Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Karille
Gallente Lordless
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 11:15:00 -
[571]
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien
sums it up quite nicely ;-)
Until you realize that he's lying about some things. Cruise missiles do more damage to battleships with an afterburner than heavy missiles. The only exceptions being the Typhoon and the Tempest. Not because they go fast, but because their sig radius is way smaller. This is at max range without any web or painter. He's right about heavies doing more damage to a BC though.
|
Opertone
Caldari SIEGE.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 11:23:00 -
[572]
Gallente this way Blasters |
Karille
Gallente Lordless
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 11:36:00 -
[573]
I don't think blasters are crap, why would i want to go there?
|
Opertone
Caldari SIEGE.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 12:00:00 -
[574]
because we love our missiles and want them to be reasonably good, we've only seen missiles to be an inferior damage platform in PvP.
now we observe some oddities in the missile damage formula, we want to clarify it, we want a well balanced weapon system within our race, which can counter the designed targets.
Strange missile behavior revolves around unclarity with signature size of the target (not shown in overview), effective signature (after paint and MWD), ambiguity of the Damage reduction Factor and disproportions in Signature vs Velocity contribution to the formula.
Basically I can't understand how a cruise missile can not do full damage to a Battleship going at default speed, why do we get 50% damage reduction to a Battleship with only an afterburner fitted, why Rage missiles do less damage than Caldari navy missiles, and how do we get our target painters to 200 km range?
|
Karille
Gallente Lordless
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 12:22:00 -
[575]
Originally by: Opertone because we love our missiles and want them to be reasonably good, we've only seen missiles to be an inferior damage platform in PvP.
now we observe some oddities in the missile damage formula, we want to clarify it, we want a well balanced weapon system within our race, which can counter the designed targets.
Strange missile behavior revolves around unclarity with signature size of the target (not shown in overview), effective signature (after paint and MWD), ambiguity of the Damage reduction Factor and disproportions in Signature vs Velocity contribution to the formula.
Basically I can't understand how a cruise missile can not do full damage to a Battleship going at default speed, why do we get 50% damage reduction to a Battleship with only an afterburner fitted, why Rage missiles do less damage than Caldari navy missiles, and how do we get our target painters to 200 km range?
I'll agree with you that sig radius would be a nice column on the overview.
Cruise missiles doing less damage to a battleship going default speed is a fallacy for all battleships but the tempest and typhoon. And that's because of their sig radius, not velocity.
You do less damage to a target with an afterburner because they get an equal advantage against turret ships.
Rage missiles do less damage than faction for the same reason the other high damage T2 ammo has a tracking penalty.
You don't get your target painters to 200km. Just like other races don't even get their GUNS to 200km
|
Hyveres
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 12:31:00 -
[576]
Edited by: Hyveres on 27/11/2008 12:31:53 Only minmatar lacks snipercapability at extreme ranges.
As for the AB issue for a battleship to gain an avoidance advantage due to transversal will usually mean getting within webrange and orbiting.
For most missileboats webrange is really not where you want to be due to the squishy nature of your ships. Too few lowslots to effectivly armourtank coupled with not enough mid to fit propulsion + utility + shieldtank means missileboats are relativly fragile.
The change is fine if they will take a look at slot composition and allow more caldari ships to run an effective armourtank. But being squishy and forced to engage close range in order for our weapons to be effective is a bad bad tradeoff.
|
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Product Number 3
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 16:16:00 -
[577]
Originally by: Karille
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien
sums it up quite nicely ;-)
Until you realize that he's lying about some things. Cruise missiles do more damage to battleships with an afterburner than heavy missiles. The only exceptions being the Typhoon and the Tempest. Not because they go fast, but because their sig radius is way smaller. This is at max range without any web or painter. He's right about heavies doing more damage to a BC though.
Wish they would for me. His information is accurate to my experience.
|
Karille
Gallente Lordless
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 16:23:00 -
[578]
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien
Originally by: Karille
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien
sums it up quite nicely ;-)
Until you realize that he's lying about some things. Cruise missiles do more damage to battleships with an afterburner than heavy missiles. The only exceptions being the Typhoon and the Tempest. Not because they go fast, but because their sig radius is way smaller. This is at max range without any web or painter. He's right about heavies doing more damage to a BC though.
Wish they would for me. His information is accurate to my experience.
Then you need to train better skills.
|
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Product Number 3
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 16:24:00 -
[579]
Originally by: Karille
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien
Originally by: Karille
Originally by: Khamal Jolstien
sums it up quite nicely ;-)
Until you realize that he's lying about some things. Cruise missiles do more damage to battleships with an afterburner than heavy missiles. The only exceptions being the Typhoon and the Tempest. Not because they go fast, but because their sig radius is way smaller. This is at max range without any web or painter. He's right about heavies doing more damage to a BC though.
Wish they would for me. His information is accurate to my experience.
Then you need to train better skills.
My relevant schools are pretty advanced. No amount of training is going to make these things worth using anymore. They weren't too good to begin with.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 17:46:00 -
[580]
Edited by: Gypsio III on 27/11/2008 17:48:06
Skill points are no substitute for knowledge. Like the knowledge that fitting an AB to a battleship is completely stupid in PVP.
|
|
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Product Number 3
|
Posted - 2008.11.28 08:38:00 -
[581]
Originally by: Gypsio III Edited by: Gypsio III on 27/11/2008 17:48:06
Skill points are no substitute for knowledge. Like the knowledge that fitting an AB to a battleship is completely stupid in PVP.
This is absolutely correct. Unfortunately, knoweldge nor skillpoints are capable of making missiles a viable platform until CCP fixes them.
|
Severe Admin
Blind Industries
|
Posted - 2008.11.28 09:26:00 -
[582]
theyre working fine u just fail. In their effort to make small ships still have survivability from losing so much speed (speed nerf) this is what happens. Dont be so whiny next time in trying to get a speed nerf think how it could effect you. You reap what you sew.
|
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Product Number 3
|
Posted - 2008.11.28 19:02:00 -
[583]
Originally by: Severe Admin theyre working fine u just fail. In their effort to make small ships still have survivability from losing so much speed (speed nerf) this is what happens. Dont be so whiny next time in trying to get a speed nerf think how it could effect you. You reap what you sew.
I can't sew very well :(.
We asked for a nerf, not this little pile of failure. They screwed up, so now we're asking them to fix it. It's no big deal, they'll figure out what's wrong and correct it. Just need to keep reminding them it's a priority issue .
For the adapt or die parrots, adapting is one thing, complete character respec is another.
|
Severe Admin
Blind Industries
|
Posted - 2008.11.28 19:16:00 -
[584]
wow look how stupid you are. missiles dont need a "fix" minmitar was destroyed by the nano nerf. They arent getting a fix. Neither will your missiles. time to deal with it.
also cry moar pls.
|
Odessima
Caldari The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 04:48:00 -
[585]
Originally by: Severe Admin wow look how stupid you are. missiles dont need a "fix" minmitar was destroyed by the nano nerf. They arent getting a fix. Neither will your missiles. time to deal with it.
also cry moar pls.
You sir remind me of a child who has one of his toys taken away and proceeds to try and get your brother in trouble so the same thing happens to him.
Bitter Much!!! Although I actually think there is no need to change the way missiles work now, mainly because I cant wait to see your tears flow and remind you of this when your next nerf comes along. Im quite sure it will make me laugh. |
Severe Admin
Blind Industries
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 05:30:00 -
[586]
hahahah you got trolled hard. I dont listen to failed wannabe pirate alliances that cant even make it in 0.0 and have to move back to low sec to fail more. i find your bitterness most gratifying. I have already adapted enjoy your missiles
|
Vikarion
Caldari White Rose Society
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 07:37:00 -
[587]
Originally by: Severe Admin wow look how stupid you are. missiles dont need a "fix" minmitar was destroyed by the nano nerf. They arent getting a fix. Neither will your missiles. time to deal with it.
also cry moar pls.
Minmatar were in trouble before the nerf (esp. battleships) and are in trouble after. But nerfing missiles also nerfs minmatar, so it's kind of been doubled up.
|
Rico Felix
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 07:56:00 -
[588]
Edited by: Rico Felix on 29/11/2008 07:58:47 This whining by Caldari ship L4 mission runners is unbelievable...
You cant even hit a BS orbiting you unwebbed with large artillery, without multiple tracking mods that sacrifice tank, and insane gunnery skills. You cant hit frigs period except once every 1000 shots webbed even with large autocannons...You would never hit a frig with large artillery orbiting you, webbed, target painted, or anything. Welcome to being balanced, maybe you shouldnt have crosstrained for caldari battleships cause all factions battleships can do L4 np if you are not ignorant.
You cookie cutter Caldari mission runners fail at the game. If all you can do is lock, fire missile, win. It is ridiculous, you should just quit Eve if the only tactics you can fathom are lock and shoot missiles. Wow..
I run L4 with a Typhoon armor tanked with autocannons, and a Malestrom with 8 artillery, and the Typhoon relies heavily on drones/web for smaller ships, and the Maelstrom completely relies on flying a certain way to get transversal low to hit anything. Welcome to having to grow a brain Caldari mission runners. Try not to think too hard there.
I use cruise on typhoon and thought it was ridiculous that they hit frigs on incoming for 340, now they hit for like 180, they still rock frigs if the frig transversal low. It is called transversal. Missiles work like that too. Fly a certain way so your missile hits frigs in the nose, or use some painters, or omg,a web, you might have to drain drone interfacing, even tech 1 light drones with drone interfacing 4 wreck frigates, oh no, you might have to actually train a bunch of msisile skills to make msisiles work well, OMGZ the sky is falling.
I can't believe how bad at videogames some of you are.
|
Vikarion
Caldari White Rose Society
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 07:58:00 -
[589]
Yes, mission runners should definitely learn to use drones. But it's not all about them - missile PvP took a huge hit, and it wasn't exactly healthy to begin with.
|
Rico Felix
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 08:03:00 -
[590]
Missiles actually hit ships MWDing now instead of not doing anything. Small ships using AB (utilizing their tiny sig radius) are better off versus larger missiles, makes sense to me.
|
|
Vikarion
Caldari White Rose Society
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 08:17:00 -
[591]
Originally by: Rico Felix Missiles actually hit ships MWDing now instead of not doing anything. Small ships using AB (utilizing their tiny sig radius) are better off versus larger missiles, makes sense to me.
And versus smaller missiles. Missiles weren't scaled correctly, so now you can get a nano effect versus even small missiles if you fit an AB.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 10:51:00 -
[592]
Originally by: Vikarion
Originally by: Rico Felix Missiles actually hit ships MWDing now instead of not doing anything. Small ships using AB (utilizing their tiny sig radius) are better off versus larger missiles, makes sense to me.
And versus smaller missiles. Missiles weren't scaled correctly, so now you can get a nano effect versus even small missiles if you fit an AB.
Missiles are just screwy. If ccp would just balance missiles like guns, we wouldn't have this problem.
All short range guns have better tracking and fitting requirements. This should apply to missiles as well. Torpedos/HAMs/Rockets would have better explosion velocity/radius compared to their long range variants.
|
BhallSpawn
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 02:21:00 -
[593]
Yes they went to far missles have sucked for a long long time hardly anyone was using them in pvp before. now you have to have down syndrome to even consider it.
|
BhallSpawn
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 23:40:00 -
[594]
"Yes, mission runners should definitely learn to use drones. But it's not all about them - missile PvP took a huge hit, and it wasn't exactly healthy to begin with."
Very true.
|
Khamal Jolstien
Caldari Product Number 3
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 02:26:00 -
[595]
Originally by: Rico Felix
Caldari ships can't fight in web range cause their tanks are weak? If Caldari have a strength isnt it their ridiculous tanks?
I can't believe how bad at videogames some of you are.
Sure, if we remove all supporting, necessary pvp modules we can get ridiculous tanks. If you go and PVP as caldari, you find your tank diminishing real quick.
|
Bohoba
Caldari HolyKnights
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 02:34:00 -
[596]
Originally by: Hyveres Edited by: Hyveres on 27/11/2008 12:31:53 Only minmatar lacks snipercapability at extreme ranges.
As for the AB issue for a battleship to gain an avoidance advantage due to transversal will usually mean getting within webrange and orbiting.
For most missileboats webrange is really not where you want to be due to the squishy nature of your ships. Too few lowslots to effectivly armourtank coupled with not enough mid to fit propulsion + utility + shieldtank means missileboats are relativly fragile.
The change is fine if they will take a look at slot composition and allow more caldari ships to run an effective armourtank. But being squishy and forced to engage close range in order for our weapons to be effective is a bad bad tradeoff.
I like this guy :) and your sig is mine hehehe
....................... 10.5 hours a day do you have what it takes ?
|
Haradgrim
Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 02:52:00 -
[597]
Originally by: Vikarion Yes, mission runners should definitely learn to use drones. But it's not all about them - missile PvP took a huge hit, and it wasn't exactly healthy to begin with.
This pretty much sums it up --
Originally by: CCP Oveur Just donęt forget the reach-around.
|
Kessiaan
Minmatar Army of One
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 03:18:00 -
[598]
Edited by: Kessiaan on 03/12/2008 03:23:53 I'm not a big time missile slinger but after having some experience with shooting them (mostly rockets) and having them shot back at me (all types) I do think some tweaks are called.
First and foremost, CCP seems to have balanced HAMs and rockets around the idea that a webbed target without a huge sig should still be able to speedtank them with an AB. I think this is a bad idea as all it has done is make them nearly useless against anyone. Rockets and HAMs should do full damage to same-size targets unless they're not webbed and AB'ing. The increased damage would be balanced by the need to get close, just like it is for everyone else.
And second while I like being able to speedtank missiles I think it's a bit over the top - I would suggest tweaking the formula so sig radius is weighted more and speed less - oversize missiles on small targets should remain the same but the max realistic damage reduction on a same-size target should only be about 50% or so at the most. Right now if I'm not TP'd light missiles bounce off my AFs shields - they do 4 damage a hit, tops. Even with a single painter the increase in DPS isn't that major; I'm basically invulnerable to missile fire as long as I'm not webbed and running my afterburner, which is great for me but I dn't think that's how it should be.
Before the nerf missiles were basically low-but-guaranteed DPS compared to guns, which have to deal with optimals and tracking and all that stuff. And that's how I think they should remain.
|
Tasty Bit
Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 03:23:00 -
[599]
Where is far, and why did they need to take missiles with them?
|
Lt Shard
Shoot To Thrill Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 04:14:00 -
[600]
who needs missles I have blaster boats! This 20 page whine says stop posting whines!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |