These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

One way to fix missiles without breaking Eve

Author
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#1 - 2014-04-15 16:55:59 UTC
I would really like to see CCP swap the completely asinine missile velocity figure for a missile acceleration figure that would make long range missile use viable and would allow the long range of cruise missiles to be good outside of PVE.

i.e. There is already a missile acceleration, even if it isn't defined, because missiles take a short time to get up to there maximum velocity.
Some very simple math would reveal the acceleration of each missile (pre-implant/skill) and since this acceleration is proven to not hazardous to the missile innards it could replace velocity as a missile attribute. The ideal result would be that, through tweaks to the acceleration, missiles would reach a mid-range target in roughly the same time as they do now, but a long range target would be under fire much quicker.
If you really want to get fancy you could lower the base damage of long range missiles, cruise are less effective within torp range, but counter-balance by adding damage based on the velocity of the missile when it impacts. So a cruise missile would be less effective at 20km than a torpedo, but when the cruise missile has time to accelerate the final damage calculation will include the base damage as well as damage from the sheer kinetic energy of a cruise missile accelerating for 200km. This would effectively give missiles an "optimal" range that would add depth and new playstyles as well as making missiles much more viable at long range. (When are you going to use the 220km+ range of cruise missiles outside of PVE under the current mechanics?)

I would suggest that missile velocity bonuses on hulls, modules, skills, and implants be swapped for acceleration. The replacement within the code should be relatively simple when compared to writing new code. Obviously it probably won't be a direct 1-for-1 switch, but the tweaks should be fairly easy/quick to figure out for the programmers.

This would make missile sniping more viable than it is, would provide an incentive to learn to use different missile types, and would provide an incentive to properly choose your fit. For the pilot going against the missile boat getting inside of the "optimal" would reduce incoming damage, for the missile pilot keeping the enemy at the desired range would increase damage so range control would be part of missile combat.

I would also suggest that another missile module, possibly scripted, be rolled out that allows pilots to affect explosion radius/velocity. This would allow pilots to trade the acceleration and damage boost from a BCS to the explosion radius/velocity bonus of the new module, therefor increasing the effectiveness against smaller targets and targets within the "optimal". The gain from the new module should not make cruise missiles at 10km under my system as effective as they are currently, just better than they would be without the new module.

I think this is something that, if done well, would allow missile pilots and turret pilots to both be happy with the outcome and help to bring missiles out of the dark ages. Thoughts? Concerns?
Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-04-15 17:07:13 UTC
Conceptually I like this idea. My primary concern would actually be server load, as it is, for the majority of their flight, missiles are traveling at a fixed velocity, which would be pretty easy for the server to handle. However, if each and every missile needs to have it's current velocity calculated, this could cause quite a bit of server load. I'm not a tech guy, so I don't know if this would actually be substantial, but that is the thing that would worry me. If I'm wrong and it would not be a problem, then by all means, this idea is pretty cool.

Seeing as missile damage is already calculated using missile velocity, the damage calculation wouldn't change all that much except that the velocity of the missile would no longer be a fixed number. This fact would also already account for cruise missiles doing didly squat up close, and hitting HARD at max range. Obviously tweaking would be needed to make sure these numbers worked well and were balanced, but I like the idea here.

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3 - 2014-04-15 17:22:42 UTC
Tengu Grib wrote:
Conceptually I like this idea. My primary concern would actually be server load, as it is, for the majority of their flight, missiles are traveling at a fixed velocity, which would be pretty easy for the server to handle. However, if each and every missile needs to have it's current velocity calculated, this could cause quite a bit of server load. I'm not a tech guy, so I don't know if this would actually be substantial, but that is the thing that would worry me. If I'm wrong and it would not be a problem, then by all means, this idea is pretty cool.

Seeing as missile damage is already calculated using missile velocity, the damage calculation wouldn't change all that much except that the velocity of the missile would no longer be a fixed number. This fact would also already account for cruise missiles doing didly squat up close, and hitting HARD at max range. Obviously tweaking would be needed to make sure these numbers worked well and were balanced, but I like the idea here.

I see what you mean for server load, and I wouldn't even be mad if they wanted to go model missile salvos as 1 missile while they work it out. You do raise a valid point, but only CCP can say how much server load would increase.

As far as I can tell the missile damage formula only takes into account the target velocity, not the actual missile velocity. Probably because missile velocity is enough of a constant that it doesn't effect damage output.
(Ref. http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Missile_Damage)
However it probably wouldn't be too hard at all to factor in the difference between target velocity and missile velocity which would result in "cruise missiles doing didly squat up close, and hitting HARD at max range". Big smile
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-04-15 17:53:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Nolen Cadmar
I think missile velocity is calculated in there somewhere. Not sure though. I swear that my cruise missiles hit for more damage beyond 20km than they do shooting the same target when inside of 20km. So that would suggest that there is a velocity factor.

I may just be crazy though.

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots

Vinyl 41
AdVictis
#5 - 2014-04-15 18:18:40 UTC
since missles are physicaly represented and they cause noticeable server your proposal makes missle calculation stress much more complex how about we go with the easier way and up the base velocity on all missles while lowering the flight time - less flight time = less load and more happy people because no more volley counting
Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6 - 2014-04-15 18:22:29 UTC
Vinyl 41 wrote:
since missles are physicaly represented and they cause noticeable server your proposal makes missle calculation stress much more complex how about we go with the easier way and up the base velocity on all missles while lowering the flight time - less flight time = less load and more happy people because no more volley counting

Me likey.

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#7 - 2014-04-15 18:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Vinyl 41 wrote:
since missles are physicaly represented and they cause noticeable server your proposal makes missle calculation stress much more complex how about we go with the easier way and up the base velocity on all missles while lowering the flight time - less flight time = less load and more happy people because no more volley counting

Because then missiles are just faster thanks to another Band-Aid so CCP doesn't have to do any real fixing. That suggestion is, at best, a patch and I am willing to bet that it would get veto'd by the tears of turret pilots.
If easy is what you want, we could just go super-duper easy and make missiles impact instantly just like artillery at 150km+. Smile
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
#8 - 2014-04-15 18:56:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Last Wolf
Instead of increasing damage, they simply roll missile velocity into explosion velocity.

This means that missiles could effectively have turret like tracking. It they get harder to hit with the closer you are to the ship, because they have less time to accelerate.

short range missiles (torps, rockets, HAMS):
Very high base velocity, but low agility.
This means that their damage is fairly consisent for their short range. (bust still worse up close and better at the edge of their "optimal")

long range missiles (cruise, heavy, light)
low base velicty, but very high agility
This means they do awful "tracking" up close, but it gets better at longer ranges and the missiles are flying very fast by the end of their flight time.

That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money....

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#9 - 2014-04-15 21:43:44 UTC
Last Wolf wrote:
Instead of increasing damage, they simply roll missile velocity into explosion velocity.

This means that missiles could effectively have turret like tracking. It they get harder to hit with the closer you are to the ship, because they have less time to accelerate.

short range missiles (torps, rockets, HAMS):
Very high base velocity, but low agility.
This means that their damage is fairly consisent for their short range. (bust still worse up close and better at the edge of their "optimal")

long range missiles (cruise, heavy, light)
low base velicty, but very high agility
This means they do awful "tracking" up close, but it gets better at longer ranges and the missiles are flying very fast by the end of their flight time.

Acceleration shouldn't factor into damage application like that. Damage dealt would be one thing but missiles are different from turrets and tracking like that would push them closer together.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#10 - 2014-04-15 23:24:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
No. You are basically turning missile boats into turrets. If you want turret like characteristics train into a turret.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#11 - 2014-04-15 23:34:43 UTC
the key distinction of missiles atm is that they have a hard max range, and they'll always do the same damage inside that range - having optimals etc is turrets - you want turrets - go train them, I hear rails have a pretty long optimal, as do arties.....

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#12 - 2014-04-16 00:04:29 UTC
And here comes the oh so helpful critiques from the usual lot of experts. Thanks guys for the well-written posts. Smile
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
#13 - 2014-04-16 01:26:59 UTC
Maybe if missiles acted more like turrets we could actually get a decent weapon system out of them. Missiles and missile boats are gimped, and have a complete lack of range/"tracking" mods outside of rigs or ship bonuses.

Golem & Raven Navy Issue have the exact same dps as tech 1 raven. Granted they can apply it better to smaller ships, but what other Marauder does the same DPS as its tech 1 version? What other weapon system is missing a dedicated Pirate boat?

That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money....

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#14 - 2014-04-16 02:18:50 UTC
Last Wolf wrote:
Maybe if missiles acted more like turrets we could actually get a decent weapon system out of them. Missiles and missile boats are gimped, and have a complete lack of range/"tracking" mods outside of rigs or ship bonuses.

Golem & Raven Navy Issue have the exact same dps as tech 1 raven. Granted they can apply it better to smaller ships, but what other Marauder does the same DPS as its tech 1 version? What other weapon system is missing a dedicated Pirate boat?

Why does that mean missiles should act more like turrets?
That is just more justification for finally getting some love to missiles.
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
#15 - 2014-04-16 02:28:35 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Last Wolf wrote:
Maybe if missiles acted more like turrets we could actually get a decent weapon system out of them. Missiles and missile boats are gimped, and have a complete lack of range/"tracking" mods outside of rigs or ship bonuses.

Golem & Raven Navy Issue have the exact same dps as tech 1 raven. Granted they can apply it better to smaller ships, but what other Marauder does the same DPS as its tech 1 version? What other weapon system is missing a dedicated Pirate boat?

Why does that mean missiles should act more like turrets?
That is just more justification for finally getting some love to missiles.



Because for some reason CCP thinks that missiles are overpowered. They think that the fact missiles always do damage when fired at a target within range(ie, they never miss) means they can't have too much dps and/or too much ability to increase applied dps. If missiles damage could be lowered by pilot skill (such as getting in close, but not getting webbed/scrammed) like you can with turrets, then maybe we can get some missile love and we can actually have high-dps missile boats and support mods that increase velocity or lower explosion radius outside of fitting rigs or implants.

That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money....

Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#16 - 2014-04-16 10:39:41 UTC
Last Wolf wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Last Wolf wrote:
Maybe if missiles acted more like turrets we could actually get a decent weapon system out of them. Missiles and missile boats are gimped, and have a complete lack of range/"tracking" mods outside of rigs or ship bonuses.

Golem & Raven Navy Issue have the exact same dps as tech 1 raven. Granted they can apply it better to smaller ships, but what other Marauder does the same DPS as its tech 1 version? What other weapon system is missing a dedicated Pirate boat?

Why does that mean missiles should act more like turrets?
That is just more justification for finally getting some love to missiles.



Because for some reason CCP thinks that missiles are overpowered. They think that the fact missiles always do damage when fired at a target within range(ie, they never miss) means they can't have too much dps and/or too much ability to increase applied dps. If missiles damage could be lowered by pilot skill (such as getting in close, but not getting webbed/scrammed) like you can with turrets, then maybe we can get some missile love and we can actually have high-dps missile boats and support mods that increase velocity or lower explosion radius outside of fitting rigs or implants.

You should stop obsessing about dps if you want to use missiles. If you want to obsess about dps you should train into turrets.

Missiles have the advantage of always hitting and being able to chose damage type. I use missiles and they're pretty powerful already. There's no need to increase missile dps with possible exception of HML.
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
#17 - 2014-04-16 11:08:28 UTC
It's not about dps, it is about utility. I would love to use something besides rigors or velocity rigs on my missile boats now and then. "Tracking" computers/enhancers for missiles is all I want, and a pirate boat that deals high missle dps with no stupid split weapons with drones or anyother weapon system.

That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money....

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#18 - 2014-04-16 15:15:39 UTC
Actually my proposal was a way to make missiles viable at long range, a way for cruise missiles to be useful and desirable beyond relatively short range.
Utility is great, and being able to properly fit a missile ship without needing to fill your rigs with rigors or risk not being able to hit for any useful damage would be a wonderful thing. Some new, proper, missile modules would be simply amazing as well but I think that the way to start isn't by introducing new modules or just increasing base velocity again. The way to start is to make missiles a little more realistic with an acceleration value instead of speed, then you can incorporate new modules and tweaks to mechanics or hull bonuses that will be properly balanced from the start.
In the big scheme, missiles would still function pretty much the same they would just be more viable and would actually tend to perform better at long range which could spawn a whole new generation of fleet doctrines... etc... Missiles would not "track" better or worse, they would just benefit from more acceleration time by dealing more damage which would allow more time for proper countermeasures to be used by the turret pilots who are so helpless against them.