EVE Search - Reality Of Weapons

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Reality Of Weapons

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kail Storm	Posted - 2009.06.09 02:51:00 - [1] 1 more thing in real life we have cruise missles [ICBM] that travel 7-15k miles in our atmoshpere which has a ton of friction and gravity, so your telling, me we cant design a missle in space that has 0 gravity that can travel past 120 km :) lol unless they are certain longer space units. I can see a laser not having range because of the particles/dust in space that refract light and dissipate it over distance and I can see the Rail Guns/ Arty because they arent guided weapons but a guided missle should have far superior range than these others and not just 30% more ...More like 300% more range. Also a Cruise Missle would have alot more punch than any weapon to me **** the Nuclear warheads alone should do 2- 4 miles in diameter of explosive power and in a vaccuum the shock alone woiuld be crazy not to mention that it would not be just expl damage but emp as well. We all know that Nukes among other things kill electronics permanately So if your not gonna give Cald Hacs and chance upclose in a fight with no drones to jam at 35k and make them use slots to match a 5 drone Gal Hac. Seriously Ive been hearing that its balanced and calds have a shot because of range and they can snipe and thats the advantage but tell me... If i shoot at you from a Cald Hac at 65 km to your Gal Hac will you sit there and just die outside your drone range? Or would you warp out since i dont have any choice of jamming you or any ewar at all? But on the other hand If we at med range [35km] and Im out of jamming range and web range wouldnt youjam me with your drones come close and waste me? And close range please its no contest. At least make missles badass on both em/expl but make them hit or miss. Or make the Cald Hacs have a fighting shot in 1 on 1 and give them some drone space not alot but enough to fight your EWAR drones at midrange. Cald would still be outclassed by 10x in the drone department considering Gals/Ammar can carry 2-4 diff kinds of drone waves, EWAR,Light EM, Light Explosive etc Or I think Missles should have the best range and 2 damage types but the further the missle the harder it should be to adjust to the fast moving frigs etc. It would be hard for a missle to change direction as its target just flipped a 180 [that you can do in space} But Hi Explosive like nuke cannot be outran by a frig the explosion is devastatingly fast, everything else in game laser damge, Railguns are true to form in my opinion. Just a thought please give good awnsers, not drive by pointless "your an idiot" ones i think its a valid point.
Tempfoolery	Posted - 2009.06.09 02:53:00 - [2] your an idiot
Traderboz	Posted - 2009.06.09 03:22:00 - [3] Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.06.09 03:32:00 - [4] Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot And then, he killed the dog...
Razmite X Minmatar Duty.	Posted - 2009.06.09 03:38:00 - [5] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Tempfoolery you're an idiot Fixed?
Peckles Destry's Lounge Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2009.06.09 03:39:00 - [6] Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot
Anubis Xian Reavers	Posted - 2009.06.09 03:58:00 - [7] Cruise missiles are not ICBMs. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
Emyth Juk	Posted - 2009.06.09 04:05:00 - [8] First off, there is a lot wrong with your explanation of the physics involved. ICBM's and Cruise Missiles are two very different things. They can both be fitted with a nuclear warhead, but they are massively different in roles. Regarding your statement on the shock wave from the exploding nuke, what medium is the wave traveling through while in space? It's air that gets pushed around that causes all the fun and games here on earth, while in space there is nothing to be pushed. Sorry. I meant to say the same as the other posters.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.09 05:49:00 - [9] The range of cruise missiles on a raven is quite alot more than 120km. How much dust do you think there is in space? Dont worry, a laser will go further than 200km in space... Nukes dont kill electronics permanently. If you optimize them to make a nice EMP (high paradise cruise missiles), they do a pretty good job, but it also isnt that hard to shield electronics pretty good.
Grek Forto Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2009.06.09 07:01:00 - [10] Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot
SuperNova221	Posted - 2009.06.09 07:37:00 - [11] TL;DR version: Wah wah not like REAL LIFE!!! wah wah make missiles the only viable sniper option wah wah buff missiles
Velin Shade	Posted - 2009.06.09 07:40:00 - [12] Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot You, and everyone who quoted you are all idiots for getting the conjunction of "you are" wrong.
Simon Coal Gallente The Grass Spiders	Posted - 2009.06.09 07:47:00 - [13] Edited by: Simon Coal on 09/06/2009 07:47:20 It is actually the contraction of 'you are', not the conjunction. Conjunctions are words that join words/phrases/clauses together. Glass houses, rocks, etc.
Zaqar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2009.06.09 07:51:00 - [14] Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot Get a brain, morans!
Apoctasy The Python Cartel.	Posted - 2009.06.09 08:04:00 - [15] Originally by: Velin Shade Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot You, and everyone who quoted you are all idiots for getting the conjunction of "you are" wrong. no u
Wai Ng'Tse	Posted - 2009.06.09 08:06:00 - [16] Who cares? It's a game. A 1600mm piece of steel isn't going to prevent a rail gun particle traveling at lightspeeds from tearing it a new orifice. But it does. Also some how shields can create a "tight" enough forcefield to prevent electrons (shot by electron blasters) from breaking it.
Kail Storm	Posted - 2009.06.09 08:21:00 - [17] Wow typical hit and run response, Most probably Gal Ammarr Characters. Dont waste your [there it is again] time responding to this if you dont wanna explain why. Ive noticed any opinion that threatens the way some of you who have have built opposite characters is shot down instantly because you all love to hang on to the way things are now. Im sure before missle nerf i would have had tones of angry Caldari Guys spitting on me for mentioning it. My uncle who works at LiverMore Labs on Gas Lasers and the "Starwars Project" was the one who told me this while I was playing eve so most of you so far are the idiots. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109_Tomahawk Wow a Missle actually has a 2500 km range ??? NO cant be, yes it does and this was made in the 1970`s, With 14.7 Milibars of pressure not the Vaccuum of space. The new tech SCRAM JET missles do 10X the distance and we are making them go mach 14 into space then back for re-entry and getting 10X that range. And what 200 Kiloton Warhead tat explodes do you know of that travels at 80/Ms. lol So In other words you would all fell safe driving a car going 176 Miles per hour away from the epicenter of the 200 Kiloton Nuclear Blast. Well it would weed out the stupid and help darwin in the long run. Im not saying it has to be completely real but i wanted a discusion on it, and so far you are all idiots for not disproving anything ive said. Since we cant get our series 7 lasers working in the desert, How could we get it throught solar flares which eat the electrons up? If you have something smart to say do it, otherwise shut it. If you dont think eve should follow real life at all say so and Ill agree with your point but mine is, A guided missle with an active seeking chip will out perform in every way Rails/Arty. And there is a Misconception that Rails travel at the speed of light?? They dont we have them now on our well the US navy ships and yes they travel very fast but not light speed, And Does the game literally mean 1600 steel, it could be a alloy we dont have but we have rail guns now and we will eventually mak a armor that can stop it. The Electrons will deminish greatly over time just like the lasers will as they hit micro particles. the game is based on real weapons that are 20k years advanced, But principles of physics dont change. 50% of people on forums are great helpers and debaters and other half is garbage who cant properly defend there points so they make stupid comments that cant be discussed.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum Pax Romana Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.09 08:35:00 - [18] Originally by: Velin Shade Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot You, and everyone who quoted you are all idiots for getting the conjunction of "you are" wrong. I think you're missing the point that the OP actually included this exact phrase in his post, so not only was this an insult addressed at him but also a subtle dig at his own poor grammar by bringing it up. Though an attribute would have made it even better. Oh, and: hes an idiot
Bibbleibble	Posted - 2009.06.09 08:37:00 - [19] Before this gets flamed to hell, you must remember that balance > realism in this game. That is why certain weapon stats are slightly out from what you might expect, and there is actually a 'hidden' range cap at 249km, as the game will never let you lock at any longer distance, so increasing the range will not help. Missiles are designed (quite cleverly considering that this is CCP) to be gang support weapons, and they are not intended to be reasonable solo weapons for the main part except the short range missiles (HAMS and Torps). Using your example of the Caldari HAC v the Gallente HAC, if you have a second gang member already tackling them, then your Cerberus/Eagle will be able to lay down the damage successfully. Every single ship larger than a frigate has to contend with the fact that there are factors limiting their ability to fight smaller and faster targets well. Explosion radius and velocity just happen to be the ones that affect missiles, as opposed to sig res and tracking for turrets. Oh, and AFAIK there cannot be a decent shock wave in space as there is not really much of a medium for it to spread through.
Lego Maniac Minmatar Dusty Death Enterprise Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.09 09:37:00 - [20] Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot ˄ ____________ ˄
1600 RT	Posted - 2009.06.09 09:43:00 - [21] real cruise missile take hours to reach their target do you want that too?
Black Blues	Posted - 2009.06.09 09:54:00 - [22] You obviously fail to understand the meaning of FICTION. On the other hand, I just smell the stink of a new "wtf my missiles fail in PvP!" rant. Your problem is not inside your computer... btw, you're an obvious idiot.
Fenris Ulfur Tenacious Tendencies	Posted - 2009.06.09 09:58:00 - [23] Originally by: Kail Storm and so far you are all idiots for not disproving anything ive said Seriously? So what you are saying here is that you want us to disprove what you've been saying? Or are you saying that you only posted this knowing that what you are talking about has no relevance to this game and that any talk about EVE not being realistic enough would invoke a responce? For a man that says he wants to start a discussion [Link] you really should read up on how to have one your self.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum Pax Romana Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.09 10:12:00 - [24] Originally by: Kail Storm My uncle who works at LiverMore Labs on Gas Lasers and the "Starwars Project" was the one who told me this while I was playing eve so most of you so far are the idiots. Oh no, EVE fails as a LiverMore Labs simulator! That's the crux of why your post is being dismissed; you're not proposing things that would make EVE better, but rather saying why EVE is "unrealistic". Firstly, it's a game not a simulator, so the emphasis is on fun and balance rather than realism. And secondly, while we have similar things in real life, who's to say what New Eden is actually like? The ships/modules/things in EVE area what they are, and as the films are fond of saying any similarity to real ships/modules/things is coincidental. Quote: Im not saying it has to be completely real but i wanted a discusion on it, and so far you are all idiots for not disproving anything ive said. If you want things to change, state clearly your proposal and say why it would make the game better, i.e. more fun to play. If you don't do this, your proposal isn't going to have any inherent validity. The onus doesn't fall on people here to disprove your claims about how real-life physics work; it's up to you to convince people that your proposals would improve the game. (And learn to use apostrophes properly too, it'll help your points come over better.)
Dmitryilyin Gallente Risky eXplosion Death or Glory	Posted - 2009.06.09 10:20:00 - [25] Actually Sleepers' missiles do mixed damage (kin/exp). ---
Kezzle	Posted - 2009.06.09 11:07:00 - [26] Kail Storm, you are a Troll, and I claim my five pounds. Either that or you are entirely stupid. Do you really want a game where you have to watch the delta-vee left in your reaction mass tanks, and make sure you have enough to reverse your course and get home? That would be realistic. You do know that cruise missiles steer using aerodynamics, and breathe air, don't you? You do know that ballistic missiles are so-called because they aren't guided past the first stage of their flight, don't you? You do realise with this sort of "guidamce" and the sort of agility exhibited by Eve ships, no missile would hit anything mobile. Ever. You do know that we already have instrument lasers that can reach the moon, and that it's collimation that poses a challenge to making weapon-grade lasers, not scattering (those instrument lasers shine a spot kilometers across on the moon)? Alternatively you've listened with half a brain to your relative and misremembered a quarter of what you heard, and now you're regurgitating it here, in some half-assed attempt to shoe-horn "reality" into space opera. You're a Donkey.
BunglefromRainbow	Posted - 2009.06.09 12:19:00 - [27] Originally by: Gartel Reiman Originally by: Velin Shade Originally by: AtheistOfDoom Originally by: Tempfoolery your an idiot You, and everyone who quoted you are all idiots for getting the conjunction of "you are" wrong. I think you're missing the point that the OP actually included this exact phrase in his post, so not only was this an insult addressed at him but also a subtle dig at his own poor grammar by bringing it up. Though an attribute would have made it even better. Oh, and: hes an idiot Shouldn't that be he apostrophe s? Sorry my bad, that was rude of me wasn't it. And my 2 cents on the weapons, Rails would be uber because whilst the they don't operate at the speed of light, they would work at a decent fraction of it. Electron blasters if we're talking "real world" would suck even with their very high speeds due to the obvious very low mass factor. CRT televions and monitors fire electrons at close to the speed of light yet none have yet to pass through my tv screen. On the other hand neutron blasters would own!!
NEWB SKWAD	Posted - 2009.06.09 12:21:00 - [28] Originally by: Kail Storm moar long range missiles waa waa You forget that a cruise missile (as defined here) relies on an air-breathing engine to provide forward motion, as well as aerodynamic forces to provide what little maneuverability it has. Since there is no air in space, your SuperAwesomeSpaceCruiseMissile of doom has to carry both an oxidizer for its' fuel, as well as extra propellant for maneuvering thrusters, neither of which an aerial cruise missile has to worry about. Also, please note that the general cruising speed of a Tomahawk is ~550mph or 880kph. Originally by: Kail Storm hurr hurr pew pew lasers and missiles should have huge range. I'm not going to deal with lasers, as that's not something I know a lot about (See what I did there? I'm not making suggestions or puking up something I heard from my mother's friend's best drinking buddy). Now, explosions, that I can handle. As has been stated many times before, most of the damage from a nuclear explosion is from the shockwave. As there is no air in space, there is very little (if any) appreciable shockwave. There are significantly different effects, mostly concerning the type and dispersal of radiation from the blast. It should be noted that if we assume (hurr hurr) that unless EVE ships are shielded from radiation (and they should be. There's lots of fun radiation in space.), then they are probably shielded against radiation. And the long range missiles? Yeah, things should coast "forever" in space. The thing is, you need to be able to turn when you get to the target. Now, if you want to get there in any reasonable amount of time, you need to go fast. Alright, now, if you've had basic physics, you know about vectors. Tell me how much fuel you need to burn to completely stop motion in the forward direction, and make a 135 degree turn to the "left" of the missile (that's behind you, in case you forgot) and accelerate back to an appreciable speed to impact the target. Originally by: Kail Storm Nuclear EMP, Caldari HACs vs. Gall/Amarr, and drones (EWAR especially) You're (o_O) missing the point here. Nuclear weapons do have an adverse effect on electronics. But considering how advanced the ships of EVE are, what do you honestly think is that chance that they don't have a backup system for everything, down to the last light switch? It's also possible to shield electronics from a nuclear blast (see here) Also, please note that nearly all modern (read: stuff have in space right now) electronics that go into space are tested for resistance to several types of radiation anyway. Drones and balancing on HAC's. Yup, there's a Gallente drone-based HAC. There's also one without drones. Oh, look, there's also an Amarr and (SNAP) a CALDARI HAC with some drones. Admittedly, they don't have a bonus to drones, but then, neither Amarr nor Caldari are supposed to actually USE DRONES AS WEAPONS. They are meant for support, not as a primary weapon. I won't go into cruisers, since you specifically said HAC's. Even though you probably meant cruisers (the Thorax springs to mind as being EWAR-drone friendly). Originally by: Kail Storm but the further the missle the harder it should be to adjust to the fast moving frigs etc. It would be hard for a missle to change direction as its target just flipped a 180 [that you can do in space} Yes. Exactly. But no for the rest of what you said there. Originally by: Kail Storm But Hi Explosive like nuke cannot be outran by a frig the explosion is devastatingly fast, everything else in game laser damge Yeah, explosions are fast. But explosions need an oxidizer (like air). There's a distinctive lack of it in space. It's a game. I hate you for you making me think this hard at 7am, but it's a better alternative than cleaning.
Kunming T.H.U.G L.I.F.E White Core	Posted - 2009.06.09 12:21:00 - [29] You want realism? Well a missile, cruise, ICBM, tactical nuke, etc in space going that fast, as u (Kail) desire, would be impossible to make a turn (aka manuever). The inertia would break the missile appart, so it can only go in a straight line and make course changes of 10-20 degrees max. Actually I wouldnt mind seeing dumb missiles, with increased DMG and speed, lob them towards ur enemy and u might get lucky or in worst case have them scater (good anti-RR gang tactic). BTW I mostly like flying gallente with blaster, but since the latest changes I often find my self in a caldari missile boat (to adapt vs CCP you have to train all races over the years) and I can say there is nothing wrong with missiles. As a turret user I had to get used to the delayed dmg but the advantages of missiles are priceless in most common pvp encounters. Cruise missiles were fine like forever, back in 2003 we fitted kestrels with dual mwd and cruise launchers and acted as dive bombers. Torps on the other hand had many changes and the current state was achieved in the end to give caldari a better chance to compete against gallente in close combat. Finally complaining about caldari missile boats not having a chance against gallente drone boats is whinery, even if u are jammed u have the chance of loading those FoF missiles (something no other weapon system has) and get rid of drones. - Quantum Rise... nerfing the unnerfable! Sponsored by CCP
SuperNova221	Posted - 2009.06.09 13:04:00 - [30] TL;DR version of Kail Storm's second post in this thread: You disagree with me so you're instantly wrong. Gtfo unless you're Caldari and agree with me.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.