P.S. what does those 50 Drakes stop from TDing turret ships and get that exact same result?

Because every target is a drake with a sig radius of the moon and you always go against targets in short-medium range that are faster than you. Nice pick on the drake vs talos, sadly I see through it.

Missiles need no TD against them because:
- Positive transversal (relativity).
- Positive modules (enhancer, computer).
- Existing EWar (damps etc.).
- Existing additional modules (AB, SB etc.).
- Different accuracy equation (subtractive vs. chance-based).

- makes no difference
- agreed and stated that I'm fully for giving missiles such type of modules
- nonsense as that also affects turret ships and thus nullifies it as a reason why missiles have problems
- these can also affect applied turret dps (albeit differently), therefore a non valid reason
- the end result is a lowered average dps, how that happens (lower fixed damage or chance based) makes no overall difference. Averages and all that

it usually means when you roll lucky, that one strike of luck is all you need to instapop the much smaller enemy as you get all your possible dps in that 1 shot.

The game balance already exist but you don't care about: speed

You can't outrun missiles but the faster you go the less dmg they do to you. And if something, missiles were the most balanced weapon system IG, no need to nerf/buff except HAM's and Cruise in need of tweaks.

Once again, players feedback being useless bring then your TDs againt missiles and break something that didn't need fixing...CCP and their understanding of their own game is just staggering.

Since the nano nerf, missile will almost alwayus do 100% damage unless its an MWD frigate (and even then a FAST one).

Missiles need a nerf... or at least a counter.

Running AB can lower missile damage considerably, they don't need a nerf but they do need a counter.

Heavily missile do full damage against frigs up to about 900 m/s

Since the nano nerf, missile will almost alwayus do 100% damage unless its an MWD frigate (and even then a FAST one).

Heavily missile do full damage against frigs up to about 900 m/s

1 yup that can (depending on scenario) but if you meant that you should have said that, You didn't. In you eagerness to use big words you forgot to convey your actual point because "Positive transversal" means nothing, what you meant was the ability to influence tracking and in that regard, without any more explanation, the most logical point is about TE/TC positively affecting turret performance which makes no difference if you give missiles that same option, as I stated earlier. Being able through navigation to affect tracking can't be construed from what you wrote, unless you know what you meant beforehand which kinda defeats the whole thing of trying to get your point across

2 Giving missiles a small percentage better expl. radius like 5% for TE and 15% for scripted TC (numbers open to discussion ofcourse) is not going to make a huge difference but it does help while giving missiles more range in the process which is what unguided missiles desperately need. Just because TC gets scripted tracking of 30% doesn't mean the missile variant should get the exact same numbers, balance and all that and if a Raven wants to use all his tank/tackle slots for that new mod then so be it, then they might actually get used in pvp some time. (killing frigates is ofcourse an amazing role for a BS and there's no other BS that can do that either)

3 they do cancel out, if something affects both "sides" (turrets and missiles) you can't use that as a reason why missiles specifically have issues with them, because it affects turrets users in the exact same way. Not sure why this is difficult to understand tbh

4 have a scrammed drake shoot an AB frigate that orbits him at 500m, now have a scrammed turret BC shoot that same frigate at that same 500m orbit. Tell me how the Drake has it more difficult than the turret BC. Two different mechanics, two different pros and cons but in the end there's really not that much difference in effectiveness. Just because they're not the same doesn't mean it's not on par

Bringing up the difference between alpha and dps is hilarious if you're trying to convince people that hit quality variance is a actually a deciding factor. While it CAN be it also can NOT be which cancels each other out. Again, not that difficult to understand.

TD working on missiles is such a fail idea it's not even funny....

The obviously correct choice would be to buff defenders to a point where they are actually viable...

Not once in our series of posts have i claimed missiles "have issues".

The fact remain that even tiny increments of explosion velocity will quickly turn any missile ship into a veritable frigate-killer

Why is the pilot in your drummed up example an idiot who let an AB frig both approach, tackle and orbit him before he reacts?

If you're gonna use an example, try not to use one so obviously colored.

(by your logic they'd cancel each other out anyway, so wouldn't it be a waste of time and effort?) P

Go read Dato Koppla's post on the last page - which you, not surprisingly, merrilly skipped.

Since the nano nerf, missile will almost alwayus do 100% damage unless its an MWD frigate (and even then a FAST one).

Missiles need a nerf... or at least a counter.

"Turrets have an accuracy that is relative based on transversal. Good piloting can turn transveral to null, any sensible piloting will diminish it"

So how is a Harbinger going to get null transversal on a 500m orbiting orbiting rifter, in a way that it wouldn't also help missile damage?

Heavily missile do full damage against frigs up to about 900 m/s

Do 900 m/s in a tight orbit around a turret cruiser and suddenly things seem a bit less balanced...

Plus they have 50-70km range...

Vilnius and Nosirevbus are arguing about sensor damps as a EW module which counters the equations affecting both turret and missile boats. What? Damps, aside from being weaksauce, don't actually affect the equations that you guys are arguing about. They just squash lock range down so you can't be damaged/pointed, or murder sensor resolution so badly it takes forever. So, while Vilnius is right on this point, you both are silly for arguing paragraphs about it.

When posts take more than 2 mouse rolls to reach their end in a video game forum it means people have issues.

EDIT: could also mean a small screen, but let's face it, that's not the case here.

You mean the game balance where they would also introduce missile accuracy modifiers akin to tracking enhancers and computers, effectively rendering all missile platforms able to throw the curve and raise their damage application on smaller ships - enabling things like Torp Ravens and scaling their damage up on anything from frigs to BC? That sounds like a brilliant plan to a mechanic that relies on linear application rather than chance.

Yes, that is definately a 'balance' we'd all love to see... cough.


No, of course, this is a completely onesided interference with a dumbfire system. Like placing a fat kid alone on an empty swingboard.

This ridiculous approach is just another completely backward attempt at trying to deal with a problem that doesn't exist.

The HML (Drake) is only considered overpowered in an element or paradigm that the developers themselves continue to feed and nurture; the blob.

It's a reliable damage projection on a low-cost, immobile and high-buffer platform, that completely rely on other ships to: maintain hostiles on grid, maintain hostiles in range, stay alive and pin down to apply accuracy. It's only powerful when piling numbers exceed intricate execution of all ship roles (or active modules), and/or exceeding the invididual or collective ability to afford extending numbers. Essentially, when you have more numbers than the other side have buttons to push.

"Big awesome fights" is the problem, no self-deceptive notion of 'balance'.

They can continue to introduce these self-deceptive changes that will only serve to removing balance where it exist, yet not do anything to deal with the percieved imbalance.

This was the case with ECM, still is, and will be the same with HML.
They do not yet understand the concept of scale impact.

In short, this change will never be effective on a large scale - only on a small scale - or more importantly (applying the scale-perspective of Malcanis' Law) only to the benefit of a large group when dealing with a small group (more Drakes, more numbers; feeding the blob, consolidation of forces in the game and AFK empires).