These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chang Liang
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2014-08-02 21:00:55 UTC
While playing the game and discussing with my corp about speccing up for a full combat char.... I heard the interesting snippet that some consider missiles to be poor choice for PvP while others argue that they are viable and there is just this dogma lingering about the fact that missiles are just bad for PvP.

This had me raise an interesting question indeed: Which is better for PvP? Gun turrets (Lasers, Hybrids and Projectiles) or Missiles? As I have never PvP'ed in EVE Online before, I myself is unsure whatever guns or missiles are better. Seeing that frigates have been rebalanced and new line of destroyers focusing on missiles have been released.... I wonder if missiles are viable in PvP or not?

What are your thoughts?
Arla Sarain
#2 - 2014-08-02 21:34:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
Turrets - instant damage.
Missiles - consistent damage but delayed.

The former is also subject to random damage with which the min/max depends on the chance to hit. Less chances to hit - less damage.

Missiles are viable.
They might need some help in winning the DPS race though. Which is probably why you are told that missiles suck.
Lanie Askulf
Doomheim
#3 - 2014-08-02 21:39:50 UTC
I don't think there is a "better for pvp," in general. For one thing "pvp," is too broad. Stealth bombers are great for wh ganks and they use missiles. Tier3 BCs are nice for ganking freighters and they use turrets. Most nullsec fleets are now dominated by sentry drones and use neither guns nor turrets.

If I had to advise a newbie on his first weapon system, I'd say racial turret, but that's only because it gives the most options for cross-training. If they had a better idea of what kind of content they wanted to get into, I'd give a more nuanced answer.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#4 - 2014-08-03 00:05:44 UTC
Say that to pre-kronos fw condors that missiles are a poor choice. Pre-Kronos there were condors everywhere, like literally everywhere.
no joke
Netan MalDoran
Noir.
Shadow Cartel
#5 - 2014-08-03 00:24:38 UTC
Lanie Askulf wrote:

Most nullsec fleets are now dominated by sentry drones and use neither guns nor turrets.


Where did you get this from? In my days in the Provi Block and CFC we never even had a sentry doctrine fit, if we did we never used them.

Anyways on topic, Missiles will always hit their target but damage may be reduced by the size and speed of the target and DPS is horrid but the Alpha is decent. Turrets may miss but the DPS is great. My advice, try both and see what you like to use better.

"Your security status has been lowered." - Hell yeah it was!

Falcon's truth
Athryn Bellee
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#6 - 2014-08-03 02:00:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Athryn Bellee
Mate, pretty much all the CFC uses these days are shield Ishtars and railgun harpies.
Chang Liang
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-08-03 10:26:46 UTC
Netan MalDoran wrote:

Anyways on topic, Missiles will always hit their target but damage may be reduced by the size and speed of the target and DPS is horrid but the Alpha is decent. Turrets may miss but the DPS is great. My advice, try both and see what you like to use better.


I see. So more speed means less damage to the target. Which means the webber will be viable anyways with missile boats. The more I can reduce speed, more damage I deal consistently.

With your advice, im gonna see which I like more. I might go rat up some cash first before I proceed with any PvP ideas. I heard it will take alot of ships to perfect PvP in one's style.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#8 - 2014-08-03 15:00:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Bronson Hughes
One big thing that many folks overlook about missiles is that, unlike turrets, your own motion doesn't contribute to how much (or how little) damage they do. The reason that Crows and Maledictions are such good ships right now isn't that they have a high damage output, it's that they have a reasonable damage output over a long range while being able to maintain high-speed evasive maneuvers while suffering little damage delay or reduction. Any turret 'ceptor trying to kite at range like they do would get low damage output at that range (long range ammo) and see that damage output fluctuate a lot based on their own maneuvers. But not the missile 'ceptors.

Having said that, when you go much beyond long-point range, the utility of missiles starts decreasing greatly because of the delayed damage.

Frigate-class missiles are fine. If anything, light missiles may be a tad OP because of the balance of range and damage you can get out of them. HAMs and Torps are okay as short-range systems because the damage delay isn't all that serious. (Kiting HAM cruisers can be a real pain actually.) Heavies and Cruises are, I think, in a bad place right now because their absurd range doesn't overcome their lackluster damage output and the long delay in said damage output. And capital missiles are just horrible, which is the main reason why the Phoenix is so horrible.

So, yes, missiles are still viable compared to turrets, just not all of them and not all of the time.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Chang Liang
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2014-08-03 16:15:07 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
One big thing that many folks overlook about missiles is that, unlike turrets, your own motion doesn't contribute to how much (or how little) damage they do. The reason that Crows and Maledictions are such good ships right now isn't that they have a high damage output, it's that they have a reasonable damage output over a long range while being able to maintain high-speed evasive maneuvers while suffering little damage delay or reduction. Any turret 'ceptor trying to kite at range like they do would get low damage output at that range (long range ammo) and see that damage output fluctuate a lot based on their own maneuvers. But not the missile 'ceptors.

Having said that, when you go much beyond long-point range, the utility of missiles starts decreasing greatly because of the delayed damage.

Frigate-class missiles are fine. If anything, light missiles may be a tad OP because of the balance of range and damage you can get out of them. HAMs and Torps are okay as short-range systems because the damage delay isn't all that serious. (Kiting HAM cruisers can be a real pain actually.) Heavies and Cruises are, I think, in a bad place right now because their absurd range doesn't overcome their lackluster damage output and the long delay in said damage output. And capital missiles are just horrible, which is the main reason why the Phoenix is so horrible.

So, yes, missiles are still viable compared to turrets, just not all of them and not all of the time.


Interesting... I will take that into consideration too. With that said, the Caracal is actually a nice ship as it got bonuses to both Light Missiles and HAMs, which makes it pretty good missile boat. On the other hand, the Corax is much cheaper if you want to use light missiles to hunt frigates or other destroyers. Not sure if the Corax is good vs cruisers or above, but that all comes down to the specs of the ships though. (Which would be very theoretical discussion at this point).

Fluctuation at long range is something I noticed on my main I used to play as three years ago when doing ratting. Railguns could fluctuate alot at great distances while it would be the same with blasters. Autocannons seemingly have a good semi-consistent damage, on the other hand the damage output might be lower than hybrid guns. But like missiles (I think) the projectile turrets also dont eat that much capacitor at all.

Untill I give both guns and missiles a try, I will keep a more neutral posture to which I would prefer. But on the other hand, each situation would always need a diffrent tool for the job. In EVE, every situations is more or less unique.... judging from what I observed in crime and warstories.
Netan MalDoran
Noir.
Shadow Cartel
#10 - 2014-08-03 16:30:17 UTC
Chang Liang wrote:

the projectile turrets also dont eat that much capacitor at all.


They don't use any, I have acutally switched out my blasters with autocannons so that if I'm neuted dry, I can still shoot and deploy drones.

"Your security status has been lowered." - Hell yeah it was!

Falcon's truth
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
#11 - 2014-08-03 16:49:27 UTC
'Delayed damage' only applies to the first volley with missiles.
In between the first and last volley, ROF is consistent. So, first volley delay, then constant ROF.

The last Volley: One issue with mixed fleets and missile boats is, you launch your last volley, but the target is dead before the missiles arrive. This could lead to a lot of wasted missiles, but more important, a lot of lost DPS.
If you're solo, no big deal. All that matters is, he dies before you die.
In a fleet, I just move to the next target one volley early.

Missiles have a unique attribute, that I call 'Rate of impact' or 'Rate of damage'. You can increase the rate of damage, by simply closing in on your target. Because, as you get closer, each missile travels a shorter distance. In a *close* fight, closing range is similar to overheating the launchers.
Conversely... if you're running away, each missile travels further, and reduces the rate of impact Sad

Selectable damage type is a plus for missiles.
Capless weapons system is also a plus.

As others have mentioned, not every hull is a good platform, not every missile is a good weapon. (Heavies specifically, suck right now)
I like missiles, and I have always loved Torps in particular. Not very experienced with small ships in general, so I can't comment about cruiser and frigate hulls.
Baron' Soontir Fel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#12 - 2014-08-03 21:21:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Baron' Soontir Fel
Frigate based missiles are good. (LMLs and Rockets + Stealthbombers)
Everything else missile based sucks balls. Until links are removed, missiles the way they currently operate will be terrible. Especially with delayed DPS (missiles take long to get there)

also what the guy said above me about closing range/losing range makes zero sense. Sure your missiles will hit faster, but the delay time in between volleys is all that's changing, not your DPS.
Lao Xin
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2014-08-03 21:50:58 UTC
I'm surprised no one mentioned signature radius or transversal velocity, or are these equal factors in guns and missiles?
Plato Forko
123 Fake Street
#14 - 2014-08-03 23:43:27 UTC
missiles are just as good as turrets for PvP but if you're talking about training a char just for PvP then going gunnery opens up more hulls for use since it covers 3 of the 4 weapon systems in game
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#15 - 2014-08-04 00:09:11 UTC
Lao Xin wrote:
I'm surprised no one mentioned signature radius or transversal velocity, or are these equal factors in guns and missiles?

Signature radius impacts missile damage, arguably more so than in turrets, but this can be overcome to some extent with target painters.

With missiles, it's the target's total velocity that counts, not just the transverse part of it. Relative maneuvers are unimportant, just how fast the target is going. (This is what I was getting at earlier.)

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#16 - 2014-08-04 03:14:55 UTC
This depends a lot on the missile your using certain ships can apply better DPS with missiles than other ships in the same class using turrets. However the reload on missiles is 10-35 seconds which makes the reload dangerous as your target may still be applying DPS and may repair or catch reps while you and your fleet reload.

That said missiles also offer great Alpha, a small wing of Bombers can take most ships down very quickly, even solo Bombers leave a hell of a dent, the same goes for a cerberus using Rapid lights or a legion using HAMS. its when you start using cruise missiles from 180 that your DPS really suffers and missiles start to suck.

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2014-08-04 15:46:57 UTC
In my experience, missiles aren't being used much largely because of the current N+1 and bring all the logi meta that's prevalent. Sustained DPS means squat in a fight with enough logi, and all that matters is alpha. As missiles apply their damage on a delay, they're a poor choice for this kind of fight.

In a fight where sustained DPS can be a factor, the missiles are on par with the other weapon systems.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#18 - 2014-08-05 01:10:19 UTC
Chang Liang wrote:
While playing the game and discussing with my corp about speccing up for a full combat char.... I heard the interesting snippet that some consider missiles to be poor choice for PvP while others argue that they are viable and there is just this dogma lingering about the fact that missiles are just bad for PvP.

This had me raise an interesting question indeed: Which is better for PvP? Gun turrets (Lasers, Hybrids and Projectiles) or Missiles? As I have never PvP'ed in EVE Online before, I myself is unsure whatever guns or missiles are better. Seeing that frigates have been rebalanced and new line of destroyers focusing on missiles have been released.... I wonder if missiles are viable in PvP or not?

What are your thoughts?



Missiles have the advantage of not worrying about transversal. On the other hand signature radius and target velocity are considered and meany missiles suffer from insane penalties vs fast moving targets. Heavy Assault missiles are great in close against a battlecruiser or bs. Heavy missiles are still nerfed from when they balanced them against how much long range turrets sucked...then they boosted long range turrets and leaft missiles sucking hind tit. Oh well except for rapid light launchers and rapid heavies.

turrets are great and missiles are flexible but kinda meh at the moment. Train your drone skills as they haven't boosted missiles in like...ever.
JAF Anders
Adenosine Inhibition
#19 - 2014-08-05 18:44:21 UTC
Missiles allow you to not worry about your own transversal as you pilot. In the solo metagame, this makes Condors and Breachers pretty flexible in their positioning without worrying about their own DPS application. In fleets, this means your DPS is more predictable -- both in terms of your own application and the enemy's ability to anticipate it.

Missiles are immune to Tracking Disruption, which is pretty stout even without bonuses. You can also load Auto-Targeting Missiles into the appropriate launchers, which allow you to keep fighting while sensor damped or even jammed.

Heavy Assault Missiles are in a healthier place than they were 2 years ago, while Heavy Missiles have seen a very sharp decrease in viability since then. The introduction of the new Rapid launchers has added a burst-DPS element to the game besides overheating.

Lucky for you, the performance you see in a Kestrel mirrors what you'll see out of the Corax, the Caracal, the Drake, and to some degree the Raven, so if you'd like to give it a whirl for yourself, spin up a few level 1 missions and have a go at it.

The pursuit of excellence and stabbed plexing alts.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#20 - 2014-08-05 18:48:42 UTC
RavenPaine wrote:
'Delayed damage' only applies to the first volley with missiles.

Not if your target has any kind of remote reps. That first volley delay means the only opportunity you have to alpha-strike your target is wasted.

Having said that, in smaller fleets, what you said holds true.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
12Next page