Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Bahahaha

I think the signature, explsion velocity, fly time, and speed stats of most missiles should be review.
But removing signature and explosion velocity? Hell NO!!
You should learn how the mechanics work before posting that.
The problem is about small targets and big missiles. imagine the effect of a torpedo on a webbed frigate without signature stats...

or make javelin's worth using .. there dps is pitiful, we need missile enhancement mods .. (what happened her CCP?)
but HAM's have the same range as torps .. so 50% range nerf is more likely , and then rockets would get the same.

Son, you should be very, very careful what you claim.



Your experience is for naught. Orthrus, Barghest, Phoenix & Leviathan will become utterly overpowered. The former 2 because pretty much nothing will be able to outrun their weapons fire and they will be applying 100% damage on everything. That, frankly, is insane. Completely mental.

The latter are arguably worse. Capital ships able to apply 100% dps to EVERYTHING. Let that sink in a minute. I know what you'll say: "but they're slow and can be outflown". Yes, by some ships but not most used in fleet fights which is where these cap ships would be used. This will bring back the solo capital killing fleets of subcaps which is completely against the direction the game is taking and against what most of the players want.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

i lack the technical expertise to provide such a thing,

what i would like to see, and im sure it would provide quite a bit of info, a full set of spread sheets compareing ALL weapons systems vs a nice wide selection of targets, small thru large and slow thru fast to include target painters on target as well.....

then we can all stop debateing this topic (which appears to come up once every couple of weeks or so) and get down to proper discussion of what needs fixing and how it could be fixed.

Once again. Missile should apply full damage to size appropriate hulls without fittings. Medium missiles should not apply perfectly to frigates, but should apply well to destroyers, and perfectly to unfit cruisers before skills or links.

Reasons why setting missile explosion velocity and signature size to the average of unfit size appropriate hulls makes sense

1. ABs should be able to create some damage reduction if unwebbed, and MWDs should create substantial reduction if unwebbed.
2. They are still relative velocity and position agnostic, which means substantially better application outside tackle range of most missiles
3. It should be possible to create some damage mitigation without prop mod by speed fitting unusually fast hulls, like the slasher
4. It should be possible to create some mitigation through running a fairly low signature ship without shield rigs or shield extenders
5. Missiles should apply excellently to things with moderate tackle applied.
6. Missiles should apply decently to painted ships of one to two categories smaller, but large missiles should still struggle to hit destroyers and frigates even if they are painted.

Unless I've gone off my rocker, Mike has said he was taking the problems with heavy missiles to CCP.

The missile changes were brought in for a reason other than BoB crying about them. One needs only to look at the reasoning behind those changes all that time ago.

Do I think missiles are in a good place? I do not. I agree with James - A missile should be able to apply 100% of its damage to a stationary (or slow-moving), unfitted hull of the same size before skills and links come into the picture. Lights/Rockets vs Frigs, Heavy/HAMs vs Cruisers, Cruises/Torps vs Battleships, Citadels vs Capitals.

Do I think OP's changes are a good idea? Well... not particularly.

I wasn't there yet but my friends from college did tell me those stories. After some reading in our old forums back in the day this was the case when EVE was just born and nobody could have had any of the fittings skills at five.

The Kestrels of the old are now the stealth bombers of the new age that sneak up on you and pod you back to the stoneage, if you get my drift.

I get that you disagree and it's fine. I wasn't expecting much agreement and as I said last week even unpopular visions need to get heard.

What I do not understand is that insta-canes are a thing, tornados are or were a thing too until bombers became more popular but a long range missile hitting a target is suddenly the end of the world.

I explained just last week how no missile can ever do the full 100% damage because they were never designed that way, hence the two forgotten attributes of shield and armor reduction.

Yes in a worse case scenario this may not end well but approaching a railgun in a straight line doesn't either.

I get that in most of your minds you see the EFT volley damage of a 40km range torpedo on an unstoppable killing spree and as shocking as that my sound, 10 Ishtar will sentry that unstoppable Raven of the field before she even gets a lock on one.

Which is where I would like to see a difference in the meta and mechanics.

I would love to see MWDs partially negating damage of missiles, as currently they have the highest damage per effective weapon slot, but suffer from annoying application and the lack of "critical" hits. I get that out flying missiles is possible, but given that I want to then see them changed from chasing to a predictive model of movement, which means that against a ship in orbit they head for where it will be, rather than having to out speed the ship they are following, this would become increasingly hard.
I did not mention that as currently the terrible application of successful volleys is the main issue. I am planning on proposing this change at least on large and XL missiles elsewhere although at present this part of the proposal is not live.