EVE Search - Torpedos equal to medium weapons?

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Torpedos equal to medium weapons?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Reihanna Rengar	Posted - 2005.06.30 11:13:00 - [1] I just got done attempting to use torpedoes with this new patch and they are worse than medium artillery. I've seen someone with medium artillery hitting a crusier for around 150 a shot (and they have pratically no skill with them) yet toirpdeos do 96? This makes torpdeo ships like the raven utterly and completely worthless vs anything other than a bs. (and even then worse than a tempest or apoc with good skill) I've seen large artillery and rails bulleye cruisers for over 700. So my question is why are torp users suddenly getting the heck nerfered out of them while railgun and artillery users can still knock out ships without a problem? Even against a bs the torp is only doing 318 compared to my usual 519. and a medium 720mm artillery can hit for 150 at only lv 3? Also the range has been dropped from 70km or so down to 30km? them equal to about medium artillery, yet large artillery and rails have 60+km? This doesn't seem like a game balance adjustment at all. It seems more making the caldari missile based vessles utterly useless compared to other races. Aren't Claradi suppoed to be the war race with a navy capable of defeating any other in existence? with missiles and torps like these I'd be amazed if they could defeat a bunch of green horns from any other fleet. Someone with high skill in artillery can wreck for 1400 points plus, is there anyway someone with comparable skill using these new torpdeos can even begin to approach that? (let alone the tremendous range of artillery compared to these new torps) What is the reason for nerfing the heaviest missile system into being so useless? A better and more balanced solution would be to place different sized war heads on these torpedoes. with heavy 600-700 point torps being short ranged (just like anti matter hybrid ammo) and light torps of 150 or so longer ranged (like hybrid iron ammo) This would balance missiles and bring them more on level with guns. As it stands though with this patch it places the power of combat securely in the realm of turret based weapons without a doubt.
DeMundus	Posted - 2005.06.30 11:17:00 - [2] Well maybe the new missil skills will balance it out.
Reihanna Rengar	Posted - 2005.06.30 11:31:00 - [3] Originally by: DeMundus Well maybe the new missile skills will balance it out. Even with those skills I doubt it will approach the 1400+ damage a heavy artillery specialist can get. Heck even before the missile nerf there was no way a torp could get that high for damage. And doing a bit of math there's no way even with the new missile range skill maxxed to get much more than 45-60km of range out of a torp (roughtly 30km +50% = roughly 45km)a far cry from the 80km torps used to do. (and large artillery and rails loaded withthe right ammo still can) If the issue is missiles always hitting every single time, why not create some kind of anti missile system that launches decoy flares or something with a % chance of decoying the incoing missile like jammers have % chance of jamming a ship?(loads some kind of chaff/flare ammo) Maybe just upping the versility of defender missiles to fire faster and be able to take out a torp if 2-4 defenders hit it?
Virtuozzo	Posted - 2005.06.30 12:02:00 - [4] Missiles won't be hitting every time with the changes, you'll have to maximise the new skills for missiles - all of them to get up to the usual results again. But even then the typical "fire and forget" attitude no longer applies. Cheers, Virtuozzo RECRUITMENT TEASERS.
Scobichevskaya	Posted - 2005.06.30 15:36:00 - [5] Originally by: Reihanna Rengar Originally by: DeMundus Well maybe the new missile skills will balance it out. Even with those skills I doubt it will approach the 1400+ damage a heavy artillery specialist can get. Heck even before the missile nerf there was no way a torp could get that high for damage. And doing a bit of math there's no way even with the new missile range skill maxxed to get much more than 45-60km of range out of a torp (roughtly 30km +50% = roughly 45km)a far cry from the 80km torps used to do. (and large artillery and rails loaded withthe right ammo still can) If the issue is missiles always hitting every single time, why not create some kind of anti missile system that launches decoy flares or something with a % chance of decoying the incoing missile like jammers have % chance of jamming a ship?(loads some kind of chaff/flare ammo) Maybe just upping the versility of defender missiles to fire faster and be able to take out a torp if 2-4 defenders hit it? this would be too smart, they cant do that ------------- RUS / RUA RUSSIAN Team
s73v3n2k	Posted - 2005.06.30 15:42:00 - [6] i always thought that in terms of BS v BS the system was already fairly balanced and when i tested torps with BS lvl 5 torps 4 and 4 of the new skills at lvl 3 i was hitting for around 600+ with one std dmg mod fitted. I terms of smaller ships i think tomB went over the top with this balance and i can no longer see a practical use for missile ships. Its not just using torps even heavy missiles will do a fraction of the dmg to a frigate compare to what you get at the moment. Because of this who is going to use them in missions and why would you take one to a fleet fight if your going to get your butt kicked by a bunch of ceptors because you can barley scratch their paint work. Considering the amount of people who actually use the test server compared to the amount on the TQ server i expect there to be alot of people complaining about this after the patch when they suddenly realise how bad this is and how much its going to effect their game play.
Lady Blazer	Posted - 2005.06.30 20:17:00 - [7] With the Caldari so vulnerable with such weak weapons us Mimitar could renew and win any war with them. With missiles that bad it also means caldari missile ships will be flooding the market at rock bottom prices as well as all those named launchers/ballastic controls. Can we say market crash? So with all of the launcher weapons so useless what are the previously ace launcher users going to be like? What is does is really hand the power to the people that focused on turrets. They didn't have their main weapons nerfed to a bottle rockets and suddenly have a ton of skills to train up to level 5 before they are even begining to get back to close to where they used to be. (As it is I know of several raven pilots and misile specialists that have told me flat out: "If this nerf happens I'm leaving for some other mmorpg.") Listen to the community on this one ccp and don't mess with what already works just fine. Focus on an area that could actually use improvement. (like drone AI and the drone exploit bug)
Silveressa	Posted - 2005.06.30 20:28:00 - [8] Originally by: s73v3n2k i always thought that in terms of BS v BS the system was already fairly balanced and when i tested torps with BS lvl 5 torps 4 and 4 of the new skills at lvl 3 i was hitting for around 600+ with one std dmg mod fitted. That's it? Originally I can inflict 500+ per torpdeo (not counting hardening) with only the standard torpedo skill at lv 3 and caldari bs at lv 3, and not damage mod. You mean to tell me I need to get bs to lv 5 torps 4 and the new skills at lv 3 before i can even get back to the previous levels of damage?! If it takes all that training it's simpler time wise to just train into a different race's ships and become a artillery or laser specialist. with all the associated guns skills to go with artillery at 3 large artillery at 4 and mim bs at 5 I'm willing to bet you can get wrecking shots well into the 1500 range. Not to mention the staggering 70-90km range of artillery. This new proposed patch will just make the launcher weapons a complete and total waste of time to continue using. "Lead by example or get of my way."
dust monkey	Posted - 2005.06.30 20:55:00 - [9] it does seam that bad, and its not a nerf, its evening it all out. it true that artillery will do more dmg but they do miss, while missiles and trops don't also if u want to do more dmg use target painters they'll increase the dmg for the new patch.
Reihanna Rengar	Posted - 2005.06.30 21:06:00 - [10] Artillery and rails already did more damage then missiles and torps before this nerf. (1000+ for 425mm rails) And yes they do miss. but when they do hit they can smash a cruiser in very, very few shots. (one 6 gun volley usually) With torps striking a crusier for only 96 it's a nerf. Making missile "miss" once in a while, that's a balanacing patch. Making them do damage comparable to medium weapons is a nerf. As for equipping more mods to get the samge damage we used to out of the weapon, we already have ballsitc control mods, we don;t need to take up more slots with more modules just to do the damage we used to do that was already weaker than the guns. Currently guns might miss yes, but guns do hit for far more damage at times when they do hit, balancing out over all. (not to mention defender missiles already neutralize any missile but torps) Also wouldn't putting a target painter on a tempset boost the sig raidus (and thus ease to hit) of any enemy increasing the chance of a "wrecking shot?" The current system with guns doing more damage at high level than missiles but missing occassionly has worked just fine since beta right? Why mess with what has been a successful system for years
Clipped Wings	Posted - 2005.06.30 22:05:00 - [11] Consider using webbers, target painters or even nossies if you think the smaller ships are going too fast. Actually, it's not a given that you can nuke cruisers with BS-sized turrets...If it gets too close, at least you'll still be doing 96 damage to it (not counting that you web, nos, and paint the living daylights out of it), which is still 96 points more than turret battleship will be doing at close range to a cruiser. Yes, I know, one can get lucky and all that, but on the flip side, you don't even have to have the transversal setting on in overview ;) -Clipped Wings of LFC "I believe in the theoretical benevolence, and practical malignity of man." ~William Hazlitt
Aitrus	Posted - 2005.06.30 23:30:00 - [12] Torps shouldn't have 70km range. They're the missile equivalent to blasters/pulse lasers/autocannons. High damage with short range. Cruise missiles are more akin to rails/artys/etc.
Flagan	Posted - 2005.06.30 23:30:00 - [13] Originally by: Reihanna Rengar Why mess with what has been a successful system for years why do dogs lick their balls? - because they can
Reihanna Rengar	Posted - 2005.07.01 00:34:00 - [14] Originally by: Aitrus Torps shouldn't have 70km range. They're the missile equivalent to blasters/pulse lasers/autocannons. High damage with short range. Cruise missiles are more akin to rails/artys/etc. Good point. If they just shortened down the range of torps but kept damage up there it'd still be balanced, but nerfing both range and damage makes them totally unblanced. (And this is not even getting into how much this nerf destroys light missiles, heavies and cruise) Another way this nerf could have been better balanced was to relase the skills out a few months before nerfing the missiles to give those that still wished to use them time to train up the skills before putting the nerf into effect so their power doesn't go from great to pathectic overnight. Also this nerf is really bad for game consistency and believability. Suddenly a torpedo that did 500+ the day before doing only 96 now? The ships that could be blown to pieces in fleet battles before by missiles can escape nearly unscathed fro now on for what in game storyline reason? (some storyline post of "new missile armor implemented on all ships" certainly isn't going to cut it imho) I would imagine this nerf will shift the balance of power in many a war that is happening giving a huge advantage to which ever side depends on missiles/missle specific ships like ravens etc, the least. Especially since it will take the launcher users 3-6 months of training to get back up to where they were. (potential last words of a Caldari general: "Pull the ravens back! Full retreat! they've got frigates!" )
GrayFox247	Posted - 2005.07.01 04:33:00 - [15] Wow what a great thing to do to us all that fly the missle boats in this game. Its bad enough I still die against other players with have my missles hitting hard. Now what seems to be the problem with missles? I use them all the time, and I'm pretty sure theres loads of more people using the missle boats. Now what was easy to use, is now FUBAR. My crow and all the Caldari missle boats will be uselless until you learn all these new skills for missles. Hmmm let me think, if I was a noob what race would I pick?? Well for sure not Caldari because I'll have to learn my missle skills for longer than learning a lvl 5 BS. Hmm think I'll pick Amarr, no missles to worry about. And learning Turrent skills really isnt that long. Jezz i'm learning them, and I never really learned anything in there, cept to use Large Rails. Missles 4TW!! Now, this change in events will impair my pvp and protection for my miners out in 0.0.. and I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one with this missle nerf problem. Well hopfully these new missle skills are at a rank of (1) might make it go faster. I hope someone grows a brain and finally realizes what the hell they did. Well after that, you all take care and keep it real..peace "Only a fool trusts his life in a weapon."
Jasha	Posted - 2005.07.01 05:21:00 - [16] personally i think this is better im sure ccp with release some new skills to boost torps back up again but for me when i use my megathron i use mostly large rails and i somtimes struggle agenst ravens because they through torp after torp after torp an a constant beating this new nerf i think will equal things out a bit
Hiram	Posted - 2005.07.01 09:00:00 - [17] I think that the missiles should just be left alone! We dont have any damage mods on our launchers like turrets, we dont get any other bonus excent an decrease in refire rates in named launchers so we have no extra range. It all ballances out with the fact you can shoot a missile down but you cant a laser beam! Tampering with missiles is just going to be messy and the new skills look interesting but some how i feel im still being robbed!
Aldelphius	Posted - 2005.07.01 09:50:00 - [18] I love how everyone brings up the 1400 wreckings, like it was something every tempest pilot was getting all the time. The pilots of those ships had ALL dmg related skills to lvl 5, plus all the extra skills required to get large arty specilization, and a low rack of all dmg mods. Train up all the new skills to lvl 5, and you might have as many SP in missles as those people who get those huge hits, and fit your raven with nothing but the best ballistic mods, and i bet you'll do more damage than before on a bs(I dont fly missile boats, i wont be arsed to do the math). Tack on a web and a painter or two and taking out a cruiser wont be the hardest thing in the world anymore.
BaJaiah	Posted - 2005.07.01 12:06:00 - [19] Well for one im done complaining about the missile changes (being a Raven pilot and all). The reason ? The system did need an overhaul. I don't care how much you complain - but theres a reason every Raven pilot could take on and complete allmost every level 4 mission... alone. I do agree that the damage values vs small fast ships - interceptors being the worst case - as they are now, are way to low. But if you wan't to consider why they might be so, think of this Raven gank-setup: High slots 6 x arbalest/tech 2 siege/cruise launchers. Med slots tech 2 afterburner/MWD, T2 XL shield booster, 2 x taget painters, 2 x web Low slots 6 x balistic controls Now - i'm no math wizard, but if we add the effect of the new skills fully trained i'm pretty sure that a raven with such a setup would deal some pretty heavy damage to any ship. The case is that CCP will have to think about such a setup and compare it to other gank-setups... The only thing i will complain about is that the larger missile boats will have to dock and change launchers to effect their range whereas any gunboat only need to change ammo (crystals included). As far as "shots missing", guns might miss and missiles can be shot down. To shoot down missiles you have to fit a (high slot) launcher with defenders. To evade gunfire you need speed and agility. Again i can't say that this is 100% fair, but it does even up the score somewhat. And most importently still leaves a difference between guns and missiles... All in all i think the new missile system will work nicely in regards to balancing the game, but it will probably need some tweaking along the way. And the new system leaves lots of options to do just that compared to the old.
very new	Posted - 2005.07.01 13:07:00 - [20] Please do not nerf missiles soo much, let people have fun, there are like 700 trial accounts prime time , let the new people like the game, do not ruin eve population or game will become "world of warcraft" - the most game
Silveressa	Posted - 2005.07.01 13:30:00 - [21] Originally by: BaJaiah The system did need an overhaul. I don't care how much you complain - but theres a reason every Raven pilot could take on and complete allmost every level 4 mission... alone. I've seen Apocs and Temepsts solo lv 4's missions as well with the same ease as a Raven. But soloing lv 4's isn't a sign to nerf a ship. Pvp is where it makes a real difference. Did missiles being the way they are normally make pvp completely lop sided? If not before then what happens after July 5th? No matter what it's a given the launchers will all pretty much suck compared to turrets until the pilots spend 2-4 months getting those skills. Now after patch day what happens to the corps currently at war that rely on launcher based ships to fight and win their wars? (or guard their assests in 0.0) The balance of power is suddenly shifted into the hands of the turret users that don't need an extra few months to "catch up" giving these corps a huge edge. (also a great time to war declare a corp composed primarily of Caldari or invade their territory) If this patch "must" come out then hold off on it, release the skills for it first, give pilots a chance to train said skills for a few months then release the missile alteration. That way the playing field will stay balanced and corps won't find a patch has ruined the fun of pvp for them and placed them at an unfair disadvantage. "Lead by example or get of my way."
BaJaiah	Posted - 2005.07.01 13:43:00 - [22] Edited by: BaJaiah on 01/07/2005 13:46:31 Edited by: BaJaiah on 01/07/2005 13:45:44 Originally by: Silveressa I've seen Apocs and Temepsts solo lv 4's missions as well with the same ease as a Raven. But soloing lv 4's isn't a sign to nerf a ship. Pvp is where it makes a real difference. Did missiles being the way they are normally make pvp completely lop sided? If not before then what happens after July 5th? No matter what it's a given the launchers will all pretty much suck compared to turrets until the pilots spend 2-4 months getting those skills. Now after patch day what happens to the corps currently at war that rely on launcher based ships to fight and win their wars? (or guard their assests in 0.0) The balance of power is suddenly shifted into the hands of the turret users that don't need an extra few months to "catch up" giving these corps a huge edge. (also a great time to war declare a corp composed primarily of Caldari or invade their territory) Well - as i said i'm primarily a Raven pilot - but still i can't really imagine neither an Apoc or a Tempest have the same ease as a Raven with a squad of 5 interceptors... The reason im focusing on NPC battle is that it is here the imbalance with the current missilesystem is present... As you state so elequently - BS PvP seems pretty balanced as it is. But i dare you to get near my Raven in an interceptor The main reason for the missile changes lies here... I do agree that it would have been nice to have gotten a headstart on the new skills as it will bring imbalance for a couple of months. Gunners have their skills trained allready...
Ante	Posted - 2005.07.01 15:54:00 - [23] I can see two problems with the missile nerf (and it most certainly is a nerf): 1: New players get screwed. Suddenly Caldari pilots get kicked in the balls in terms of damage early game because, 2: Webs and painters have now become standard on ANY ship that wants to do any considerable amount of damage \| snipe bs which we all oh so love anyway. Snipers get an indirect boost because yet another class of ship has been nerfed to oblivion? Painters and webs make me cry... why have you made ships without them so useless?
Fester Addams	Posted - 2005.07.01 18:25:00 - [24] I love the fact that its never the average damage over time that is used in threads like this one, its always I have seen a proj user do... A hybrid weapon can dish out... A buddy tells me he... And on the other side of the coin its never told what the target was. Usually in the end it will come out their gun got that against a stationary BS at optimal range while my missile was firet against a max shielded oponent (frigg with MWD if tested on chaos). Now this is not only true for missiles, when projs got cut way back I read plenty of fellow proj players say the exact same thing. Yes, missiles will probably loose some of their power after the uppcomming patch but anyone that claims they are on par with proj guns have never used proj guns themselves (cant compare missiles to hybrids as I have never used them)
Ante	Posted - 2005.07.01 20:27:00 - [25] Originally by: Fester Addams I love the fact that its never the average damage over time that is used in threads like this one, its always I have seen a proj user do... A hybrid weapon can dish out... A buddy tells me he... And on the other side of the coin its never told what the target was. Usually in the end it will come out their gun got that against a stationary BS at optimal range while my missile was firet against a max shielded oponent (frigg with MWD if tested on chaos). Now this is not only true for missiles, when projs got cut way back I read plenty of fellow proj players say the exact same thing. Yes, missiles will probably loose some of their power after the uppcomming patch but anyone that claims they are on par with proj guns have never used proj guns themselves (cant compare missiles to hybrids as I have never used them) Doesn't it seem wrong that light missiles, the anti-frigate missiles, hit frigs with mwd for 0.7 damage as tested in sisi?
Silveressa	Posted - 2005.07.01 20:54:00 - [26] Edited by: Silveressa on 01/07/2005 20:55:03 Originally by: BaJaiah The reason im focusing on NPC battle is that it is here the imbalance with the current missilesystem is present... As you state so elequently - BS PvP seems pretty balanced as it is. But i dare you to get near my Raven in an interceptor The main reason for the missile changes lies here.. So they's screwing with a system becsuse it lets players take down npcs too easily? wtf? Who really cares if a player can knock out an npc easily, it;s not like it;s got a few hundred mill invest in their ship or going to get upset over it. Nerfing a weapon to make NPC's happy is the stupidest thing yet imho. PVP is what a lot of players play eve for, and nerfing them like this screws pvpers beyod all recognition. Isn't pvp one of the founding core parts of eve? (thus why 1/2 of eve allows open pvp and the other half does too if you;re at war?) This change forces everyone to waste slots with painters just to get good damage anymore, when they already need to waste slots with webbers to catch inty's and other fast ships. If you;re going to make painers a necessity then put an extra slot on all caldari missile boats to hold one. If I was a main missile using pvper and this patch took me off the battle field for a few months until I could train up a bucket of skills I'd seriously consider just investing all that time (and money) into getting somewhere signifigant in a different mmorpg. If rats are too dang weak up their damage, up their numbers, up their resisences, change the stupid NPC's to make them harder not the players weapons. Ruining pvp for some people is a bad move for a game the revolves around it, and one that can cost the company a lot of potential customers and profit. "Lead by example or get of my way."
OVERCOPES 1	Posted - 2005.07.01 21:15:00 - [27] Originally by: Silveressa Edited by: Silveressa on 01/07/2005 20:55:03 Originally by: BaJaiah The reason im focusing on NPC battle is that it is here the imbalance with the current missilesystem is present... As you state so elequently - BS PvP seems pretty balanced as it is. But i dare you to get near my Raven in an interceptor The main reason for the missile changes lies here.. So they's screwing with a system becsuse it lets players take down npcs too easily? wtf? Who really cares if a player can knock out an npc easily, it;s not like it;s got a few hundred mill invest in their ship or going to get upset over it. Nerfing a weapon to make NPC's happy is the stupidest thing yet imho. PVP is what a lot of players play eve for, and nerfing them like this screws pvpers beyod all recognition. Isn't pvp one of the founding core parts of eve? (thus why 1/2 of eve allows open pvp and the other half does too if you;re at war?) This change forces everyone to waste slots with painters just to get good damage anymore, when they already need to waste slots with webbers to catch inty's and other fast ships. If you;re going to make painers a necessity then put an extra slot on all caldari missile boats to hold one. If I was a main missile using pvper and this patch took me off the battle field for a few months until I could train up a bucket of skills I'd seriously consider just investing all that time (and money) into getting somewhere signifigant in a different mmorpg. If rats are too dang weak up their damage, up their numbers, up their resisences, change the stupid NPC's to make them harder not the players weapons. Ruining pvp for some people is a bad move for a game the revolves around it, and one that can cost the company a lot of potential customers and profit. thats the whole point,3 month noobies should not be able to solo L4 missions.period. why should i invest almost 2 years of training time to be able to a L4 in my chosen ship (megathron,and i still have trouble doing angel extravaganza),and a 3 month old player breezes through it.unbalanced. iknew this was going to happen,and im glad it has. raven=win ship nomore.
Dark Avatar	Posted - 2005.07.01 21:43:00 - [28] Originally by: OVERCOPES 1 Originally by: Silveressa Edited by: Silveressa on 01/07/2005 20:55:03 Originally by: BaJaiah The reason im focusing on NPC battle is that it is here the imbalance with the current missilesystem is present... As you state so elequently - BS PvP seems pretty balanced as it is. But i dare you to get near my Raven in an interceptor The main reason for the missile changes lies here.. o they's screwing with a system becsuse it lets players take down npcs too easily? wtf? Who really cares if a player can knock out an npc easily, it;s not like it;s got a few hundred mill invest in their ship or going to get upset over it. Nerfing a weapon to make NPC's happy is the stupidest thing yet imho. PVP is what a lot of players play eve for, and nerfing them like this screws pvpers beyod all recognition. Isn't pvp one of the founding core parts of eve? (thus why 1/2 of eve allows open pvp and the other half does too if you;re at war?) This change forces everyone to waste slots with painters just to get good damage anymore, when they already need to waste slots with webbers to catch inty's and other fast ships. If you;re going to make painers a necessity then put an extra slot on all caldari missile boats to hold one. If I was a main missile using pvper and this patch took me off the battle field for a few months until I could train up a bucket of skills I'd seriously consider just investing all that time (and money) into getting somewhere signifigant in a different mmorpg. If rats are too dang weak up their damage, up their numbers, up their resisences, change the stupid NPC's to make them harder not the players weapons. Ruining pvp for some people is a bad move for a game the revolves around it, and one that can cost the company a lot of potential customers and profit. thats the whole point,3 month noobies should not be able to solo L4 missions.period. why should i invest almost 2 years of training time to be able to a L4 in my chosen ship (megathron,and i still have trouble doing angel extravaganza),and a 3 month old player breezes through it.unbalanced. iknew this was going to happen,and im glad it has. raven=win ship nomore. I have invested a year and a half in missile skills. To find out its all gonna go to waste. CCP Can I petition to MOVE all skills in caldari ships and missiles over to a gunship please? This missile change is as bad as exploiting the game mechanics. I hope you take this seriously because I am serious. I take your point about 3 month old characters not being able to solo l4 missions BUT what about us that have invested and been around for a long time?
Silveressa	Posted - 2005.07.01 21:46:00 - [29] Edited by: Silveressa on 01/07/2005 21:46:50 Originally by: OVERCOPES 1 thats the whole point,3 month noobies should not be able to solo L4 missions.period. why should i invest almost 2 years of training time to be able to a L4 in my chosen ship (megathron,and i still have trouble doing angel extravaganza),and a 3 month old player breezes through it.unbalanced. iknew this was going to happen,and im glad it has. It;s not just noobs that are getting the stick. long term raven pilots ae getting it stuck to them and now unable to handle lv 4 missions as well but thats beside the pint. Who care how easily someone can "solo" a lv 4 mision? does it really make a difference a the end of the day how well pilot x can kick npc butt compared to you? What matters is the pvp aspect and how the patch effects it. if there's some kind of perceaived problem with killing npc's solo compared to others inablity to do so they upp the npcs resistence to missiles. that would solve the entire missiles vs npc problem and not wreck them for pvp. "Lead by example or get of my way."
Repossessed	Posted - 2005.07.02 03:56:00 - [30] Yes, it's a whine, but here goes. Actually, we all know missles needed to be fixed, they were too much in one way. Based on test server results, however, can't take on a 3 ship frigate NPC spawn? How vulnerable are the caldari and minnie gonna be? I expect that every caldari and minnie using missles as primary armament to petition immediately if they lose a ship due to this. Please save all information, and be professional. I don't know if CCP will like what I'm saying here, but they've always been receptive to professional information being presented to them, in just about every case I can remember. Use the forums, use the data, and show them it's wrong. They will see it. Just don't whine them to death too much, or they'll ignore the important facts you present them. Thinking about putting my caldari and minnie in a .8 system, and moving down the ladder til I can see where my guys can survive. lol If you like the idea i've presented, sign it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.