|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
44
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 16:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea Would love if you expanded a bit.
Ok how about this. This trend of increasing reload time is a bad design philosophy to keep applying. At this rate you'll make 1400mm artillery take 10 minutes to reload because it can do a 13K volley. Because y'know burst damage or some crap like that.
It is bad to have to disengage just to reload your primary offensive weapon. rapid light missiles are not bomb launchers or asb's. You could just increase the cerberus damage more with rapid lights to that 409 dps so people have an even bigger reason to specialize beyond another 30K flight range. For rapid heavies you will need a t2 specilized boat like the golem maybe that can boost that damage up to where you are considering it ~900 dps (maybe higher to 1100 dps on golem and 450 dps on cerberus)
Leave the modules as generally good where you have them now...increase bonuses for specialization. Incentives are great. |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
46
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:Undecided on the weapon change, it's not a class of weapon I'd likely use much - more of a turret person. I like the idea in principle however. However one thing I think needs to happen if you have a 40 second reload.
The ability to cancel it, or pre select the ammo to load on the next reload. Sitting and waiting 40 seconds for it to reload the ammo you don't want is just gonna be massively annoying.
Its a bad idea to start this on weapons. Ohhh how about we do this to 220mm AC's! double dps...half ammo and 40 sec reload! Or Artillery! Or Blasters! Sure you'll do 1800 dps but you won't be able to sustain it enough to make a difference!
This is like taking viagra with the added side effect of it making you prematurely ejaculate. Sure its extra heavy and creamy but now you have to wait an entire day to do it again! |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
51
|
Posted - 2013.11.09 01:31:00 -
[3] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Octavian Madullier wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:Fires for 50s, reloads for 40.
I surely can't be the first person to think two weapon groups allowing for either constant, sustained damage yet with the option of massive spike application. LOL ... no you are not ... its the obvious way to use them ...and u have different missile types in each group thus avoided having only kinetic loaded when facing Caldari ... While there are a few situations that this is a good plan, this is also similar to "ungrouping" your artillery weapons. More often than not, you want to put as much damage on your target as quickly as possible. That's exactly what makes this an effective buff, at least for PvP.
So I take it you're the satan worshipper behind these shennanigans. Can you please stop attempting to fix something that isn't broken? Just go fix drone assignment or something geeze. If there was something *wrong* with RLML's I'd say so...but honestly they **** face as it is. For RHML's I can see them being an excellent weapon but all it really indicates is that torpedoes need a tweak to explosion velocity or radius so that they aren't so terribad at killing anything less than a structure or siege/triaged capital.
If you're for this you should also be for a 10 minute reload on all artillery. Way to make me want to "untrain" all of my caldari skills. Like I said this is like viagra that makes you **** faster and heavier but you have to wait another day to do it again because of brand new prostate mechanics! This makes things LESS fun. |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
51
|
Posted - 2013.11.09 01:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Colman Dietmar wrote:From what I've seen, rapid caracal is already pretty much impossible to deal with using T1 frigs AND can be a threat to cruiser-sized kiting ships. Why buff it more? If anything, I would like to see a nerf to rapid launchers, not a buff to their gankiness.
And yes, I did not miss the reload time, it's just that in 50 seconds you can kill some cruisers with that 400dps, not to speak of smaller targets. If the launcher did not have enough active time to kill a cruiser, then it would be better, although it would still make caracal pretty much immune to frigs.
This is a bad idea for all of the reasons you haven't mentioned. wagh my tristan can't tackle a cerb! jeeze look the reason this is bad is the... 40 SECOND RELOAD TIMER! Who the hell wants to wait 40 seconds to reload their primary offensive weapons system?!?!
Well I guess there's no idea like a bad idea. :(((((((( sad face |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
51
|
Posted - 2013.11.09 01:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
*summons CCP Fozzie to fix this* |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
111
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 18:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:If your main complaint is fire and forget than you should further read my post in the new rapid launcher thread that ccp nerzilla aka king of the un thought out ideas aka ccp rise started. I explain how the missile mechanics are flawed and unrealistic. I explain how missiles should function how fighter pilots use them. Meaning that players should have to maneuver there ships to give their missile the best flight path to their target. Someone who flies stupidy would see there missile overshoot or turn too hard and loose lock. Missile pilot would have to do something to inflict damage. Turrets users should be happy about this change as well.
Let me guess...you like the GURPS roleplaying system and Alternity. Your method is overly complicated and pointless. Good job at over-thinking it person-who-has-no-clue on what re-inventing an entire combat system would entail for no good reason.
I think you took a torpedo to the brain stem. |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
111
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 18:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:If we're going to start entertaining the prospect of transversal and angular velocity entering into the equation, then we need to revisit missile damage application in its entirety - as well as the possibility of critical hits. In this scenario, I think it's a case of "better the devil you know".
no one is talking about that. I think this is all in your head man. |

Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
111
|
Posted - 2014.03.10 18:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
Justin Cody wrote:Vincintius Agrippa wrote:If your main complaint is fire and forget than you should further read my post in the new rapid launcher thread that ccp nerzilla aka king of the un thought out ideas aka ccp rise started. I explain how the missile mechanics are flawed and unrealistic. I explain how missiles should function how fighter pilots use them. Meaning that players should have to maneuver there ships to give their missile the best flight path to their target. Someone who flies stupidy would see there missile overshoot or turn too hard and loose lock. Missile pilot would have to do something to inflict damage. Turrets users should be happy about this change as well. .
Furthermore there is no reason that 30-40,000 years in the future that pilots who are cyber-jacked into their ships should need to fire missiles in the same fashion that a 21st century fighter pilot does.
The size of our ships even at the smallest are like 20th century frigates and destroyers in scale. They should function with our sensor suite...being that if the target it locked our systems are tracking said target and relaying telemetry to the missile while in flight. LOS is'nt a problem in space by and large. As for but hey what about multiple targets...we have skills allowing us as pilots to manage more targets effectively. If I want I can split my launchers to 1 per target and that is ok.
EVE is a sci-fi sim so please don't go projecting modern flight sim mechanics onto it. Maybe for EVE Valkyrie you have a point. But that is another game altogether. |
|
|
|