Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

You do realize that the old proverb « Caldari : Tank, Electronic Warfare, Damage. Take only 2 of them. » is still there ? Losing one more medium slot in a Caldari ship is NOT an option.

I don't know that I've ever had a low slot available for the low module..
Not would I want to use it.
Basically, all the MGC does is allow me to replace a TP.

For those making claims that it evens playing field, since turrets have disrupters and drones can be killed;
You must first consider that missiles already require assistance in order to apply optimal damage to ships in their class.
IE: heavies against cruisers and cruise/torp against another BS.

You must then also consider that when your tracking disrupted, they effect your ability to hit moving targets without effecting the ability to hit stationary targets; while being range disrupted, it doesn't effect your ability to track targets within range.

Now, factor missile disrupters. If fitted to disrupt range, they reduce your range, as well as reduce the ability to hit fast targets, as it will reduce velocity on top of flight time.
If fitted to disrupt application, they will effect your ability to hit moving targets via exp velocity, but also your ability to hit stationary targets via exp radius.

Basically, regardless of script, you will effect my ship in two different aspects.
How does this seem like balance?
Missiles already have these issues and require modules to address them. Now, they will need even more modules.
A Raven fitted with torps or cruise already needs 2-3 MGCs to get full applications against another BS hull,'moving or not moving, with or without a prop mod.. Am I now supposed to fit 4-6 MGCs?
Am I then supposed to fit an armor tank and forgo damage modules?

See, in a turret or drone boat, you typically already have relatively good tracking and application against like size hulls.
You add modules in order to increase your effectiveness against smaller targets and/or to counter TDs; so for a turret boat, these modules become an addition as opposed to a necessity.
For missile boats larger than a destroyer, module assistance is a necessity when using their standard weapon classes.

As a side note, turrets have variations that can allow for more variable and durable fits by going with smaller sized turrets, which will likely be balanced to make lower and mid sized turret variations even more viable, while the larger variants in a class will be optimal for a destroyer, in the case of smaller, and BCs in the case of med turrets, which is somewhat already the case.

For missiles, heavies, and especially HAMs, are difficult to build viable fits with on cruiser hulls; suggesting that their balance is focused around BCs.
Honestly, their needs to be another class of missiles for cruiser hulls, thus leaving heavy systems for BCs, though they still need balance for the better.

Overall point, MDs only make the flaws with missiles stand out that much more.

your going to have to back that up.

And before any mentions it again, please inform me of this stationary target that has a small enough sig to avoid damage so much.

Fixed it for you.

That's the PVP standard because Fury and Precision generally suck in PVP.
Fury and Rage are NOT meant to hit capitals, structures, and heavily webbed and painted targets as you suggest.

If that were the case, than why do blasters, rails, pulses, beams, ACs, and arty's all work perfectly fine against BS class hulls with t2 ammo?


Edit... Forgot to mention the needs of navy against a target raven with a AB.
cruise - 3 MGCs for full
torp - 3 and 1 TP

Add 1 disruptor
cruise - 3 and 2
torp - 3 and 4

2 disruptors
cruise - 3 and 4 (mid slots full) 81% efficiency
torp - 3 and 4 60% efficiency.


Mind you, in comparison to the Abaddon, the efficiency becomes relatively equal.
HOWEVER, the Abaddon retains that efficiency while still maintaining tank, and dps.
In order for a cruise or torp fitted Raven with navy missiles to retain this efficiency, they must completely load down their mid slots with application modules, thus requiring the use of armor tank. Costing the ship damage, tank, and whatever else.

Also, if you're not using a web/MGC/TP, your efficiency with any missile drops by an insane amount.

Ah, so now it's an unwebbed BS with an AB, AB's being ideal for countering missiles..... And you are expecting 100% application vs this, something that a lot of turrets also will be unable to achieve.
Talk about moving the goalposts for your argument.

Also a lot of T2 ammo is not ideal to use in many circumstances, thus why turret boats will carry normal ammo as well.

One line of ships that performs well with missile does not make missile perform well.


Also, torps a cruise missiles could use a bit of rebalance as well.
I can live with cruise missiles as they are, but torps aren't too grand.



Missile boats large than a frig typically don't use webs, as they typically rely on range..
This may be different with armor boats, but this is generally specific to shield and missile combo.

You may find it on a ham tengu or drake, and possibly a torp BS (which you rarely see outside the alliance tournament anymore)..

Most of the cruiser hulls rely on kite fits, so a web means nothing as they will get pwned by the other weapon systems within web range.

And I did not move the goal posts.
I was presenting the fact that turrets can get more efficiency with less modules with or without disruption.

And right there is the problem with "High Damage Anti Ship" missiles, hams and torps, that is what they are called but don't bother using them for that, they are however great for shooting pocos ans pos's. Rage torps are even ok to shoot another battleship (in pvp), as long as it is painted, webbed and your stationary, any transversal will kill your application.

A little test of the "new" MGC precision scripted (in place of the web) on a hamgu (with 1 T2 damage application rig) running besieged sites. It took 9 min 30 sec to complete with Rage.
With web and no MGC it took 7 mins.
With MGE and no web the site exploded before the last npc died.
With web and MGE it took 10 mins 45 secs to complete (dropping the DCU to fit the MGE really hurts DPS and the MGE doesn't make up for it via applying what dps you have left better).
That is cruiser size weapon shooting primarily battleship hulls.
You can by keeping trans low knock a few seconds off the time to complete with a web, with a MGC or MGE it didn't make enough difference to be noticeable.
Running these sites using navy hams, not only takes longer but often ends up costing you more than you'll make from the site as the drops are not reliable, damage application is a little better with navies but the amount applied is far lower.
The few cruisers in the sites do die faster with navies but the 10 seconds between switching ammo all but negates the use of navies. With Rage they die in 4 or 5 volleys (15 seconds at most), with navies they die in 3 volleys plus the 10 seconds to reload (around 15 seconds).

I know, this is a PVE scenario but I wanted to test them somewhere the results are always the same (same amount of battleships and cruisers spawn each time and at approximately the same ranges) against something a class (or 2) above the hamgu.
My skills are all at 5 except Ham spec which is at 4, using no implants or drugs.
I ran 10 besieged sites and took the best time from each config.
I plan on doing this again with a railgu, just for comparison.

Nevyn, Your right, you shouldn't use T2 ammo for pvp. Isn't it a shame that missile boats are unable to use T2 ammo for PVP. Not sure any other weapon system is restricted to faction ammo for pvping.

Yeah.

The rebalance is on the ammo type itself.

Anti-Ship missiles have rediculous explosions radius's for application which would feed into "Missile tracking"

The range is dictate dy missile type an if its action or not.. which works that same was as gunnery ammo, But in short Range "Higher tracking", they have technicallyu "worse tracking", unless you throw in rigs.

I think its more of a balance issue due to complicated mechnics involving factors that are not present in gunnery.

Just my oppinion. I could be wrong.

lol lets just keep nerfing caldari , that seems like a great plan , we re the only race that gets kinetic bonus's only , amarr gets all dmg bonus min all dmg to missles why are we left out with kinetic? , I'm only joking , we should just have 1 ship that we can use that's projectile based and full of nuets and disrupters , cause lets face it that's all pvp ers use pointless to use missles in pvp , lasers do ok but most use projectiles , so we re just getting the kewl race out of the game entirely lol caldari are sexy their ships don't look like a huge female marriage enhancer , they don't have duct tape holding them together , I don't even play the game any more I just train skills in a station , which now my ships will be rust covered lol , it gonna get to a point where no one plays this game anymore , ah the good ole days of running 20-30 missions to get a plex , then china got in and boom 200mil to 800 mil for plexs now theyre over 1.2 bil each , since pvp is soley dependant on what kind of internet you have theres tons of players that don't play because you cant do much content with out pvping someone that's on a massive internet connection , how about adding non pvp stuff for those of us that just like playing the game? id love to just fart around in a highsec wormhole where I can gradualy build a carrier to just cruise around in by myself lol