These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Edey
#161 - 2013-04-16 21:32:12 UTC
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Breaking news: we don't balance modules in this PvP game around their effect in PvE. That tail doesn't wag this dog. As examples of where PvE rates might get plain nerfed for the benefit of the game, see recent HM nerf, upcoming TE nerf (that probably should be a Mach+tier3 BCs nerf).


Breaking news: right now Cruises suck very hard at PvE compared to AC/Blasters/Pulses.
Those who say cruises will be OP just never flew any Gun ship and have no idea how bad their CNRs/Ravens/Golems are.
So even with this 30% damage buff missiles (cruises) won't be as good as ACs or Blasters: there are still Painters, AB rats, Defenders and overdamage. Those 4 things will keep missiles inefficient.

Now I want to see a Torp changes.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#162 - 2013-04-16 21:35:38 UTC
Edey wrote:
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Breaking news: we don't balance modules in this PvP game around their effect in PvE. That tail doesn't wag this dog. As examples of where PvE rates might get plain nerfed for the benefit of the game, see recent HM nerf, upcoming TE nerf (that probably should be a Mach+tier3 BCs nerf).


Breaking news: right now Cruises suck very hard at PvE compared to AC/Blasters/Pulses.
Those who say cruises will be OP just never flew any Gun ship and have no idea how bad their CNRs/Ravens/Golems are.
So even with this 30% damage buff missiles (cruises) won't be as good as ACs or Blasters: there are still Painters, AB rats, Defenders and overdamage. Those 4 things will keep missiles inefficient.

Now I want to see a Torp changes.


Turrets are pretty great, I agree. But honestly I've flown a great many kinds of ships and cruise is pretty damn good at PVE - especially with 30% more damage. You sound like someone that doesn't know how to fit a missile ship TBH.

-Liang

Ed: Protip: filling your lows with CPRs is Doing It Wrong.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#163 - 2013-04-16 21:46:09 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Destoya wrote:
Seems like a very big buff and a significant step towards making cruises viable weapons outside of L4 missions

I do already have some concerns over the relative strength of the turtle-tanking Golem teams that have been used very frequently in the past alliance tournaments and the SCL, but if we can see people start to use fleet comps like ravens or navy scorpions in "real EVE" the benefits far outweigh a change in the AT meta


We're not going to ignore the effect this has on the AT meta, don't worry.


The poster was over-stating the power of the cruise golems though. They were useful only because by that stage in the tournament most teams were kite. Cruise Golems are almost a guaranteed loss against any up close and personal comp.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Edey
#164 - 2013-04-16 21:49:29 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Edey wrote:
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Breaking news: we don't balance modules in this PvP game around their effect in PvE. That tail doesn't wag this dog. As examples of where PvE rates might get plain nerfed for the benefit of the game, see recent HM nerf, upcoming TE nerf (that probably should be a Mach+tier3 BCs nerf).


Breaking news: right now Cruises suck very hard at PvE compared to AC/Blasters/Pulses.
Those who say cruises will be OP just never flew any Gun ship and have no idea how bad their CNRs/Ravens/Golems are.
So even with this 30% damage buff missiles (cruises) won't be as good as ACs or Blasters: there are still Painters, AB rats, Defenders and overdamage. Those 4 things will keep missiles inefficient.

Now I want to see a Torp changes.


Turrets are pretty great, I agree. But honestly I've flown a great many kinds of ships and cruise is pretty damn good at PVE - especially with 30% more damage. You sound like someone that doesn't know how to fit a missile ship TBH.

-Liang

Ed: Protip: filling your lows with CPRs is Doing It Wrong.


You should define your "damn good" because I have no idea how to measure it.
If you're just a EFT warrior than I know what your good means.
If not, you should describe what is good for you. Is it some "good" when you are able kill a rat or is it when you kill that rat within 15 sec?

I've been doing PvE since 06 and believe me I know how to fit ships.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#165 - 2013-04-16 21:50:42 UTC
Edey wrote:

Breaking news: right now Cruises suck very hard at PvE compared to AC/Blasters/Pulses.


Breaking news: comparing a long-range weapon with three short-range ones is unlikely to give useful information. You probably thought that HMLs didn't need nerfing because they had much lower DPS than medium blasters too.
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#166 - 2013-04-16 21:52:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Walkuris
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Breaking news: we don't balance modules in this PvP game around their effect in PvE. That tail doesn't wag this dog. As examples of where PvE rates might get plain nerfed for the benefit of the game, see recent HM nerf, upcoming TE nerf (that probably should be a Mach+tier3 BCs nerf).


All fine and dandy, but balancing missiles has been an Achilles heel for quite some time now, excuse me for staying skeptical until the cat is actually in the bag.
And please don't call it a pvp game I understand the need to be seen as "Hardcore" in EvE but PvE is the basis of it all just as in real life we exist by the grace of the environment not just stealing each others lunch money.
That said cruise missiles were delegated completely to the realm of PvE so expect to get some PvE responses.
As I am fully aware of the PvP content, and would love to see more viability for flying smaller hulls instead of large gun turret=everything shenanigans.
I would love to actually hear WHERE we can expect large missiles to stand compared to large guns with their different respective mechanics of course.

Not saying CCP can't do anything right but having a fail weapon system for a long time can get tedious and make one wonder if the end of the tunnel is in sight.
Wouldn't be too bad to know what to que up next, pretty invested into missiles but gunnery still takes like a fraction of missile SP while adding support skills for 3 weapon types minimally depending on how you look at it.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#167 - 2013-04-16 21:53:46 UTC
I take it that no one see's the extra fitting requirements as being too big a hurdle to overcome?

Just gathering opinion...

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#168 - 2013-04-16 21:58:25 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I take it that no one see's the extra fitting requirements as being too big a hurdle to overcome?

Just gathering opinion...


Fitting cruise on a Raven was never a problem. The new Raven is getting 1875 PG and 62.5 CPU, so the 1080 PG for 6x CMLs won't even cover the extra. The Typhoon has even more PG, it'll be peachy.
Edey
#169 - 2013-04-16 22:01:31 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Edey wrote:

Breaking news: right now Cruises suck very hard at PvE compared to AC/Blasters/Pulses.


Breaking news: comparing a long-range weapon with three short-range ones is unlikely to give useful information. You probably thought that HMLs didn't need nerfing because they had much lower DPS than medium blasters too.


Who cares if it's a long range weapon or a short one? In PvE performance matters only.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#170 - 2013-04-16 22:03:55 UTC
Quote:
I've been doing PvE since 06 and believe me I know how to fit ships.


I really am a terrible person, and I'm really sorry, but this made me bite my lip. Smile

I know, I know, take it in context with the coversation.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#171 - 2013-04-16 22:06:22 UTC
Edey wrote:
Who cares if it's a long range weapon or a short one? In PvE performance matters only.


It matters when formulating sensible expectations of weapons' abilities.
FourierTransformer
#172 - 2013-04-16 22:26:18 UTC
Edey wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Edey wrote:

Breaking news: right now Cruises suck very hard at PvE compared to AC/Blasters/Pulses.


Breaking news: comparing a long-range weapon with three short-range ones is unlikely to give useful information. You probably thought that HMLs didn't need nerfing because they had much lower DPS than medium blasters too.


Who cares if it's a long range weapon or a short one? In PvE performance matters only.

Tbh you kinda sound like an EFT warrior here. In many missions, exploration sites, and anoms, there are independent groups of enemies that can be more than a 100km apart.

With cruise, you warp in and start shooting, hit approach on the acceleration gate, and that's it. With blasters, you warp in, burn over to one group, start shooting, burn to the second group, start shooting, burn to the third group, start shooting, burn to the fourth....etc. etc. ad nauseoum and then you have to burn back to the acceleration gate.

In practice, the time you save getting in range by using cruise works out to a much higher isk/hour. The only turrets that can really compare well to cruise in this regard are lasers, and they have their own limitations.

However, none of this affects pvp. The issue of hitting moving targets in pvp is what really gimps the larger missiles. A cruise missile will do significantly reduced damage to a target moving at 400m/s at 100k. Arty, Rails, and Beams will have no trouble hitting said target for full damage, instantaneously. Unless this changes, cruise will always be an exclusively pve platform.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#173 - 2013-04-16 22:45:51 UTC
hmm 750 dps raven is looking pretty kickass tbh

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#174 - 2013-04-16 22:49:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Walkuris
FourierTransformer wrote:

Tbh you kinda sound like an EFT warrior here. In many missions, exploration sites, and anoms, there are independent groups of enemies that can be more than a 100km apart.

With cruise, you warp in and start shooting, hit approach on the acceleration gate, and that's it. With blasters, you warp in, burn over to one group, start shooting, burn to the second group, start shooting, burn to the third group, start shooting, burn to the fourth....etc. etc. ad nauseoum and then you have to burn back to the acceleration gate.

In practice, the time you save getting in range by using cruise works out to a much higher isk/hour. The only turrets that can really compare well to cruise in this regard are lasers, and they have their own limitations.


Well actually it is quite easy to make things come to you, just fire at something outside of actual range.
With the proper ammo large autocannons will fire out to 60-80km not too familiar with pulse lasers but all these factors combined really make for a non-argument.
I would look into that again because that is half the problem with missiles you really don't do anything special with a LOT of drawbacks.

That said the BOLDED part of your comment hits the nail on the head, (not just in PvP) due to mission frigs MWD'ing straight at gun boats they can be insta-popped and rats are actually finished in the proper order too killing the small stuff closing in fast then the larger things that trigger and are ez to hit.
I doubt tracking nerfs will affect this mechanic but we will see, ergo my skepticism.
Steve Spooner
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#175 - 2013-04-16 22:58:55 UTC
Pedo Torps Pedo Torps because I shouldn't have to fit 2 target painters to hit a battleship for full damage.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#176 - 2013-04-16 23:12:32 UTC
Edey wrote:

You should define your "damn good" because I have no idea how to measure it.
If you're just a EFT warrior than I know what your good means.
If not, you should describe what is good for you. Is it some "good" when you are able kill a rat or is it when you kill that rat within 15 sec?

I've been doing PvE since 06 and believe me I know how to fit ships.


You can probably find some of my old mission efficiency e-peen warrioring threads if you like.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#177 - 2013-04-16 23:17:14 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
On paper, yes, but not for applied dps. Unless of course, when CCP Rise refered to Scan Resolution on the weapons, he meant explosion velocity. I believe he meant explosion radius though, which would mean it would be harder to apply damage to a target. Especially so without painters.

All in all though, I think these cangese will be a good start. Can't wait to try them on SiSi.

Oh god ! Your raven isn't a soloBBQroflstompPWNmobile ? I'm sad for you...

You know about huggin/rapier right ?

Oh, and the Raven just got a 7th mid slot.

Wow. Did you get out of bed on the wrong side of bed this morning?

Feel free to point out exactly where I was complaining in my post. Also, feel free to point out where I mentioned the word 'Raven'.
Until you can do that, I suggest you take a big dose of 'ChillTheFuckOut' and re-read what I wrote, in context.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#178 - 2013-04-16 23:18:19 UTC
Steve Spooner wrote:
Pedo Torps Pedo Torps because I shouldn't have to fit 2 target painters to hit a battleship for full damage.

Don't forget that Many BS's are getting a Sig.Rad. Increase with the rebalance.
CaptainFalcon07
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#179 - 2013-04-16 23:24:01 UTC
As a player with caldari bs V and cruise missiles V Sad I welcome this change.

Any chance on looking at Torpedoes?

Because right now the only significant use they have in PVP are on stealth bombers with massive increase in range and explosion velocity.

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#180 - 2013-04-16 23:38:06 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Edey wrote:

You should define your "damn good" because I have no idea how to measure it.
If you're just a EFT warrior than I know what your good means.
If not, you should describe what is good for you. Is it some "good" when you are able kill a rat or is it when you kill that rat within 15 sec?

I've been doing PvE since 06 and believe me I know how to fit ships.


You can probably find some of my old mission efficiency e-peen warrioring threads if you like.

-Liang



And on those threads are one of the few were Liang argument is damm impressive :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"