open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked More Missiles!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 : last (15)

Author Topic

Abbadonuk
Caldari
Ramm's RDI
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2004.08.04 07:55:00 - [301]
 

I guess all the people complaining about missiles hitting frigates will be prepared to watch the nerf bat swing back to lasers as soon as it has finished making missiles lame? I equipped an Apoc with Mega Pulses and went out looking for frigates to kill.

Guess what? I had no problems at all, one shot kills from 10km to 40km ranges. If an Apoc with Mega Pulse can do wrecking damage to frigates why should it take 20 cruise missiles to kill the same frigate?

BTW, My gunnery skills are no overly great, but I did fit a few tracking boosters.

meowcat
Aliastra
Posted - 2004.08.04 09:22:00 - [302]
 

Edited by: meowcat on 04/08/2004 09:33:55
in a vacuum there cannot be a kinetic shockwave

edit: somones already made this point, sry

Titan II
Gallente
Doomheim
Posted - 2004.08.04 18:04:00 - [303]
 

Originally by: Abbadonuk
I guess all the people complaining about missiles hitting frigates will be prepared to watch the nerf bat swing back to lasers as soon as it has finished making missiles lame? I equipped an Apoc with Mega Pulses and went out looking for frigates to kill.

Guess what? I had no problems at all, one shot kills from 10km to 40km ranges. If an Apoc with Mega Pulse can do wrecking damage to frigates why should it take 20 cruise missiles to kill the same frigate?

BTW, My gunnery skills are no overly great, but I did fit a few tracking boosters.


I think that Tomb was just thinking with his keyboard. I sure that he sobered up and realized that targets don't have much say in how much damage a heavy strike is going to do.

Actually I think that they do. They provide the upper limit. My punisher has 451 armor, 250 shields and 262 structure. So the max a torpedo strike can do is 963... and I just don't give a damn about anything above that...Shocked

Gariuys
Evil Strangers Inc.
Posted - 2004.08.05 09:19:00 - [304]
 

Originally by: Laveticus Draconis
Originally by: Clan MacGregor
Originally by: Laveticus Draconis
Originally by: deathbyfire
let me guess you both like spaming missles


I don't own a Raven, however I do have a Caracal, and no, missiles are by no means all I use. Every weapon in the game has its advantages and disadvantages and it should stay that way. Hell, I guess everything will be nerfed so much in time that no one will notice a difference, it'll just take longer to do the same thing. Rolling Eyes


I think the damage models are fine. But the 100% hit rate on missiles needs to be addressed. Frigate pilots also need to understand that it takes a big pair of brass ones to go after a battleship, and to expect to get destroyed...Rolling Eyes

I love Frigates, I just don't expect to take down a bs in oneYARRRR!!


Agreed, the 100% hit rate could be changed. Think I’m just tired of getting a new ship, rigging it out, and having the weapons and such completely changed soon there after.

I retract my previous statement regarding CCP. However, please do consider investing in a decent calculator.
Smile


Think the problem is that, the messing with agility etc. to have missiles miss or unable to effectively hit frigates hasn't produced good results. This is another way of achieving the same effect.

Juan Andalusian
Evolution
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2004.08.05 13:13:00 - [305]
 

Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 05/08/2004 13:15:53
*Sigh*

What was this thread all about again?

Making missiles long range weapons?!? why are ravens still flown in fleet battles then?

Gariuys said at some point: waiting 2min (a bit of an exaggeration) to do damage is unaccteptable... why is it unacceptable for a weapon system that uses no cap, is equally effective at close and long range to have "damage lag" under certain situations?

2nd *Sigh*

Anyone of you remember how it was fighting a crow / kesstrel with a taranis / incursus pre changes?

Anyone remember how it was for 2 close range turret frigs to circle a Raven, getting webbed and still being able to survive the first 34 cruise missiles with good use of sbombs?

Anyone remember how it was when you fit yer BS to counter cruise missile frigate squads and the look on the face of those pilots when you pwned them?

So what now?

Someone's skill at avoiding cruise while flying frigate is going to be replaced with 100% hit but less damage?

Or the BS pilot who actually bothered to differentiate his loadout now gets laughed at?

Xelios said it... i will say it again:

THE MODULES WERE THERE AND STILL ARE! PEOPLE JUST DIDN'T WANT TO F*CKING USE THEM!

You guys cannot see the forrest for the trees anymore. Look at where we've gone to achieve what?!?

If you had kept:

Old school 2m/s cruise speed +
Old launching mechanics (none of this i fire torps from my ass crap) +
New missiles only hit target +
Old launchers +
Tweaking of some frig counter measures.

Noone could have viably complained.

Hotice
Posted - 2004.08.06 08:00:00 - [306]
 

Edited by: Hotice on 06/08/2004 08:27:29
Real life cruise missiles fly far faster than any naval ships. Thus it is possible to use them against ships. However, it is next to impossible to use cruise missiles to hit any jet. As matter of fact, even B52 can evade cruise missiles. The largest missile that can hit fast moving target in the air is Phoenix missile. It is at most equal to heavy missile in Eve. Cruise missiles and Torp should be anti cruiser and battleship weapon. There is no way for cruise missle to track a fast moving frigate or interceptor.

Also, unless frigate and interceptor can carry large torp or big bomb in large squadron size. They shouldn't be able to hurt battleship at all in any form. What frigte/interceptor can do to battleship pretty much limited to jamming and web if enough of them are at it. It is ridicules for 1 or 2 frigate/interceptor to be able to slow down a battleship. Try get 30 jet fighters fire their biggest AA missile at modern battleship see how much damage they do. Besides a few dents and lose of paint job, they cannot even come close to kill the battleship. Nothing less than some well placed heavy surface to surface missiles could do any kind of serious damage to the battleship. Frigate job is to sink upto cruisers class ships. To sink battleship you need high level dive bombs and other battleships.

Simple example for modern Class: IOWA battleship armament:

Nine 16-inch/50caliber guns in three triple turrets

Twenty 5-inch/38 caliber dual purpose guns in ten twin mounts

Sixty-four 40-mm. anti-aircraft guns in 16 quadruple mounts, later increased to eighty guns in 20 mounts

Forty-nine 20-mm. anti-aircraft guns, increased during WWII to fifty-seven.

Eight armored box launchers for 32 Tomahawk cruise missles

Four quadruple canister launchers for 16 Harpoon anti-ship missles

Four Vulcan/Phalanx weapon systems for aircraft/missle defense

Advanced commnications systems, air-search radar

Anything less than another same class battleship face it will be destroyed in matter of 30 minutes at most. When it comes to combat ship design, CCP really need to do more research. It is laughable that missiles can hit any and everything 100%. Large cruise missiles and torpidos will miss small fast moving target. At same time small missile cannot and shouldn't really hurt big battleships. What we are missing here is large bomb or torpido that frigate can carry 1 or 2 at time to be used against battleship in large number. The exception here is cruiser carry heavy missiles. Which is kind of dual purpose missile type. It can hit frigate but not very well, and it can do some damage to battleship but need large amount of the missiles to do the job.

Each missile type is designed for very specific purpose, range and speed. There is no such thing as general purpose missile. Use incorrect missile type against a wrong type of target will make missile either miss the target or not really do anything to the target. A Hellfire missile is great against a tank but totally useless against a cruiser. Fire a Tomahawk against a MIG-29 is a total waste.

GoGo Yubari
Veto.
Posted - 2004.08.06 14:38:00 - [307]
 

Thinking about the basic premise of the missile changes, I have to wonder a bit at the thinking behind it all. When you think that a 100m3 explosion does "more" damage against a target of 100m3 than one of 10m3, it may sound reasonable. Yes, you're going to end up with 100m3 of potentially destroyed ship components, versus the 10m3 in the latter case. Kinda obvious.

The game already has an abstracted system of measuring damage. It's all in shield, armor and structure. That's what accounts in part for varying ship sizes as well. A 10m3 target has X hp, while a 100m3 target has so much more. Compare frigates with battleships. This new proposed changed is - imho - imposing another ill-fitting system/paradigm on an already existing one.

Iron Jackal
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2004.08.06 17:55:00 - [308]
 

Originally by: GoGo Yubari
Thinking about the basic premise of the missile changes, I have to wonder a bit at the thinking behind it all. When you think that a 100m3 explosion does "more" damage against a target of 100m3 than one of 10m3, it may sound reasonable. Yes, you're going to end up with 100m3 of potentially destroyed ship components, versus the 10m3 in the latter case. Kinda obvious.

The game already has an abstracted system of measuring damage. It's all in shield, armor and structure. That's what accounts in part for varying ship sizes as well. A 10m3 target has X hp, while a 100m3 target has so much more. Compare frigates with battleships. This new proposed changed is - imho - imposing another ill-fitting system/paradigm on an already existing one.



There just looking for a quick and easy way to nerf missiles without having to go back and dsust off those anoying highschool physics booksEvil or Very Mad

mafish
Minmatar
Dashavatara
Posted - 2004.08.06 20:05:00 - [309]
 

after having a play around on test with the changes i have found:
1. to a raven/scorp torps do the same damage
2. to a tempest they do 100 less damage
3. damage to a mwding and duel mwding scorp is full not ne more :/
4. now takes about 4ish vollys to kill a maller used to take 2ish
5 cruise havent been changed
6 my torp that used to hit for 630 does 41 to a frigate

i have never been bother with ne change in the game i have just adapted got on with things but my fear with this is the raven will be phased out and not able to defend its self it can still have a great defence but torps will be nurfed unless fighting another raven or scorp and cruise just dont do the damage to hurt a armour tank

Iron Jackal
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2004.08.06 20:20:00 - [310]
 

Originally by: mafish
after having a play around on test with the changes i have found:
1. to a raven/scorp torps do the same damage
2. to a tempest they do 100 less damage
3. damage to a mwding and duel mwding scorp is full not ne more :/
4. now takes about 4ish vollys to kill a maller used to take 2ish
5 cruise havent been changed
6 my torp that used to hit for 630 does 41 to a frigate

i have never been bother with ne change in the game i have just adapted got on with things but my fear with this is the raven will be phased out and not able to defend its self it can still have a great defence but torps will be nurfed unless fighting another raven or scorp and cruise just dont do the damage to hurt a armour tank




Time to sell the Raven and get 500 Rifters...Evil or Very Mad

Dumbest thing I heard so far

mafish
Minmatar
Dashavatara
Posted - 2004.08.07 09:54:00 - [311]
 

Originally by: Iron Jackal

Time to sell the Raven and get 500 Rifters...Evil or Very Mad

Dumbest thing I heard so far


lol that was what i said when i hit the frig but it was a crow i hit so a rifter may take 50 damage mayby more if the torp ever hits Rolling Eyes

Aequitas Veritas
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2004.08.07 11:21:00 - [312]
 

Edited by: Aequitas Veritas on 07/08/2004 11:46:44
TomB, I assume that you will change missile speed while changing their damage?

Exarch
Defiance Weaponry
Posted - 2004.08.07 13:40:00 - [313]
 

50 damage is alot to a frig.

Deadflip2
Gallente
HeartVenom Inc.
Posted - 2004.08.07 15:22:00 - [314]
 

Edited by: Deadflip2 on 07/08/2004 15:25:50
say i fit my raven for close combat, wich means i need to get close to my opponent, the opponent will turn away, this will mean that givin chase to an opponent means my missiles do far less damage, also i forsee scenarios where players simple orbit at long range (missiles follow their tails, and since he is going at a speed i do less dmg).
with this change abusing the changes are far to simple if you ask me, very good idea though

Christian Xavier
Caldari
The Fraternal Association of Killer Squibs
Posted - 2004.08.07 16:20:00 - [315]
 

I think I read that a missile "missing" can't be done, but what about. Ship Maneuverability. vs. Missile Maneuverability.

Assuming
SM = 50 (Ship Maneuverability)
MM = 40 (Missile Maneuverability)
50 - 40 = 10
A frig would have 10 higher chance of "evading" a missile. This would give a 10% miss chance.

Hit = 100% damage.
Miss = Proposed fake Area of effect damage.

SM = (% of max speed * maneuverability stat.)
So a frig at a stop is DEAD, plain and simple.

If the standard maneuverability speed is 40, and you're going 150% speed it becomes 60.

Now to keep MWD's from becoming UBER you simply put a penalty on maneuverability for the MWD. +500% speed, (-75% to -90%) maneuverability (while active, and maybe instead of sig radius). This also means the MWD would fill in the "high speed" get to them fast role, and the AB would be the "high maneuverability" dodging fire role. MWD's best defense against big missiles is to pray or run. AB is just pray, but a little better chances. MWD's would also be forced to orbit further out since they just can't maneuver properly at speeds so much greater than they were designed for.

So there is no true miss, but instead near misses. My Goals in this post:
1. Not to makes frigs the end all destroyers. They should be seen as useful though. It encourages people to take the newbs out and give them a taste of PvP.
2. To give big ships a chance for those one hit kills they need to make frigs run. With a couple defenders and torps doing 50 damage I would put a Raven's threat level to a frig ridiculously lower using the current plan.
3. It still encourages “mixed fleets”. Frigs have a place just like BS’s, but the BS place is a bit higher. PvP armed frigs can still be destroyed by any ship. PvP armed BS’s can’t be “easily” destroyed by any ship. If I have a tank, I should still fear the crafty man with a plan no matter what he’s armed with.
4. To give frigs a chance for a near miss or two to keep a larger ship locked down long enough for another ship to kill. Also give missiles a bit more general balance. No one will fly a frig to 0.0 if they ALWAYS die with the first hit.
5. To give AB's a purpose. Not just the "I can't use MWD's yet". Oversized ABs are great, but they're going away soon, so there needs to be something else. This “should” go in to effect when the 10MN on a frig and 100MN on a cruiser ability goes away.

So, in summary: Ships can “avoid” some missile damage, but a stopped ship CAN’T. Torps are best for killing BS’s, but the splash damage and full damage chance still keeps them feared by ANYTHING. AB’s have a use again without over sizing. Forgive me if I've re-posted anyone's ideas. Any thoughts?

Aequitas Veritas
NibbleTek
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2004.08.07 16:44:00 - [316]
 

Very nice idea : )
Hope TomB will take his time to comment on it... It makes a lot more sense than the changes he has though of at least.

Iron Jackal
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2004.08.08 01:27:00 - [317]
 

Originally by: Exarch
50 damage is alot to a frig.



Torpedo's should do a minimum of 400 damage [if it hits]

50 is just stupidRolling Eyes

Def Antares
Posted - 2004.08.08 08:33:00 - [318]
 

Originally by: mafish
3. damage to a mwding and duel mwding scorp is full not ne more :/


aah? pardon? Shocked

Jerioca
Amarr
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers
Privateer Alliance
Posted - 2004.08.08 17:32:00 - [319]
 

OK, this thread is 16 pages long now and I'm just not going to wade through that many post so if this has been covered, sorry but there you are...

TomB, I can see what you're trying to achieve but some of your logic is wrong imo based primarily on what a missile actually is as a weapon.

A missile is by its very nature, and hinted at by its name, is not designed to hit anything. It is actually designed to fly up alongside a target and explode. If it does hit the target it's a bonus. If it's designed to hit a target it's a rocket. End of story.

Having got that out of the way a missile does not rely on blast damage or shock waves hitting the object you want it to destroy though they can have an important effect. The primary damage from a missile is caused by the shrapnel effect of the missile casing as it desintigrates from the explosion peppering the objects body somewhat like a shot gun or from expanding rod casings and similar that are wrapped round the explosive charge that effectively saw things in two. Most damage from a missile in RL is primarily physical from high speed contact between the remains of the missile and the object your trying to destroy. the rest of the work is done by the hull of the object ripping itself apart now that its structural integrity has been flawed which is usually but not always helped along by the blast wave from the explosion itself.

Any actual damage from the blast wave doesn't rely very much on whether you're moving into or away from the epicentre of the explosion the important thing is how far away you are from the epicentre you are when the blast hits you. The further you are away from the blast the less the effects are by an exponentially reducing amount.

So if anything in a head on with a missile, unless the missile actually hits the target (a very rare occurance) you're actually going to get less damage than in a tail chase situation as by the time the missile realises it's next to you and explodes you've already travelled a significant way past the epicentre of the explosion given the relative closing/opening velocities and thus away from the effective range of shrapnel effect. with limited hull damage the blast will have little effect apart from knocking the object around (potentially destructive in an atmoshpere but just a major inconvenience and cups flying around the bridge in space).

Of course you're not going to be able to emulate this in a game like EVE and I as well as probably everyone else wouldn't want that. But my point is that while it's right that there should be a greater variance of damage from missile explosions to give any semblance of normality you should not be increasing damage beyond maximum damage for the given missile in a head on. It just doesn't stack up with how things really occur I'm afraid. Likewise the tail chase scenario is actually the best possible way in which you can use a missile as the actual relative closing speed is much less and the victim is going to be spending far more time in the kill range of the missile when it actually explodes.

Again to have any sense of how missiles actually work this logic you're using will actually produce minimum damage in a head on and maximum or near to maximum damage in a tail chase. The only realistic scenario for minimizing damage to a frigate that is running rings round a battleship is if the missile explodes by the frigate when their respective paths are at 90° to each other giving the frigate maximum transverse velocity. by the time the effects of the explosion are at their peek the frigate will be well out of the range of the shrapnel from the missile.

Of course this only really applies to kinetic or explosive missiles in the game. Thermal and EMP missiles are a whole different ball park which I'm not in a position to debate.

In my view, game wise you're barking up the wrong tree TomB. By all means bring in some randomisation of missile warhead damage but I don't think it should be a significant amount, say 15% variation off the top of my head, if a missile gets within range of you to be able to explode you're going to get the effective full weight from the damage potential regardless. What you should be concentrating on is avoiding the missile getting to you in the first place through speed, manoeuvrability and missile countermeasures modules.

With thanks for a great game apart from some of the fuzzy logic getting into the design,

mafish
Minmatar
Dashavatara
Posted - 2004.08.08 17:50:00 - [320]
 

Originally by: Exarch
50 damage is alot to a frig.


not when it cannot hit

mafish
Minmatar
Dashavatara
Posted - 2004.08.08 17:56:00 - [321]
 

Edited by: mafish on 08/08/2004 17:58:37
Edited by: mafish on 08/08/2004 17:57:45
Originally by: Def Antares
Originally by: mafish
3. damage to a mwding and duel mwding scorp is full not ne more :/


aah? pardon? Shocked


i may have read this wrong (it was a while after i read the thread to testing it) but i thought it was going to work on how big the ship is so as mwd's make the ship bigger the missiles should do more damage this is not the case tho they just do what they used to so all that has really happened is they have nurfed damage to all ships apart from caldari which they seem to take full damage still :/

Selim
Akh'Vehlr Industries
Posted - 2004.08.09 14:11:00 - [322]
 

Yeah, I'm not sure about this either.

Will a missile do any more damage to a ship with a sig radius of above 400 than it will to a ship with exactly 400?

What would be the stats of a cruise missile with the current ideas? Kinetic damage + current damage, of course. I'm hoping the current damage will be lowered, to make room for the kinetic damage. Because missiles right now are fine damage-wise...

Also, Torps need to be lowered in range. Max range without skills... 25 or 30 km? Cruises used beyond that? They're not long-range things by nature but right now they hit out pretty far. Just to clarify, a torp would do less kinetic damage than, say, a cruise missile, right?

And lastly, whats on everyones mind is... when are the missile velocity boosts going to be released? Wink

Braddict
Caldari
Doomheim
Posted - 2004.08.09 18:54:00 - [323]
 

Originally by: Selim
Yeah, I'm not sure about this either.


I 2nd that.. with the recent missile/launcher nerf, I felt that was a sufficient & much needed adjustment.

Battleships already take forever to lock onto a frigate anyways & even more so on interceptors. If a frigate pilot wants to avoid cruise missiles they can either target jam the BS with assistance or quickly warp out before the BS can lock them & begin launching cruise missiles.

Frigates aren't supposed to be infamous for their durability vs Battleships using cruise missiles.

Matthew Johnson
Gallente
Johnson Industries
Posted - 2004.08.09 20:06:00 - [324]
 

How about:

Missles get a dice-roll when they hit their target. Then their size is compared with the signiture radius of the ship, reulsting in a likeness of a hit. If they fail the dice-roll, they simply pass the ships and have to turn and do another run.


Selim
Akh'Vehlr Industries
Posted - 2004.08.09 20:18:00 - [325]
 

Originally by: Braddict
Originally by: Selim
Yeah, I'm not sure about this either.


I 2nd that.. with the recent missile/launcher nerf, I felt that was a sufficient & much needed adjustment.

Battleships already take forever to lock onto a frigate anyways & even more so on interceptors. If a frigate pilot wants to avoid cruise missiles they can either target jam the BS with assistance or quickly warp out before the BS can lock them & begin launching cruise missiles.

Frigates aren't supposed to be infamous for their durability vs Battleships using cruise missiles.



Actually I meant I wasnt sure about the formula. I agree with the changes.

Istvaan Shogaatsu
Caldari
Guiding Hand Social Club
Posted - 2004.08.10 17:19:00 - [326]
 

K, I don't know who thought up that giant missiles hitting small targets should do small amounts of damage. Ever see a 2000lb bomb hit a Volkswagen? Hint: It doesn't leave key-scratches on the doors.

Frigates and cruisers don't need this missile handicap. They have evasion and countermeasures to prevent being savaged by missiles.

Pagefault
Evoke.
Ev0ke
Posted - 2004.08.10 17:27:00 - [327]
 

Make sure, that u have thought about the following:
- Be careful with defenders, they a) chase missiles (large shock penalties) and b) missiles are small (large area effect penalty), ie: make sure defenders still kill any missile in any situation

- Shock bounties can be hard for frigs, which needs to approach a bs fast. Be careful with the balance here, or frigs may have a problem to get in combat range at all

- You might apply a shock bounty probability based on missile type/ship size, it could be considered very unlikely, that a torp hits a frig 'at the nose', and therefore only a very small chance that shock bounty apply at all.
- and a new skill here to improve it :)

- Shock penalties are a bit unlogical, because the kinetic energy is almost nothing compared to the energy of a missile warhead (but i don't need exact physics, i need a funny game, so i don't care about it). but at least consider small missile to have a relativly high shock bounty, as they are fast and have big "dead" mass compared to their warhead.

- You can itroduce missiles of same class, but with reduced dmg, but also reduced area effect, and therefore be better against small ships (named missiles.. huh)

- another idea pops up: u might consider a missile's fuel to explode as well and give additional thermal dmg, depending on the time, the missile was in space. (close range, more damage; missile must chase fast ship for a while -> bad damage), just an idea, and i consider it hard to implement in game mechanics, probably not worth it.

all together: great idea!

Detaurus
Posted - 2004.08.10 17:53:00 - [328]
 

Holy crap yaal, if anyone would like to see the missile changes, log on and shoot now before they fix their 'error' on the same Serpentis Guards I do 27 dmg when I used to do 90 with heavy missiles.

Seya


sableye
principle of motion
Posted - 2004.08.10 21:09:00 - [329]
 

if you make these changed missle's need to be ablot cheaper, the same price as a peice of ammo or so, and thx for nerfing my scourge missle's.

Detaurus
Posted - 2004.08.10 21:55:00 - [330]
 

I wish we could get some type of answer wheteher it was intended for missiles to be nerfed so badly. My friend is doing 80 dmg to frigates with his blaster, and a missile does 26 at a ROF of 19???? Lol.



Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 : last (15)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only