EVE Search - Hammerhead: Facts on missiles like you wanted

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Hammerhead: Facts on missiles like you wanted

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 00:49:00 - [31] Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 13/10/2005 00:20:51 I think I want some of your turrets. Because I sure don't get hit at that sort of range in my inty. (280's, frex, just MISS entirely). So no, I don't see anything but people whining because they can't instapop frigs now. Again. That's why i took 125mm rails as example ;p Anyway, you have to remember that missiles will do the same whatever direction youre going. I mean, turrets will hit or not (or very little) depending largely on your transversal, missiles just go by velocity, direction doesent matter to them. You can approach a missile ship head-on in an inty and it makes not a jot of difference. Hence, I'd argue light should do some damage to an inty. It doesent have to be much, say 10% at 3.5kms? 10% @ km/s? I dunno, some token damage that says "this is an anti-frigate weapon, and since the missile rework it actually does what its supposed to". The problem here being there's no module that will help a missile track better, what you see is what you get, and what you get right now is below turrets by a chunk. Maybe im wrong, but eh. This is mostly academic for me, i dont use missiles very often... still, i cant help but argue about it ;p Btw, light were never able to instapop interceptors. They couldnt even catch up to them, so whats the relevance of that comment? ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
DayVV4lkEr	Posted - 2005.10.13 02:19:00 - [32] This Thread is about facts ? OK. Rockets are really good (tested many many times) Light Missiles are ok as "long range" frig weapons but they suck as short range weapons for cruisers (compared to blasters. blasters do more damage AND have better tracking then rails. light missiles have better "tracking" but do way less damage then heavys) Heavys are ok but could use a little reduction in the explosion radius so they can't at least hit cruisers for full damage. Cruise Missiles are totally ok u can still kill frigs in a raven with 6 CM-Launcher (right fitting) i didn't test torpedos yet but what i heard u can compare them to tachyon beam lasers if u go against BS u do really hard damage and u will hit but anything else u don't have much to look at. Main problem atm in my opinion is that something like a heavy rocket is missing and that the heavy missiles in general are to bad (the heavy rockets could have the explosion radius of the current heavy missiles and the heavy missiles explosion radius should be lowered) excuse me if this post is a little confused it's all ready late :)
B0rn2KiLL	Posted - 2005.10.13 02:33:00 - [33] torp size! TORP SIZE!! runs away yelling and plucking out the hair on his legs torp size!!!! --- When It Absolutely Positively Has To Be Desotroyed.
Tigerclaw1987	Posted - 2005.10.13 02:44:00 - [34] if this works the way it says....... ok no flash calculations.. its 2 early.... on missiles vs other ships: sig radius(enemy) + exp veloc(u) = dmg???? ive been itching 2 find out wa u did to my fav weapon since i come back online lol.. sum tell me?
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2005.10.13 03:06:00 - [35] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 13/10/2005 03:07:12 Originally by: keepiru Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 13/10/2005 00:20:51 I think I want some of your turrets. Because I sure don't get hit at that sort of range in my inty. (280's, frex, just MISS entirely). So no, I don't see anything but people whining because they can't instapop frigs now. Again. That's why i took 125mm rails as example ;p Anyway, you have to remember that missiles will do the same whatever direction youre going. I mean, turrets will hit or not (or very little) depending largely on your transversal, missiles just go by velocity, direction doesent matter to them. You can approach a missile ship head-on in an inty and it makes not a jot of difference. Hence, I'd argue light should do some damage to an inty. It doesent have to be much, say 10% at 3.5kms? 10% @ km/s? I dunno, some token damage that says "this is an anti-frigate weapon, and since the missile rework it actually does what its supposed to". The problem here being there's no module that will help a missile track better, what you see is what you get, and what you get right now is below turrets by a chunk. Maybe im wrong, but eh. This is mostly academic for me, i dont use missiles very often... still, i cant help but argue about it ;p Btw, light were never able to instapop interceptors. They couldnt even catch up to them, so whats the relevance of that comment? Lol. You never stacked missiles then right? Or used a web. There were ways, don't pretend there were not. 125's won't do me much damage at 15+ km, in my Claw, as a general rule. Long range inty fire is, and should, be low damage. The thing is, missile ships have a long range, and one you CANNOT "get under". I can get close to a turret ship with those long range guns, and it's stuffed. The missile ship will keep hitting me. The Crow is a excellent weapon..either with rockets against interceptors or against larger ships with lights. Its inability to use lights as an amazing weapon (because it can still be effective in some situations) against interceptors isn't something I'd cry about. (And yes, I can fly them) "Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted."
Trelennen	Posted - 2005.10.13 03:42:00 - [36] Originally by: Tigerclaw1987 if this works the way it says....... ok no flash calculations.. its 2 early.... on missiles vs other ships: sig radius(enemy) + exp veloc(u) = dmg???? ive been itching 2 find out wa u did to my fav weapon since i come back online lol.. sum tell me? More like dmg = min(1,sig radius/explosion radius) * exp(-[max(0, speed-explosion velocity)]¦/1500¦) (see here for complete thread) Originally by: Mangus Thermopyle When I started EVE, I thought EVE would require dedication and long term planning. I could never dream that the third ship I piloted would be the end of the line.
Megadon	Posted - 2005.10.13 03:56:00 - [37] Some great discussion. Does anyone else think that cruise missiles against frigs/smaller targets is also borked? or am I expecting too much?
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 04:17:00 - [38] Edited by: keepiru on 13/10/2005 04:18:19 Originally by: Maya Rkell Lol. You never stacked missiles then right? Or used a web. There were ways, don't pretend there were not. 125's won't do me much damage at 15+ km, in my Claw, as a general rule. Long range inty fire is, and should, be low damage. The thing is, missile ships have a long range, and one you CANNOT "get under". I can get close to a turret ship with those long range guns, and it's stuffed. The missile ship will keep hitting me. The Crow is a excellent weapon..either with rockets against interceptors or against larger ships with lights. Its inability to use lights as an amazing weapon (because it can still be effective in some situations) against interceptors isn't something I'd cry about. (And yes, I can fly them) As to having stacked missiles... cant say i've ever done that. But then i was never a fan of pre-cold war missiles, they were boring. ;p As to the rest. I see your points. Thinking about it more, and taking into consideration the damage curve... I think I have to take a better look at the figures :) (time passes :p) ...well.... remarkably similar to a 150mm railgun with lead ammo as far as dps goes. we're talking a few % difference. I guess considering that, it also performs very similarly to a 150mm rail versus a target @ lead optimal (regarding dps at varying target speeds). I retract all my arguments regarding light missiles :) ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
Aliksr	Posted - 2005.10.13 04:45:00 - [39] What we really need is someone to calculate the DPS of short range and long range cruiser guns and compare them to the DPS and range of Heavy and Assault launchers. I think those kind of numbers would do wonders to frame this debate and make the case for Heavy Rockets.
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 04:57:00 - [40] Originally by: Aliksr What we really need is someone to calculate the DPS of short range and long range cruiser guns and compare them to the DPS and range of Heavy and Assault launchers. I think those kind of numbers would do wonders to frame this debate and make the case for Heavy Rockets. Heavy Missiles = 250mm rails with lead as far as DPS goes, withing a few % difference. Which tells you all you need to know about how badly heavy rockets or something of the sort are needed, really. ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
DarK	Posted - 2005.10.13 05:32:00 - [41] Yep. I've made a topic about medium torps, and about 5 other people have too. I really wish it was asked in the dev chat/oveur chat, rather than about 5 of the same questions over and over again. Heavy missile DPS is fine for its range, if we had meidum sized torp + launcher it would be the cruise missile equivelant.
Tovarishch	Posted - 2005.10.13 05:42:00 - [42] Nice work, Keep. This thread puts into very clear relief a couple of the biggest problems with missiles.... let alone some ships... like the Cerberus.
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 05:50:00 - [43] aint worth the bytes sent back and forth if nothing changes... helping heavy missiles hp/m wont count for a damn if the weapon class is still missing a short-range candadate, wether we call them medium torps or heavy rockets or flying pancakes. here's to hoping they give it 5 minutes thinking time. o/ BTW: Heavy Rockets: 20km max range? less? more? what say thee? ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
DarK	Posted - 2005.10.13 06:10:00 - [44] http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=204477&page=1#30 One of the old threads regarding the medium torps. The range is a hard one to determine.
Aliksr	Posted - 2005.10.13 07:39:00 - [45] Edited by: Aliksr on 13/10/2005 07:42:27 I'm saying listing the dps for cruiser class weapons will do a little more to focus the debate. It's clear there's a lot of debate about how missile-firing cruisers have this terrific range but no tactical option to sacrifice that range (and, with higher fitting reqs, some tanking) for a bit more damage. Listing actual dps and range for comparative weapons should show that assaults are still a long range weapon, and that heavy missile dps is quite reasonable given their extreme range. On the range question i think 5km before skills, no more than 15km with max skills. Should be exempt from range bonuses on the cerberus. Should be at least 450dps with 4x bcs II on a cerb, suitably less on ships without the bonuses and lowslots like blackbird, stabber, caracal.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.10.13 07:47:00 - [46] Quote: On the range question i think 5km before skills, no more than 15km with max skills. Should be exempt from range bonuses on the cerberus. Should be at least 450dps with 4x bcs II on a cerb, suitably less on ships without the bonuses and lowslots like blackbird, stabber, caracal. 5 Hvy Launcher II and 4 BCU II and max skilled out Cerberus does a smidgen over 300 DPS with kinetic heavys.. there is no way to reach 450 DPS. ------ If Captain James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock embracing one another, in a bath tube, nude, in space, is wrong, I don't want to be right.
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 07:49:00 - [47] 250mm Railgun II with lead ~ 18dps with max skills, 35km + 15km falloff Heavy Launcher II ~ 20dps with max skills, 84km max range If we really must have all the decimal places i can run the maths again, but im going cross-eyed from lack of sleep here. Please remember that flight time has a considerable impact on dps at the sort of range outlined above, 6+ seconds with no damage @ 35k, 15 at max range. Thats half an eternity, and you actual dps over a typical engagement - taking the cerbie as an example and considering HAC pilots penchant for operating alone or in small groups - will be seriously affected, even presuming your target decides to stick around for some reason. I wouldnt ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 07:50:00 - [48] Originally by: Jim Raynor Quote: On the range question i think 5km before skills, no more than 15km with max skills. Should be exempt from range bonuses on the cerberus. Should be at least 450dps with 4x bcs II on a cerb, suitably less on ships without the bonuses and lowslots like blackbird, stabber, caracal. 5 Hvy Launcher II and 4 BCU II and max skilled out Cerberus does a smidgen over 300 DPS with kinetic heavys.. there is no way to reach 450 DPS. Talking about hypothetical heavy rockets there jim. ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
Aliksr	Posted - 2005.10.13 07:51:00 - [49] Edited by: Aliksr on 13/10/2005 07:51:05 Originally by: Jim Raynor 5 Hvy Launcher II and 4 BCU II and max skilled out Cerberus does a smidgen over 300 DPS with kinetic heavys.. there is no way to reach 450 DPS. Your calculations are what i based that number on Raynor, i'm talking about kind of damage cerberus pilots should get from a purported new reduced-range class of cruiser missiles.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.10.13 07:51:00 - [50] Edited by: Jim Raynor on 13/10/2005 07:52:40 Originally by: Aliksr Originally by: Jim Raynor 5 Hvy Launcher II and 4 BCU II and max skilled out Cerberus does a smidgen over 300 DPS with kinetic heavys.. there is no way to reach 450 DPS. That number is based on your calculations Raynor, i'm talking about kind of damage cerberus pilots should get from a purported new reduced-range class of cruiser missiles. o heavy rocket launcher and heavy rockets would be teh uber.. ~450dps would be nice yeah.. ------ If Captain James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock embracing one another, in a bath tube, nude, in space, is wrong, I don't want to be right.
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:10:00 - [51] Originally by: keepiru 250mm Railgun II with lead ~ 18dps with max skills, 35km + 15km falloff Heavy Launcher II ~ 20dps with max skills, 84km max range Some1 could do this for assault launcher also. I think it coul be the 'heavy'rocket launcher, just imptoving the ROF and let it fire lights and heavy rockets ? So we do not need a new launcher and standard launchers do not get any benefit from the heavy rockets dps wise (or only very little?)
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:12:00 - [52] Trouble with that is the little side effect of having a high(er) dps frigate-killing weapon. ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
keepiru	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:15:00 - [53] And just so you know: Assault Launcher II: 15.6dps ------------- WTB: a Faction Micro Smartbomb :P
Elfaen Ethenwe	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:39:00 - [54] The trouble with all missiles now is that get your speed to a value X and damage = 0 or near it .
von Torgo	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:47:00 - [55] Originally by: El*** Ethenwe* The trouble with all missiles now is that get your speed to a value X and damage = 0 or near it . The trouble with all turrets is that get your transversal velocity to X and damage = 0
DarK	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:54:00 - [56] Originally by: keepiru Trouble with that is the little side effect of having a high(er) dps frigate-killing weapon. Not really, when you consider that these things would have a crap explosion radius, velocity and normal velocity. Think heavy missiles but way way worse. Should be effective against cruisers and above.
DarK	Posted - 2005.10.13 08:58:00 - [57] A caracal would be a good bomber then, which would make up for it's paperarmour.
Travel Girl	Posted - 2005.10.13 10:50:00 - [58] Originally by: Maya Rkell The Crow is a excellent weapon..either with rockets against interceptors or against larger ships with lights. Its inability to use lights as an amazing weapon (because it can still be effective in some situations) against interceptors isn't something I'd cry about. (And yes, I can fly them) Maybe u should wander y u dont though. The problem is that gun-users can choose a tactic that offers them an edge in combat, missile users cant (not to that effect anyway). Current missile system is a joke - former missile system was a joke, think we need a new one - one not made up in a hurry this time hopefully. (Have nt seen ya in space, but saying I can fly them n talking bout claw with 280s sorta give out that u dont)
Travel Girl	Posted - 2005.10.13 10:53:00 - [59] Edited by: Travel Girl on 13/10/2005 10:54:40 Originally by: von Torgo Originally by: El*** Ethenwe* The trouble with all missiles now is that get your speed to a value X and damage = 0 or near it . The trouble with all turrets is that get your transversal velocity to X and damage = 0 but if guns are at optimal "conditions" they will do alot more dmg than missiles + no anti beam weapons in game + gun ammo takes up less space .... cough Amarr...
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.10.13 10:58:00 - [60] Originally by: Travel Girl Edited by: Travel Girl on 13/10/2005 10:54:40 Originally by: von Torgo Originally by: El*** Ethenwe* The trouble with all missiles now is that get your speed to a value X and damage = 0 or near it . The trouble with all turrets is that get your transversal velocity to X and damage = 0 but if guns are at optimal "conditions" they will do alot more dmg than missiles + no anti beam weapons in game + gun ammo takes up less space .... cough Amarr... I'm going to twist yer arguments just for fun. If the turret ship has transversal velocity Y but hasn't passed the missile threshhold... also if it passes the missile threshhold, then it's not likely to do damage at all (due to either range or tracking) + no working anti-missile weapon in game + no 100% working anti-MISSILE EWar in game + missiles don't use cap See? Arguments can easily be twisted. wheat barley kill anything? are you oats of your mind? I corn belive you just said that, rice I'm off to bed

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: 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.