Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |

Darth Saladyn
EntroPrelatial Vanguard EntroPraetorian Aegis
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 15:51:00 -
[421] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
Cruise Missiles have pve applications, but otherwise torpedoes become the only available weapon system for missile focused battleships. We want to change that!
Rise
i hope there will be a change with torps aswell as they have good ON PAPER dps but when it comes to applying it they struggle to hit a battleship for full damage without a target painter and woe betide you if your target is moving. |

elitatwo
Congregatio
76
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 16:18:00 -
[422] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
[b]5% increased rate of fire for all Cruise Missile Launchers
Strange that noone complained about an increase in rof from cruise launchers.
Just to remind you a tech1 cruise launcher has a base rof of 22 seconds. Now 22 + 5% makes 23.1 seconds.
Am I the only one who doesn't like that at all?
If it is meant to decrease the rate of fire I'm all in and I take my complaint back but if not I stand by my opinion that it is bad.
I cannot make up my mind about the rest right now until I tested them on SISI. |

Lucine Delacourt
Compound Interests
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 16:41:00 -
[423] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
[b]5% increased rate of fire for all Cruise Missile Launchers
Strange that noone complained about an increase in rof from cruise launchers. Just to remind you a tech1 cruise launcher has a base rof of 22 seconds. Now 22 + 5% makes 23.1 seconds. Am I the only one who doesn't like that at all? If it is meant to decrease the rate of fire I'm all in and I take my complaint back but if not I stand by my opinion that it is bad. I cannot make up my mind about the rest right now until I tested them on SISI.
They fire faster. |

Jureth22
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
52
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 18:04:00 -
[424] - Quote
just tested a cruise raven vs a typhoon
fitt of raven : 6x cruise missile launcher II + scourge fury/1x web/1x painter/4x bcu
initial volley whitout tp : 1201 with tp : 1500
seriosly???? will cruise missiles need to tp a battleship size hull to be able to make their full potention damage.
i am dissapoint,dps looks ok on paper,but when in combat,everything changes |

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
671
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 19:00:00 -
[425] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
5% increased rate of fire for all Cruise Missile Launchers
[b] Strange that noone complained about an increase in rof from cruise launchers. Just to remind you a tech1 cruise launcher has a base rof of 22 seconds. Now 22 + 5% makes 23.1 seconds. Am I the only one who doesn't like that at all? If it is meant to decrease the rate of fire I'm all in and I take my complaint back but if not I stand by my opinion that it is bad. I cannot make up my mind about the rest right now until I tested them on SISI.
Take a wild guess as to why nobody complained.
Actually, a couple of people did complain, but like you they didn't bother actually reading the OP. |

Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 19:09:00 -
[426] - Quote
Jureth22 wrote:just tested a cruise raven vs a typhoon
fitt of raven : 6x cruise missile launcher II + scourge fury/1x web/1x painter/4x bcu
initial volley whitout tp : 1201 with tp : 1500
seriosly???? will cruise missiles need to tp a battleship size hull to be able to make their full potention damage.
i am dissapoint,dps looks ok on paper,but when in combat,everything changes May I ask you why, among the 16 BS at disposal, you just happened to pick the one with the lowest signature ? I mean, the Typhoon have marginaly more sig than a Myrmidon... I'm sure you didn't do it to biased your results, but you must be really unlucky and a little unwary I guess. |

Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Atrocitas
3369
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 19:49:00 -
[427] - Quote
Jureth22 wrote:just tested a cruise raven vs a typhoon
fitt of raven : 6x cruise missile launcher II + scourge fury/1x web/1x painter/4x bcu
initial volley whitout tp : 1201 with tp : 1500
seriosly???? will cruise missiles need to tp a battleship size hull to be able to make their full potention damage.
i am dissapoint,dps looks ok on paper,but when in combat,everything changes
I'm not sure why you would expect to use fury missiles to do full damage to any attack battleship. Try using the correct ammo (navy).
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|

Shingorash
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:14:00 -
[428] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Jureth22 wrote:just tested a cruise raven vs a typhoon
fitt of raven : 6x cruise missile launcher II + scourge fury/1x web/1x painter/4x bcu
initial volley whitout tp : 1201 with tp : 1500
seriosly???? will cruise missiles need to tp a battleship size hull to be able to make their full potention damage.
i am dissapoint,dps looks ok on paper,but when in combat,everything changes I'm not sure why you would expect to use fury missiles to do full damage to any attack battleship. Try using the correct ammo (navy). -Liang
Fury is fine as long as you have it painted and webbed.
Also with missiles it pays to have 1x rigor and 1x flare rig. Not your usual PVP rig choice but if you want to do some damage you need them. |

Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Atrocitas
3369
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:18:00 -
[429] - Quote
Sure, but this is not an unexpected thing. Also, these changes are not yet on Sisi (I just checked).
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|

Shingorash
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:23:00 -
[430] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Sure, but this is not an unexpected thing. Also, these changes are not yet on Sisi (I just checked).
-Liang
They are on Duality now I think.
I am just about to login and have a look, client just finished updating. |

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
671
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:24:00 -
[431] - Quote
Two Rigours are better than a Rigour and a Flare. The only advantage of Flare is a lesser calibration cost. |

Shingorash
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:32:00 -
[432] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Two Rigours are better than a Rigour and a Flare. The only advantage of Flare is a lesser calibration cost.
You are right. But I want to test a few different things out. |

Enya Sparhawk
State Protectorate Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:51:00 -
[433] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:SongSinger wrote:most annoying that as the transverse velocity to zero gun deal 100% damage, it does not matter if SIGtarget/SIGweapon<1 missiles even stationary target unable to deal 100% damage, if SIGtarget/RadiusExpl<1 this is especially annoying with citadel cruise missiles (torpedoes) Transversal is never zero unless you are EHP bashing or stumble upon someone who had a bathroom emergency (ie. AFK). Controlling/minimizing transversal is a large part of successful use of guns, but you are right to defeat the explosion radius you need a module, specifically a TP which is a fair trade considering you potentially do 100% damage at all ranges without having to switch ammo (no optimal/falloff concerns). There should be some factor or coefficient in the damage calculation formula that differentiates between a guided and unguided missle. With a guided missle, you would need to factor in its guidance (its ability to hit dead center on a circle ie. sig radius) and its velocity (its ability to not only reach that target, but to position itself in a better striking position).
It needs something that would best represent in damage application those actions of the guided missle that I just mentioned... F+¡orghr+í: Gr+í na f+¡rinne D+¬an g+íire...Tiocfaidh +ír l+í |

Jake Xerath
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 01:02:00 -
[434] - Quote
This is making me even more excited for Odyssey! A well needed buff for Cruise missiles.  |

I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
433
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 14:54:00 -
[435] - Quote
My Rattlesnake approves of this message. Already getting close to 1100 dps with it (Mostly from sentries, but the cruise missile buff will help significantly as well). Should go up quite a bit more. Heck, might entice me to get a Golem again. *removed inappropriate signature* - CCP Eterne |

Phlum Ary
Decentralization United.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 15:56:00 -
[436] - Quote
awesome, torps need a buff too i think |

Allandri
Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 20:05:00 -
[437] - Quote
Fought and beat 3 Typhoons, a Hyperion, and almost destroyed the Oracle that popped me in a cruise Golem one after the other on Duality.
+1 |

Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
306
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 20:13:00 -
[438] - Quote
Allandri wrote:Fought and beat 3 Typhoons, a Hyperion, and almost destroyed the Oracle that popped me in a cruise Golem one after the other on Duality.
+1 t2 vs t1 nothing special |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
168
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 10:58:00 -
[439] - Quote
Jureth22 wrote:just tested a cruise raven vs a typhoon
fitt of raven : 6x cruise missile launcher II + scourge fury/1x web/1x painter/4x bcu
initial volley whitout tp : 1201 with tp : 1500
seriosly???? will cruise missiles need to tp a battleship size hull to be able to make their full potention damage.
i am dissapoint,dps looks ok on paper,but when in combat,everything changes
Checked what battleship you are firign at? The typhoon is exaclty the lowest sgianture battleship EXACLTY so that it can mitigate incomming damage. Try firing at a hyperion and see if you need ANY Tpainter. |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
168
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 11:00:00 -
[440] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Allandri wrote:Fought and beat 3 Typhoons, a Hyperion, and almost destroyed the Oracle that popped me in a cruise Golem one after the other on Duality.
+1 t2 vs t1 nothing special
LOL? Marauders are not that much more powerful than T1 battleships if fitting the same class of modules. #typhoons with torpedoes can overhelm a golem tank. He fought stupid people..... just that. |

Shingorash
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
51
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 18:13:00 -
[441] - Quote
Initial tests on the test server look good.
Fit like this (which I admit is a bit of an odd fit for a PVP and the fact it has no prop mod) the ship has taken out 3 other Ravens, a Tengu and a Sac.
High power 6x Cruise Missile Launcher II 1x Heavy Energy Neutralizer II
Medium power 1x Faint Warp Disruptor I 1x Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron 1x X-Large C5-L Emergency Shield Overload I 1x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II 1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II 1x Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I 1x EM Ward Field II
Low power 1x Damage Control II 3x Ballistic Control System II 1x Gravimetric Backup Array II Rig Slot 1x Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I 2x Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
Drones 5x Warrior II 5x Hammerhead II
Using Fury's I was hitting the Raven's for about 2300 damage a volley and the Tengu I was hitting for 1100 or so a Volley with Precision Missiles. Also 4 shotted an active tanked Sacrilege with T2 Precision.
If the missiles stay like this they might actually be viable for PVP. The Explosion penalty isn't really having an effect.
Need to test against Frigates.
|

Enya Sparhawk
State Protectorate Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 21:07:00 -
[442] - Quote
Hmmm, you know, the only thing I would do with torps is drastically increase their velocity (like make them faster than a cruise missle)... F+¡orghr+í: Gr+í na f+¡rinne D+¬an g+íire...Tiocfaidh +ír l+í |

Bucca Zerodyme
Good For Nothing Corporation Union of Independence
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 22:39:00 -
[443] - Quote
Shingorash wrote:Initial tests on the test server look good.
Fit like this (which I admit is a bit of an odd fit for a PVP and the fact it has no prop mod) the ship has taken out 3 other Ravens, a Tengu and a Sac.
High power 6x Cruise Missile Launcher II 1x Heavy Energy Neutralizer II
Medium power 1x Faint Warp Disruptor I 1x Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron 1x X-Large C5-L Emergency Shield Overload I 1x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II 1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II 1x Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I 1x EM Ward Field II
Low power 1x Damage Control II 3x Ballistic Control System II 1x Gravimetric Backup Array II Rig Slot 1x Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I 2x Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
Drones 5x Warrior II 5x Hammerhead II
Using Fury's I was hitting the Raven's for about 2300 damage a volley and the Tengu I was hitting for 1100 or so a Volley with Precision Missiles. Also 4 shotted an active tanked Sacrilege with T2 Precision.
If the missiles stay like this they might actually be viable for PVP. The Explosion penalty isn't really having an effect.
Need to test against Frigates.
Cruise is still not good against speed-tanking. But as long as ppl dont take Cruise seriously they wont fit an AB. Time will tell us if cruise will be good or bad. |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction Whores in space
174
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 23:01:00 -
[444] - Quote
Bucca Zerodyme wrote:Shingorash wrote:Initial tests on the test server look good.
Fit like this (which I admit is a bit of an odd fit for a PVP and the fact it has no prop mod) the ship has taken out 3 other Ravens, a Tengu and a Sac.
High power 6x Cruise Missile Launcher II 1x Heavy Energy Neutralizer II
Medium power 1x Faint Warp Disruptor I 1x Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron 1x X-Large C5-L Emergency Shield Overload I 1x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II 1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II 1x Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I 1x EM Ward Field II
Low power 1x Damage Control II 3x Ballistic Control System II 1x Gravimetric Backup Array II Rig Slot 1x Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I 2x Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
Drones 5x Warrior II 5x Hammerhead II
Using Fury's I was hitting the Raven's for about 2300 damage a volley and the Tengu I was hitting for 1100 or so a Volley with Precision Missiles. Also 4 shotted an active tanked Sacrilege with T2 Precision.
If the missiles stay like this they might actually be viable for PVP. The Explosion penalty isn't really having an effect.
Need to test against Frigates.
Cruise is still not good against speed-tanking. But as long as ppl dont take Cruise seriously they wont fit an AB. Time will tell us if cruise will be good or bad.
MIssiles are supposed to be a bit weak against AB speed tanking. That is their price for always doign SOME damage. If they coudl do most of their damage to AB speed tankers then mobility would be useles in the game.. jsut after the speed nerf thta happened.. they had to be nerfed VERY VERY fast because they made all other forms of combat irrelevant. |

Shingorash
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
51
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 00:01:00 -
[445] - Quote
Well that Raven ended up 10 for 0 so it is clearly working well.
Even against something with an AB those precision missiles chew them up. Especially when in web range.
If these are the final chnnges I am more than happy with them.
Worked well on a Geddon as well. Cruise and long range neuts is a good combo. |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8806
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 07:55:00 -
[446] - Quote
TZeer wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:TZeer wrote:Raven could be useful in PVP. But not with the current mechanics to probing where you get a warp in within 5 sec. Sure, and if you're trying to use the Raven against fleets that are big enough to have a dedicated covops traveling with them.... well, then maybe you shouldn't use a Raven. That doesn't make it not useful. And hell - the Raven's fully capable of dropping out 900 DPS up close if someone were to warp their fleet on top of them. -Liang it would need a change of game mechanics. But what I think would make peopel satisfied woudl be if a cruise missile could be fired.. the raven could warp out .... and the missile fired would still hit and damage the target. That could lead to some interesting tactics Not really. Based on the same reason you don't see paper thin sniper setups @ 150km+ any more. You simply don't have time to align and warp out again, if they try to scan you down when you come in.
You do see them quite a bit at ~100km though. Malcanis' Law:-á "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
|

Nemesis Bosseret
Dysfunctional Nocturnal Rejects Fracture Point
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 08:30:00 -
[447] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Hello!
As you all know, we are rebalancing all of the tech 1 battleships for Odyssey. This means its a very good time to begin looking at large missile systems. This post covers Cruise Missiles specifically.
The biggest problem for Cruise missiles is that their main draw is their range (roughly 75k with no skills, 170k with all 5s, and 250km or so with a Raven). Unfortunately, using long-range missiles in most pvp situations is unrealistic, as the flight time for the missiles, which can be up to 20 seconds, allows plenty of opportunity for your target to evade damage. On top of that, in situations where flight time isn't as much of a problem (like small scale engagements), cruise damage is extremely low. The result is a situation where Cruise Missiles have pve applications, but otherwise torpedoes become the only available weapon system for missile focused battleships. We want to change that!
We are hoping to improve Cruise from two angles. First we will increase their damage by around 30%. This will happen partly in a change to the base missile damage, and partly in a rate of fire increase for the launchers. Secondly, we are going to increase the base velocity of cruise missiles substantially, making their role as the premiere long range missile at least slightly more realistic. These two improvements will be balanced by an increase in power grid need for the launchers, and a small explosion radius increase for the missiles.
Specifically:
5% increased rate of fire for all Cruise Missile Launchers 200 added power grid need for all Cruise Missile launchers
4700m/sec base missile velocity for all Cruise Missiles (up from 3750m/sec) 14 second base flight time for all Cruise Missiles (down from 20 seconds) 25% increase in base damage for all Cruise Missiles 10% increase in explosion radius for all Cruise Missiles
Please keep in mind this change is not comprehensive. Following Odyssey, we hope to do more work to improve the missile systems in EVE by potentially adding new modules and/or interactions.
Look forward to hearing your feedback, as always Rise i see one issue with this............ Ur shooting something the size of a cruiser at me and expect an interceptor to be overtaken by it? lol common speed is not the issue with cruise missles i say damage boost yes because they definitly need it but u dont need to tweek the speed....... an interceptor should be able to out run incomming fire easy its how they stay alive since there paper thin |

Josilin du Guesclin
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 10:00:00 -
[448] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Jureth22 wrote:just tested a cruise raven vs a typhoon
fitt of raven : 6x cruise missile launcher II + scourge fury/1x web/1x painter/4x bcu
initial volley whitout tp : 1201 with tp : 1500
seriosly???? will cruise missiles need to tp a battleship size hull to be able to make their full potention damage.
i am dissapoint,dps looks ok on paper,but when in combat,everything changes I'm not sure why you would expect to use fury missiles to do full damage to any attack battleship. Try using the correct ammo (navy). -Liang If the BS is moving and not webbed/painted, you'll probably want to use precision.
|

Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
249
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 11:13:00 -
[449] - Quote
Nemesis Bosseret wrote:Ur shooting something the size of a cruiser at me and expect an interceptor to be overtaken by it? lol
Brb. Taking my car back to the dealer because a 747 is faster. |

Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
101
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 12:05:00 -
[450] - Quote
Nemesis Bosseret wrote:an interceptor should be able to out run incomming fire easy
Yeah, why not. lets build a ship that can outrun missiles. That guy did it, too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tF1Up_xXSI
There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |