open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Missiles need to change
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Hatch
Minmatar
4 Marketeers
Rura-Penthe
Posted - 2008.06.27 17:10:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Matrixcvd
All you guys are doing is role playing

stop thinking about how you want missiles to work and start learning how they work

if you fight fast ships, you need to slow them down
if you are in a big ship you can tank and out Cap them
if you cant figure out which ships need to die first you dont WTB Game Balance, you WTB an FC


AMEN BROTHA

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2008.06.27 17:57:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: theteck
you are near or far the missle hit ...

my hybrid gun cant do it

missile to good lowering the missile hit its good




You can hit fast targets from distance or when target makes error in maneuvers, and if it comes close you can neut and web it and hit it. Missile can't damage fast target at all.
Medium guns hit nanoships quite reliably, medium missiles(heavy/heavy assault) can't do a thing.
So there is obvious disbalance - there is a range of speed where T1 guns of small and medium size can harm ships but only T2 small missiles can harm them while medium and T1 missiles cannot.

Opertone
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.06.29 10:07:00 - [33]
 

explain how can 10 thousand tons' Heavy assault ship with 80 000 m3 volume move faster than 0.03 m3 lightweight missile? (less than 100 kg)

what kind of engines fit on the heavy assault ship that allow the assault ship to be faster and more agile than a missile with a warhead?

how were missiles designed to be unable to hit the targets? why can the heavy ships be faster than the missiles designed to hit targets of this class?

(how do projectiles travel instantaneously?)

TheTerribleTerryTate
Minmatar
Dark Neutron Star
Drama Flakes
Posted - 2008.06.30 12:07:00 - [34]
 

"I'm the Professor, why does nobody listen to me? LAVA, HOT!" --Farnsworth, Futurama

Missiles, much smaller, more manoeuverable relative to ships, much larger, less manoeuverable. Explosions, extremely fast high-energy event that should in the least, be a concern for sticks-for-structure, massive vessels regardless. *shrug?*

BhallSpawn
Posted - 2008.07.01 04:46:00 - [35]
 

bump
buff missles

Ghostwarden
Posted - 2008.07.01 16:01:00 - [36]
 

I have a simple (at least I think its simple) fix here.

New missile types.

Speed missiles.
Increased Velocity by 100% (This is a rough guess)
Increased Explosion Velocity by 50 to 100% (Another rough guess)
Decrease Damage by 50-75 %.

Then the Caldari would have to carry yet more ammo to deal with the nanno ships. (and this is all these missiles would be good for).

Ghost

swoj
The New Order.
Posted - 2008.07.01 19:06:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Internet Knight
Edited by: Internet Knight on 20/06/2008 09:48:36
Originally by: Resamo
The problem for me that i find very annoying is that if a ship is flying straight at me at full speed my missiles do nothing to him... how? he is not outrunnign them he is not doing anything?
That's the problem in a nutshell.

There's something called radial velocity. That is, the speed at which something is increasing or decreasing distance from yourself. Missiles' explosion velocity should be compared against a ship's radial velocity of the missile (compared against the target), not the velocity of the missile.

So, if the target's radial velocity is high (the target is moving away from the missile), damage is reduced. Whereas, if the target's radial velocity is low (the target is moving towards the missile), damage is increased.

This would allow you to still do damage to something orbiting you (but not full damage, as the ship orbiting you is likely not going towards you full on). It would allow you to do full damage to someone that's coming towards you full on. And it would allow you to do no damage to someone in full retreat.




I'd agree with this, would definitely be the right way to go (well, possibly part of the solution, probably would not be a whole solution in itself, but one thing at a time). Would make it very dangerous for speed ships to make their approach and would require both sides to out think their opponent to get the tactical advantage rather than just 'Orbit at xx'

SDragoon
Posted - 2008.07.02 06:10:00 - [38]
 

Edited by: SDragoon on 02/07/2008 06:19:03
Allow target painters to also reduce the effective speed of the target for comparison to missile explosion velocity. The missile is detonating closer to the target, thus the target is closer to the blast center and subject to the blast wave when it is at its fastest.

For example, a 30% target painter would increase the target signature by 30% and decrease it's effective speed vs explosion velocity (or effective explosive velocity of missile hitting the painted target) by 30%(Number subject to balancing)

So if a vagabond is cruising around at 6k/s and you put a 30% target painter on him, he'd have an effective speed of 4,200. Which is still fast enough to nullify damage from almost anything but precision light missiles, but you get the idea.

Right now Target painters aren't used very much, and missile are hurting since you can't damage anything going over 3k/ms short of light precision missile. Guns have tracking computers, give missiles target painters!

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2008.07.02 07:39:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: SDragoon
Edited by: SDragoon on 02/07/2008 06:19:03
Allow target painters to also reduce the effective speed of the target for comparison to missile explosion velocity. The missile is detonating closer to the target, thus the target is closer to the blast center and subject to the blast wave when it is at its fastest.

For example, a 30% target painter would increase the target signature by 30% and decrease it's effective speed vs explosion velocity (or effective explosive velocity of missile hitting the painted target) by 30%(Number subject to balancing)

So if a vagabond is cruising around at 6k/s and you put a 30% target painter on him, he'd have an effective speed of 4,200. Which is still fast enough to nullify damage from almost anything but precision light missiles, but you get the idea.

Right now Target painters aren't used very much, and missile are hurting since you can't damage anything going over 3k/ms short of light precision missile. Guns have tracking computers, give missiles target painters!


You realize guns also benefit from painters? With your suggestion guns will benefit even more - +30% signature and -30% speed equals +69% tracking bonus for everyone, nice huh? Who needs a tracking computer after that?
No, the changes should be on missiles only, or new modules that affect missile velocity & explosion velocity.

reaping miner
Incidental Damage
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2008.07.02 18:48:00 - [40]
 

well guns dont hit ceptors either..
if u dont like 12Km webber buy a domination webber or something like it.
and i bet CCP is not going the boost the missles in this case (if they do something) they will prlly just nerf MWD's or ceptors or something in that direction.

SDragoon
Posted - 2008.07.03 00:43:00 - [41]
 

Edited by: SDragoon on 03/07/2008 00:43:43
Originally by: FlameGlow
Originally by: SDragoon
Edited by: SDragoon on 02/07/2008 06:19:03
Allow target painters to also reduce the effective speed of the target for comparison to missile explosion velocity. The missile is detonating closer to the target, thus the target is closer to the blast center and subject to the blast wave when it is at its fastest.

For example, a 30% target painter would increase the target signature by 30% and decrease it's effective speed vs explosion velocity (or effective explosive velocity of missile hitting the painted target) by 30%(Number subject to balancing)

So if a vagabond is cruising around at 6k/s and you put a 30% target painter on him, he'd have an effective speed of 4,200. Which is still fast enough to nullify damage from almost anything but precision light missiles, but you get the idea.

Right now Target painters aren't used very much, and missile are hurting since you can't damage anything going over 3k/ms short of light precision missile. Guns have tracking computers, give missiles target painters!


You realize guns also benefit from painters? With your suggestion guns will benefit even more - +30% signature and -30% speed equals +69% tracking bonus for everyone, nice huh? Who needs a tracking computer after that?
No, the changes should be on missiles only, or new modules that affect missile velocity & explosion velocity.



Train reading to level 1 and try again.

Christari Zuborov
Amarr
Ore Mongers
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:30:00 - [42]
 

No one ever discusses the differences in training time length between missiles and gunnery when the 'balance' subject comes up...


schneirder
Viziam
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:40:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Internet Knight
Edited by: Internet Knight on 20/06/2008 09:48:36
Originally by: Resamo
The problem for me that i find very annoying is that if a ship is flying straight at me at full speed my missiles do nothing to him... how? he is not outrunnign them he is not doing anything?
That's the problem in a nutshell.

There's something called radial velocity. That is, the speed at which something is increasing or decreasing distance from yourself. Missiles' explosion velocity should be compared against a ship's radial velocity of the missile (compared against the target), not the velocity of the missile.

So, if the target's radial velocity is high (the target is moving away from the missile), damage is reduced. Whereas, if the target's radial velocity is low (the target is moving towards the missile), damage is increased.

This would allow you to still do damage to something orbiting you (but not full damage, as the ship orbiting you is likely not going towards you full on). It would allow you to do full damage to someone that's coming towards you full on. And it would allow you to do no damage to someone in full retreat.

Problem solved. Get to work, CCP.

ninjaedit


This is probably the best post I've seen on Eve-O, because it's COMPLETELY CORRECT. It makes no sense to blabber about ships 'outrunning' missiles when they are flying directly towards them. I just feel sad because CCP won't pay any attention.

Chris Sharp
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:51:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Christari Zuborov
No one ever discusses the differences in training time length between missiles and gunnery when the 'balance' subject comes up...




Basically a great idea!

Some new Skills for missiles!

Advanced Hypercharge (3) I-V
* 10% explosion Velo per level to all Missiles and Torpedos
* Requires Warhead Upgrades V
* Requires Missile Launcher Operation IV

Advanced Rocket Fuel Composition (5) I-V
* 15% more Velocity per level to Missiles and Torpedos
* Requires Missile Bombardment IV
* Requires Projection IV

Condensed Combustion Fields (3) I-V
* 5% reduced Explosion Radius of all Missiles and Torpedos
* Requires Guided Missile Precision IV

there you go. More Skillpoints needed for Missiles, and Missile boosts for all others. XD

SDragoon
Posted - 2008.07.04 07:09:00 - [45]
 

I think he's referring to the fact that you don't need to get level 5 in like 6 different skills before you can start training for tech 2 weaponry on battleships...

Wemo
Caldari
Guerrilla Cartel
INVICTUS ALLIANCE
Posted - 2008.07.04 20:09:00 - [46]
 

It's not that the ship heading right at you is out running the missile. It is outrunning the missiles explosion.

If the missile was 'smart' enough to compensate for the closure rate it could detonate prior to reaching the target and the target would then fly into the blast. That would obviously require some intelligence that even our ships navigation system couldn't accomplish.

Warping to a gate should execute an 'approach' gate, not fly into the middle of it and get hung up and unable to get out. But that's another discussion.

Zeph Solaris
Shark Investments
Posted - 2008.07.05 05:27:00 - [47]
 

I've brought this up before. The solution is to rework missiles to determine whether the target will fly through the explosion radius or not. This will mean that ships flying towards missiles will be vulnerable while ships flying away from missiles will be able to tank them.


:ccpeffort:

Slade Hoo
Amarr
Retired Gunslingers
Posted - 2008.07.05 07:35:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Slade Hoo on 05/07/2008 07:47:47
"If you whine enough, they will change it", thats the correct description of this Thread.

Missiles are fine.
Two examples:
Missiles (with 2000 explosion velocity) hit a target orbiting with 2000m/s for 100% dmg
Turrets don't.
It's a tracking issue.

Turrets (with 0.1 tracking) hit Ships with 10km/s if angular fits tracking
Missiles don't, cause explosion velocity is too low.
It's a tracking issue

you see? each weapon has its benefits and disadvantages. Missiles have weaknesses to high raw speed, turrets are weak against high transversal. That's their difference. If you don't like missiles...don't use them. The game mechanic CCP made is very good.
If missiles would hit any target at any speed...where would be the counter? you can't evade them...your signature radius can not be smaller than base value (halo imps excluded), defender missiles are utterly crap.
So if missiles don't have any "tracking" problems...they aren't balanced with turrets anymore.

But one thing I am missing...Turrets have Tracking enhancers, Tracking computers and tracking rigs. Missiles only got rigs. Adding explosion velocity/radius mods for low- and midslots would be great.

edit: I don't like this idea with increased damage when target approaches you and less damage while flying away. It's too turret-like

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2008.07.05 08:16:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: FlameGlow on 05/07/2008 08:17:46
Originally by: Slade Hoo

"If you whine enough, they will change it", thats the correct description of this Thread.

Missiles are fine.
Two examples:
Missiles (with 2000 explosion velocity) hit a target orbiting with 2000m/s for 100% dmg
Turrets don't.
It's a tracking issue.

Turrets (with 0.1 tracking) hit Ships with 10km/s if angular fits tracking
Missiles don't, cause explosion velocity is too low.
It's a tracking issue

you see? each weapon has its benefits and disadvantages. Missiles have weaknesses to high raw speed, turrets are weak against high transversal. That's their difference. If you don't like missiles...don't use them. The game mechanic CCP made is very good.
If missiles would hit any target at any speed...where would be the counter? you can't evade them...your signature radius can not be smaller than base value (halo imps excluded), defender missiles are utterly crap.
So if missiles don't have any "tracking" problems...they aren't balanced with turrets anymore.

But one thing I am missing...Turrets have Tracking enhancers, Tracking computers and tracking rigs. Missiles only got rigs. Adding explosion velocity/radius mods for low- and midslots would be great.



No, missiles are not fine:
1) 2000 m/s explosion velocity you say? Light missiles only, anything bigger requires 3 explosion velocity rigs to get there, T2 missiles & lvl 5 skills are not enough.
2) Your turret with 0.1 tracking will hit target just outside web range 30% of the time if signature is same as gun's signature resolution(and it's probably bigger because of MWD)
3) Now pretty much everyone fits MWD. Downsides of high target speed are reduced by signature increase for turrets, missiles get nothing from increased signature(because damage reduction for speed is greater)
4)Missiles don't have critical hits turrets get sometimes even at 0% hit chance
5)No modules to boost velocity, flight time or explosion velocity of missiles, only rigs.

Elsinaril
CHON
THE R0NIN
Posted - 2008.07.05 09:21:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: FlameGlow

No, missiles are not fine:
1) 2000 m/s explosion velocity you say? Light missiles only, anything bigger requires 3 explosion velocity rigs to get there, T2 missiles & lvl 5 skills are not enough.
2) Your turret with 0.1 tracking will hit target just outside web range 30% of the time if signature is same as gun's signature resolution(and it's probably bigger because of MWD)
3) Now pretty much everyone fits MWD. Downsides of high target speed are reduced by signature increase for turrets, missiles get nothing from increased signature(because damage reduction for speed is greater)
4)Missiles don't have critical hits turrets get sometimes even at 0% hit chance
5)No modules to boost velocity, flight time or explosion velocity of missiles, only rigs.


QFT, also add
6) Only 1 ship got missile explosion velocity bonus ... compared to turret tracking speed bonus, which is applied to about 20+ ships there.

Jim Raynor
Caldari
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:26:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Jarkovii
If a missile impacts a target, regardless of speed, It should do its intended "damage". If I have an interceptor charge say a kestrel of mine, and I fire a volley of light missiles at him and they impact. They should do more than just 0 lousy damage.

The draw back of having missiles chase down MWD users and to avail they hit and still do zero damage. Its a serious let down for a specific weapon system forcing people to look to gunnery for the instant hit benefit or abandoning their skirmish.

EW is not an alternative if the webber range is 12km max with out the bonus's of other ships radial benefits. And target painters barely increase the signature radius of small ships with the benefit being 30% bonus to a signature radius of 20? Whoopdeedoo for its use.

If its as easy to fit an MWD and orbit at range with enough speed to escape the explosion velocity then there should be tracking modifiers for missiles as well or force missiles to do damage to struck targets while allowing people to out run missiles.

This is no rant, its merely a suggestion and a realistic counter to the missile problem.



The problem really isn't missiles. In some ways missiles are better than turrets. Missiles aren't broken, nanofibers are.

The problem is polycarbs, nanos, overdrives, and MWDs. I strongly believe that ships are way way too fast and nanoing really has to get toned down. The guns and missiles in EVE just aren't designed to keep up with the speed ships are moving at. I don't think nanos should be completely nerfed but right now it's the only way to PvP in EVE right now, there are counters to nanos, yes but they're not always practical.

I don't really wanna go into a nano-whine because I'm sure it's all been said and done at this point and if CCP wants to fix it they will (and I hope they do). Your missiles don't really suck, it's just nanofibers and microwarp drives make them appear to suck dude.

Alak D'bor
Syncore
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:51:00 - [52]
 

You appear to be lost. This forum is about what's on the test server RIGHT NOW. Since your fantasy world doesn't really exist, take it to features and whines.

Zaintiraris
Caldari
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2008.07.06 20:52:00 - [53]
 

Missiles behave properly.

If I'm moving 1000m/s, and a missile has caught up to me doing 1100m/s, and explodes 100m behind me, then because of the way explosions work (they explode OUTWARD) then the amount of energy that reaches the back of my shields is likely to be very small.

Think of a shockwave - it is an expanding circle, where the surface of the circle contains mass - particles from the explosion. Each impact of one of these particles transfers the explosive energy to the target - but the particle density is diminishing with distance, so few particles will catch up to me, and I won't recieve much of the energy from the explosion.

Ferocious FeAr
THE FINAL STAND
Everto Rex Regis
Posted - 2008.07.07 00:17:00 - [54]
 

Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 07/07/2008 00:22:54
tech 2 missiles in general are a complete mess.

There is no reason to use rage torps, faction torps do what it does and better.
There is no reason to use precision missiles, they aren't fast enough and when they do hit the target it does nothing.
There is no reason to use fury missiles, faction heavy, heavy assault missiles do what it does and better.
There is no reason to use tech 2 rocket and light missile ammo, they do more bad than good on a tank that relies solely on speed tank.


As a caldari character I can say I'm very disappointed at CCP for neglecting the issues. I find myself piloting with hybrids almost 100% of the time now. The issues with missiles have swayed my interest.

If that was your intention CCP you have done an exceptional job, keep up the great work.

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2008.07.07 12:26:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Zaintiraris
Missiles behave properly.

If I'm moving 1000m/s, and a missile has caught up to me doing 1100m/s, and explodes 100m behind me, then because of the way explosions work (they explode OUTWARD) then the amount of energy that reaches the back of my shields is likely to be very small.

Think of a shockwave - it is an expanding circle, where the surface of the circle contains mass - particles from the explosion. Each impact of one of these particles transfers the explosive energy to the target - but the particle density is diminishing with distance, so few particles will catch up to me, and I won't recieve much of the energy from the explosion.

Please don't post such nonsence, there are children here who might actually beleive you. If you talk about reality - explosion has missile's movement vector added to it actually(it cannot just disappear like in EVE). So if a missile moving at 1000 m/s explodes right behind you with explosion speed 1500 m/s then relatively to immobile observer shockwave towards you will be moving at 2500 m/s and shockwave in opposite direction is moving at 500 m/s. Not to mention that explosion velocity is usualy higher then missile speed by tens of times.

Derek Sigres
Posted - 2008.07.07 14:43:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Christari Zuborov
No one ever discusses the differences in training time length between missiles and gunnery when the 'balance' subject comes up...




Are we referring to the fact that missiles have the "benefit" of being able to train for t2 of a specific weapon more easily or the fact that all our skills are 1x higher than their equivalent gunnery skill AND we have to train an extra skill to get the long range and short range guns for the same ship class?

In terms of skill training I think it balances out. Easier to spec, more difficult to be good at everything.

Fabrezio
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.07 21:10:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Edited by: Jaketh Ivanes on 18/06/2008 11:31:42
Missiles don't impact on ships, they explode in proximity, meaning a light missile will detonate at 50m and a torpedo at 500m. A fast ship will be able to out run the blast wave and a small ships will not be hit by the full wave.
I think it is explained in the missile guide, but I know that is the explanation CCP have given us previously.

EDIT: Turrest don't hit over 5 km/s either, so I need an implant that increases turret tracking by 45% (or what ever amount is needed for my small turrets to hit Smile).


You realize, that the missile exploding within proximity takes us back to 1960's technology, yes? Missiles have been hitting their targets directly for several decades now. You are telling me that in the future, in a place far, far away, that they haven't figured that out?

Fabrezio
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.07.07 21:12:00 - [58]
 

Let me also add to that, when something explodes (depending on what is exploding), lets say, something atomic. What it is releasing are waves, which travel at the speed of light. Nothing is moving that fast to escape the blast wave (as it would require you to travel faster than the speed of light).

Derek Sigres
Posted - 2008.07.07 21:50:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Fabrezio
Let me also add to that, when something explodes (depending on what is exploding), lets say, something atomic. What it is releasing are waves, which travel at the speed of light. Nothing is moving that fast to escape the blast wave (as it would require you to travel faster than the speed of light).


Actually, various explosives and materials have differing rates of explosion travel. The concussive wave of a detonation in literal terms is caused by a rapid expansion of gas, and the rate of expansion is a function of both the physical properties (the stored chemical energy) of the explosive and the relative atmosperhic pressure in the vicinity of the detonation. Only a portion of the energy of an explosive is transferred into kinetic energy (explosive damage is, in all reality, kinetic damage), some is transfered into various parts of the EM spectrum (heat, visible light and so forth). Other, less conventional explosives are sufficiently powerful that the amount of non kinetic energy generated is sufficient to be cause for concern. Modern Nuclear weapons for example generate incredible amounts of EM energy (visible light alone is sufficent to cause 3rd degree burns).

As such, different parts of the energy of the explosion traves at different rates. The EM component travels at the rate of light in it's current medium, along with the rate of expansion of the kinetic component. To that end it would seem that the "nuclear" versions of missiles ought to do a fair amount of EM and thermal damage along with kinetic and explosive, and at least portions of that damage would be transferable to a target no matter what their speed (an interceptor traveling at 12k/s is, for all intents and purposes standing still relative to the speed of light).

Lets not also forget that an explosion of a missile is relative to the projectile launching it. If Eve WERE to attempt to simlate reality a missile actually explodes at it's velocity + explosion velocity at the edge of the wave traveling in the direction of the missile and explosion velocity - missile velocity at the trail edge. As such, a 12km/s interceptor traveling directly towards a Heavy missile launched by a max skilled cerb should be hitting a blast wave traveling at a relative 17km/s or so, and rather than evading damage completely as it does now would actually enhance the damage immensely (I'm not sure if the rate of blast wave travel increase the damage potential in a linear, exponential or logarithmatic fashion, but my guess is logarithmatic given that the destructive area of a blast doubles for every 10 fold increase in power) While I'm sure an algorithm could model this very well, the sheer number of calculates of this sort the server would be doing would probably cause terrible lag.

Andreya
Red Federation
Posted - 2008.07.08 12:28:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Hatch
web range should be expanded from 10 to 15-30k, but that is another topic all together.


tell that to a taranis pilot....

they and myself will tell you to **** off


Pages: 1 [2] 3

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