-m-e-r.

In this point I totally agree but not to give them more range because :bomber:, and we might like it or hate it it's the argument to consider first before touching Torps any further.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
stoicfaux
#93 - 2013-09-18 23:22:01 UTC
20 torps. 27 cruise missiles. Not 16.

/inner_ocd

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#94 - 2013-09-19 06:31:50 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Onictus wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:

Compare the DPS between Fury cruse missiles and Rage, CN, and Javelin torps. Then realize that Rage torps aren't practical except against the very largest and slowest of ships and structures. Don't forget to include reload time in your DPS numbers.



At 16 rounds a clip you waist a LOT of time reloading.



16 rounds AND the v-e-r-y l-o-n-g r-e-l-o-a-d t-i-m-e-r.

In this point I totally agree but not to give them more range because :bomber:, and we might like it or hate it it's the argument to consider first before touching Torps any further.


Wouldn't it make more sense to recalculate the bomber's bonuses after we've made the torp work for every other ship?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
marVLs
#95 - 2013-09-19 08:05:23 UTC
Clip size is terrible, yep that's true - need improvement to at least 40

Torp range... bad for not insta hit BS weapon, on ship with range bonus for them they have range that should be without that bonus.

Torp damage, javelins got low damage but it's good with range buff, Rages got great damage but terrible exp radius, something wrong that BS size weapon can't hit other BS for full damage...

I like them being slow velocity, that's make them not OP with those changes, really very slow speed of them is bigger disadvantage than some may think.

There are some ideas here and there, maybe make them fast reloading weapon with big clip? (but there's a problem with that missile lag issue).


Some crazy (rather not possible) idea: torp launcher visualy have 3 missiles loaded in bay, but only one is firing and other one's are vaporizing... ******** Roll so maybe make them clip inside a clip weapon, so from every bay they shoot 3 missiles at same time, or with 1s intervals, ofcourse this will need more balance but in imagination it looks cool and bring something fresh at last Blink
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#96 - 2013-09-19 08:53:49 UTC
marVLs wrote:
Clip size is terrible, yep that's true - need improvement to at least 40

Torp range... bad for not insta hit BS weapon, on ship with range bonus for them they have range that should be without that bonus.

Torp damage, javelins got low damage but it's good with range buff, Rages got great damage but terrible exp radius, something wrong that BS size weapon can't hit other BS for full damage...

I like them being slow velocity, that's make them not OP with those changes, really very slow speed of them is bigger disadvantage than some may think.

There are some ideas here and there, maybe make them fast reloading weapon with big clip? (but there's a problem with that missile lag issue).


Some crazy (rather not possible) idea: torp launcher visualy have 3 missiles loaded in bay, but only one is firing and other one's are vaporizing... ******** Roll so maybe make them clip inside a clip weapon, so from every bay they shoot 3 missiles at same time, or with 1s intervals, ofcourse this will need more balance but in imagination it looks cool and bring something fresh at last Blink

yeah could work like anciliary shield boosters , awesome for 1 min then needs long reload time
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#97 - 2013-09-19 14:13:55 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
marVLs wrote:
Clip size is terrible, yep that's true - need improvement to at least 40

Torp range... bad for not insta hit BS weapon, on ship with range bonus for them they have range that should be without that bonus.

Torp damage, javelins got low damage but it's good with range buff, Rages got great damage but terrible exp radius, something wrong that BS size weapon can't hit other BS for full damage...

I like them being slow velocity, that's make them not OP with those changes, really very slow speed of them is bigger disadvantage than some may think.

There are some ideas here and there, maybe make them fast reloading weapon with big clip? (but there's a problem with that missile lag issue).


Some crazy (rather not possible) idea: torp launcher visualy have 3 missiles loaded in bay, but only one is firing and other one's are vaporizing... ******** Roll so maybe make them clip inside a clip weapon, so from every bay they shoot 3 missiles at same time, or with 1s intervals, ofcourse this will need more balance but in imagination it looks cool and bring something fresh at last Blink

yeah could work like anciliary shield boosters , awesome for 1 min then needs long reload time


This would effectively be a substantial Bomber buff.

It is revealing that it takes huge bonuses like those on Stealth Bombers to make torps viable.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
marVLs
#98 - 2013-09-19 14:26:31 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


This would effectively be a substantial Bomber buff.

It is revealing that it takes huge bonuses like those on Stealth Bombers to make torps viable.



Of course bomber bonus should be changed, why should every other ship and torps suffer just because bombers
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#99 - 2013-09-19 18:13:43 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Onictus wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:

Compare the DPS between Fury cruse missiles and Rage, CN, and Javelin torps. Then realize that Rage torps aren't practical except against the very largest and slowest of ships and structures. Don't forget to include reload time in your DPS numbers.



At 16 rounds a clip you waist a LOT of time reloading.



16 rounds AND the v-e-r-y l-o-n-g r-e-l-o-a-d t-i-m-e-r.

In this point I totally agree but not to give them more range because :bomber:, and we might like it or hate it it's the argument to consider first before touching Torps any further.


Wouldn't it make more sense to recalculate the bomber's bonuses after we've made the torp work for every other ship?



That indeed is the obvious route however bombers are actually quite amazing and I'm afraid they could get a "meh" effect after getting Numbers™ revamp, you know the 7.5 and 10 they like so much Lol

On the other side why not just adapt current ships with Torp bonus to make them a bit more useful?
-aka HM Drakes/Tengus- those became useless/under used because of a tiny 2% difference before med turrets revamp, now it's more about 8 to10% buff they need to make hulls able to use them a viable choice again, yeah another thread.

In fact Bombers imho are close to stepping on the red line but they're not there yet, thus very good ships fun to fly and any number you change might affect them harder than we can expect, entire wings and tactics are build around bombers, I'm afraid in fact they become null or totally op ruining the game either one way or the other.
I can agree some hulls full skills 28km is rather very very short but this is not really the ammo fault, it's ship bonus that must be changed, yes it's a bit more work to do but imho the best thing to do, if on top TP's get a boost to help them apply their dps, ammo clip/rof increased, how could this go wrong without touching bombers?

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#100 - 2013-09-19 18:25:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
marVLs wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


This would effectively be a substantial Bomber buff.

It is revealing that it takes huge bonuses like those on Stealth Bombers to make torps viable.



Of course bomber bonus should be changed, why should every other ship and torps suffer just because bombers




I think you see the problem from the bad perspective. It's not because of bombers Torps suffer but because other ships using them, as modules supposed to help them work better, are not adapted correctly or modules don't have the efficiency they should/could have.

How many Tp bonus ships do we see in fleets or gangs and using TP's? -christ I think in all my eve career I must have seen one. Most often are used by sentry fleets FC to alpha one target and sometimes because someone said so without it having much impact on the overall end of the fight if none.

How many Torp or ships using torps threads do you see where everyone tells to use 2 TPs? -Stoicfaux is imho someone very advised about missiles, their mechanics and fits, I often read his posts about this weapon system with attention and interest because this guy knows what he talks about.
We might have a different opinion on "how to" but in the end I think both don't see bombers as the true issue but the revealing element what is wrong with torps: ships bonus first then TPs (Tp is always mentioned several times in the same post sort to say how important this module is but also how much of "weak" the benefit per module is).

Torps are an extremely powerful weapon system if all factors are positive so lets not take this lightly and take the easy road to see them get nerf a couple months later, the yoyo effect is not really what I like in this game.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne