These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ballistic Enhancer

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#61 - 2013-12-20 23:23:51 UTC
lol i will, if i find myself in a situation where i think they'd be my best option, i have them trained on 3 chars. but just because i dnt find myself in such a situation often doesn't mean they are not useful. dnt get me wrong, im not saying they're good and have in no way 'preached thier virtues', but i'd probs find more use for them than medium beams lets say, even with TE's and TC's.

Then again, my behaviour should probably not be used as a model for whats good and not good in eve, otherwise large projectiles are in serious need of a buff P

the main points i want to convey in this thread have always been:

- No one seems to really know what missiles work and dont work. everyone says something different. (with perhaps the exception of heavy missiles being very unpopular in their current, but still used, state)

- I hope we dnt get missile application mods without missile disruption mods. It makes logical sense to me and especially as some missiles would be quite scary.

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
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#62 - 2013-12-20 23:54:37 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
lol i will, if i find myself in a situation where i think they'd be my best option, i have them trained on 3 chars. but just because i dnt find myself in such a situation often doesn't mean they are not useful..


I know your trying to be measured and reasonable but that's exactly what it means, you don't find yourself in a situation where heavies are the best option because such a situation doesn't exist. I can't even imagine a realistic scenario where HML's would be the best option for pvp. They are the easy option for low level pve with a drake, if you cant be bothered rotating drones or managing your angular, and you don't mind spending twice as long to do a mission then bang on some HML's and f1 your way through it.

This is my only character, and I'd like to use Caldari ships where possible, they dont have to be "da best at everything" winmattar and gallente style but it would be nice if I at least had competitive missile options in every class.
Meyr
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
OnlyFleets.
#63 - 2013-12-21 00:10:08 UTC
No. Missiles have selectable damage types, ignore tracking, do full damage at max range, never miss, and now, you want even better DPS & DPS application?

No.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#64 - 2013-12-21 00:11:26 UTC
Meyr wrote:
No. Missiles have selectable damage types, ignore tracking, do full damage at max range, never miss, and now, you want even better DPS & DPS application?

Full damage at max range… that's a good one.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#65 - 2013-12-21 00:18:49 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Meyr wrote:
No. Missiles have selectable damage types, ignore tracking, do full damage at max range, never miss, and now, you want even better DPS & DPS application?

Full damage at max range… that's a good one.


They seem to think if they post this half baked rubbish often enough people will think its true.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#66 - 2013-12-21 00:21:54 UTC
Meyr wrote:
No. Missiles have selectable damage types, ignore tracking, do full damage at max range


Are you talking about missiles or drones there?
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#67 - 2013-12-21 00:35:35 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
. We also have Target Painters.

no we don't, we just appropriated it as a workable kludge to fix a broken & poorly designed & implemented weapon system


Target Painters are a minmatar racial e-war counter to the turret destabilsers used in amarrian racial e-war platforms (it's a game lore thing, we just found a secondary un-intentional use for them)

Webbifiers were not put in the game to make missile users lives any easier either ..
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#68 - 2013-12-21 00:49:14 UTC
Edora Madullier wrote:
As long as there is a "Ballistic Disruptor", why not ?


I'd rather see a Signature Reduction Module, or even a Rig added to the game, would achieve the same thing


s/m/l/xl passive mid slot - reduce signature by [x] amount (no stacking penalty)
cpu/pg costs could be in the "shield extender" region

active midslot - reduce signature by [x%] (stacking penalty)
cpu/pg/cap costs could be in the "shield hardener" region
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#69 - 2013-12-21 02:50:44 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
. We also have Target Painters.

no we don't, we just appropriated it as a workable kludge to fix a broken & poorly designed & implemented weapon system

"Appropriation" or no, they're the only long-range alternative we have at the moment.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#70 - 2013-12-21 02:55:35 UTC
To get the topic back on-track, let me pose an alternative... Missiles would not be affected by tracking disruptors, there would not be a mid-slot scripted Ballistic Computer - but you would sacrifice range by running one of these modules.
.....

Ballistic Enhancer
This would function similar to the Tracking Enhancer for turrets, allowing missile-based ships to better apply damage without having to utilize rig slots - which frees up more options for PvP fits. This would be a passive low-slot module, and since low slots are a premium on most missile-based hulls - these would be a tradeoff for raw DPS, speed, damage control (etc.)

Ballistic Enhancer II (+variants)
• -5% missile range, 7.5% explosion radius and 7.5% explosion velocity (I)
• -7.5% missile range, 10% explosion radius and 10% explosion velocity (II)
• -10% missile range, 12.5% explosion radius and 12.5% explosion velocity (Faction)
• Passive module, low-slot; non-scripted; 15 tf CPU (I), 30 tf CPU (II), 25 tf CPU (Faction), 1 MW power grid (all)
• Weapon Upgrades IV (II) and Missile Operation II skill requirements
• Stacking penalized with other modules and rigs

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#71 - 2013-12-21 03:01:32 UTC
Meyr wrote:
Missiles ignore tracking


Do you even use missiles? Do you understand at all that missiles have tracking? Explosion radius and explosion velocity make up the parts of a missile's tracking. They're also what makes AB tanking of missiles a thing that exists to keep missiles from doing their full damage.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#72 - 2013-12-21 09:14:39 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
To get the topic back on-track, let me pose an alternative... Missiles would not be affected by tracking disruptors, there would not be a mid-slot scripted Ballistic Computer - but you would sacrifice range by running one of these modules.
.....

Ballistic Enhancer
This would function similar to the Tracking Enhancer for turrets, allowing missile-based ships to better apply damage without having to utilize rig slots - which frees up more options for PvP fits. This would be a passive low-slot module, and since low slots are a premium on most missile-based hulls - these would be a tradeoff for raw DPS, speed, damage control (etc.)

Ballistic Enhancer II (+variants)
• -5% missile range, 7.5% explosion radius and 7.5% explosion velocity (I)
• -7.5% missile range, 10% explosion radius and 10% explosion velocity (II)
• -10% missile range, 12.5% explosion radius and 12.5% explosion velocity (Faction)
• Passive module, low-slot; non-scripted; 15 tf CPU (I), 30 tf CPU (II), 25 tf CPU (Faction), 1 MW power grid (all)
• Weapon Upgrades IV (II) and Missile Operation II skill requirements
• Stacking penalized with other modules and rigs


The range loss is not necessary. You are already sacrificing DPS for damage application.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2013-12-21 09:29:36 UTC
Edora Madullier wrote:
As long as there is a "Ballistic Disruptor", why not ?

This, please.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2013-12-21 09:31:11 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Meyr wrote:
Missiles ignore tracking


Do you even use missiles? Do you understand at all that missiles have tracking? Explosion radius and explosion velocity make up the parts of a missile's tracking. They're also what makes AB tanking of missiles a thing that exists to keep missiles from doing their full damage.

I don't think you know what "tracking" means.

That's not called "tracking". Missiles hit their target if it's in range, period. They have infinite ability to track a target - how much damage is applied, however, is dependent on the factors you listed.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#75 - 2013-12-21 09:50:04 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Meyr wrote:
Missiles ignore tracking


Do you even use missiles? Do you understand at all that missiles have tracking? Explosion radius and explosion velocity make up the parts of a missile's tracking. They're also what makes AB tanking of missiles a thing that exists to keep missiles from doing their full damage.

I don't think you know what "tracking" means.

That's not called "tracking". Missiles hit their target if it's in range, period. They have infinite ability to track a target - how much damage is applied, however, is dependent on the factors you listed.


It actually is called tracking in EVE.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#76 - 2013-12-21 10:40:08 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
Edora Madullier wrote:
As long as there is a "Ballistic Disruptor", why not ?

This, please.


the same unit should apply to drones as well
Meditril
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#77 - 2013-12-21 18:31:31 UTC
A clear NO from my side to any further missile boosts as long no useful anti missile defence module is implemented. (Defender Missiles are not an useful module, they are broken for many reasons!)

Missiles are currently very good (and close to being overpowered) if you know how to correctly use them.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#78 - 2013-12-21 22:46:08 UTC
Meditril wrote:

Missiles are currently very good (and close to being overpowered) if you know how to correctly use them.


How do you people say complete nonsense like this with a straight face?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#79 - 2013-12-22 01:20:34 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Meditril wrote:

Missiles are currently very good (and close to being overpowered) if you know how to correctly use them.


How do you people say complete nonsense like this with a straight face?

Because there is no E-War that totally shuts a missile user down.
TD's.... Ignored.
TP's... Well. everyone ignores those other than taking more DPS.
Damping or ECM, fit FOF, while I agree it's not great, it does some damage at least. Far better than a turret user can do with no targets or no targets inside lock range.
Neuts. Missiles don't use cap. (Ok, projectiles share this benefit, but the rest of the turrets don't)

You are now asking for the ability to buff your damage application while maintaining the immunity to disruption.
And this can't be sold as putting missiles where they should be at a base level, since that fix should be applied to the base missile stats. Though I do agree a lot of the missiles do need a base application buff so they hit same sized targets with no prop mod or other speed buffs near/at full damage.

Lore wise I can easily make up fluff as to why TD's would affect normal missiles also. FOF missiles could keep their immunity to EWar.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#80 - 2013-12-22 01:37:09 UTC
Meditril wrote:
Missiles are currently very good (and close to being overpowered) if you know how to correctly use them.

Is that so... So pray tell, what do you fly? Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.