These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Short and sweet Missile revamp Thread
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#61 - 2011-12-18 18:31:22 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Youre essentially trying to make missiles more like turrets, in that their alpha would matter a bit more (faster damage to target). However, the fact that they are different currently forces FCs to prepare differently and use different tactics. Diversity in combat is good. This is working as intended.


You're correct. It is forcing FCs to use different tactics. However, those tactics are either bring a solid missile fleet, or don't bring missile boats.
You are correct though that I am trying to make missiles a little more like turrets in that they'll have more effective alpha, but also that they'll fit better into mixed fleets.
I think we can both agree that missiles are effective in some slight situations, and that a solid missile fleet is also quite effect. However, we both also know that finding a corp/alliance that is pure missiles is quite unlikely, so finding a solid missile fleet is also quite difficult. So instead of keeping missiles behind the curve in mixed fleets, I would like to see them have a fast alpha (though still not instant) so that they'll better fit into both mixed pve and pvp fleets.

The way missiles are now, they're only effective when solo or when in a solid missile fleet.
So again, it's a matter of making them more effective in mixed fleets.


Roll Missiles are effective in small mixed fleets. In large fleets, you don't want mixed combinations, you want a solid fleet doctrine of ships (drake fleet, armorhacs, sniperhacs, alphafleet).

you need more pvp experience Joe before you start commenting on this stuff.
Goose99
#62 - 2011-12-18 18:51:39 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Youre essentially trying to make missiles more like turrets, in that their alpha would matter a bit more (faster damage to target). However, the fact that they are different currently forces FCs to prepare differently and use different tactics. Diversity in combat is good. This is working as intended.


You're correct. It is forcing FCs to use different tactics. However, those tactics are either bring a solid missile fleet, or don't bring missile boats.
You are correct though that I am trying to make missiles a little more like turrets in that they'll have more effective alpha, but also that they'll fit better into mixed fleets.
I think we can both agree that missiles are effective in some slight situations, and that a solid missile fleet is also quite effect. However, we both also know that finding a corp/alliance that is pure missiles is quite unlikely, so finding a solid missile fleet is also quite difficult. So instead of keeping missiles behind the curve in mixed fleets, I would like to see them have a fast alpha (though still not instant) so that they'll better fit into both mixed pve and pvp fleets.

The way missiles are now, they're only effective when solo or when in a solid missile fleet.
So again, it's a matter of making them more effective in mixed fleets.


Roll Missiles are effective in small mixed fleets. In large fleets, you don't want mixed combinations, you want a solid fleet doctrine of ships (drake fleet, armorhacs, sniperhacs, alphafleet).

you need more pvp experience Joe before you start commenting on this stuff.


There's the drake blob, and then there's the... drake blob. "Solid fleet doctrine" for missile is limited to the drake blob. Wait, did you mention "tactics?" Why yes you did.Lol

Emperor Salazar wrote:
FCs to prepare differently and use different tactics.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#63 - 2011-12-18 18:53:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Emperor Salazar
Confirming that fleets of maels or hurricanes or ahacs or rokhs or abbadons are actually drakes in disguise.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#64 - 2011-12-18 18:53:37 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:

Roll Missiles are effective in small mixed fleets. In large fleets, you don't want mixed combinations, you want a solid fleet doctrine of ships (drake fleet, armorhacs, sniperhacs, alphafleet).

you need more pvp experience Joe before you start commenting on this stuff.


You should never have a fleet comprised on one ship type or one weapon type unless you're in a smaller fleet that's designed more for guerilla warfare.
When it comes to having a large fleet, you want logistics, ewar, long range, short range, bombers, interceptors. You want to be able to handle any possible situation.
However, like I've said, missile boats don't fit well into these fleets unless it's either a solid missile fleet, or the missile boat has some other factor to make it fiable such as the scorpion, widow, and other ewar ships that carry missiles.

There's also another negative affect for missile boats. Our accuracy modifying module, the target painter. Now, turrets have a module that directly effects their turrets. The can add to this accuracy by adding other things like webs, but they have a limited range.
Now, look at our accuracy modifying module. Notice something? It has an optimal range and an accuracy falloff range. Typically optimal is 30 and falloff is 60.
Basically what I'm stating with this is that you have an accuracy modifying module that directly effects the turrets, but at long as the target is in optimal, then your good. However, missiles which are designed to be effective from 0 to max flight don't even have an accuracy mod that is effective at closer or farther ranges.
Now, this however is off topic from my original comment, but I just wanted to put that out.

Anyway, the way I look at this as far as pvp balancing goes is if I put two ships pitted against each other, both with the same rate of fire, same range, same dps, and same tank and they both begin firing on each other at the exact same time, then both ships should be destroyed at the exact same time reguardless of weapon. That is balance. Now, if we throw in some other factors, such as missiles being only limited to max range and turrets being limited to an optimal range, then you have to throw out some other balancing mechanics. So missiles are given a flight time and turrets are allowed to hit instantly. This is not at all an issue. The turret should have a slight advantage in alpha if their target is within their optimal, because missiles don't have an optimal. However, the slow flight speed of missiles doesn't just give turrets a slight advantage, but gives them a massive advantage if their target is in optimal. However, we both generally know that coming in on a target outside of your optimal range is an idiotic move. So in order for the missile boat to stand a chance at all, he has to be the one to set the range, where as a turret can defend itself as long as the incoming target is in optimal. It is also quite difficult for a missile boat to know what your optimal is. So he might come in at his max range and find that you're snip fitted, or he'll come in at 0 and find you're cq fitted.

So again, there are very few situations where a missile boat can find itself with the major advantage without factoring in ewar.

Iknow, I know, I'm blabing, but what i'm getting at is that turrets should have the upper head in head to head dps within their optimal range, but missiles shouldn't be so far behind that they never stood a chance to begin with. That is an imbalance.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#65 - 2011-12-18 18:56:08 UTC
Joe link me to a single fleet fight you have ever been in.
Goose99
#66 - 2011-12-18 18:58:30 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Confirming that fleets of maels or hurricanes or ahacs or rokhs or abbadons are actually drakes in disguise.


Confirming they all use missiles. Also confirming creating huge blobs of the exactly same ship with same fit wins Eve.Big smile

Oh wait, one of them is true.Shocked
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#67 - 2011-12-18 19:19:01 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Joe link me to a single fleet fight you have ever been in.


lol, youre still fishing for the name of my main, lol.

I fly only missile boats.

I'm not willing to waist money flying a tengu or golem in pvp.
A raven is quite in effective in pvp expecially with a mixed fleet.
I've lost 1 scorpion, 3 bombers, and 5 drakes.
I've actually lost more than that, but those are just the ones that i've lost while in combat. Not gate camps, not missions, not stupidity. Those are pure losses while in combat.

Now, that's not many ships, but since I fly missile boats and they're somewhat inneffective at pvp, I just stick to what they're good at.
Goose99
#68 - 2011-12-18 19:25:09 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:

I fly only missile boats.


My condolences.Straight
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#69 - 2011-12-18 19:44:46 UTC
Goose99 wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:

I fly only missile boats.


My condolences.Straight


L o l. Now it's a matter of choice I love missile. I just want to be able to get into more incursions and pvp without having to train for turrets, because right now my only option 4 incursions is it logistics, m 4 p v p my only options are a drink or a bomber and wall the bombers fun the drake is probly the most boring ship I've never flown.
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#70 - 2011-12-18 21:35:54 UTC
Sorry Joe, I've lost track of any points that you might be trying to make. I explained to you that missile speed isn't generally a problem, and where it is (Cruise), there are other, more critical problems that would remain even if you speeded up missiles.

All of your posts seem to indicate PVP experience consisting entirely of you being a fleet drone in a nullsec blob. Get out of 0.0, go to lowsec and do some small-gang fights with people willing to teach you when and how to use missiles. The very short version is that missiles trade delayed damage for greater damage-at-range, and a good degree of selectable damage types. You can use that to your advantage whether you're flying a Kestrel, a nano-Drake or a Rook
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#71 - 2011-12-18 23:01:40 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Sorry Joe, I've lost track of any points that you might be trying to make. I explained to you that missile speed isn't generally a problem, and where it is (Cruise), there are other, more critical problems that would remain even if you speeded up missiles.

All of your posts seem to indicate PVP experience consisting entirely of you being a fleet drone in a nullsec blob. Get out of 0.0, go to lowsec and do some small-gang fights with people willing to teach you when and how to use missiles. The very short version is that missiles trade delayed damage for greater damage-at-range, and a good degree of selectable damage types. You can use that to your advantage whether you're flying a Kestrel, a nano-Drake or a Rook


Yes, they do exchange damage at range for delayed damage, however, they have such a long delay that the having that long range is not worth the penalty.

I would at least like to see each missile spead up enoguh to where at max range one volley will hit before the next volley is fired.

For example, lets say you have a drake a max skill, both your range skills at lvl 5, and t2 range rigs with a max range of 90km, then I would like to see the missile velocity increased so that volley 1 hits before volley 2 is fired at max range.
So lets say as it is now, you have 6km/s velocity with a 15 sec flight time but the tech 2 launchers have a 10 second rate of fire. So you're launching a volley 5 seconds before the 1st volley hits the target.
Now, increase the velocity and decrease the flight time so that with t2 launchers you're first volley hits just before your second volley is launched so that if the target is destroyed, the second volley isn't waisted, so the stats would look more like this.
t2 launchers with 10 second cycle, a flight time of 10 seconds, and 9km/s. This means the missile actually pops slightly before it reaches the target which is slightly before 10 seconds, which means if the target is destroyed it negates the next volley being fired.
Of course, like I said, this is factored based off t2 launchers because they have the faster cycle time, so that all launchers will hit before the next volley fires. While this isn't near a large of a modifier as I was suggesting, it's enough to satisfy missile pilots since we won't be waisting volleys any more.

If it was balanced so that at max skills, t2 rigs,with a t2 launcher all missile types hit at max range before the next volley was fired, then this would balance all the way down the hill to minimal skills with t1 launchers and t1 rigs.

So all missiles in all launchers with any rig would still hit before the next volley was fired and would not be the massive exchange that I was suggesting, but only a change of a few seconds at most and a few km/s at most.
Katie Frost
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#72 - 2011-12-18 23:30:42 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:

I fly only missile boats.


You want to improve missiles by effectively making them more akin to turrets and you spent some 4 pages of this thread arguing for missiles and comparing them to turrets... without ever having flown or operated a turret ship? Something isn't quite right about that.

I also note that you mentioned that if two ships, one missile and one turret, were sitting still and firing at one another (same tank, DPS etc), the turret ship would win based on the last missile not hitting the turret ship before the missile ship exploded (flight time/velocity argument). Yes, you are quite correct. The laboratory conditions put in place would ensure of this. However in any case, what you are arguing is not to increase the flight-time and/or velocity of the missiles but for missiles to strike their target once the missile ship firing the missile is no longer present.

Other than that, it sounds like you simply do not know how to use missile ships in combat. They are, unlike stated somewhere in this thread, skill intensive to pilot and use effectively. Do me a favour and cross-train into a T2 Hurricane/Harbinger/Brutix. I'll meet up with you in my HM nano-Drake and we'll see how effective your turrets will be as you are trying to close your range on me. I can guarantee you that you will be well into your low tank, before your optimal fall-off becomes effective against my tank. Whereas, my missiles with all their shortfalls, explosion radii, velocities and flight times will still hit you at 60-70kms.

Move on from PvE, learn to fly missile ships, cross train into turrets and then come back and have a chuckle at this topic.
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#73 - 2011-12-18 23:55:23 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
I would at least like to see each missile spead up enoguh to where at max range one volley will hit before the next volley is fired.

For example, lets say you have a drake a max skill, both your range skills at lvl 5, and t2 range rigs with a max range of 90km, then I would like to see the missile velocity increased so that volley 1 hits before volley 2 is fired at max range.


What you would like to see is not important. What is important is balance. Why are faster HMs from a Drake necessary? Are you arguing that HM Drakes are underpowered and need to be boosted? Please provide supporting evidence.
Katie Frost
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2011-12-19 00:15:45 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Yes, they do exchange damage at range for delayed damage, however, they have such a long delay that the having that long range is not worth the penalty.


Yes it is.

If a Drake could project the same or nearly the same amount of damage at the same rate at 20km as it would at 90km, something would be very unbalanced. If you want to implement improved or insta-hit for missiles, then you would need to depreciate missile damage with distance to target... making them about on par with, oh I don't know... what other weapon system does this? Possibly a sniper-fit turret system?

It really sounds like you want to fly some turret ships.
Sati Kerensky
Perkone
Caldari State
#75 - 2011-12-19 00:22:54 UTC
Katie Frost wrote:
You want to improve missiles by effectively making them more akin to turrets and you spent some 4 pages of this thread arguing for missiles and comparing them to turrets... without ever having flown or operated a turret ship? Something isn't quite right about that.

From where I stand, the argument would instead be that a good part of the populace - those Caldari that did in fact think before spending any skills on relatively useless hybrid guns and instead went for 'their' primary weapon system - are basically getting locked out of incursions and PvP with the current mechanics. Sure, there may be some minorities who build fleets that accept them, or they could group up, but the three other quarters (plus those that spent the time to cross-train) can mix and mingle freely.
Korg Tronix
Mole Station Nursery
#76 - 2011-12-19 00:27:46 UTC
Sati Kerensky wrote:
Katie Frost wrote:
You want to improve missiles by effectively making them more akin to turrets and you spent some 4 pages of this thread arguing for missiles and comparing them to turrets... without ever having flown or operated a turret ship? Something isn't quite right about that.

From where I stand, the argument would instead be that a good part of the populace - those Caldari that did in fact think before spending any skills on relatively useless hybrid guns and instead went for 'their' primary weapon system - are basically getting locked out of incursions and PvP with the current mechanics. Sure, there may be some minorities who build fleets that accept them, or they could group up, but the three other quarters (plus those that spent the time to cross-train) can mix and mingle freely.


Funny I am near max skills in pretty much all missile boats below battleship (I just dont fly them) and I have never had a problem pvping in a missile boat, whether that be HAM/HM Drake, Rocket Frigs (pre and post buff) and Torp SB etc. The problem with 90% pvp in missile boats has never been the flight time but more that most people dont bother actually fitting to missiles great advantages. Good DPS at Great Ranges.

Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams]
Katie Frost
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#77 - 2011-12-19 00:31:06 UTC
Sati Kerensky wrote:
Katie Frost wrote:
You want to improve missiles by effectively making them more akin to turrets and you spent some 4 pages of this thread arguing for missiles and comparing them to turrets... without ever having flown or operated a turret ship? Something isn't quite right about that.

From where I stand, the argument would instead be that a good part of the populace - those Caldari that did in fact think before spending any skills on relatively useless hybrid guns and instead went for 'their' primary weapon system - are basically getting locked out of incursions and PvP with the current mechanics. Sure, there may be some minorities who build fleets that accept them, or they could group up, but the three other quarters (plus those that spent the time to cross-train) can mix and mingle freely.


You just defeated your own point. If there is such a good part of Caldari populace that only ever trained missile weapons, then you shouldn't have any issues in finding any fleets that would be missile-only based. Another retort would be the stats on the Drake use in both PvE and PvP. Unless people started fitting hybrids on Drakes lately, that is a resounding counter-argument to any concepts of missiles being underpowered or that you would find difficulty in forming fleets with other Drake pilots.

Drake blobs are still one of the most common fleets out there and even in turret BC fleets, I would struggle to see how a Drake would go amiss unless you are SeBo popping frigates.
Sati Kerensky
Perkone
Caldari State
#78 - 2011-12-19 00:34:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Sati Kerensky
Katie Frost wrote:
Sati Kerensky wrote:
Katie Frost wrote:
You want to improve missiles by effectively making them more akin to turrets and you spent some 4 pages of this thread arguing for missiles and comparing them to turrets... without ever having flown or operated a turret ship? Something isn't quite right about that.

From where I stand, the argument would instead be that a good part of the populace - those Caldari that did in fact think before spending any skills on relatively useless hybrid guns and instead went for 'their' primary weapon system - are basically getting locked out of incursions and PvP with the current mechanics. Sure, there may be some minorities who build fleets that accept them, or they could group up, but the three other quarters (plus those that spent the time to cross-train) can mix and mingle freely.


You just defeated your own point. If there is such a good part of Caldari populace that only ever trained missile weapons, then you shouldn't have any issues in finding any fleets that would be missile-only based. Another retort would be the stats on the Drake use in both PvE and PvP. Unless people started fitting hybrids on Drakes lately, that is a resounding counter-argument to any concepts of missiles being underpowered or that you would find difficulty in forming fleets with other Drake pilots.

Drake blobs are still one of the most common fleets out there and even in turret BC fleets, I would struggle to see how a Drake would go amiss unless you are SeBo popping frigates.

Actually, nope. I've just spent lots of training time on stuff other than combat, and now that I'm getting back to fighting skills, I'm SERIOUSLY going for gunnery, simply because I want to FOR ONCE get a place in an incursion fleet. (that actually has a chance in the contested areas where turret fleets rule because of the mechanics)
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#79 - 2011-12-19 02:27:53 UTC
Korg Tronix wrote:
Sati Kerensky wrote:
Katie Frost wrote:
You want to improve missiles by effectively making them more akin to turrets and you spent some 4 pages of this thread arguing for missiles and comparing them to turrets... without ever having flown or operated a turret ship? Something isn't quite right about that.

From where I stand, the argument would instead be that a good part of the populace - those Caldari that did in fact think before spending any skills on relatively useless hybrid guns and instead went for 'their' primary weapon system - are basically getting locked out of incursions and PvP with the current mechanics. Sure, there may be some minorities who build fleets that accept them, or they could group up, but the three other quarters (plus those that spent the time to cross-train) can mix and mingle freely.


Funny I am near max skills in pretty much all missile boats below battleship (I just dont fly them) and I have never had a problem pvping in a missile boat, whether that be HAM/HM Drake, Rocket Frigs (pre and post buff) and Torp SB etc. The problem with 90% pvp in missile boats has never been the flight time but more that most people dont bother actually fitting to missiles great advantages. Good DPS at Great Ranges.


You CAN get a missile boat into another fleet. The problem is that the fleet would actually be better off had they grabbed a turret boat. I fly stealth bombers in both low and null sec pvp, but apart from the bomb itself, it is really not very effective even having that high dps. Reason being is because a well organized fleet will call out targets and focus fire on them. So typically, by the time my missiles make it there, the target is already destroyed.

So again, the issue is not that missile boats don't have the dps or don't have effectiveness in pvp, it's that when they're in a mixed fleet they lose effectiveness the further away the targets get, because the targets will be destroyed by turrets before missile volleys can make it there.

Hence my earlier compairison of a turret and a missile boat with the same range, same dps, same rate of fire, and same tank, the missile boat will go down first and the turret boat will survive, even though the volley of missiles that would deal the killing blow was already in the air.
Katie Frost
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#80 - 2011-12-19 02:47:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Katie Frost
It really depends on the fleet and the situation Joe.

If you are running a missile boat in an alpha-gang, then yeah... get used to those 0% KMs and being ineffective in assisting your fleet in killing the primary. Likewise however, a turret ship that is out of range of the primary target will have much the same issue in that it will shoot numerous times at the target without hitting it at all.

If you are flying a SB with a Tempest Gang then you are scouting, targeting EWAR and Logi, shooting structures... or you are doing something wrong.

Instead of trying to change game mechanics of a weapon platform which is unique and perfectly well suited in PvP situations, learn to adapt and fly your ship better.

As an example of the effectiveness of missile boats in PvP, think of scenarios where EWAR/Logi ships decloak/appear out of the turret ships' range (assuming they are not LR fitted). I would love for those HM's to be able to 1) hit them every time, 2) do decent damage, and 3) shoot them at range...