| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
implanted
   |
Posted - 2005.07.12 15:55:00 -
[1]
why oh why cant you hit buildings/structures with torps/cruises like you used to b4 cold war.i understand the bit about smaller ships cos they "outryn" the explosion but now torps/cruise now vear off at last minute when shooting structures ?
this should not happen.
is it a fault ?
|
Lufio II
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 15:56:00 -
[2]
not every strucure is destroyable. If they don't show up in Overview, don't bother shootig them.
MSSI Forums
Provider of Prorator Blockade Runner Transport Ships in Domain |
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 15:58:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Lufio II
not every strucure is destroyable. If they don't show up in Overview, don't bother shootig them.
ye i know that please read the question and answer if u know y..
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 16:00:00 -
[4]
Its also related to sig radius--but to be honest, a building larger than an apoc shouldn't have a sig radius of a frigate. This should be fixed.
--
Want your POS to make money? Call me up. I've designed POSs that make upwards of 50m a day. |
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 16:02:00 -
[5]
so its a bug then...ah thanx man.
|
Allen Deckard
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 16:21:00 -
[6]
yah do a mission supposed to kill something like a radio telescope.
Start hitting it for crap damage like your hitting a frig.
Hmm telescope isn't moving, Should be putting out a sig radius that is hugh cause----well-----it's hugh.
|
Manfred Doomhammer
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 16:25:00 -
[7]
on a sidenote.. is it just me, or do guns now too not hit the target , but a location somewhat away from the target (coincidentally where the missiles explode too)
just had this happening with some npcs shooting at me
----
Manfred Doomhammer
Fleet Admiral
CEO ShadowTec Inc.
|
Akyr
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 16:26:00 -
[8]
right, it's not moving ... but rotating, and faster it do it ...... *hmmmmm
|
Allen Deckard
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 16:53:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Manfred Doomhammer
on a sidenote.. is it just me, or do guns now too not hit the target , but a location somewhat away from the target (coincidentally where the missiles explode too)
just had this happening with some npcs shooting at me
That is def a game glitch.
Personally I love it when you fire a missle and it apears from somewhere like a 1000meters from your ship to go after the enemy. Then you go to collect the loot can it says you are right on top of it but you cant open it cause your to far away.
Usually fixed by docking and undocking. Then again in .0 alot of time there is no dock.
|
2OV3
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 21:24:00 -
[10]
yeah agree...when i shoot structures with missiles the damage has gone that i used to get..even with new skills at lvl 3 ?
yet buildings dont move ?
then y r they behaving like frigs ? i dont get it either mate.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.12 21:36:00 -
[11]
It's to do with the sig radius of the building. The sig radius represents how accurately the missile can track the building. You see, misiles have to explode before they impact a target because if they impacted, it would risk wrecking the detonator and the missile would be useless. So if the sig radius of the building is low, it would not be able to accurately track its position and to ensure it doesn't impact with the object it would ahve to detonate earlier, hence the decreased damage. The velocity has nothing to do with the decreased damage.
|
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 06:14:00 -
[12]
its a ***king giant building surely it has a bigger sig rad than a frig ?
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 06:27:00 -
[13]
Originally by: implanted
its a ***king giant building surely it has a bigger sig rad than a frig ?
It might but remember how POS have stealth arrays (not in-game yet AFAIK)? They're like signature scattering things that stop your ship/missile detecting the structure well. And you know how real life stealth bombers have paint that absorbs radar? That's kind of the same thing, it reduces the detectability of the plane. In eve, they introduced something similar with interceptors. They use special alloys to reduce signature radius, who's to say that entire serpentis lookout tower isn't made of the same stuff or isn't running some kind of stealth array/module?
|
Vaaliant
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 06:43:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Nyphur
It's to do with the sig radius of the building. The sig radius represents how accurately the missile can track the building. You see, misiles have to explode before they impact a target because if they impacted, it would risk wrecking the detonator and the missile would be useless. So if the sig radius of the building is low, it would not be able to accurately track its position and to ensure it doesn't impact with the object it would ahve to detonate earlier, hence the decreased damage. The velocity has nothing to do with the decreased damage.
Thats has gotta be one of the best made up explanations/excuses to date that I've heard of as to why missiles to do crap damage...the fact that it doesnt make much sense either doesn't detract from its value 
I swear the guys at CCP should have looked into blast field values.
|
gizli
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 07:51:00 -
[15]
buildings dont move?...
U tellin me i didnt need to scramble that station?
-------------------------
Mwahahahahahahhahah!
_____ (\_/)
| ___|-(-.-)- -
|_| Damn rabbit
|
Nikolai Nuvolari
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 08:05:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Nyphur
who's to say that entire serpentis lookout tower isn't made of the same stuff or isn't running some kind of stealth array/module?
Well, if nobody else will...
The entire Serpentis lookout tower IS NOT made of the same stuff and it IS NOT running a stealth array or module.
___________________________________________
^^^***---All things serve the Beam---***^^^
GDBT is recruiting! |
X'Alor
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 16:33:00 -
[17]
something we found yesterday with guns.
MAKE SURE TO EQUIP A WEBBER ON YOUR SHIP TO WEB THEM PESKY HIGH SPEED STRUCTURES
yes activate a webber on them structures and see what happens.
a painter has no affect respectively but a webber sure as heck did.
how funny is that.
strutures should have hugh hugh signatures and large guns should be able to hit them at 2km orbit but can not
unless webbed
|
Rasitiln
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 16:40:00 -
[18]
hmm ive always webed the structures i just thoought its was funny, now its seems to have a point....CCP works in mysterious ways you know
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 16:41:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Nyphur on 13/07/2005 16:41:53
Originally by: Vaaliant
Thats has gotta be one of the best made up explanations/excuses to date that I've heard of as to why missiles to do crap damage...the fact that it doesnt make much sense either doesn't detract from its value
I swear the guys at CCP should have looked into blast field values.
It's based on how actual missiles have to work in real life, as far as I know. The less reliable the targetting data, the earlier the missile has to explode to avoid collision with the target. They work out the minimum distance from the target they can reasonably determine its position and detonate when they are detected as being that far away from it to avoid collision completely. This means the harder the object's position is to detect accurately, the greater the margin of error and the further away from the target the missile will have to explode.
Lower sig radius means it's harder to accurately detect the position of.
Originally by: Rasitiln
hmm ive always webed the structures i just thoought its was funny, now its seems to have a point....CCP works in mysterious ways you know
Webbing structures won't help ^^. If it does, that's a bug and it should be reported.
|
Zandramus
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 16:53:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Rasitiln
hmm ive always webed the structures i just thoought its was funny, now its seems to have a point....CCP works in mysterious ways you know
Meh
Try and figure out why Concord kicks your ass for accidently scrambling a gate, i mean was I preventing it from warping away or something , but apparently thos jackasses down in Concrd think I did something offensive.
Zandramus
Homeless And Clueless
S.A.S
|
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.13 17:34:00 -
[21]
nyphur....this....
It's based on how actual missiles have to work in real life, as far as I know. The less reliable the targetting data, the earlier the missile has to explode to avoid collision with the target. They work out the minimum distance from the target they can reasonably determine its position and detonate when they are detected as being that far away from it to avoid collision completely. This means the harder the object's position is to detect accurately, the greater the margin of error and the further away from the target the missile will have to explode.
is total cwap mate....
if a missile/torp hits a building at 1000 kph or something and doesnt explode what will happen ?
ill inform you.
IT WILL MAKE A KIN BIG HOLE IN IT...
so its flawed and stop brown nosing CCP 
|
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 20:26:00 -
[22]
no one has still come up with a reason why torps/missiles now dont hit structures which dont move and have a massive sig radius ...please fix this ccp.
|
Dr Cball
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:00:00 -
[23]
Originally by: implanted
so its a bug then...ah thanx man.
whaaaa....bugs in Eve, NEVER, LIES!!!
|
Rocius
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:00:00 -
[24]
No Crap.....
I get simmiliar results from my 720mm II's ......
How in the hell can I miss 3 shots in a row with em???? I was 20km from a structure, and was NOT MOVING..... why do I miss like that???? It makes NO SENSE AT ALL
shots fired at structures, if from guns or missles, should NEVER MISS..... they should do decent damage nearly ALL THE TIME..... thats just stupid that they dont.
Dont take your gaming too serious ! |
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:05:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Nyphur on 14/07/2005 21:05:55
Originally by: implanted
nyphur....this....
if a missile/torp hits a building at 1000 kph or something and doesnt explode what will happen ?
ill inform you.
IT WILL MAKE A KIN BIG HOLE IN IT...
Yeah, it'll make a hole in it. And? If it explodes beside it, it'd destroy the entire building. A missile in eve colliding with a ship could be like a bullet hitting a tank. The armour on space ships is not made of cement, it's made of tougher alloys than we have. The missiles themselves deal more damage than we can deal in reality right now. A rocket from eve could probably take out a tank in reality.
In short, the momentum imparted by a torpedo impacting on a ship in eve would be less than 1 damage. The real damage comes from the missile eploding.
Originally by: implanted
no one has still come up with a reason why torps/missiles now dont hit structures which dont move and have a massive sig radius ...please fix this ccp.
I did but you ignored it.
|
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:09:00 -
[26]
nyphur for your information structures have a much bigger sig rad than a frig so stick to thread and someone please tell me y we cant hit structures anymore ?
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:18:00 -
[27]
Originally by: implanted
nyphur for your information structures have a much bigger sig rad than a frig so stick to thread and someone please tell me y we cant hit structures anymore ?
Er.. If structures had a bigger sig radius than a frig, missiles would hit structures for more damage than they do on stationary frigates. Can you point me to where you're getting the information that structures have bigger sig radii than frigates? Because I haven't seen the sig radius of NPC structures put anywhere.
|
Citizen Angstrom
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 21:27:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Nyphur
Originally by: implanted
nyphur for your information structures have a much bigger sig rad than a frig so stick to thread and someone please tell me y we cant hit structures anymore ?
Er.. If structures had a bigger sig radius than a frig, missiles would hit structures for more damage than they do on stationary frigates. Can you point me to where you're getting the information that structures have bigger sig radii than frigates? Because I haven't seen the sig radius of NPC structures put anywhere.
I've mentioned this in various threads already, including the feedback forum prior to Cold War patch launch. It is completely InSaNe that a multiple-kilometer diameter space station can 'dodge' a missile better than a battleship. or that it can dodge at all, for that matter.
Unfortunately, when CCP finalised the code for the missile nerfs, they forgot about structures. And when they remembered, it was too late. At some stage, I guess they'll sort this out... Until then, it's the most visible and objectionable part of the missile nerfs.
Thank goodness I started learning Amarr ships and weapons last year, when all this talk of 'missile balancing' first started! I don't think I could stand all the mining or trading otherwise... 
|
Vaaliant
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 22:29:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Nyphur
Edited by: Nyphur on 13/07/2005 16:41:53
It's based on how actual missiles have to work in real life, as far as I know. The less reliable the targetting data, the earlier the missile has to explode to avoid collision with the target. They work out the minimum distance from the target they can reasonably determine its position and detonate when they are detected as being that far away from it to avoid collision completely. This means the harder the object's position is to detect accurately, the greater the margin of error and the further away from the target the missile will have to explode.
Lower sig radius means it's harder to accurately detect the position of.
Originally by: Rasitiln
hmm ive always webed the structures i just thoought its was funny, now its seems to have a point....CCP works in mysterious ways you know
Webbing structures won't help ^^. If it does, that's a bug and it should be reported.
Missiles don't work that way in real life. Missiles (air to air, surface to air and TBM interceptors) use generally a proximity kill effect where their blast combined with the shrapnel creates a mission kill on the target, the closer the blast is to the target the more effective the kill (there are also kinetic kill vehicles for ballistic interception). What the current missile system doesn't take into account is that missile targetting data can BE accurate, hence why no one ever sees things like wrecking damage shots with a missile and why we generally see crap damages even with lights. Also another example that hasn't been explained is that of guided torpedos, wire guided missiles like maverick/TOW2/Milan etc and the various bunker buster class of missiles (from SLAM-ER to JASSM to even Harpoon) which can slag heavy objects. A lot of missiles actually are designed to penetrate then explode or have shaped charge warheads designed to take on heavily armored objects. None of that is in EVE.
|
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 22:37:00 -
[30]
Has CCP been taken over by Maxis, and is EVE turning into The Sims in Space(tm)
|
VossKarr
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 22:47:00 -
[31]
Edited by: VossKarr on 14/07/2005 22:49:40
Originally by: Vaaliant
Originally by: Nyphur
Edited by: Nyphur on 13/07/2005 16:41:53
It's based on how actual missiles have to work in real life, as far as I know. The less reliable the targetting data, the earlier the missile has to explode to avoid collision with the target. They work out the minimum distance from the target they can reasonably determine its position and detonate when they are detected as being that far away from it to avoid collision completely. This means the harder the object's position is to detect accurately, the greater the margin of error and the further away from the target the missile will have to explode.
Lower sig radius means it's harder to accurately detect the position of.
Originally by: Rasitiln
hmm ive always webed the structures i just thoought its was funny, now its seems to have a point....CCP works in mysterious ways you know
Webbing structures won't help ^^. If it does, that's a bug and it should be reported.
Missiles don't work that way in real life. Missiles (air to air, surface to air and TBM interceptors) use generally a proximity kill effect where their blast combined with the shrapnel creates a mission kill on the target, the closer the blast is to the target the more effective the kill (there are also kinetic kill vehicles for ballistic interception). What the current missile system doesn't take into account is that missile targetting data can BE accurate, hence why no one ever sees things like wrecking damage shots with a missile and why we generally see crap damages even with lights. Also another example that hasn't been explained is that of guided torpedos, wire guided missiles like maverick/TOW2/Milan etc and the various bunker buster class of missiles (from SLAM-ER to JASSM to even Harpoon) which can slag heavy objects. A lot of missiles actually are designed to penetrate then explode or have shaped charge warheads designed to take on heavily armored objects. None of that is in EVE.
Just a little correction. Mavericks aren't wire-guided, they have TV/IR/Laser seeker heads, depending on the model. Modern A-A missiles no longer use shrapnel, they use continuous-rod warheads that litteraly cut like a circular saw through the target. 
|
SengH
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 22:49:00 -
[32]
u know when shooting a POS @ 150km... i always wondered how someone could MISS the shield that has a 30km radius. You just need to point in the direction and shoot.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 23:32:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Vaaliant
Missiles don't work that way in real life. Missiles (air to air, surface to air and TBM interceptors) use generally a proximity kill effect where their blast combined with the shrapnel creates a mission kill on the target, the closer the blast is to the target the more effective the kill (there are also kinetic kill vehicles for ballistic interception). What the current missile system doesn't take into account is that missile targetting data can BE accurate, hence why no one ever sees things like wrecking damage shots with a missile
designed to penetrate then explode or have shaped charge warheads designed to take on heavily armored objects. None of that is in EVE.
The way you described missiles working is identical to the way I described them working. Identical. The only difference is that you're describing a situation where targetting data is exact. The way I described missiles in eve working is how the missile would work if the missile was set off early.
But why would the missile explode early? It would have to register its proximity to the target to explode, right? Signature radius is a visible measure of how strongly the sensors can detect the object. A signature radius of 0 means any sensor would detect nothing but vacuum. The lower the signature radius of the thing you're attacking, the less reliable the sensor data is and the further off the data will be from the true values. If something had a huge sig radius, its exact position could be determined and the missile would explode right next to the hull, hitting for a lot of damage, as does happen in eve.
If the sig radius is really small, the missile would calculate the position wrong and detonate either too early or too late. In modern detection systems in real life when it's important not to overshoot, the quick fix to this is determining the maximum distance that it could be off by and tacking that onto the values you have. In eve, that would mean that the lower the sig radius, the less accurate the targetting data, meaning that in order to ensure the missile doesn't overshoot the mark and thus risk impacting and wrecking the detonator on the missile, a larger amount needs tacked onto the proximity sensor on the missile. The result is that the smaller the sig radius of the object, the further away from it missiles will explode. The damage will be consistent and lower, whether the target is moving or not. Things that reduce sig radius are like missile countermeasures because they reduce the factor that missiles use when targetting.
Don't like that system? Think about what would happen if you didn't tack on that extra distance. A lot of missiles fired on things with low a sig radius would overshoot and impact, dealing 0 damage. Of those that didn't overshoot the mark due to innacurate sensor data, they would either be right next ot the ship when they exploded and deal a lot of damage or they could be as far away as the extra distance that was tacked on before and deal the same damage as they do now. They could deal anywhere between the damage they deal now and the maximum possible damage they can deal. The damage for missiles that didn't overshoot the mark would be increased on average significantly but the smaller the sig radius the more missiles would overshoot the mark.
Actually, I think that would deal more damage, statistically, and it would be random damage too. But that's not how missiles in eve seem to work. They conform to the system I described above. Missiles always explode a set distance from the ship dependant on its sig radius in order to avoid impacting and dealing 0 damage. The smaller the sig radius, the further away the explosion is.
And we don't have armour-piercing warheads because the armour is too tough to penetrate. The warheads deal incredible amounts of actual damage by exploding which is focused by the direction and speed of the missile, of course, but an impact itself wouldn't deliver damage or penetrate the armour
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 23:34:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Nyphur on 14/07/2005 23:38:23
Originally by: Citizen Angstrom
I've mentioned this in various threads already, including the feedback forum prior to Cold War patch launch. It is completely InSaNe that a multiple-kilometer diameter space station can 'dodge' a missile better than a battleship. or that it can dodge at all, for that matter.
Dodge? So you've had missiles deal 0.0 damage on a station? If you have, bug-report it. Stations don't dodge missiles at all, nothing dodges them. They simply deal less damage than normal. Dodging the blast is something that happens when something is moving fast. I think people are forgetting that the reduction of damage from missiles comes from two sources - speed of the targetted unit and sig radius of the targetted unit. People are mistaking the latter for the former in this regard, assuming that the station is somehow "dodging" their missile blasts. the simple fact is that the damage is being reduced by sig radius. If you want an explanation, in order to make sure every missile does some damage, they're exploding further away from the target as per my explanation throughout this thread.
|
Vaaliant
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 23:49:00 -
[35]
Nyphur the problem with missiles is that we seem to always have inaccurate targetting data which is a logical fallacy. How the HELL do you get inaccurate targetting data on an object thats got the sig radius of a full sized moon AND is not moving? Hence why your argument is wrong and the explanation borked. We've pointed this out during testing on SISI but no one listened. Now the Devs seem to be on vacation so again no one will listen.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 23:59:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Vaaliant
Nyphur the problem with missiles is that we seem to always have inaccurate targetting data which is a logical fallacy. How the HELL do you get inaccurate targetting data on an object thats got the sig radius of a full sized moon AND is not moving? Hence why your argument is wrong and the explanation borked. We've pointed this out during testing on SISI but no one listened. Now the Devs seem to be on vacation so again no one will listen.
If its sig radius is huge then you really should be dealing full damage on it and from what I've seen of eve, you will. The thing is that while the object might be huge, the sig radius can be deceptively small. They're made of materials, like all ships, that decrease the signature it emits which missiles and turrets track. The solution then is that the sig radius of structures needs increased if you can't hit them with missiles, as that does sound a little silly. But the system is working within normal limits, it's meant to hit low because the structures have low sig radii.
|
Antic
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 00:12:00 -
[37]
could people stop giving us crap on how missiles work in RL? Thats totaly irrelevant. EVE dosnt take place in 2005. its FAR FAR in the future and technological advances happen you know.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 00:17:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Antic
could people stop giving us crap on how missiles work in RL? Thats totaly irrelevant. EVE dosnt take place in 2005. its FAR FAR in the future and technological advances happen you know.
The fact remains that they are missiles. The fundamental way missiles work won't have changed in this many years, considering the missiles themselves haven't. Check the description. They're still big metal shells filled with some kind of explosive. If they worked any other way than conventional missiles, they wouldn't do anything.
|
Rei Storm
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 00:26:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Rei Storm on 15/07/2005 00:26:07
LOL whoops
-----------------------------
I hate to advocate sex, drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity to anyone... But they've always works for me... |
implanted
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 06:11:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Antic
could people stop giving us crap on how missiles work in RL? Thats totaly irrelevant. EVE dosnt take place in 2005. its FAR FAR in the future and technological advances happen you know.
well said that man...
you should not "miss" a whomping great building
|
Calian
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 06:42:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Nyphur
The fact remains that they are missiles.
Wrong. They are not missiles, they are bits of data on a game, so will you please stop trying to explain away a bug with all this logic which makes no relivance AT ALL because they are not missiles, they're not real, they're some programers nightmare, and they screwed up and gave buildings too small of a sig radius. Enough with the explanations, they have zero relivance to a game which exists as 1s and 0s on a computer.
-------------------------
I hate everyone, except you. |
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 07:14:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Calian
Originally by: Nyphur
The fact remains that they are missiles.
Wrong. They are not missiles, they are bits of data on a game, so will you please stop trying to explain away a bug with all this logic which makes no relivance AT ALL because they are not missiles, they're not real, they're some programers nightmare, and they screwed up and gave buildings too small of a sig radius. Enough with the explanations, they have zero relivance to a game which exists as 1s and 0s on a computer.
Now you're jsut being silly. Of course they're data in a game. But they represent missiles as we know them. ANd no, they don't have zero relevance. A lot of people are complaining that the way missiles work now is totally stupid and unrealistic. I'm just showing them that it's entirely realistic and while they may not like the way it works, I can explain how the system appears to work from the outside, which the in-game mechanics use mathematics to mimic. So while my explanation will make zero difference to how the game works, I'm really just taking the game mechanics and applying logic to it to help people understand why the new missile system isn't ridiculous.
|
Christopher Scott
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 07:49:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Nyphur
Originally by: Calian
Originally by: Nyphur
The fact remains that they are missiles.
Wrong. They are not missiles, they are bits of data on a game, so will you please stop trying to explain away a bug with all this logic which makes no relivance AT ALL because they are not missiles, they're not real, they're some programers nightmare, and they screwed up and gave buildings too small of a sig radius. Enough with the explanations, they have zero relivance to a game which exists as 1s and 0s on a computer.
Now you're jsut being silly. Of course they're data in a game. But they represent missiles as we know them. ANd no, they don't have zero relevance. A lot of people are complaining that the way missiles work now is totally stupid and unrealistic. I'm just showing them that it's entirely realistic and while they may not like the way it works, I can explain how the system appears to work from the outside, which the in-game mechanics use mathematics to mimic. So while my explanation will make zero difference to how the game works, I'm really just taking the game mechanics and applying logic to it to help people understand why the new missile system isn't ridiculous.
Let's just pretend that your explanation of IRL missiles(which is incorrect) bears any significance in a make-believe videogame set in a space-faring universe(which it doesn't).
Your explanation may have some relevance towards, missiles.. FoF missiles that is. FoF missiles use their own targeting system, hence they don't require the ship's sensor systems. FoF missiles aren't very effective against structures, so there's no point in arguing about them.
Targeted missiles, on the other hand, are guided by the sensor systems on your own ship. Hence, why they require a target lock from the ship, and benefeit from the skills employed by the person flying the ship. Considering that all ship-class sensor systems, including pods, are able to detect exactly where and what type of starbase is operating within 500km, hell even within 13au if you are good with the scanner, there is absolutely no credible argument for saying these starbases, or any type of structure for that matter, employ any kind of stealth or signature reduction that has any effective impact on their visibility towards ship-class sensor systems.
Targeted missiles are 'guided' by the eyes of the ship, and therefore should be as accurate as the ship itself, given no other factors are at play. Since the only other factor is speed, of which the starbase has none, and the ship's sensors can see the starbase with 100% clarity, even get a 'play-by-play' readout of it's exact shield and armor integrity, I would think a guided missile should have absolutely no problem hitting a starbase with excellent effect.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.07.15 08:04:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Nyphur on 15/07/2005 08:05:52
Originally by: Christopher Scott
Targeted missiles, on the other hand, are guided by the sensor systems on your own ship. Hence, why they require a target lock from the ship, and benefeit from the skills employed by the person flying the ship. Considering that all ship-class sensor systems, including pods, are able to detect exactly where and what type of starbase is operating within 500km, hell even within 13au if you are good with the scanner, there is absolutely no credible argument for saying these starbases, or any type of structure for that matter, employ any kind of stealth or signature reduction that has any effective impact on their visibility towards ship-class sensor systems.
Given the availible information and assuming my previous explanation is correct as a premise, targetted missiles fit in perfectly well. The missiles are guided by your ship but they explode on their own so they use their own proximity detectors. That would be consistent with the damage data.
I do agree that the signature radius of structures does seem to be a problem. Missiles should be hitting for full damage on them and that means increasing the sig radius of them by a large factor. It's not fair that turrets can damage structures more than missiles.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |