| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aannet
   |
Posted - 2010.04.01 13:16:00 -
[1]
As all of as know there are several issues with current missiles design, the most common known are:
1. Rockets damage
2. Heavy missiles and DRAKE 
But all proposed solutions doesn't take into account the root cause of these issues. Just look at close range and long range missiles weapons and you can see that long range weapons have better "tracking" than close range missiles.
Somebody can say that this is feature of missiles weapons, but it really big inconsistency with other weapons design. Also, keep in mind that missiles haven't damage reduction factor by flight range.
In result we have heavy missiles as all porpoise solution for related missiles ship platforms. And especially for the ultimate DRAKE \o/ 
I think that there should be two major changes in missiles design:
1. Rebalance "tracking" for close range and long range missiles - long range missiles should have lesser hit factor for fast moving targets. For now, for example, heavy missiles haven't good hit effect only on interceptors, however because of signature bonus, not of speed factor.
2. Decrease base flight time and/or speed for all missiles and add new module that extend these parameters like tracking enhancer. This module will give a live for T2 long range ammo and will add some variability to fitting instead of 'all-balcons-to-low'.
After these changes there will be, also, fixed the problem with all-porpoise Drake.
For now, if you go to some kind of guerrilla operations on fast moving cruisers ships, there is no any possibility to fight against 4-5 drakes with heavy missiles. Because they deliver more than 1500+ DPS on the range of their locking range without any "tracking" problems.
|
SemiCharmed
Clans of the Sanctums
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 13:49:00 -
[2]
Missiles TRACK!?!?! - When the f did this happen!?
No body else post after me, just let this post die... just let it go...
--------------------------------------------
Remember Kids, Only YOU Can Prevent Fourm fires. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 13:57:00 -
[3]
Pah, everyone knows that Quantum Rise nerfed missiles into uselessness. 
|
Morikai Acler
Caldari
The Whitesands Consortium
Honourable Templum of Alcedonia
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:06:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Aannet
In result we have heavy missiles as all porpoise solution for related missiles ship platforms. And especially for the ultimate DRAKE \o/
I think that there should be two major changes in missiles design:
1. Rebalance "tracking" for close range and long range missiles - long range missiles should have lesser hit factor for fast moving targets. For now, for example, heavy missiles haven't good hit effect only on interceptors, however because of signature bonus, not of speed factor.
2. Decrease base flight time and/or speed for all missiles and add new module that extend these parameters like tracking enhancer. This module will give a live for T2 long range ammo and will add some variability to fitting instead of 'all-balcons-to-low'.
After these changes there will be, also, fixed the problem with all-porpoise Drake.
For now, if you go to some kind of guerrilla operations on fast moving cruisers ships, there is no any possibility to fight against 4-5 drakes with heavy missiles. Because they deliver more than 1500+ DPS on the range of their locking range without any "tracking" problems.
/me Looks at the 820dps my Brutix setup can do while still having a decent buffer, looks at the 650dps my Hurricane and Harbinger setups can do without medium drones. Then looks at the 400ish dps my drake setup can do with 3 dmg mods in the lows...
Now take into consideration all 3 of those other bc's have decent shield or armor buffer on em. Drakes are used a lot because they're easier for newbs to get into and fly than the turret ships are. If anything they need to increase missile flight speeds, and decrease flight time to make them slightly more useful at range.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:17:00 -
[5]
Missiles still do damage?
This is unacceptable.
CCP, NURF MISSILES, NAO!!!
oh and nurf Drakes too. They're too Caldari-ish.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:18:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Morikai Acler
Originally by: Aannet
In result we have heavy missiles as all porpoise solution for related missiles ship platforms. And especially for the ultimate DRAKE \o/
I think that there should be two major changes in missiles design:
1. Rebalance "tracking" for close range and long range missiles - long range missiles should have lesser hit factor for fast moving targets. For now, for example, heavy missiles haven't good hit effect only on interceptors, however because of signature bonus, not of speed factor.
2. Decrease base flight time and/or speed for all missiles and add new module that extend these parameters like tracking enhancer. This module will give a live for T2 long range ammo and will add some variability to fitting instead of 'all-balcons-to-low'.
After these changes there will be, also, fixed the problem with all-porpoise Drake.
For now, if you go to some kind of guerrilla operations on fast moving cruisers ships, there is no any possibility to fight against 4-5 drakes with heavy missiles. Because they deliver more than 1500+ DPS on the range of their locking range without any "tracking" problems.
/me Looks at the 820dps my Brutix setup can do while still having a decent buffer, looks at the 650dps my Hurricane and Harbinger setups can do without medium drones. Then looks at the 400ish dps my drake setup can do with 3 dmg mods in the lows...
Now take into consideration all 3 of those other bc's have decent shield or armor buffer on em. Drakes are used a lot because they're easier for newbs to get into and fly than the turret ships are. If anything they need to increase missile flight speeds, and decrease flight time to make them slightly more useful at range.
am i allowed to bring my 730dps drake with 70k EHP?
just curious.
|
Eleonory
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:42:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Morikai Acler
/me Looks at the 820dps my Brutix setup can do while still having a decent buffer, looks at the 650dps my Hurricane and Harbinger setups can do without medium drones. Then looks at the 400ish dps my drake setup can do with 3 dmg mods in the lows...
Now take into consideration all 3 of those other bc's have decent shield or armor buffer on em. Drakes are used a lot because they're easier for newbs to get into and fly than the turret ships are. If anything they need to increase missile flight speeds, and decrease flight time to make them slightly more useful at range.
Lol, m8! Ur 820dps Brutix sucks good with his fantastic optimal  . 650dps Hurri? good choice, man. But 425 acII have "little problem" with trackin in close-combat
Let's take our incredible DRAKE \0/ Wtf? this "easier for newbs" rocket-platform can kick ur ass from 90 - 0km without any problem  Ok. Let's take a lot of drakes! Profit? 
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:46:00 -
[8]
drakes + scimis are pure ****.
ever took a look at the alpha of 50 drakes?=)
|
Temnaya
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:51:00 -
[9]
Yeah, man. Brutix, hurricane, harbinger... **** them on your vagabond
Drake? oh, wait, itz a trap!!!! A pair of drakes will blow up your omgpwnzvagabond just becoz of this pure dps on 100km range ) Kill them fast, tanking by dps or die like a prick under unholy caldarian missiles 
/signed
|
Aannet
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:52:00 -
[10]
Originally by: darius mclever
drakes + scimis are pure ****.
ever took a look at the alpha of 50 drakes?=)
Yes, DrakeSide. nerf themself 
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 14:58:00 -
[11]
btw you got to remind your self... caldari suck at pvp.
as for the vaga vs drake ... true sansha warp scrambler + true sansha web + hams for nice WTF on the vaga side ;)
|
Valandril
Caldari
Ex-Mortis
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 15:04:00 -
[12]
Caldari is fine, with drake and NH they were given great soloboats and rest is IMBAH support.
Read latest "THE WORD" |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 15:20:00 -
[13]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 01/04/2010 15:24:50
Originally by: Eleonory
Let's take our incredible DRAKE \0/ Wtf? this "easier for newbs" rocket-platform can kick ur ass from 90 - 0km without any problem Ok. Let's take a lot of drakes! Profit?
Rocket Drake. 90km.
This thread is filled with so much misinformation it's beyond ridiculous.
Yes! let's nerf the Drake!!! It shoots to over a distance of 9000!1!!
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Eleonory
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 15:31:00 -
[14]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Rocket Drake. 90km.
This thread is filled with so much misinformation it's beyond ridiculous.
Yes! let's nerf the Drake!!! It shoots to over a distance of 9000!1!!
Rly? Or u just wanna train ur trolling-skill here?
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 15:36:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Eleonory
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Rocket Drake. 90km.
This thread is filled with so much misinformation it's beyond ridiculous.
Yes! let's nerf the Drake!!! It shoots to over a distance of 9000!1!!
Rly? Or u just wanna train ur trolling-skill here?
Right, I'm the one trolling.
I have to admit... Your Rocket Drake IS way overpowered though .
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
lookatzebirdie
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 16:11:00 -
[16]
Originally by: darius mclever
drakes + scimis are pure ****.
ever took a look at the alpha of 50 drakes?=)
Most drake pilots (read UBER TANK HML pilots) are too dmb to even realise the capabilities of a HAM drake and scimi backup and so will continue to scream for HMs to be buffed. I pity the fools
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 17:32:00 -
[17]
Originally by: lookatzebirdie
Originally by: darius mclever
drakes + scimis are pure ****.
ever took a look at the alpha of 50 drakes?=)
Most drake pilots (read UBER TANK HML pilots) are too dmb to even realise the capabilities of a HAM drake and scimi backup and so will continue to scream for HMs to be buffed. I pity the fools
my comment was independent of the mounted launchers. HML drakes have their roles in fleets, as you got your slighly lower dps faster applied than ham drakes.
|
Aannet
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 19:19:00 -
[18]
Originally by: lookatzebirdie
Most drake pilots (read UBER TANK HML pilots) are too dmb to even realise the capabilities of a HAM drake and scimi backup and so will continue to scream for HMs to be buffed. I pity the fools
Really? Just see at history of market in Jita - heavy missiles are ten-times popular than HAMs...
Also, see on sell history for Drakes - just for the last year their average selling quantity per day jumps from 200 to 350 ships.
I don't think that such tendency is the result of "useless missiles"
|
Krennel Darius
Caldari
Nova Security Systems
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 19:51:00 -
[19]
The only thing missiles need right now is a fix for rockets.
Although I must admit more damage for heavy missiles would be nice.
_________________________________________________
If at first you don't succeed, you're not Chuck Norris |
lookatzebirdie
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 07:00:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Aannet
Originally by: lookatzebirdie
Most drake pilots (read UBER TANK HML pilots) are too dmb to even realise the capabilities of a HAM drake and scimi backup and so will continue to scream for HMs to be buffed. I pity the fools
Really? Just see at history of market in Jita - heavy missiles are ten-times popular than HAMs...
you just made my point for me :) the obsession with HM drakes is so vast that most drake pilots are unaware of the damage potential of their ship with HAMS. I have been met with complete surpise on numerous occasions when I inform a fellow drake pilot of my fit and the damage it can do.. go figure
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 07:35:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Morikai Acler
Originally by: Aannet
In result we have heavy missiles as all porpoise solution for related missiles ship platforms. And especially for the ultimate DRAKE \o/
I think that there should be two major changes in missiles design:
1. Rebalance "tracking" for close range and long range missiles - long range missiles should have lesser hit factor for fast moving targets. For now, for example, heavy missiles haven't good hit effect only on interceptors, however because of signature bonus, not of speed factor.
2. Decrease base flight time and/or speed for all missiles and add new module that extend these parameters like tracking enhancer. This module will give a live for T2 long range ammo and will add some variability to fitting instead of 'all-balcons-to-low'.
After these changes there will be, also, fixed the problem with all-porpoise Drake.
For now, if you go to some kind of guerrilla operations on fast moving cruisers ships, there is no any possibility to fight against 4-5 drakes with heavy missiles. Because they deliver more than 1500+ DPS on the range of their locking range without any "tracking" problems.
/me Looks at the 820dps my Brutix setup can do while still having a decent buffer, looks at the 650dps my Hurricane and Harbinger setups can do without medium drones. Then looks at the 400ish dps my drake setup can do with 3 dmg mods in the lows...
Now take into consideration all 3 of those other bc's have decent shield or armor buffer on em. Drakes are used a lot because they're easier for newbs to get into and fly than the turret ships are. If anything they need to increase missile flight speeds, and decrease flight time to make them slightly more useful at range.
/me suggest you to look the range of that Brutix set up against the range of that Drake set up, the reduction in damage caused by missed hits too.
And what is your "decent buffer" against a "drake buffer+resist" tank.
You pay a lot for those "on paper" 820 DPS.
|
Tokran Inami
Matari Exodus
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 13:12:00 -
[22]
Originally by: lookatzebirdie
the obsession with HM drakes is so vast that most drake pilots are unaware of the damage potential of their ship with HAMS.
Really? Problem is that with the increased powergrid needs of HAMS, you will either have to drop you propulsion mod (not really a good idea), totally gimp your HP or use a fitting mod.... wich will mean 1 less BCU wich will lead to a dps advantage of HAMs that is marginally at best.
What HAM drakes do, any other races BC can do too, but the dps/range ratio of HM drakes is unique.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 14:30:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Gypsio III on 02/04/2010 14:30:15
Originally by: Tokran Inami
Originally by: lookatzebirdie
the obsession with HM drakes is so vast that most drake pilots are unaware of the damage potential of their ship with HAMS.
Really? Problem is that with the increased powergrid needs of HAMS, you will either have to drop you propulsion mod (not really a good idea), totally gimp your HP or use a fitting mod.... wich will mean 1 less BCU wich will lead to a dps advantage of HAMs that is marginally at best.
As opposed to the increased CPU needs of HMLs, meaning that "you will either have to drop you propulsion mod (not really a good idea), totally gimp your HP or use a fitting mod.... wich will mean 1 less BCU"?
|
Meeko Atari
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 15:37:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Tokran Inami
Originally by: lookatzebirdie
the obsession with HM drakes is so vast that most drake pilots are unaware of the damage potential of their ship with HAMS.
Really? Problem is that with the increased powergrid needs of HAMS, you will either have to drop you propulsion mod (not really a good idea), totally gimp your HP or use a fitting mod.... wich will mean 1 less BCU wich will lead to a dps advantage of HAMs that is marginally at best.
What HAM drakes do, any other races BC can do too, but the dps/range ratio of HM drakes is unique.
A 3% power grid implant, and you get 3 BCU's and a DC on a HAM drake that ( skills depending ) can push past 700DPS and have 70 to 80k effective with full tackle and a MWD...just saying
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 15:39:00 -
[25]
or you fit a HML launcher for baiting.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |