These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Cruise Missiles

First post First post
Author
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#681 - 2013-05-20 13:16:34 UTC
I'm guessing Torpedos's aren't going to make the cut? In the post about the Typhoon changes, it is mentioned that Torpedo's were being looked at. Will they be addressed in a .point release? They are pretty useless right now because of their inability to scale to smaller / faster targets in any meaningful way, and T2 versions are worse than faction (Which at least hit smaller than battleship targets better).

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Ocih
Space Mermaids
#682 - 2013-05-20 17:35:49 UTC
Torps were boned when they became the primary weapon of a frigate. They were balanced around use by that ship and any torp fit battleship became an unwieldy dump truck.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#683 - 2013-05-21 07:40:14 UTC
Ocih wrote:
Torps were boned when they became the primary weapon of a frigate. They were balanced around use by that ship and any torp fit battleship became an unwieldy dump truck.


Would kill if they swapped the new cruise in the bombers for torps, like when they were originally made.
Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#684 - 2013-05-21 09:26:33 UTC
I spotted an significant oversight in test server with cruise missiles. While the intial post says that the change affects ALL cruise missiles it seems that the FOF variants still have the old stats.

So is it possible to modify the FOF variants as well before release? Some of the FOF variants are after all also considered "cruise missiles".

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#685 - 2013-05-23 08:32:56 UTC
Carniflex wrote:
I spotted an significant oversight in test server with cruise missiles. While the intial post says that the change affects ALL cruise missiles it seems that the FOF variants still have the old stats.

So is it possible to modify the FOF variants as well before release? Some of the FOF variants are after all also considered "cruise missiles".



While you are at it I should add that in addition to normal FOF missiles there still exist also the faction variants. While you no longer can get them from LP store for some reason people still have these around and they are used in very limited quantities. So would you be able to address the cruise FOF missiles before the patch hits please do not forget the faction variants.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Florian Kuehne
Tech3 Company
#686 - 2013-05-23 10:46:17 UTC
I think the changes are a bit good. The Damage would be to high in comparison with the torps.

And before changing stuff, fix your missiles so that they work correctly Attention
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#687 - 2013-05-23 11:49:44 UTC
Quote:
I spotted an significant oversight in test server with cruise missiles.


Thanks very much for posting! This is indeed a significant oversight and I'll get it taken care of asap!

@ccp_rise

Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#688 - 2013-05-23 14:39:11 UTC
So, I only fly Gallente stuff, but having a few million SP available (mass test \0/) I stuck my alt in a cruise missile Raven...

... holy cow Shocked

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Kenshi Hanshin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#689 - 2013-05-23 18:39:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenshi Hanshin
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
I spotted an significant oversight in test server with cruise missiles.


Thanks very much for posting! This is indeed a significant oversight and I'll get it taken care of asap!


One more oversight:

Missile mechanics need to be modernized to reflect actual physics aka damage-application & mitigate the absurd flight times. There are numerous suggested methods in the thread. I am sure you can find them.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#690 - 2013-05-25 10:17:40 UTC
After days of thinking one question or better one tiny request remains.

CCP Team Game Of Drones, can you please increase the number of cruise missiles a lanucher can carry to 50 instead of 27 (for the tech2 launcher) or at least to 40 missiles and the faction lanuchers accordingly?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Knives Thomsan
Broski North
#691 - 2013-05-25 15:04:29 UTC
This changes nothing. No one is going to use cruise missiles. The problem is not flight time. Having a 10 second delay before your first damage hits was a good enough penalty for the fact that your subsequent missiles are sure to hit unlike guns. Damage is the problem and this change actually decreases the DPS for a Navy Raven. It does increase alpha, but that doesn't help when you're fighting tanky cruisers to battleships at range.
TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#692 - 2013-05-25 16:57:40 UTC
Knives Thomsan wrote:
This changes nothing. No one is going to use cruise missiles. The problem is not flight time. Having a 10 second delay before your first damage hits was a good enough penalty for the fact that your subsequent missiles are sure to hit unlike guns. Damage is the problem and this change actually decreases the DPS for a Navy Raven. It does increase alpha, but that doesn't help when you're fighting tanky cruisers to battleships at range.


Could you be telling any more bullcrap? I don't think thats possible.

4700m/sec base missile velocity for all Cruise Missiles (up from 3750m/sec) - Damage is now applied faster after firing

25% increase in base damage for all Cruise Missiles - a 25% increase in Damage is a nerf? Please do explain me how.

My Condor costs less than that module!

Devil Inside Us
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#693 - 2013-05-25 18:00:42 UTC
Knives Thomsan wrote:
This changes nothing. No one is going to use cruise missiles. The problem is not flight time. Having a 10 second delay before your first damage hits was a good enough penalty for the fact that your subsequent missiles are sure to hit unlike guns. Damage is the problem and this change actually decreases the DPS for a Navy Raven. It does increase alpha, but that doesn't help when you're fighting tanky cruisers to battleships at range.



Reading is for chumps....



... I mean champs... reading is for champs...
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#694 - 2013-05-26 09:45:37 UTC
Knives Thomsan wrote:
This changes nothing. No one is going to use cruise missiles. The problem is not flight time. Having a 10 second delay before your first damage hits was a good enough penalty for the fact that your subsequent missiles are sure to hit unlike guns. Damage is the problem and this change actually decreases the DPS for a Navy Raven. It does increase alpha, but that doesn't help when you're fighting tanky cruisers to battleships at range.


How can 5% increase in ROF, and a 25% increase in damage, with a minor penalty to explosion radius (which was pretty good already) be a reduction in damage?

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

marVLs
#695 - 2013-05-26 10:29:33 UTC
Yeah increase number of missiles in t2 launcher
Lugalzagezi666
#696 - 2013-05-26 15:51:31 UTC
marVLs wrote:
Yeah increase number of missiles in t2 launcher

Lowering the volume of missiles would be better imo.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#697 - 2013-05-29 13:54:48 UTC
So any comments from CCP why these long range weapons received such an absurdly ridiculous overbuff?

I guess balancing range with dps was a boring idea and had to be scrapped.

.

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#698 - 2013-05-29 14:48:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
Roime wrote:
So any comments from CCP why these long range weapons received such an absurdly ridiculous overbuff?

I guess balancing range with dps was a boring idea and had to be scrapped.


Is it an overbuff? It seems to be that rail/tachyon BS get similar DPS figures around the 50-70 km mark, without the problem of delayed damage. This gives cruise a niche beyond that range, up to the soft 150 km cap, although if we include the Naga in this then cruise only has a meaningful DPS advantage beyond 120 km or so. Indeed, it seems that this is a good example of "balancing range with DPS", as the DPS advantage of cruise only manifests itself at range, where it is countered by the delay.

Now, sure, there are many other factors to consider, such as host platform mobility, tank and fittings, damage types, cap use, "tracking" close-up etc, but you criticised the weapon itself, not the Raven and Typhoon when fitted with cruise specifically, nor in comparison to their attack BS counterparts or ABCs.
Nick Bete
Highsec Haulers Inc.
#699 - 2013-05-29 15:40:04 UTC
You can safely ignore anything that Roime character said. Reading his posts in other threads he comes off as an arrogant bittervet who thinks he knows what's best for the game more so than CCP.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#700 - 2013-05-29 16:19:02 UTC
Nick Bete wrote:
You can safely ignore anything that Roime character said. Reading his posts in other threads he comes off as an arrogant bittervet who thinks he knows what's best for the game more so than CCP.


If I did that I'd ignore all my own posts too. Actually I find Roime's posts to be pretty sensible generally, so I was surprised to see him suggest that new cruise was much too good.