So a small gun that usually has the effective range of 7000m, can now fire almost 2,000,000m?

How do you explain the huge difference in effective range? 20km in space, 300km when shooting a planet?

Shell gets caught in the planet's gravity well. Hits the atmosphere, gravity does the rest. Something like that is what they'll go with, I assume.

It may be worth remembering just how big and powerful the shells are that we use in EVE when compared to standard ground based weaponry. Gallente destroyers with rails will usually fire 125mm shells, slightly smaller than the 130mm shells fired by modern naval destroyers.

We know how much damage that kind of real life shell can cause, now imagine those shells being filled with anti-matter! And now imagine a shell half a metre across made of the same stuff travelling a good percentage the speed of light, the kind fired from a 425mm battleship railgun. The kinetic damage alone would vaporise a large portion of the area. Add in the anti--matter and you wouldn't just kill a few DUST soldiers, you would vaporise a few square kilometres.

Still, I do understand how small guns could be used this way, but wouldn't it be more fun if you could hover in the skies in a squad of Rifters and pound the ground with arty and missiles while someone else's fighter squadron defended your ships from anti-aircraft defences and ground-launched fighters, or just assisted with the bombing? Or, if you had your frigs and fighters in the sky while the other side had their frigs and fighters in the sky simultaneously.... imagine what the light show would look like from the ground? Trails of missiles and high-velocity rounds streaking back and forth while fighters and bombers deployed by carriers in orbit swarmed the scene, as chunks of hull plating and other debris rained from the sky to fall on the battlefield below, adding an additional potential hazard to DUST troops?

Just read that orbital strikes will be fired from small guns.. Does this seem like a break from "eve reality" to anyone else?

Guesse since they used an Abaddon for the Fanfest demo i just assumed you would need large guns to fire them, if not some sort of special module that takes buku CPU or something. That said i actually still feel like a destroyer raining death from hundreds of kilometers up is a bit far fetched.

Not tryin to get it changed or anything, just noticed it today and didn't sit right. I'm imagining clouds of thrashers or even atrons, hell even industrials firing highly destructive weapons a really really long way... not how i'd have done it anyway o/

As black powder weapons are arguably the least advanced, I'll use the Thrasher to explain this.

A Thrasher can be fit with either 250mm or 280mm rounds, these rounds are far more advanced then anything you've experienced in your lives. At a range of approximately 40km and still be within optimal range. These bullets are at least a foot wide we don't know their length or contents but it's 18,000 years more advanced and full of technology developed for conflict in space. It's cheap to fit, efficient and fast but can die relatively quickly. Absolutely perfect for the role of bombarding a target with high explosives..

People certainly take their space physics very seriously...

People certainly take their space physics very seriously...

But the only question is Why do you want to start Small ...

You should have begin At least with BS for Orbital strike .. dread should be the standard..

You doing it Wrong CCP and you Know it stop telling B....

And if it physics you want to explain the fact : Shoot Small ammo in universe with heat and force in the atmosphere planet you bullet disapear ... becaus it was too small.

An XL bullet .. could at least with a little imagination become a Small bullet when hitting the ground .....

Don't get it?

I can think of one underlying reason that probably tops all others to start small instead of starting big.

Starting big excludes a lot of players who have yet to skill for big. Starting small allows all players, including trial accounts, to participate. Excluding players from game features is a good way to lose players and subscribers. Including everyone is a good way of encouraging more subscribers, and maintaining current ones. Let's not forget that, at the end of the day, CCP are a business - as well as doing this for ALL their fans and customers, they still have a bottom line to consider. No bottom line = no CCP = no EVE = everybody loses.

Its mostly because CCP has seemed to stop caring about making things actually go together with the Eve universe. The idea for allowing Destroyers to be used for Orbital Bombardment seems to be a cop-out. They seem to want to have a low entry bar for it, either because they know they won't be able to get older players to do it(after the first 3 months) or because they want dust players to sub and be able to do it quickly. I mean how could you go from a Moros bombarding a planet to a Catalyst.

In the end, everything regarding the integration with Dust seems to be half assed and not thought through very well. Seemingly out of desperation. Guess that's what happens when you bomb a built up major release(Incarna) then have major uncertainty with your first non Eve release, which has been indev probably longer then it will be active.


Edit: Also yes I'm bitter, if you didn't get the memo.

So with that mentality trial players should be able to fly titans. What you are asking for is instant gratification. You believe that everyone at anytime should be able to do everything. That isn't Eve.

Eve ship classes aren't modeled after RL ship classes. You are trying to compare navel vessels to internet spaceships, the idea isn't the same.

Yes, destroyers for orbital bombardment. Why do you ask? Because we want to be able to build up to bigger and better. If we started with Titans doing orbital bombardment and then added the others going down each time we added something it would be smaller.

This way we start with destroyers with small guns and next time we add bigger guns we can make it bigger and better.

Keep in mind our goal is to start with a small connection between the two games and build it up from that so we don't break anything, or break as little as possible.

Hope that helps answer why we went with destroyers first. :)

This iteration of Orbital Bombardment is focused on the Tactical Strike variant which is performed with specialized ammo for small turret based weapons. Each turret category has a specialized ammo type: - Hybrids: Tactical Hybrid S - Lasers: Tactical Laser S - Projectiles: Tactical EMP S

The hybrid strike delivers a nice spread of high-damage rounds that are effective against infantry and vehicles. Laser strikes have a more focused area and are good for taking out installations or heavy vehicles. The EMP strike does a massive amount of damage to shields in a large area, but it will not damage armor, so it's good against heavily shield tanked targets.

Just read that orbital strikes will be fired from small guns.. Does this seem like a break from "eve reality" to anyone else?

Guesse since they used an Abaddon for the Fanfest demo i just assumed you would need large guns to fire them, if not some sort of special module that takes buku CPU or something. That said i actually still feel like a destroyer raining death from hundreds of kilometers up is a bit far fetched.

Not tryin to get it changed or anything, just noticed it today and didn't sit right. I'm imagining clouds of thrashers or even atrons, hell even industrials firing highly destructive weapons a really really long way... not how i'd have done it anyway o/

Technically, all it takes is an orbital platform, (i.e: satellite with this intended purpose). Beware, they are floating up there, over your head, as we speak.