EVE Search - Wow...Defender missles are junk!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Wow...Defender missles are junk!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Virago	Posted - 2005.07.09 05:32:00 - [1] CCP, have you guys given any though to defender missles? Preferably the launchers? Missles are so fast now that when you hear the "whoosh" from the enemy you don't have enough time to activate the launcher before you're slammed. Would it be too much to have the launcher stay activated when you're in battle once you click it? Or would that be unfair?
General Killah	Posted - 2005.07.09 06:31:00 - [2] Personally I think defenders should have a separate launcher entirely, and should stay on like you said only activating when missiles are found. --------------------------------- (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
Deakin Frost	Posted - 2005.07.09 11:36:00 - [3] More like defenders don't work at all anymore. They can't even hit NPC missiles from a 0.3 spawn.
Neslo	Posted - 2005.07.09 12:55:00 - [4] Originally by: Deakin Frost More like defenders don't work at all anymore. They can't even hit NPC missiles from a 0.3 spawn. Yep I can confirm this. Defenders do not work... have tried it with corp mates... they launch and lose lock immediately as if you warped out... or the target was destroyed.... From Ashes to Ashes... From Dust to Dust....
Joshua Foiritain	Posted - 2005.07.09 15:24:00 - [5] Defenders work fine for me. They kept 2 Sansha Heavy missile batteries of me. It does however require a quick responce after you hear the enemy launching a missile ------------------ [WTT: Vigilant]
Virago	Posted - 2005.07.10 03:58:00 - [6] Yes, a Missle battery with a steady stream of missles coming out. Defenders were over looked in testing. Sorry.
thebold	Posted - 2005.07.10 11:21:00 - [7] Edited by: thebold on 10/07/2005 11:21:18 FYI: Linkage Your not the only ones :P ============================================== We do the Blowing up thingy
Lonewolfnight	Posted - 2006.04.04 00:07:00 - [8] I'd like to just add my voice to this and ask CCP to work on the defender missles. They are very ineffective as they stand. I'd feel less upset if the NPC's worked the same but they don't. It seems that a npc can shoot defender missles always at the right time and they always launch just right. I do like some of the suggestions for auto launch setups. Also doubling up on the same missle isn't good. Thanks
Miss Overlord	Posted - 2006.04.04 04:19:00 - [9] mmm some loving needed perhaps improved UI or auto lock on misisles if u have one fitted but not sure if it will get quick or delayed attention
Tachy	Posted - 2006.04.04 10:48:00 - [10] Defender is launched and moves away from your ship in a straight line until the next cycle of computing its target. Then it turns towards the closest missile heading for you. Accelerates, misses in the first attempt because the target is moving fast. It turns around when the next cycle of flight path calculation hits. The defender misses because its target already impacted on you. This translates into: The defender missile is useless unless there is no missile closer than 20km from you when you're launching it. That's 20km + distance needed to overcome any lag. --==*-- Megadon CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray

vixit	Posted - 2006.04.05 09:45:00 - [11] Defender do work but not very good (even worse after missile changes) Here's my old idea http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=144663 I hope you like it Greetings and CUin EvE and have fun! VIXIT
Kunming	Posted - 2006.04.05 12:31:00 - [12] IMO the whole defender concept is broken. Why waste a high slot to shot 1 missile while a missile boat can render all your turrets useless with just 1 tracking disruptor?! I dont think tracking disruptors, sensor dampners or ECM is overpowered; they all have their unique use in certain tactical situations. Even NOS can be countered with cap boosters, but there is simply no proper missile defence... defenders are broken, the concept is flawed and you need 100km between you and the missile spammer to hit any incoming missiles at all... smartbombs use too much cap compared to a tracking disruptor, damp or ECM, and timing is a pain now that the missiles are insanely fast. Did i mentioned that missiles always hit, and now with the improved speed you cant even out run them, together with the fact that there is no effective counter for them and that T2 missiles cover all disadvantages T1s have, they seem to be more like glorified turrets that take a bit more time at long range (but thats why u have T2 cruise missles). CCP pls give us a proper counter to missiles, or nerf them to hell and back. Website Kaos Empire Killboard
Cyaard	Posted - 2006.04.27 00:40:00 - [13] and another thread full of valid complaints.. and no response from the dev... hmmm
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.04.27 00:50:00 - [14] Virago, Someone didn't KNOW? "The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer
4 LOM	Posted - 2006.04.27 09:36:00 - [15] Edited by: 4 LOM on 27/04/2006 09:36:26 Originally by: Kunming IMO the whole defender concept is broken. Why waste a high slot to shot 1 missile while a missile boat can render all your turrets useless with just 1 tracking disruptor?! If you implement some kind of missile tracking disrupter then you need to give me a missile tracking computer, and once you let me fill my mid slots with missile tracking computers you will be very sad indeed that you wanted some form of missile tracking disruptor. I agree however that defenders need to be fixed... but if they do work properly you need some way for a missile user to fit to compensate for it. A good idea everytime i read it is some kind of point defence gun system, this means if you want to shoot down a missile you need to sacrifice a turret point only problem i can see with this is that ships like the raven and crow would be able to fit this and still not hurt there damage output, maybe make these point defence guns size related (small, medium, large) have it so a small and medium cant really take out big missiles and vice versa and give them simmilar fittings to turrets, maybe a little less for large but the same for medium and small. Thats my 2 cents at least. Edit: Missspelling Quote for the win Originally by: Twilight Moon of course you have nice hair. That pod goo, is actually VO5 conditioner.
Miss Overlord	Posted - 2006.04.27 11:37:00 - [16] the devs like defenders as they are at the moment totally f**king useless. Enjoy oh and dont use until we get tech 2 useless defender missiles
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.04.27 12:58:00 - [17] 4LOM, the gane's not really designed to handle it.. and you'd end up making them mandatory and raising missile damage and messing up ships with no turret slots and smaller ships, and... Can of worms. "The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer
mazzilliu	Posted - 2006.04.27 16:57:00 - [18] smartbombs are more useful then defendors, if youre lucky and one goes off at the same time a missile hits you. hits the missile as well as anything else around :] ----------------------- ghuis8nf83fn45viunv8jgijfc4eshuvvgs You currently have 100 skills and 781,742 skill points eat THAT
Cheopis	Posted - 2006.04.28 07:37:00 - [19] Edited by: Cheopis on 28/04/2006 07:45:05 Defender missiles need to go the way of the Dodo and the deployable mines. Create a new weapon type, point defense lasers. Have it build off of small turret weapon skills, similar to how t2 small turret skills work. Point defense lasers would not require turret slots, any high slot will do, but only allow one per ship. You activate a point defense laser like you would activate a armor repairer or shield booster - they would remain active even when in warp, so they could activate immediately upon exit from warp. Point defense lasers would be 100% automatic, and would not be capable of targeting anything but missiles. On rockets, one hit by a point defense laser would destroy the rocket On light missiles, one hit reduces hit% to 50% and two hits destroys the missile Standard missiles, one hit reduces hit % to 75%, two hits and the % to hit is 50%, three hits destroys the missile. Every size class of missile would increase the number of hits required to kill the missile by 1, and reduce the effectiveness of each successful hit by half of what one hit on the next smaller missile class would do. Point defense lasers on your ship would target the closest missile with a vector bringing it closer to your ship. If your ally is shooting missiles in your direction at an enemy, yes, you would target those missiles. The lasers will attempt to engage any missile that enters targeting range of your ship, but would have similar accuracy and falloff characteristics as small beam lasers, but at least 2x the rate of fire (per each laser in the point defense cluster) Small turret point defense turrets would mount only a couple independent lasers, medium would mount twice that many, large three times as many as smalls, and capital point defense would mount four times as many independent lasers as small point defense turrets.. Named Teir 1 point defense lasers would have all the same combat characteristics, except perhaps better fitting requirements. Teir 2 point defense lasers would have exactly the same characteristics as t1 point defense lasers, except they would have twice as many independent lasers. Point defense lasers might be made even more interesting with a secondary module called a missile targeting array that would harness all unused CPU available in your ship for use by the point defense tracking. (Teir 2 skill) For each doubling of CPU over the base CPU requirement of the point defense cluster, you would get a 50% increase to your base optimal range. So, if a point defense laser cluster requires 25 CPU, and you have 50 CPU unused on your ship after you mount a missile targeting array, your optimal range on the cluster would be 150% of normal. Base CPU * 2 unused CPU = + 50% optimal Base CPU * 4 unused CPU = + 100% optimal This would obviously make some Industrial ships quite efficient as antimissile ships, so missile targeting arrays should be limited to non-industrial ships, though they could mount point defense lasers. And yes, I know for a fact that antimissile turrets have been discussed a zillion times before, but if we don't ask for them regularly, we can't complain that they don't exist Comments? Flames? edit Oooh, Oooh Gang Leadership idea - missile defense optimization module - mount one, and your gang's antimissile defenses will work more efficiently :)
Miss Overlord	Posted - 2006.04.28 11:59:00 - [20] well thought out point defense cannons (minmatar version would be projectiles) gallente would have a anti missile railgun - blaster projtecile. T2 higher CPU and PG usage as u presented t2 ammo would also have some changes. Calderi could maintain a defender missile system so no flames here

Cheopis	Posted - 2006.04.28 15:30:00 - [21] Originally by: Miss Overlord well thought out point defense cannons (minmatar version would be projectiles) gallente would have a anti missile railgun - blaster projtecile. T2 higher CPU and PG usage as u presented t2 ammo would also have some changes. Calderi could maintain a defender missile system so no flames here Actually, I thought about whether or not different races should have different types of defender systems, and it makes no sense. Missiles are tiny and fast targets (well, except citadel class slowpokes) The best possible defense against tiny, unarmored targets is lightspeed weapons. Defender missiles are also an ok idea, tactically, since they track and can make course corrections, but I think that the tracking calculations are why defender missiles suck so badly now. If CCP were to make Defender missiles substantially better, and actually have the defenders track their missile targets as they do now, I suspect that server CPU load for antimissile systems alone would start to be an issue. The answer, I think, is non-server-tracking point defense. Hit or miss. No tracking, course corrections, speed calculations, explosion velocity or any of that other stuff. I would even toss out the typical tracking calculations for ship to ship combat. If a missile is in range of an active antimissile system, it engages, and has a % chance to hit, regardless of the velocities of missile and ship. I think that lasers are the ideal system for point defense, but as long as all systems work with identical efficiency, it would be fair, no matter what the description of them was.
Wolfy Axel	Posted - 2006.04.28 16:23:00 - [22] Idea: Make Anty-missile deffense systems controled by the AI script and increase the CPU load or add another subsystem (eg. missile targeting computer...) Alternate DS: Something similar to Phalanx Naval deffense - short range Gatling autocannon (but it would require a rate of fire of 0.01 to mimik the effect)
ragewind	Posted - 2006.04.28 16:37:00 - [23] why are these anti missile systems at all? can i have a big mirror and a magnet to stop the other weapon types too ------------------------------------ fix eves industrial sector! advanced industrial ship
Cheopis	Posted - 2006.04.28 18:49:00 - [24] Originally by: ragewind why are these anti missile systems at all? can i have a big mirror and a magnet to stop the other weapon types too There needs to be missile defense systems because, quite simply, missiles can't miss. If you are in range, and are slower then the missile, you will be hit. This means that missiles have an advantage over weapons that actually have to track.
Prestis	Posted - 2006.04.28 20:34:00 - [25] Originally by: ragewind why are these anti missile systems at all? can i have a big mirror and a magnet to stop the other weapon types too Because missiles started life as a bonus weapon system with a 1001 advantages over turrets. They might of lost a couple but they still need an actual downside. And right now defender missiles aren't it. At a minimum they need to be replaced with a missile equivilent to turret disruptors. Chaff launchers anyone?
ragewind	Posted - 2006.04.28 22:49:00 - [26] i was under the imprestion that missiles are atually weaker on the DPS front than the other weapon classes ------------------------------------ fix eves industrial sector! advanced industrial ship
4 LOM	Posted - 2006.04.29 06:49:00 - [27] Originally by: ragewind i was under the imprestion that missiles are atually weaker on the DPS front than the other weapon classes They are, at high skill levels turrets are much better the missiles dps wise (i beleive) but at the lower skill levels missiles are much better. I am a missile user i have 7.5M in missiles 1.5M in gunnery and alot of the time i wish i trained guns instead, what it comes down to is that they are different weapons systems and have different strengths and weakness unfortunatly most people cant seem to see past there strengths and therefor claim they are UBER. They are in my opinion fairly balanced weapons systems (disagree with me if you want, except for precision missiles that i admit are a tad overpowerd) they both have strengths and weaknesses that favor one system over the other depending on the situation. But what is of concern in this thread is the fact that defender missiles are not as advertised at ranges less then 40km. (while tracking disrupters, anti turret, work quite well). You should be able to sacrifice a slot like you would with a tracking disruptor to have a similar effect on missiles. There needs to be a counter to missiles, preferably a mid or low slot counter or none hard point high slot counter (make it a gun it favores caldari, make it a launcher it favors the other races. think about it and it makes sense). But at the same time if there is a missile counter there needs to be a counter to the counter. Ie if there is something like a "chaft launcher" that increase the explosion radius of the missiels there needs to be a mod that simalry reduces the explosion radius of the missile. If defenders worked as advertised they would remove 50-100% of the missiles fired from a cruiser+ sized with only one rocket launcher with defenders, therefore makeing them unbeleivably overpowerd (thats why i think ccp has not fixed them, they are looking for a better solution)That or they think defenders are working good enough because when used at the right ranges and properly they do remove alot of the missiles that are fired. I dont have a real solution and the solution i posted a few posts ago is not a very good one but good ideas can start from bad ideas. Originally by: Twilight Moon of course you have nice hair. That pod goo, is actually VO5 conditioner.
Cheopis	Posted - 2006.04.29 08:10:00 - [28] Originally by: ragewind i was under the imprestion that missiles are atually weaker on the DPS front than the other weapon classes It all depends on what you are fighting. Missiles have a HUGE advantage at high skill levels, when you are fighting small ships with larger ships. Big turrets can't track worth crap - even if it only takes two hits to kill a ship, if that ship can regenerate all it's armor and half of it's shields inbetween each of your hits, it's a lose-lose situation. If you fit a big ship with small turrets to fight small ships, and you are attacked by a big ship, you're screwed. With missiles (at high skill), the exact same loadout will work just as well against small ships as against large ships.
Blood Gutter	Posted - 2006.04.30 11:57:00 - [29] Originally by: Cheopis Originally by: ragewind i was under the imprestion that missiles are atually weaker on the DPS front than the other weapon classes It all depends on what you are fighting. Missiles have a HUGE advantage at high skill levels, when you are fighting small ships with larger ships. Big turrets can't track worth crap - even if it only takes two hits to kill a ship, if that ship can regenerate all it's armor and half of it's shields inbetween each of your hits, it's a lose-lose situation. If you fit a big ship with small turrets to fight small ships, and you are attacked by a big ship, you're screwed. With missiles (at high skill), the exact same loadout will work just as well against small ships as against large ships. Yeah, it kinda sucks how even a Mega Wtfpwn Anti-Planet Missile can damage a frigate, whereas big turrets are useless... and then if they MWD the missiles will blow it away whereas turrets are even more laughably bad.
4 LOM	Posted - 2006.04.30 21:02:00 - [30] Originally by: Blood Gutter Originally by: Cheopis Originally by: ragewind i was under the imprestion that missiles are atually weaker on the DPS front than the other weapon classes It all depends on what you are fighting. Missiles have a HUGE advantage at high skill levels, when you are fighting small ships with larger ships. Big turrets can't track worth crap - even if it only takes two hits to kill a ship, if that ship can regenerate all it's armor and half of it's shields inbetween each of your hits, it's a lose-lose situation. If you fit a big ship with small turrets to fight small ships, and you are attacked by a big ship, you're screwed. With missiles (at high skill), the exact same loadout will work just as well against small ships as against large ships. Yeah, it kinda sucks how even a Mega Wtfpwn Anti-Planet Missile can damage a frigate, whereas big turrets are useless... and then if they MWD the missiles will blow it away whereas turrets are even more laughably bad. Funny, i have been instapoed 100km+ away bye large guns in a frigate, and i have never been insta poped bye a missile. Different bloody weapons systems with different strengths and weaknesses, get that through your head. Originally by: Twilight Moon of course you have nice hair. That pod goo, is actually VO5 conditioner.



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.