These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Short and sweet Missile revamp Thread
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#101 - 2011-12-21 14:03:27 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
you're just throwing every ignorant claim you can think of around in the hope that one of them might stick. Yet you're too ignorant to understand the correct criticisms to make, hence your obsession with EFT numbers.


I like you Gypsio. You manage to say everything I'm thinking but can't properly articulate because I just want to call him an idiot.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#102 - 2011-12-21 18:15:31 UTC
Yet neither of you are willing to say "lets test it".

So how am I to believe that missiles are fine and that this would make missiles to OP when it hasn't been tested?

You guys can't even agree to at least having CCP test it so that I and others can see. So what am I supposed to think?
Is it you knocking me? is it you refusing to be wrong? Do you not want to compete more with missiles in pvp? Or do you simply hate missiles in general and would rather see them go away over anything else?

Like I said. It's simple. Test the change and see how it works.
Korg Tronix
Mole Station Nursery
#103 - 2011-12-21 18:25:23 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Yet neither of you are willing to say "lets test it".

So how am I to believe that missiles are fine and that this would make missiles to OP when it hasn't been tested?

You guys can't even agree to at least having CCP test it so that I and others can see. So what am I supposed to think?
Is it you knocking me? is it you refusing to be wrong? Do you not want to compete more with missiles in pvp? Or do you simply hate missiles in general and would rather see them go away over anything else?

Like I said. It's simple. Test the change and see how it works.


Why test something that is not needed? You so far have failed to convince anyone that actually uses missiles regularly that is needed and every point you make has either been inaccurate or idiotic.

CCP aren't going to test something for the sake of it, you actually have to use a convincing argument.

Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams]
Bearilian
Man Eating Bears
#104 - 2011-12-21 20:17:49 UTC
yet as joe has thoroughly stated, the only reason you are not convinced is because you dont like change, and are afraid of missiles already. because this is not a one sided argument. there are not that many of you arguing against him. and since this proposed change would effect nothing but missile flight time, there isnt a convincing argument why not to tryi it.

there is an unbalance, you just arent willing to admit it.
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#105 - 2011-12-21 20:44:50 UTC
Bearilian wrote:
yet as joe has thoroughly stated, the only reason you are not convinced is because you dont like change, and are afraid of missiles already. because this is not a one sided argument. there are not that many of you arguing against him. and since this proposed change would effect nothing but missile flight time, there isnt a convincing argument why not to tryi it.

there is an unbalance, you just arent willing to admit it.


There might be something to the argument that I and some others on here are resistant to change, but as a Caldari, who maxed missiles at an early stage before crosstraining projectiles, Lasers, and Hybrids, (in that order) I've come to appreciate the distinct characteristics of missiles, they are effective in pvp, you just need to pick appropriate targets and styles, just like you wouldn't put arties on an interceptor, everybody complains about blob warfare, but then they want to make their weapon more effective for focused fire, thus more effective for blob warfare. Well blob warfare and focused fire is really the only advantage you get with a turret over a launcher. Damage projection and a lack of tracking issues more than makes up for the delay to target and fits well with the style of combat I like.
Korg Tronix
Mole Station Nursery
#106 - 2011-12-21 20:49:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Korg Tronix
Bearilian wrote:
yet as joe has thoroughly stated, the only reason you are not convinced is because you dont like change, and are afraid of missiles already. because this is not a one sided argument. there are not that many of you arguing against him. and since this proposed change would effect nothing but missile flight time, there isnt a convincing argument why not to tryi it.

there is an unbalance, you just arent willing to admit it.


I am a regular user of missiles and I haven't found flight time to ever be an issue. You are flawed as a sniper, yes but in a mid range fight you are king for many reason other than tank.

So far no one in favour of this change has put forward a convincing argument as to why this change is needed, it wont affect anything in a short - mid range game for missile users and although would improve the Cerberus role as a sniper no one snipes any more anyway and if they did missiles still wouldn't be asked for because turrets get instant damage at that range. So short of making missiles exactly like turrets there is nothing that will change the sniping niche.

His example of a turret boat and a missile boat shooting each other is quite idiotic. It removes all factors that are good about missiles whilst adding some to turrets that dont exist, i.e. a turret boat hitting the same range as a missile boat with the same damage/rof/alpha.
Taking a Drake and any medium turret BC as an example you will never match the dps at range of a Drake, certainly not at long ranges (70-80km) because the turret has too make a lot of sacrifices to hit that sort of range. Saying these ships are untanked in this scenario you cooked up is stupid because to hit these ranges any of the turret bc's will have around half the ehp of the drake whilst still not matching its dps at that range. Its the advantages of Missiles.

Lets take the example in closer, again with a drake and any turret bc. The Drake could use HAMs and any of the turret BCs could have there highest tier turret fitted. The Drake hits just shy of 700dps with tech 2 HAMs all the way out to 15km none of the turret ships can match that and have a similar tank.

Even with the premier frigates its the same, my hookbill gets 170dps out to 11km with 7k ehp (roughly), very few frigates can match that combination of consistent dps at that range whilst still having a decent tank and the ones that do have tracking issues that my hookbill does not.

There are some flaws with two types of missiles, Standards and Cruises, and Joes solution solves neither.
The missile boats with flaws aren't flawed due to the missiles they fit but due to other issues or because a lot of pilots generally don't know how to fit there ships, only going to cry wolf about them after losing.

Edit. Like the above poster said this change would only improve things in focused fire situation but would still not mean missiles getting picked over turrets for long range duties.

Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams]
Imrik86
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#107 - 2011-12-24 16:35:43 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
The issue I have is the fact that realistically missiles in Eve already go preaty fast when you think about it.


Dude, ships in EVE travel faster than light. I expect they would have some pretty badass missiles in a future like this. Actually, it surprises me that missiles aren't simply warheads propelled by MWDs.

Talk about realism. This is a game.
Goose99
#108 - 2011-12-24 17:01:15 UTC
Imrik86 wrote:
Sobaan Tali wrote:
The issue I have is the fact that realistically missiles in Eve already go preaty fast when you think about it.


Dude, ships in EVE travel faster than light. I expect they would have some pretty badass missiles in a future like this. Actually, it surprises me that missiles aren't simply warheads propelled by MWDs.

Talk about realism. This is a game.


You know what else travels faster than light? Winmatar bullets. That's why they win.Cool
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#109 - 2011-12-26 02:31:24 UTC
Goose99 wrote:
Imrik86 wrote:
Sobaan Tali wrote:
The issue I have is the fact that realistically missiles in Eve already go preaty fast when you think about it.


Dude, ships in EVE travel faster than light. I expect they would have some pretty badass missiles in a future like this. Actually, it surprises me that missiles aren't simply warheads propelled by MWDs.

Talk about realism. This is a game.


You know what else travels faster than light? Winmatar bullets. That's why they win.Cool

You gotta love all these people complaining that missiles shouldn't go faster.
Yes they forget that hybrids and projectiles use a projected round that for some reason is instant. If they want to suggest that missiles shouldn't go faster then I suggest that projectiles should go to the same speed is messed up because REALISTICALLY (yeah I went there) missiles on earth can break the speed at which a projectile can travel. With that in mind missiles should be able to go as fast it's not faster than projectiles.
Korg Tronix
Mole Station Nursery
#110 - 2011-12-26 13:03:33 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Goose99 wrote:
Imrik86 wrote:
Sobaan Tali wrote:
The issue I have is the fact that realistically missiles in Eve already go preaty fast when you think about it.


Dude, ships in EVE travel faster than light. I expect they would have some pretty badass missiles in a future like this. Actually, it surprises me that missiles aren't simply warheads propelled by MWDs.

Talk about realism. This is a game.


You know what else travels faster than light? Winmatar bullets. That's why they win.Cool

You gotta love all these people complaining that missiles shouldn't go faster.
Yes they forget that hybrids and projectiles use a projected round that for some reason is instant. If they want to suggest that missiles shouldn't go faster then I suggest that projectiles should go to the same speed is messed up because REALISTICALLY (yeah I went there) missiles on earth can break the speed at which a projectile can travel. With that in mind missiles should be able to go as fast it's not faster than projectiles.


Fancy responding to my post at least. Mostly the point that your solution still wouldn't mean missile ships being picked over turret ships for sniping. Whilst not affecting small gang short/mid range fighting at all

Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams]
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#111 - 2011-12-26 14:15:52 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Suggestion

Greatly increase missile velocity


Wouldn't that make it possible to snipe in any missile ship?

Quote:

Greatly reduce missile flight time
Balance accel time so that missiles still go the same distance.


I see... so what you're proposing is to be able to apply dps to the target more quickly.

I'm going to oppose this idea because missile ships already (generally) have better tank.

The big picture here is the following:

Caldari = relatively crappy dps and relatively long times to put dps on the target but big-ass-tank
Minni = big alpha but average DPS at mid-range and speed as a weapon.... crappy tank
Gallente = average dps and average speed but decent tank. at close range they perform better than at long range.
Amarr = big tank and big dps but only really useful at point-blank range. At mid to long range they perform sub-optimally.

Personally I think the caldari ships (especially the Drake) do their job just fine. If you fly caldari and really want more "quick" dps then you should cross train to a race that does it better.

Making a Drake more like a Myrmidon would take away the differences between these two ships and therefore the need for racial differences.

T-
Velicitia
XS Tech
#112 - 2011-12-26 14:40:10 UTC
Tinu Moorhsum wrote:

Personally I think the caldari ships (especially the Drake) do their job just fine. If you fly caldari and really want more "quick" dps then you should cross train to a race that does it better train hybrids and use the other half of your ships.



FYP Cool

Granted, the DPS will still be sub-optimal as compared to the gallente blaster fetish, or Arties at range ... but it's instant DPS at range.

As someone else mentioned above, missiles are *significantly* better at applying the same DPS at the full range of their engagement envelope than turrets are... sure, you might only be getting 60 or 80% of your base damage per volley because of the target's speed, but that's better than the chance of your volley doing absolutely nothing to your target because you're fighting in falloff, or can't track them.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Bearilian
Man Eating Bears
#113 - 2011-12-26 20:51:15 UTC
Tinu Moorhsum wrote:

I see... so what you're proposing is to be able to apply dps to the target more quickly.

I'm going to oppose this idea because missile ships already (generally) have better tank.

The big picture here is the following:

Caldari = relatively crappy dps and relatively long times to put dps on the target but big-ass-tank
Minni = big alpha but average DPS at mid-range and speed as a weapon.... crappy tank
Gallente = average dps and average speed but decent tank. at close range they perform better than at long range.
Amarr = big tank and big dps but only really useful at point-blank range. At mid to long range they perform sub-optimally.

Personally I think the caldari ships (especially the Drake) do their job just fine. If you fly caldari and really want more "quick" dps then you should cross train to a race that does it better.

Making a Drake more like a Myrmidon would take away the differences between these two ships and therefore the need for racial differences.

T-


this is more or less accurate to the ballance and roles of the races.
but his argument is way out of hand. what the original post suggested was to increase velocity so the missiles get to the target faster. this will have two benefits; the first being that missiles will be wasted less, when the target is destroyed. and the second is that in pvp, missile boats may become less of a target do to their missiles goin inactive if killed.

It will not increase dps, explosion velocity will stay the same, missiles will still travel considerably slower than turrets. that is what is almost annoying about everyones argument. if you doubled the velocity of missiles, that would not even come close to turrets "insta" damage.........
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#114 - 2011-12-27 08:45:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Bearilian wrote:

this is more or less accurate to the ballance and roles of the races.
but his argument is way out of hand. what the original post suggested was to increase velocity so the missiles get to the target faster. this will have two benefits; the first being that missiles will be wasted less, when the target is destroyed. and the second is that in pvp, missile boats may become less of a target do to their missiles goin inactive if killed.

It will not increase dps, explosion velocity will stay the same, missiles will still travel considerably slower than turrets. that is what is almost annoying about everyones argument. if you doubled the velocity of missiles, that would not even come close to turrets "insta" damage.........


Just quoting you because you're correct.

It changes nothing about missiles except they hit sooner, thus less waisted volleys and more mixed fleet acceptability.
Like I posted kinda deep into this thread, I'm fine if they would simply balance missiles based on their max range.

Example
If you have an 80 km range 5km/s for 16 seconds and have a cycle time of 10 seconds with a t2 launcher, then you're firing your second volley while the first volley is still 6 seconds from the target.

What I suggest is keep the range at 80km but ramp up the velocity to 8km/s and reduce the flight time to 10 seconds while still having a 10 second cycle time with the launcher. Since the missile will detonate on the target slightly before max range (assuming it's a stationary target) then if the target is destroyed, the second volley will not fire.

This change will balancing the missiles to be like this, but also certain ships that are given a bonus towards launcher cycle time may also need a balance to factor in the reduction of cycle time. If you balance the missiles off the in game launcher with the fastest cycle time, then all other launchers will have the same benefit of the missiles hitting the target before the next volley is fired.

Honestly, the worst part of missiles is the waisted volleys and it's not always possible to determine if the volley you just fired will be the last one required, so just take the guess work out of it and have missiles hit before the next volley fires.

Oh, and CCP, seriously, can you get rid of the damn math and just let us look at the missile info and see Flight Range listed right there to include acceleration? I mean common. I don't mind the math, but the fudge factor that is accel time sux @ss.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#115 - 2011-12-30 17:07:36 UTC
bump
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#116 - 2011-12-31 05:57:00 UTC
Obsidiana wrote:
Get in close and it isn't a problem. Full damage on approach is the real advantage. This also slightly increases DPS. It is also a good reason to use torps. Missiles need to have a down side since they have great range and good damage (besides lacking falloff, having no wrecking blows, and no damage modifier on lanchers).


True, but that means missiles can't be used for sniping. If CCP wants that, fine by me, but remove heavy and cruise missiles from the game completely.

Missiles are sub-par weapon system, and yet there are some that don't wish that to be changed, OP stuff to remain OP and useless one to remain useless.

How yes no.