Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Reggie Stoneloader
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 08:49:00 -
[1]
With HAMs, the old-style Assault Launchers are somewhat vestigial. However, they represent the only real instance of a smaller ship's weapon class being installed on a larger ship with improved performance over it's normal form (light missiles firing faster out of a big launcher mounted on a cruiser). What if that were expanded to deal with fast ships?
I suggest a change and an addition.
First, adjust the Assault Launcher to bestow 500% missile velocity and 20% reduction in flight time, keeping range the same but offering faster impacts and light missiles that hit pretty much anything. A Caracal with assault launchers already takes about a 40% reduction in DPS compared to its heavy-missile-spewing counterpart, and that loss of damage output would be preserved.
Second, introduce a battleship-sized "Salvo Launcher" or something, that fires heavy missiles with a similar bonus.
It would give Caldari missile boats a niche role in pitched PvP battles as a "bully" unit, able to effectively engage smaller ships but something of a joke versus their peers in terms of damage.
Crusades: Bounties & Security Status |
Valharu
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 14:04:00 -
[2]
Not a bad Idea.
|
A'ruhn
We Be Tinkers
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 16:02:00 -
[3]
I really like the idea, but it might kind of kill off the use of Inty's in pvp, as well as any smaller class of ship. Though as you said, this would indeed give caldari a role in pvp.
I'd make a slight change. For the salvo launchers and such, make the explosion radius of the missiles greatly larger to balance the fact that it would crush small ships instantly otherwise(Lore reason could be firing more missiles means slightly less precise tracking) but keep the increased missile speed. Make them very rapid fire, and have the explosion velocity amped up greatly as well. this means it could be a very effective counter to the current love of speed fits (since they have VERY little durability) but shouldnt make small ships obsolete in pvp.
|
Yamichi Wiggin
Caldari Rising Knights SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 16:09:00 -
[4]
I confess to judging a book by its cover. I always hate the "we should fix missiles" threads. But I tend to like stuff you put out there, Reggie. SO I read this one even though I was concerned that I may suddenly start to really dislike you.
Thankfully- I still like you. Your math is a bit wrong. you'd want to reduce flight time TO 20% not BY 20%. So maybe your math was right but the semantics were off. Either way- I like the idea. Could be entertaining to have Ravens running around firing of 3597235039571255214 heavy missiles at small support ships and utterly dependent upon gang mates to protect them from the big ships. I dig it. ------ Pain is weakness leaving the body.
There is no love in fear |
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 18:22:00 -
[5]
You would want to increase explosion velocity greatly, while increasing explosion radius. This means that ships going ridiculously fast won't get as much of a reduction for going at ridiculous speeds, but a smaller ship with an AB will not get insta-gibbed by them. That also means that the Vagabonds and such with 700m sigs (or Frigates with 200m sig) on MWD take most of the full damage.
A Precision Light Missile hitting an Interceptor going 10km/s STILL is going to do pretty much nil damage, if this does not modify the explosion stats. -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth |
Reggie Stoneloader
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 18:51:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Reggie Stoneloader on 15/11/2007 18:57:56
Originally by: Yamichi Wiggin you'd want to reduce flight time TO 20% not BY 20%.
D'oh! Typo. Thanks for catching that, I'll fix it.
The explosion radius thing is a good idea. I was going to reduce the damage output, because even as I typed it I thought "40% reduction in DPS isn't really enough to keep it from butchering interceptors," but the straight damage nerf seemed so artificial. Explosion radius is a much better idea. Maybe in improvement to the explosion speed, too, so it does **** damage, but it definitely does it, encouraging turbo-ships to lose a nanofiber and fit a light armor repairer instead to keep up.
I guess the world I envision is one where a salvo-Raven can kill a nano-Vagabond a little faster than a torp-Raven can kill a Cyclone, and a Caracal with assault launchers can torch an Enyo in the time it would take it to kill a Thorax with heavy missiles. A tanked or plated Thorax can last a long time against a Caracal, but if it's all magstabs and nanos in the lows, the Caracal can eat through it in a few volleys. Not a trump for the ship-type, just a counter for the setup.
Crusades: Bounties & Security Status |
Randolf Sightblinder
Ex Coelis
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 20:38:00 -
[7]
I was having similar thoughts, not really a launcher more of a better precision t2 missile. Something that had a lower damage than current t2 weapons but a massivly boosted explosion velocity. A weapon that would do much less dps against a non nanoed ship than even t1 ammo but could hit a nanoed ship. An equivalent "shotgun" or fast tracking ammo with less damage or larger sig radius than normal ammo.
Randolf.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |