EVE Search - Anti-Missile System (I'm caldari too. o.O)

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Anti-Missile System (I'm caldari too. o.O)

» 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)
Rein Fallow	Posted - 2006.01.21 21:20:00 - [1] Defender missiles seem to not be liked, embraced, or even cared about by the general population. So, I thought long and hard about what could be done, that wouldn't totally screw up missiles, but might add a bit more balance. Voila. I'll call it AMS. Somewhere or another, I've read/seen/or heard about real lifee, water-faring battleships that have a turret that's controlled by a computer that does nothing else then shoot down incoming missiles. It doesn't have a 100% hit rate, and it can't take on that many. But it's worth it, it seems. Now, how to go and implement this. You could either allow incoming missiles to be locked onto and fired upon, but atleast light missiles only have a 5 second flight time. Not a very long time to lock, and fire. Especially if you have to unlock other targets, ETC. In fact, I think it's impossible. But it might work for other missiles. Not quite sure about their flight time. Or, have a turret that only fires on incoming missiles, needs to be restocked with ammo, and takes up a Hi or Med slot, along with a Turret Hardpoint. Maybe a limit or one or two per ship. Or alot of cap/power/CPU usage. You choose. Have it always on, instead of activating it. So maybe scratch the high Cap use. Give missiles HP, and maybe different sets of AMS that are for taking out Light Missiles primarily, or Heavy Missiles, but aren't much use for others. ETC. Just an idea. ;P
Fooball	Posted - 2006.01.21 23:55:00 - [2] The largest fault with the Defenders is that afaik they do not protect any gangmates. If they did (and did the work properly), people would get dedicated anti-missile ships into their gangs. Atm defenders are imho pointless for most of the situations. Yeah, something should be done, I agree.
Azzmet Shrapt	Posted - 2006.01.22 00:22:00 - [3] Yes, but if you add ships that can be dedicated to anti-missile work you have to add something equally beneficial for anti-projectile and anti-hybrid and anti-laser. Otherwise you're nerfing missiles. I'm a major missile user and if something like this came out it would be a major downfall to my capabilities. EVE Applets - Every little feature you've ever wanted..
Amaii Templ	Posted - 2006.01.22 04:02:00 - [4] It really does need to be in there. I can't count how many times I could've helped my corpmates out by being a dedicated anti-missile ship, but there's no option to do so. So yes, AMS is definately needed. Above all it requires team play, and that's what EvE is all about. Just putting one AMS on a battleship won't do that much good; you'll shoot down what, maybe 25% of the missiles coming in? Get a frigate with three of them, and that jumps up to about 70% or so. Big difference. Of course, it should also be a counterable tactic. If you use EW on the AMS ship, suddenly his hit rate drops drastically. Also, there could be special "Slow" missiles that don't go fast enough to trigger the AMS, but can be targeted manually, if someone is on his ball. (Caveat: Good luck targeting, tracking, and killing all eight of these babies. ^_^) Also, no matter what, no single AMS module should be able to shoot down more than one missile every three seconds. This way you can still volley-fire-through. My Sunday Indy
Zhan Dao	Posted - 2006.01.22 04:49:00 - [5] I'd be happy if Defender missiles would automatically trigger instead of having to manually press them.
Brogan Dagarkin	Posted - 2006.01.22 05:21:00 - [6] Why is it that everyone wants changes to defender missiles or new anti-missile systems? Are missiles overpowered somehow? If so, I seem to have missed it along with everyone else. If missiles are so overpowered that CCP need to introduce more anti-missile technology why isn't everyone using them? How about we nerf lasers as well since they don't require physical ammo? And then why not nerf projectiles since they don't use much cap? When will this end? I think that the current balance is pretty much right since everyone isn't using just one type of weapon. BTW, i rarely use missiles, preferring railguns myself.
Encad Briht	Posted - 2006.01.22 10:35:00 - [7] i thought of point defense laser with a activation time of about 30 sec, and a skill for it that shortens the activation time and the number of missiles it defends against at the same time. would be quite nice if you had a weapon to defend against missiles that are locked on one of your gangmates. The Defender are Crap atm, they dont hit anything. --------------------------------------- Member of UU : Diplomatic Corps
Macro Eater	Posted - 2006.01.22 11:17:00 - [8] Edited by: Macro Eater on 22/01/2006 11:18:43 Edited by: Macro Eater on 22/01/2006 11:17:40 Originally by: Azzmet Shrapt Yes, but if you add ships that can be dedicated to anti-missile work you have to add something equally beneficial for anti-projectile and anti-hybrid and anti-laser. Otherwise you're nerfing missiles. turrets are already affected by sensor damp, tracking disruptor, range, speed, cap use and so on... missiles ever hit, doesn't mattere range or all other s**t that turrets users must face! and don't forget jamming ships: you have fof missiles, turrets cannot use... "fof charges"....
RedClaws	Posted - 2006.01.22 11:33:00 - [9] Originally by: Macro Eater Edited by: Macro Eater on 22/01/2006 11:18:43 Edited by: Macro Eater on 22/01/2006 11:17:40 Originally by: Azzmet Shrapt Yes, but if you add ships that can be dedicated to anti-missile work you have to add something equally beneficial for anti-projectile and anti-hybrid and anti-laser. Otherwise you're nerfing missiles. turrets are already affected by sensor damp, tracking disruptor, range, speed, cap use and so on... missiles ever hit, doesn't mattere range or all other s**t that turrets users must face! and don't forget jamming ships: you have fof missiles, turrets cannot use... "fof charges".... Quoted for the omg truth!! My nos and tracking disruptor setups are useless vs missles!
Britannica	Posted - 2006.01.22 11:49:00 - [10] all guns have tracking, even anti missile ones. missile boat gets within 5km you'll more likely need an extra anti ship gun to beat the tank than an anti missile gun that cant hit the missiles in time defenders dont have tracking they are a garanteed way of stopping missiles fired at you, giving them the ability to hit any missile fired at gang-mates might be alot more helpful than reducing the damage output of a gunship to a point that at close range it cant win
Fooball	Posted - 2006.01.22 12:30:00 - [11] Originally by: Brogan Dagarkin Why is it that everyone wants changes to defender missiles or new anti-missile systems? Are missiles overpowered somehow? If so, I seem to have missed it along with everyone else. If missiles are so overpowered that CCP need to introduce more anti-missile technology why isn't everyone using them? Just to bring new elements into the game. Finding the balance is an other issue imho. I use missiles myself. Only missiles, all the way. I don't want to "nerf" them. But I am wondering.. We have had anti-missile weaponry on the previous century already and these guys at space and all can't do any of that crap?
BrerLapin	Posted - 2006.01.22 13:29:00 - [12] Eyup Fooball. Actually modern day Anti-missile systems are incredibly ineffiecent & consumptive of resources so I dont think a simple hi slots a big enough deal. Possibley a dedicated anti missile ships yes. But not a simple module. AMS's systems like the Vulcan fire hundreds of thousands of rounds at almost point blank range (considering). Defenders work fine for me & I fail to see why a system would be designed to protect other ships in the first place. If you wanted to go that way, your talking about a custom designed frigate with massive sensor strength & a single mount for the Strip miner equivalent of a Hybrid/projectile multiple barrel mount. A more in-game & easier to actually code would be interceptor drones that expend themselves on the warheads. Originally by: Market Scanner Maybe CCP needs to remove all 3D models of NPC's and replace them with white 2D squares with the NPC's name typed in the square. I miss pong.
Fooball	Posted - 2006.01.22 15:47:00 - [13] Originally by: BrerLapin Defenders work fine for me & I fail to see why a system would be designed to protect other ships in the first place. If you wanted to go that way, your talking about a custom designed frigate with massive sensor strength & a single mount for the Strip miner equivalent of a Hybrid/projectile multiple barrel mount. I'd buy that, I guess
rewozz2	Posted - 2006.01.22 16:12:00 - [14] They call that a smartbomb.
Macro Eater	Posted - 2006.01.22 17:01:00 - [15] Originally by: rewozz2 They call that a smartbomb. ...never tried to use one to stop incoming missiles uh?!
Tresh Keen	Posted - 2006.01.22 17:16:00 - [16] Originally by: rewozz2 They call that a smartbomb. Yes, but they dont want to use Smartbombs they want a "i kill all missiles in an range of 100km" Button. Cheers, Tresh
Macro Eater	Posted - 2006.01.22 17:43:00 - [17] Originally by: Tresh Keen Originally by: rewozz2 They call that a smartbomb. Yes, but they dont want to use Smartbombs they want a "i kill all missiles in an range of 100km" Button. man... don't be stupid many smartbombs are required, and they are not so usefull anyway and think about this: missile boat -high slots: missiles; -med slots: anti-turrets fit; turret ship -high slots: anti-missiles fit; -med slots: ... does it make sense to fit anti-missiles items and then i can't fight you?? we are just discussing trying to find a FUNCTIONAL solution you can't say missiles doesn't have all those benefits
Siegfried vonRichthofen	Posted - 2006.01.22 19:19:00 - [18] no matter if ams is cool or not: You cant build an ams that prevents friends from being hit, because that would mean, that the ams would bring down ALL missiles even those your friends fire at the enemy. For the point of an ams generally: I use missiles from the start (and i guess till the end of all days :) ) The npcs seem to have no problem taking down excactly the 1 missile from my shoot that is purposed to do the most dmg from type (strange i wonder how they time that :) ) The problem is not that we need a new ams system. The excisting modul should be made a bit easier to use (like ACTVATE: I Fire down 1 missile from someone who has targeted me, when it comes into range, i repeat that every xx seconds) That would do the job perfetly.... Having a modul that would render missiles totally useless would wipe out the whole caldari race :) and isnt needed... by no one.. never... never ever ever NEVER!
Macro Eater	Posted - 2006.01.22 19:28:00 - [19] We don't want something that make caldari ships useless. We want something to defend ourself vs missiles, 'cause vs turrets you can...
Siegfried vonRichthofen	Posted - 2006.01.22 19:40:00 - [20] but as said above.. are missiles too powerful?
Macro Eater	Posted - 2006.01.22 23:12:00 - [21] imho... yes
Takran	Posted - 2006.01.23 00:46:00 - [22] I'd say they are too powerful, yes. I mainly fly frigates at the moment - tried cruisers and didn't much like them. The whole point of frigates is that they don't hit hard, but they are hard to hit. By being generally zoomy I can generally survive against relatively hefty guns. But as soon as missiles come, I'm frantically trying to warp out. They're an instant death sentence. If you're flying a battleship with 8 high-slots, which can just be left armour tanking and blasting while you keep an eye out for missiles, then yes, defender systems are probably pretty good. But if you can only support a couple of weapons at the best of times, and are fast enough that flying manually and outmanouvering your foe is key to winning, you don't have the space to spare for defenders or the time to use them.
Marcus Right	Posted - 2006.01.23 08:41:00 - [23] AMS isn't a new idea... I suggested it a while back and that's after snagging the idea from one of my favorite board games involving giant robots that shoot each other up. I whole heartidly support the idea of AMS. Though I believe they should take up turret slots, come in verities exactly the same as we have turrets now. Be unable to attack ships (because they have built in AI that search for incoming missiles that are programmed to not be distracted by ships). They would use massive ammounts of ammo and/or energy to knock down a single missle. Amazingly Enough I can't seem to find my past posts, which leads me to believe it was taken down? At any rate it went something like this: 1. They'd take up a turret slot each. 2. They used massive ammounts of ammo and/or energy. 3. They needed lots of CPU to track the fast incoming targets. 4. They would only work in defending the ship they were attached to. (Defender Missiles should shoot down any missile no mater who it's going after.) 5. They could never, never, never, ever target a ship. 6. Each AMS auto-fired when it saw an incoming missle provided it had the ammo/energy to do so. (Which could be a real pain in it's own right.) 7. They would of coarse need a special skill to use. As a side note, I feel that a defender missle should be able to (attempt) to knock down any missle in flight even if it's going for a ship other then your own. - Right - www.eve-search.com
Fridge oblivion	Posted - 2006.01.23 09:56:00 - [24] Missiles are too good compared to guns, I would like to see missiles that can be jammed somehow so some would miss or at least you wouldn't get the full damage. Such a jamming device could work better against FOF missiles then against normal ones. But I would already be happy to see fof defenders, the manual triggering or a smartbomb are completly ineffective considering the lag. And again, yes missiles are too powerfull. I haven't maxed them out yet but with a kessy without ballistic control systems I can rat in 0.2. This is not normal as well as Kessy > Crow is not thw way it should be. If I use missiles, all a web is good for is keep the rats at bay but I rather fit some EW instead... I wonder where the negative side of missiles lie which one could "accentuate" since defenders and smartbombs only have limited succes. And you should be able to target a ship with defender missiles, so that they home on the missiles your target fires. This would be an easy way to allow you to protect gangmembers. When I was young I wanted to be me, my childhood dream came true
Britannica	Posted - 2006.01.23 13:17:00 - [25] most I know would use one of the following for PvP provided they could replace it -ferox with rails -omen -thorax -prophecy -brutix -mauler -moa -eagle -zealot -deimos -blackbird -scorp -dominix -apoc -geddon guns or EW, few missiles. those people have been in game for at least 8 months
Amaii Templ	Posted - 2006.01.23 14:40:00 - [26] Missiles are, at the moment, pretty much an "I win" button. I'm Gallente, I fly Gallente ships. The only ship I fly at the moment is my Tristan, because it has launcher hardpoints. Forget drones, they don't do enough damage to help. My railguns are my secondary weapons. I fire missiles, and rat frigates start dieing. Even rat cruisers, if I care to fly around them long and fast enough and hammer them with an obscene amount of ammunition. I'm in no way set up for doing this, I think I have what, a skill of 2 in standard missile operation? Missiles always hit, and do incredible damage. If you have a backup weapon that can just ablate the ship's tank, you then wait for the next round of missiles. But then, a lot of rats I fight, even in the missions, die in two hits from my missiles. There needs to be some kind of AMS in game. Please, don't just make it a turret hardpoint alternative to launchers. We really need something with which you can defend your corpmates. This would give rise to cooperative play like never before; an escort frigate who's job it is to keep the heat off the battleships, and the battleships whose job it is to turn the heat up on the other guys. My Sunday Indy
BrerLapin	Posted - 2006.01.23 15:02:00 - [27] Its called ECM. Missiles are overpowered compared to what, do you have any DPS to cost data for this rather specious reasoning ? Originally by: Market Scanner Maybe CCP needs to remove all 3D models of NPC's and replace them with white 2D squares with the NPC's name typed in the square. I miss pong.
Mistress Red	Posted - 2006.01.24 03:54:00 - [28] I think this is a good idea as an alternative to defenders and was just about to start a thread about it until I found this one - anyway, here was my idea, which seems to be along the same lines as quite a few in this topic but could probably do with a bit of tweaking: Point defense system A module which takes a high slot so some firepower would have to be sacrificed - used in place of defenders for taking out incoming missiles as an anti-missile measure on those ships that don't have a launcher slot - it could maybe be slightly more effective than defenders (higher rof than an assault launcher and instantaneous destruction of the incoming missile as opposed to the defender's 'seek' time for example) seeing as it won't have the double advantage of a launcher that can also be equipped with regular missiles. Typically point defense is short range with extremely high tracking, so if the point defense were to have an area effect (such as taking out every missile within range instead of just those within range of the ship with the module fitted) it would be quite small, so it would have to stay close to any ships it was defending, if that were the intention. Also, a possible drawback could be that they can't discern if any missile within range were friend or enemy, so gang members launching missiles nearby would have to take care (although with careful timing, they could launch just after the point defense activates). Another possibility is there could also be different type for different missiles - one that has the same rof as each launcher type but also hits with enough damage to take out the appropriate size of missile - eg: one that has the same rof as an assault launcher and has a high probability of taking out any rocket and/or standard missile within range, but doesn't pack enough punch to take out heavies or anything above and won't reactivate soon enough once they're in range (although there could be a small probability that it does, along the same lines of the 'wrecking' shots of other turrets) - likewise there could be one that is effective against torps but has such a low rof that most missiles fired from smaller launchers will get through. This wouldn't make missile ships useless because you would effectively only be offsetting the damage output of one high slot while at the same time reducing your own damage output taking up one high slot or your own (and even then you'd need to know what type of launchers they were using beforehand).
Macro Eater	Posted - 2006.01.24 12:43:00 - [29] Edited by: Macro Eater on 24/01/2006 12:43:18 Originally by: BrerLapin Its called ECM. It's called FOF MISSILES! edit: spelling
BrerLapin	Posted - 2006.01.24 13:19:00 - [30] if your endangered by FOFs your ship is dead meat anyway. Originally by: Market Scanner Maybe CCP needs to remove all 3D models of NPC's and replace them with white 2D squares with the NPC's name typed in the square. I miss pong.

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.