Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Firewalls just simply need to go. Offensive systems should never have been allowed to work in a defensive manner.
Defender missiles also need to be reworked to effectively mimic flares to reduce incoming damage from missiles by altering incoming missile explosion velocity/radius for a duration after each cycle against you.

That's pretty easily bypassed by having your command ships or specific doctrine ship fly between you and the hostiles equip with different smartbomb types. Not exactly hard to do since most command ships already do such a thing to handle l/m/h drones on fleet or annoying ecm bursting ceptors...

You can give them larger buffers requiring larger numbers of smartbombs to kill them, but that creates an issue of fleets taking more damage from friendly fire than the missiles themselves. So it begs the question, why should the ability of one offensive weapon be allowed to completely counter another even remain?


I'd rather smartbombs be relegated to their original design as (anti)close combat weapon systems and defender missiles given a reliable use/purpose in defending against incoming waves of missiles. Not asking for a buff to missiles here, just defense against them given to the module specifically designed to do so.

It will only end up being a 43% boost if the ratio ends up being the smallest of the 3 terms. The function looks for the minimum.

Fyi, posted a thread for a googledocs spreadsheet with speculative values for the MGC/MGE and their effect on applied missile damage:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=428613&find=unread

Officer Missile Guidance modules for the win!
I for one welcome our new Missile Overlords. Oh wait, that's me!

that would make Rapid Launcher too powerful, only way to avoid it is nerf Rapid launcher really hard that it is mandatory to have 1 scripted mid slot to return to old stats

That would totally break my heart...


And here I was under the impression heavy missiles were getting a buff... Well, it's not like Caldari ships really have a lot of low slots to play with (or mids for that matter)... Guess we'll have to wait on the details.

Simple way to balance RHML and buffing HML. If Heavy missiles get a dmg/application buff, just drop a few missiles from clip of RHML. Overall clip damage remains the same and application is alittle better (which it should be tbh).

I will be very sad if CCP screws up the few missile ships i use by nerfing base stats to the point of NEEDING a missile TE/TC. I already fly a dual webbed, rigor fitted, crash boosted, TP wielding typhoon just to make heavies apply decently. If i gotta slap on a MTE/MTC too.. then im going to be running out of tank/dps real fast.

We would have to see them in action imo. Lost dps can be made up for by decent application. High paper damage that hits less not always a good thing. Why for example we can have really good arguments over missile rigs current day eve. The ROF or damage boost ones could be nice. But....some flare and rigor could be just as good.

But that's me...I have always been more into application. To the point I have on turrets downsized the guns (as this tends to give tracking boosts). Or if its damage mod or te.....I liked te. Way I see it's like fighting/martial arts. you can have power out the ass in your strikes....they have to hit to actually do you any good.

Sure. Missiles are all about application, but buffing it and reducing the dps we will get same value with less tank. So without those mods overall dps will be worse (not to mention tank). I don't see we get torps golem with above and not overall dps reduction. This is how Fozz made changes. Like with freighters. I can see hull that will benefit, like said golem or jack, but overall lots of ships will be worse. Missiles already have, or should have worse dps beacuse of selected damage. Funny sentence when looking on caldari kinetic lock.