Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Scaremongering nonsense.

Missiles are pretty good. They just not automatic fight-winners.

Stop whining.

The thing is: most missile users just want more range.

Missiles are in a manner of speaking immune to *most* ewar. Neuts don't affect them (but active shield tanking OMG you're gonna die), TD don't affect them because they're missiles, ECM kills the boat not the missile (and then there's FOF missiles), damps are same as ECM.

So if you add a midslot missile range module you've covered every base pretty much. TP for the purposes of "tracking" and sig interactions, BCS for raw DPS increase. Midslot range improver inhibits shield tankers and reduces the advantages armour tanking ships (phoon etc) have in terms of EWAR fitting. Making this range increaser a lowslot is asking too much, shield tankers hurt for lows already. Making it a high is kinda stupid too but it might have to happen. I think a midslot range booster for missiles is balanced especially if it just affects flight time and not velocity because then fast ships can still out-run the missiles (they just have to run a little further).

Edit: I should add that missiles are the most easily mitigated weapon in eve without needing special modules or ewar thanks to sig tanking and speed. Turrets at 0 transversal will still pwn the target, missiles will *always* suffer a damage loss if the target is moving above the explosion velocity. I recommend anyone who doesn't understand the missile formula to look at it right now.

C&C?

That's so wrong it hurts. Most missile users want better damage application.

I'd recommend fitting a targrt painter. or getting someone in a hyena.

Really? A target painter? I never thought of that. What does it do?

When useing HML on a command ship, such as the damnation there are a few things you should really remember.

1) a command ship is designed to give links, doing damage to a target is its 3rd or 4th task.
2) when your in a command ship, most of the targets will either be Battlecruisers or Battleships.
3) when your in a command ship, you have a fleet with you.

Against slow moveing pinned battlecruisers, or battleships the Heavy Missile still works good, thats never been argued about. Whats been argued about is that the Heavy Missile is the worst by -MILES- in damage application to ships it should be intended for: Cruiser sized hulls.

Have you ever had problems with Pulse or Beam lasers applying your damage to a cruiser, No. Heavy Missiles have been "rebalanced" only to workable stats in Blob Warfare, reduced range, increased speed to reduce computeing power, and slightly reduced damage against battleships and up for "balance"

Nobody made much fuss about the range issues almost all missile users knew that it was slightly offbalanced. What people complain about is the fact that Except for tackled battlecruisers and Battleships (A.K.A LARGE TARGETS) Heavy missiles can't hit anything decent.

Were not even talking like vagabond pownage from applying 90% of your max damage from a frigate trying to get into range or orbiting, to you orbiting a battleship in the same vagabond, were talking about maybe doing a little bit more the 1% to 10% of our damage potential to an incomming frigate or a little bit more then 25% of a Mwd T1 cruiser.



Projectile guns have the same Neut immunity, instead of TD you have smart bombs and Defender missiles (granted there broken as well, but what you expect there... *drum rofl* MISSILES) to counter ECM and DAMPS youd have to switch out missiles, oh wait, hes reloading his Rapid fire launchers for FOF? i think we all agree that the notion of THAT is even worse than waiting for an cycle break, or getting into range, or getting out of range and warping... In fact with drones, most non missile ships (wich tend to have (with a few exceptions) better dronebays) are better off anyways. If your ECM'd or damped, your Fof's first have to go trough everything hostile thats closer first, Drones, tacklers, Dps ships, logistic ships, before able to get to the ewar ships

Previously shown in this thread that this doesn't help with Heavy Missiles. Going over your losses, you are using Heavy Assualt Missiles, whose mechanics we know are improved dramatically with target painting, and also are able to operate within web range. Even with five target painters attached to something like say, the Bellicose, fit with heavy missiles, its missiles still don't hit for 100% damage. Even with Precision missiles against the sort of targets they are intended for, they drop DPS.

That, frankly, is a ludicrous situation, that drove use of the RLML up in the first place.

You're right - in the command ship dps is my secondary concern after staying alive, and yes this particular ship is used in a small fleet (actually sometimes just two of us, sometimes you just have to take the opportunity to kill a target when it's there).

You're also right that HMLs are a good fleet weapon, and right that they are not a natural choice for a fight that starts as a 1v1. But then I wouldn't bring a knife to a gunfight either.

In the same way i would not (deliberately, it has happened by accident) take HMLs to a 1v1 brawl, neither would I choose to take railguns, beam lasers and certainly not howitzers. But it does happen occasionally, and when it does you just have to make do and maximise your strengths.

If I was jumped with HMLs, then obviously I'd be looking to burn for range while causing my aggressor to burn cap by healing the damage I was putting on him. Obviously the damnation is not the best ship for that :-)

HMLs bring flexibility at the cost of reduced dps, they bring choice of damage types at the cost of damage application to hypothetical after-burning cruiser targets (I'm not sure how many of those you encounter, personally not many).

Knowing the pros and cons of various weapons systems allows savvy pilots to plan ahead of time of course, so if I see some HML drakes ratting in a wormhole I naturally reach for a dual-prop ishtar, knowing that I have an effective counter in the afterburner. However, savvy drake pilots (you don't meet many) will fit a web, and will have logistics waiting.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight...

o/

I checked the numbers : against a cruiser HML are the best weapon from 50km to beyond.

The need for target painter is seen as a huge drawback, but most if not all MLRT fit use one or more TC/TE to extend range and tracking and fitting for LR gun don't leave them anything for tank anyway. HM don't need them because they already *apply* more damage than any other MLR weapon at 50km, yet if you sacrifice tank -- like ALL other need to do -- you can improve this even more.

In fact, IMO the main problem is that most missile users seem to want their HML eventhough they don't actually need range. It's simple though : need range ? Go for HML. Don't need range ? Go for HAML. That's the question any turret pilot asks himself, but for a strange reason it should be different for missile...

Even worse : in fact HML should suffer the same problem beam laser suffer ; pulse have a so long range beams are almost never useful. The problem should be the same if missile users weren't so scared of losing the above 30km range they don't need for most situations.

And if the only concern is pve, then these rivers of cries would make a lot more sense.

As for torps, I just saw a BR with a nullsec alliance fielding Torp Typhoon doctrine.

It seems to me that your complaint is with caldari hulls, rather than missiles.

I can't comment on that since I think the only caldari ships I ever flew into a fight were a naga, a tengu and a basilisk.

[/quote]