These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Missile Damage Application Modules- IT IS PAST DUE
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#1 - 2015-01-23 23:44:59 UTC
It has come to pass that there are modules that increase the damage of drones, and that was the next to last excuse for why missile rely on rigs, boosters and implants if they are to improve explosion velocity and radius. The only other barrier is a weapon to debuff that possible increase.

Now while CCP ponders a buff to projectiles and tinkers with existing named modules could you please:

INTRODUCE MODULES (MID AND/OR LOW) THAT IMPROVE THE DAMAGE APPLICATION OF MISSILES ?

Just askin'


To make it topical, is there any resistant argument that justifies this absence besides the fact that CCP has not gotten around to missiles?

T

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#2 - 2015-01-23 23:54:28 UTC
they tried. It didnt work.

/ 20th thread on this topic

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#3 - 2015-01-24 00:03:42 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
they tried. It didnt work.

/ 20th thread on this topic


Sorry, I was away for a little while and your post was a bit limited. Are you saying CCP tried to introduce a mid/low slot module that improved missile damage application and testing showed it failed? If so do you have a link?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#4 - 2015-01-24 00:28:39 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
..Sorry, I was away for a little while and your post was a bit limited. Are you saying CCP tried to introduce a mid/low slot module that improved missile damage application and testing showed it failed? If so do you have a link?


Daichi doesn't need a link since he pays attention. CCP has this magic wurld that nobody knows about where they have a replica of EVE where they test stuff, conspiracy theorists call it SiSi but it's unknown to this day if it exists..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#5 - 2015-01-24 00:30:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
I believe they tried both application and disruption mods.

Cant find a reference saying they were put off cause they were broken. Maybe i just assumed that after there was never a working version on sisi or read it else where.
Quote:

We also wanted to update the Tracking Disruptors to affect missiles too, but the version we implemented was too limited (it only worked if you were flying certain ships and/or the enemy was using certain missiles). We haven’t found a good universal solution yet, so we’ll have to wait on this one.


Source

See also:
http://www.themittani.com/news/missile-balance-initiative-rebalanced
https://forums.testeveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=198413

edit-

i am very confident that there was a mass test on sisi just for this, and at that point it did not work.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2015-01-24 00:33:12 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
It has come to pass that there are modules that increase the damage of drones, and that was the next to last excuse for why missile rely on rigs, boosters and implants if they are to improve explosion velocity and radius. The only other barrier is a weapon to debuff that possible increase.

Now while CCP ponders a buff to projectiles and tinkers with existing named modules could you please:

INTRODUCE MODULES (MID AND/OR LOW) THAT IMPROVE THE DAMAGE APPLICATION OF MISSILES ?

Just askin'


To make it topical, is there any resistant argument that justifies this absence besides the fact that CCP has not gotten around to missiles?

T


There are already modules for this (medslot) in the game they are called Target painter and webifier. Use them. You can decrease the speed of your target and blow up his sig.

-1 no futher modules needed
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#7 - 2015-01-24 00:38:00 UTC
Tabyll Altol wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
It has come to pass that there are modules that increase the damage of drones, and that was the next to last excuse for why missile rely on rigs, boosters and implants if they are to improve explosion velocity and radius. The only other barrier is a weapon to debuff that possible increase.

Now while CCP ponders a buff to projectiles and tinkers with existing named modules could you please:

INTRODUCE MODULES (MID AND/OR LOW) THAT IMPROVE THE DAMAGE APPLICATION OF MISSILES ?

Just askin'


To make it topical, is there any resistant argument that justifies this absence besides the fact that CCP has not gotten around to missiles?

T


There are already modules for this (medslot) in the game they are called Target painter and webifier. Use them. You can decrease the speed of your target and blow up his sig.

-1 no futher modules needed

Wow! And these are just for missiles? I feel like one of the cool kids now.
Oh... What's that? Turrets have 2 lows, 2 scripted mids, rigs and they benefit from these magical "target painters" and "webifiers"? Well, in that case I feel slighted again with only rigs and these magic modules that seem to work for every weapon.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#8 - 2015-01-24 00:52:42 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
..Sorry, I was away for a little while and your post was a bit limited. Are you saying CCP tried to introduce a mid/low slot module that improved missile damage application and testing showed it failed? If so do you have a link?


Daichi doesn't need a link since he pays attention. CCP has this magic wurld that nobody knows about where they have a replica of EVE where they test stuff, conspiracy theorists call it SiSi but it's unknown to this day if it exists..


I am sorry. You misread and I am sure it was my fault. I do not mean that he needs a link. I mean I would like one so that I become as informed as he and obviously you are about the subject without just accepting terse unsubtantiated responses.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#9 - 2015-01-24 01:15:47 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
I believe they tried both application and disruption mods.

Cant find a reference saying they were put off cause they were broken. Maybe i just assumed that after there was never a working version on sisi or read it else where.
Quote:

We also wanted to update the Tracking Disruptors to affect missiles too, but the version we implemented was too limited (it only worked if you were flying certain ships and/or the enemy was using certain missiles). We haven’t found a good universal solution yet, so we’ll have to wait on this one.


Source

See also:
http://www.themittani.com/news/missile-balance-initiative-rebalanced
https://forums.testeveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=198413

edit-

i am very confident that there was a mass test on sisi just for this, and at that point it did not work.


Thanks for the links,Daichi. They broaden my understanding and curiosity.

They suggest that CCP still has not tackled the disruption as it relates to existing turret disruption weapons also affecting missiles but it seems they have not shown in any way that enhancement is an issue proven to not work.

Making tracking disrupters also work vs. missiles - that may be a technological problem

Introducing modules to enhance missile damage application - I see no evidence of a problem in the links.

If I have read this incorrectly I hope you will set me straight. I see no reason why CCP can not introduce new modules that debuff missiles independent of turrets to cure the former problem.

That should put the OP back on sound footing. We need modules that buff missile damage application similar to tracking enhancers and computers. Turrets and drones have them. I see little reason to put this off another ten years or so.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#10 - 2015-01-24 01:44:53 UTC
OP doesn't seem to understand that Target Painters and Stasis Webifiers both exist and both do a splendid job of increasing missile damage application.

OP also doesn't seem to have considered that if missiles get dedicated mid/low application mods they'll also become susceptible to disruption mods - something that will be a very significant nail in the coffin of "missiles in PvP".
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#11 - 2015-01-24 01:54:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
fail double post

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#12 - 2015-01-24 02:01:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Patri Andari wrote:
[quote=Alvatore DiMarco]OP doesn't seem to understand that Target Painters and Stasis Webifiers both exist and both do a splendid job of increasing missile damage application.

OP also doesn't seem to have considered that if missiles get dedicated mid/low application mods they'll also become susceptible to disruption mods - something that will be a very significant nail in the coffin of "missiles in PvP".



OP does realize that Target Painters and Stasis Webifiers both exists and both do a splendid job of increasing damage application of missiles....and drones...and turrets. OP also understands that their are additional application rigs for all three but only modules for drones and turrets. OP thinks this should be addressed.

OP also is open to the introduction of disruption mods that debuff missile damage application and thinks this will be as significant (or little) a "nail in the coffin" for missiles in PVP as it is now for turrets and drones in PVP.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Lugh Crow-Slave
#13 - 2015-01-24 02:11:37 UTC
not all weapon systems need to be the same

sure there are no damage application mods but there is also no e-war that affects missiles (not even ECM or damps if you fit FoF)

it's a trade off and in a good place atm

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#14 - 2015-01-24 02:18:04 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
not all weapon systems need to be the same

sure there are no damage application mods but there is also no e-war that affects missiles (not even ECM or damps if you fit FoF)

it's a trade off and in a good place atm


I agree

Damage application mods for missiles should be weaker than those for drones and turrets and there needs to be an ewar that affects them. That said, they should certainly be an option.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#15 - 2015-01-24 02:20:56 UTC
I think even modules that at their highest level offer no more application enhancement than T2 rigs would be acceptable for now. That would at least make rigs less of a necesity and free those slots for other more useful rigs.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Lugh Crow-Slave
#16 - 2015-01-24 02:22:39 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
[quote=Lugh Crow-Slave]

I agree

Damage application mods for missiles should be weaker than those for drones and turrets and there needs to be an ewar that affects them. That said, they should certainly be an option.



all it will mean is the current base stats are reduced so that at best you can get just over the current application or at worst the same level


you are looking at them like they need more application when they have simply been balanced to already have near max application to start with.


if you want damage application mods use a turret if you want free choice of damage type and E-war immunity use missiles

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#17 - 2015-01-24 02:36:18 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
[quote=Lugh Crow-Slave]

I agree

Damage application mods for missiles should be weaker than those for drones and turrets and there needs to be an ewar that affects them. That said, they should certainly be an option.



all it will mean is the current base stats are reduced so that at best you can get just over the current application or at worst the same level


you are looking at them like they need more application when they have simply been balanced to already have near max application to start with.


if you want damage application mods use a turret if you want free choice of damage type and E-war immunity use missiles

It will mean more than that. It will make rig options mean more for missile boats instead of the "must have rigor" option that is the current meta

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Lugh Crow-Slave
#18 - 2015-01-24 02:42:51 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:

It will mean more than that. It will make rig options mean more for missile boats instead of the "must have rigor" option that is the current meta


the only time you "must have rigor" is if you are solo have no web or are attacking well bellow your class.


what this will do is make any damage application mods mandatory because like i said if these get brought in then missiles base expl vel and expl rad will be nerffed down to where damage application mods can bring them back up to where they are now

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#19 - 2015-01-24 02:51:24 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Tabyll Altol wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
It has come to pass that there are modules that increase the damage of drones, and that was the next to last excuse for why missile rely on rigs, boosters and implants if they are to improve explosion velocity and radius. The only other barrier is a weapon to debuff that possible increase.

Now while CCP ponders a buff to projectiles and tinkers with existing named modules could you please:

INTRODUCE MODULES (MID AND/OR LOW) THAT IMPROVE THE DAMAGE APPLICATION OF MISSILES ?

Just askin'


To make it topical, is there any resistant argument that justifies this absence besides the fact that CCP has not gotten around to missiles?

T


There are already modules for this (medslot) in the game they are called Target painter and webifier. Use them. You can decrease the speed of your target and blow up his sig.

-1 no futher modules needed

Wow! And these are just for missiles? I feel like one of the cool kids now.
Oh... What's that? Turrets have 2 lows, 2 scripted mids, rigs and they benefit from these magical "target painters" and "webifiers"? Well, in that case I feel slighted again with only rigs and these magic modules that seem to work for every weapon.



You can have them but they will need to nerf your missiles to the ground.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#20 - 2015-01-24 02:54:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:

It will mean more than that. It will make rig options mean more for missile boats instead of the "must have rigor" option that is the current meta


the only time you "must have rigor" is if you are solo have no web or are attacking well bellow your class.


what this will do is make any damage application mods mandatory because like i said if these get brought in then missiles base expl vel and expl rad will be nerffed down to where damage application mods can bring them back up to where they are now


No. They will become an option alongside BCU. This will free rigs for range, tank or other. I nervously wonder why you are in favor of limiting missile boats to be the only ones with such limited options.

If the application becomes too strong then nerf it. CCP did that to tracking enhancers. They did not simply remove them from the game.

I understand your concerns, honestly. However, they do not rise to an acceptable reason to limit fitting options for only one class of weapons.

There was a time when missile boats were the only ones with T2 ammo drawbacks. This lasted too long because many had the same mindset you display. CCP finally saw how unbalanced that was and removed them. THE SKY DID NOT FALL.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
123Next page