| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Sarmaul
   |
Posted - 2006.05.16 09:34:00 -
[1]
come on people, don't flame him for asking for assault missiles when tomb himself said they would eventually be coming into the game 
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 10:09:00 -
[2]
tux, are we still getting the 20% damage mod boost to top-tier artillery we were promised by hammerhead last year too?
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 10:19:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Ras Blumin
Originally by: Sarmaul
tux, are we still getting the 20% damage mod boost to top-tier artillery we were promised by hammerhead last year too?
Sounds like the boost they got when they majorly sucked. Linky?
shhhh you'll ruin the plan!!!
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 10:38:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Originally by: Fergus Runkle
I'm looking forward to the Assault Rockets (or whatever they will be called), I'm expecting an extra skill to train (isn't there always). Just one thing concerns me ..
For PvE the assault launcher in its current form is a very effective anti frig (even 'ceptor with good skills) weapon. I hope we don't lose the ability to fit light missiles in the assault launcher.
you can always fit a standard launcher ...
assault launchers fire faster and get bonuses from cruiser-sized ships.
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 21:40:00 -
[5]
Originally by: j0sephine
Edited by: j0sephine on 18/05/2006 21:39:02
"This thred seems to be running on the assumption that Assault Missiles are going to be near as long ranged as Heavy Missiles and more damaging to boot."
I think this comes from presumption that: short range high damage missile + Cerberus double range bonus = range of heavy missile on regular (non-Caldari) ship (and still high damage)
Which i suppose is reasonable way to spot potential problem o.O;
obvious answer is to nerf the cerb into uselessness then
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 14:26:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Tuxford
Changing the current assault missile launcher to fire the new assault missiles is something I would like to do. I would also like to travel back in time and do it at release but I don't really see it happening. I think its far more likely that a new type will be made as for it being more in line with siege launcher or rockets then I'm thinking it should use slightly less grid than heavy launcher but in all honesty, I haven't started working on this haven't actually scheduled myself some time to do it but its something I really want to do because I don't think missile cruiser are complete without this.
please don't increase the fitting reqs of assault launchers 
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 18:49:00 -
[7]
jo, the reason the muninn didn't get an extra damage bonus is because it got an extra high + turret slot instead ;)
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 18:59:00 -
[8]
teh wizzels, when j0 mentioned the double damage bonus, I think he was on about how most hacs have a damage bonus for the cruiser skill and another for the hac skill.
anywya like I said, the muninn gets an extra turret and high instead which is just as, if not better than a hac-skill related damage bonus
|
| |
|