| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nyphur
   |
Posted - 2005.11.05 07:54:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Nyphur on 05/11/2005 07:54:25
EDIT: whoops, hit enter. I'm tpying it up now.
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 12:05:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Marcus Aurelius on 05/11/2005 12:09:47
High level complexes arent soloable with af's.
Af tanks however work great, but need BS assistance do deal the neded damage and to be repaired.
With the new effects in, it might just not be possible to kill all frigates in a level fast enough to save your af from being killed...because the frigs do web you.
And will not the new ecm effects do exactly that ? make it harder to kill the npc's fast enough ? I know that alt east jamming, dampening and tracking disrupting will. And nossing might just screw with the remote repairing enough to make it somewhat harder too.
And anyway, the high level complexes should be made harder by players. Remove the need for any keys for them and that is exactly what you accomplish.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 12:44:00 -
[3]
Thing is, when AFs start actually taking any significant amount of damage, they fold up. It's a very fine balance between being able to tank everything and being able to tank nothing with less than 1k hitpoints
|
Ante
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 14:16:00 -
[4]
I'd be interested to see whether an AF with two gankageddons with max armour rep drones repping the AF will be the new plex combo.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 15:52:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Nyphur on 05/11/2005 15:52:48
I never said soloable. It's impossible to solo high level complexes without backup but I'm saying my deimos, which has just as pathetic damage due to being a specialised tank, is worse than a tiny assault frigate as a tank. I KNOW that wasn't intended.
You have to keep in mind that the nossing, ECM, tracking disruption etc are all going to be done on the assault frigate. ECM and tracking disruption make no difference to it but nossing will kill its ability ro run the afterburner. That won't solve the problem in the slightest.
|
Rendill
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 18:04:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Nyphur
Edited by: Nyphur on 05/11/2005 15:52:48
I never said soloable. It's impossible to solo high level complexes without backup but I'm saying my deimos, which has just as pathetic damage due to being a specialised tank, is worse than a tiny assault frigate as a tank. I KNOW that wasn't intended.
You have to keep in mind that the nossing, ECM, tracking disruption etc are all going to be done on the assault frigate. ECM and tracking disruption make no difference to it but nossing will kill its ability ro run the afterburner. That won't solve the problem in the slightest.
And how do you know it wasn't intended? Best thing about EVE is that biggest isn't always best.
CEO |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.11.05 18:21:00 -
[7]
"And how do you know it wasn't intended?"
Because the high-level complexes were designed pre-missile changes, when highly damaging missiles would absolutely murder anything the size of AF...
|
0CISCOKID0
|
Posted - 2005.11.06 11:24:00 -
[8]
The concept of missle damage as envisioned by CCP is based on entirely on fiction. Military explosives in RL have detonation speeds well in excess of 2,000 M/S, not the ridiculous CCP value of 700 M/S, regardless of warhead size. Their solution was quick and easy but created other problems, such as that above.
A more effective solution would be for CCP to rework damage vs warhead size and missle speed. Heavier missles/torps/CM's carry a larger warhead (which does more damage) but moves more slowly than a lighter missle. And, yes, BS's would have a heck of a time trying to hit smaller ships with big missles, but that's what secondary armament is for - a small turret or launcher for the ankle-biters.
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.11.07 05:55:00 -
[9]
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
The explosion speed factors very little into the damage equation with anything but intys.
The velocity falloff (point as which you hit ~50% damage, or 1/2 of ~0% damage) for all missiles is 1500m/s.
AFs are protected from from Guristas BS purely by their resists and their size. Webbed, the rails begin to hit them. I can tank three 1.5m BS in an enyo with normal T2 gear, but double-webbed, I can't tank a 500k BS.
T2 Destroyers: a proposal
Requested Changes: An alphabet's worth |
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.11.07 11:11:00 -
[10]
This is true. The other day I tanked two 750ks and a 5m without going below 98% armour. (Couldn't beat the tank on the 5m but that's another story). But that was only because I got the inties quickly. The last time before that I met a Dread BS I got webbed by five inties and died in about twenty seconds.
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.11.07 11:42:00 -
[11]
We don't need more webbing NPC's, we need missiles fixed so they actually hurt small ships. I can tank so many Heavy/Cruise batteries it isn't funny, but one gun sentry at over 60km really hurts.
And I heard the noise of thunder. And I looked and behold: a pale horse. And his name, that sat on him, was Death. And Hell followed with him |
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.11.09 18:43:00 -
[12]
It wasn't intended because it breaks the risk versus reward scheme that CCP has always maintained. If it costs less to risk an assault frigate to tank a complex than it does to risk a ship that's designed for tanking, it makes it more viable. Currently, nothing can touch an assault frigate and it needs very little support. Should one assault frigate and one battleship be able to so seriously complete a 10/10 complex? That's ridiculous.
It was a huge achievement when someone completed the angels 10/10 using a clever smartbomb and web-support tank of apocs. THAT is tactical and clever. flying a tiny ship in circles around a container while a battleship picks everything off is neither.
All it takes is two accounts now and you can solo any NPC combat eve has to offer. This is because of the lack of webbing by NPCs on faster targets and I think making the web-chance based on target speed and having NPCs switch targets properly and not based on who is closer or who is at their optimal (both player-controlled circumstances) would go a long way to restoring normality to this aspect of Eve since the missile patch.
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.11.10 04:50:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Nyphur
It wasn't intended because it breaks the risk versus reward scheme that CCP has always maintained. If it costs less to risk an assault frigate to tank a complex than it does to risk a ship that's designed for tanking, it makes it more viable. Currently, nothing can touch an assault frigate and it needs very little support.
Eh wtf?
Any decent AF is going to be running close to 30mil when equipped with gear. Also sentries and long range fire still murder them. You only become immune once you manage to get a close orbit around the guy shooting you. The only problem is missiles doing bugger all damage.
Stick a couple of sentry III's at 100km and AF's can't do jack.
And I heard the noise of thunder. And I looked and behold: a pale horse. And his name, that sat on him, was Death. And Hell followed with him |
Lygos
|
Posted - 2005.11.12 19:10:00 -
[14]
AFs have a place in mixed ops. Not a huge place, but a definite one is reserved to them. I think it is good that they are on the field. Most of the BS-based fleet directors just use us like some kind of advanced drone anyhow.
Complexes are also about range, and BS aren't going to lose that any time soon.
Relax.
"Everything I love is combustible." |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |