Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Yup...so...y'know...with these mods let's just get rid of the lot.

Now we have solid anti-missile ewar, let's drop the crappy, lag inducing edge case stuff that we had to make do with previously.

Unless there is a good reason to keep special snowflake extra ewar for missiles for a reason beyond "lolmissiles".

Was asked for but denied.

Shame. Ishtars online is one of things that killed EvE [IMHO].

No. You can't have my stuff.

can't lock and apply ewar to drones ??

did I miss that memo

you know there's 2 skills that you you train up in your mind that allow your missiles to go further? cause eve always functions on logic

did i miss the memo where this isnt a solo game? yes let me carry around 10 td's to counter just 2 pilots. genius.

Drones don't exactly need ewar. Though this would depend on where CCP wants drones to fit into the meta.

If drone hulls are meant to be the "jack of all trades" then allowing them to be ewar immune isn't immediately a bad thing provided:
1] Drones never exceed a more specialized hulls abilities(IE they would always be worse than a sniper ship at sniping)
2] Their effective application was always less than the weapon system they are competing against.
3] They remain destroyable and with a limited storage capacity.

Except for a few hulls this actually applies. It gives drone hulls the niche of being able to handle multiple situations without actually being better than what they are fighting.

It also lets things like disruptors have a critical niche as well. Remember ROCK - PAPER - SCISSORS.

Firstly, gameplay takes an upfront seat when it comes to adjustments and how everything is balanced. It's better to have a fun, diverse game, rather than trying to make a lore-based one (also far simpler and easier). Keep in mind, lore in a situation like this, is easily bent and flexed. There are very few limitations to what you can make up as lore reasons for things.

Game balance aside, there ways to disrupt a missile's effectiveness in the real world today.

Short version: screw with their navigation.

Long version: (this not comprehensive nor does it include every possible aspect of different systems. Just the basic ideas)
Missile guidance systems are divided between GOT (go-on-target) and GOLIS (go-on-location-in-space) systems.

GOLIS systems basically go to a specific place. An ICBM or many cruise missiles (real-life) use systems such as this. The target needs to be stationary or mostly stationary for them to work effectively. The benefit of this is that a target tracking suite is not needed on the missile, leaving more room for any number of other things (counter-countermeasures, bigger payload, more fuel, etc.). All necessary data o the target is input before the missile is fired. On mobile platforms, this data might be constantly updated until the last micro-second before launch. At a bare minimum, the GOLIS system requires at least a single point of reference in order to operate properly. Some systems use satellites, stars, or other natural/artificial fixed points. Some are even loaded with topographical data to use as a fixed point (the point is isn't necessarily a single place, but a comparison of multiple within the data). These are sel-contained and require no further assistance to do their job. Fire and forget.

Keep in mind, missiles are designed to fit a particular size so that they can be launched from whatever is carrying them. The difference in size of man carried surface-to-air missiles, missiles loaded on jets, and missiles fired from tubes on a submarine, can have major impact on squeezing as much use out of every cubic centimeter of the missile.

GOT guidance systems are composed of a target tracker, missile tracker, and guidance computer. Target tracker tracks the position of the target, relative to the sensor. Missile tracker system determine the missile's location (or more properly, determines it's new location) relative to where it was. The guidance computer is similar to the one on a GOLIS system, does lots of quick trigonometry to calculate a path to the target. The difference being, GOT computers utilize data from both trackers where the GOLIS uses the preset data and its fixed points. GOT can tell if their target has moved and adjust accordingly. GOT missiles are also capable of using remote sensors, instead of ones located on itself. It will communicate remotely with these sensors (usually home-based, sometimes part of a wider network) to do the same job.

Both systems can be fired from a stationary or moving platform.

Here lies the biggest difference: so long as a GOLIS system can determine its position, it can find a way to its target. A GOLIS system, relies on updating external data in order to know where to hit. This leaves GOT systems vulnerable to interference of its sensors, giving it bad data. GOLIS is a bit harder to disrupt, since trying to change the input from a static location (how does one jam stars???) is more difficult than pointing a jammer at the missile (direction and sensor type plays a big role in this).

How does this apply to Eve?

Well, I could easily be wrong, but I'm going to assume that spaceship missiles use GOT, since their targets are most likely moving, and possibly very fast too. Knowing what the system is, a ship can design its countermeasures around changing the information provided by sensors, either on the origin ship or the missile itself (i'll explain a problem with this in a second).

Now, since the game has limitations in computing power, some shortcuts and assumptions are needed to ensure smooth and consistent operation.

Examples:

Signature Radius:

Signature radius can be seen as how well the guidance computer (more accurately, it's sensors) can determine the location of the ship. the smaller the sig radius, the less accurate the data is. This is where the warhead will try to go, and will determine where the missile will explode.
Another assumption I will make, is that Eve missiles use location to determine detonation, rather than impact. Why? Shields. I don't know if it explained for certain, but I believe it is safe to assume a shield bubble or surface, can be adjusted in size (kind of like stretching a balloon). The bigger the volume covered the weaker it is. So a shield could be manipulated to extend very far from the ship, causing the resulting explosion to be farther from the hull (shields are not solid, and this can be seen when a shield with low hp can bleed damage to the armor). It is also likely that Eve missiles use a directed explosion to efficiently use energy against the target. Adjustments to other missile aspects can effect this, and this is how we see explosion radius. If the explosion 'cone' is larger than the ship, most of the damage is thrown into empty space.
So with those assumptions, we know a missile will attempt to explode as close to the target ship as it can, without being fooled by a shield stretch.

Explosion Velocity:

There are a couple aspects that will contribute to this value. All are plausible, and Eve likely just lumps them together for simplicity.

Firstly, how fast is the energy from the explosion moving? This aspect is easily seen when using an every day water hose, and extremely well seen with pressure-washers. When a fluid (explosion can be considered 'mostly' fluid, since it is made of expanding gases and - CONTINUED ON NEXT POST

particles of shrapnel acting similar to fluid particles. When the exit of a given tube or warhead is made smaller, the fluid will move faster since more particles must move through the smaller space in the same amount of time (see: Bernoulli Principle). If the size of the cone is larger, the material moves slower, if it is smaller, material moves faster.
Knowing a missile explodes near it's target, this leaves a gap of time where the particles are moving toward the target at whtever velocity they have. This time could determine if a ship is still fully within the radius of the explosion cone. If the material moves too slow, the ship could either fully escape the damage, or move far enough to only receive part of it, reducing its overall impact. It's almost like dodging the thousands of tiny 'bullets' ejecting from the warhead.

The only other aspect that I can think of to affect explosion velocity, is the agility of the ship. Not the agility we see in game (time it takes to reach top speed), but all the micro-adjustments that aren't calculated in-game. A ship turning slightly at an angle (in the real universe) could mitigate damage to a smaller profile on the ship, rather than being hit 'broadside' and absorbing more of the energy in more places. A skilled pilot could, in essence, make an evasive maneuver to turn his tempest at an angle from the explosion and avoid or deflect a greater part of the energy. The of course, using the same skill, to correct his angle so he doesn't lose much momentum in the greater direction of his movement.

Aside from Sig radius and Explosion velocity, continue reading with this in mind:
Eve trying to simplify and reduce computing need, does not allow you to target missiles (not that many ships would have the time), allow you to shoot them. Even if missiles could be targeted and shot, consider that it would drastically reduce the chance of doing anything meaningful to the 2-8 different missiles approaching. This is why defender missiles really suck, and why smartbombs are beautifully effective (no need to target or aim).

"Ok, Rowells. You have literally scared away the children and given me cancer with this Wll-o-text. GET TO THE DAMN POINT!!

Since you asked so nicely:

Here are a couple plausible methods on how Missile Tracking Disruption works:

Firstly, the module is not necessarily a single object on the ship, but a suite of different tools tuned to different methods. They can work on different aspects of the multiple missiles in order to accomplish the same thing. Most likely (as the name implies) the modules confuse the missile as to the actual location and/or size of the ship. The modules can be scripted and tuned for either specific purpose.

The second method is that the missiles are remotely guided (still using GOT) from data given by the origin ship. This also explains why you ca just fire the missiles and point at the target, if the origin ship does not have any data. So, the MTD would disrupt the communications between the host ship and the missile, making it less effective.

Since we can't target missiles (and don't want server hamsters dying every time a claymore undocks (so many missiles, such a short time), we relegate the task to simply targetting the ships.

"Still doesn't explain the shorter range."

Actually it does. Since the warhead is constantly receiving interference and incomplete data, it makes inefficient decisions. It's like a drunk driver and a formula-one driver in a drag race. The drunk missiles makes overcorrections and bad adjustments, costing it precious fuel. Whereas the formula-one racer is focused and fully aware of the road ahead.

Ok, so I'm done. Splerge over. Return to your lives citizens.

Bottom line really with this is; A few years ago CCP nerfed missiles - They were crap for a long time.
CCP created a new module (removing a module that was supposed to be OP replacing it with the new 'balanced" Rapid Launchers) that is now considered OP due to CCP releasing a new ship with extreme bonuses to rapid launchers.

CCP gave missiles an ever so slight buff that made some of them usable (in pvp) again.

Now because "some" ship / launcher configurations are considered OP by some - Missiles get another nice nerf to put them right back to where they were (if not worse) prior to the minor buff they received (only a few months ago).


CCP balance logic at its all time best. Nerf a whole class of weapons (and every single missile ship) because we made a mistake and made ONE new ship too powerful.



-- - -- - --
Heavy missiles are just above crap, Hams are ok if your shooting battlecruisers (or MWD shield cruisers) and above - Soon, Heavy missiles will only be useful for PVE (again) and Hams will simply not be worth fitting. Don't forget the poor lumbering Phoenix, which for the first time in years is more than a paperweight, will become less useful, than a paperweight.
1 or 2 ships that use missiles have anything like decent damage application and the whole range of missile ships now gets a nerf because of it.

whilst clearly you're not.

drones are ----> autonomous
which means ewar applied to the ship launching them is irrelevant to their ability to function