EVE Search - Just curious, are we still getting Assault Missiles?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Just curious, are we still getting Assault Missiles?

» 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 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Mudkest	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:20:00 - [31] ooh, that'll be fun on my bellicose :o - It is much more efficient to talk to yourself in person than via the chat system. Now imagine the unimaginable
Kamikaaazi	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:24:00 - [32] Edited by: Kamikaaazi on 16/05/2006 10:24:21 Gronsak you are a idiot. Go back to hunt NPC-s. In pvp cerberus at 150km is as harmless as an ibis. In close range it gets pwned by other damage dealing hac-s easily.
Fergus Runkle	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:34:00 - [33] 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.
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:36:00 - [34] 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 ... ------------------------------ if you want peace, prepare for war ... ------------------------------ Removed due to offensive content - Laqum I realy liked my signature. Oh well
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:38:00 - [35] 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.
Retrax	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:39:00 - [36] Hmmmm.... Do we get new large capacity, high ROF, light missile bays, to replace current assault launchers? Will there be new large capacity, high ROF, heavy missile bays for battleships? Will the new 'Assault Missiles' be dependent on the light or heavy missile skills? Honestly if it were up to me, I'd say no to the above, but then what? That's quite a riddle. "Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing." - Dr. Wernher von Braun
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:39:00 - [37] You can all scream about how pointless it is that a cerbie can get 150km range, but its a pretty bloody usefull ability if you don't land smack on top of your target, especially as its DPS is exactly the same along the whole of that range. Lets bear in mind that if you compare all the most damaging HACs their damage reduces pretty damn fast over optimal. Even at 25km they do a mass amount less damage than a cerbie. I am also of the belief that short range, high damage cruiser size missiles will bork the way close range combat works, because if you all get your way, you can match DPS but don't have to worry about falloff or tracking messing up that damage. In fact its exactly the same problem we have with the raven at the moment and IIRC quite a few people aren't happy with that either. <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head
madaluap	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:45:00 - [38] Make these launchers good, but dont let em make other shortrange weapons crap. caracal with 5 of these should never outdamage a omen or other gank ships. _________________________________________________ OW YEH BABEH, I GOT THE GLITTERS I GOT EM
Kookman	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:45:00 - [39] /emote hands Jim Whinor his mini-raven. There you go son, now go back to your playground.
Shimpu	Posted - 2006.05.16 10:52:00 - [40] Originally by: Meridius Cerberus needs a boost? Doesn't stand up to pulse lasers or autocannons? Oh no you're right, it has 10-20x the range and does slightly less damage. Buhu? Nerf heavies then you can have your assault missiles, right now there is absolutely no need for the Cerb (or Caracal for that matter) to do anymore damage. Quite sad to see you post this actually. All this fubar about 20x the range... Try to scramble from that range... Try to bring your Cerberus into a fleet fight... Yes, for PvE what you say is true, but for PvP the cerberus isn't that uber. I would love to see some cruiser sized rocket launcher to deal heavy damage at short(10-15km) range. P.S.: Anyone noticed that there are near to none Cerberuses used in PvP compared to other hacs?
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:03:00 - [41] i can see it now 500DPS at 50km -------------------Sig----------------------- welcome to eve, a game for the unemployed, the t2 bpo winners, GTC sellers, macro miners and agent *****s
Serj Darek	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:05:00 - [42] I think they need to introduce some sort of missile destabilizer that you can aim at your enemy to make the missiles less reliable. since turret destablization is catastrophic if your using guns, and defender missiles are more of a joke. Fix the Typhoon description! 3 years in the making!
Kookman	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:10:00 - [43] Originally by: Gronsak i can see it now 500DPS at 50km You forgot to say "With full tank too".
Kookman	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:10:00 - [44] Quote: P.S.: Anyone noticed that there are near to none Cerberuses used in PvP compared to other hacs? Flawless statistical research.
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:16:00 - [45] Originally by: Gronsak i can see it now 500DPS at 50km read please ... nobody here got over 15km range for those ... ------------------------------ if you want peace, prepare for war ... ------------------------------ Removed due to offensive content - Laqum I realy liked my signature. Oh well
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:17:00 - [46] Originally by: Kookman Originally by: Gronsak i can see it now 500DPS at 50km You forgot to say "With full tank too". Also forgot to say that your inside Tux's head on what his prototype looked like AND that you have the magic 50km warp scrambler. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Kamikaaazi	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:20:00 - [47] i think EM missiles should jamm and scramble ships for ~10 sec when they hit.
Kery Nysell	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:23:00 - [48] Originally by: Kaylana Syi Originally by: Kookman Originally by: Gronsak i can see it now 500DPS at 50km You forgot to say "With full tank too". Also forgot to say that your inside Tux's head on what his prototype looked like AND that you have the magic 50km warp scrambler. He did not forget. He's Gronsak. Researching, reading or even making sense is below him. Like, I'm sure he saw the other posts with ranges of 10 to 15 kms, but that didn't stop him from whining about "500 DPS at 50 kms" ... And that is still outside scrambler range BTW, I hate PvP but even I know that at that range, nothing stops the target from warping ... and 500 DPS on empty space is pretty pointless.
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:25:00 - [49] God kills a kitten everytime you say that any range beyond 20km is pointless in PvP. And he kills a puppy for everytime someone says 10-15km is short range in the context of a cruiser. Blasters and AC's have an optimal of around 1 or 2km... Pulses get 6km. And you want to do the same kind of damage from 15km away ? Without having to worry about tracking or really getting hit at all? WHAT ?!? BALANCE PEOPLE BALANCE. Considering that there a number of caracal set-ups that can get in a stand up fight with any of the ganka cruisers and give a very good account of themselves with the current selection of missiles, do we really think that releasing a more damaging version of them that still outranges all the other close range guns is the best option ? <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head
xPreatorianx	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:34:00 - [50] Im all for it just make it a range shorter then 30 km say 20-10 km.But we all know gronsak wont be happy till the only things caldari can spam are harmless snow balls.
LWMaverick	Posted - 2006.05.16 11:36:00 - [51] Originally by: Valea Silpha God kills a kitten everytime you say that any range beyond 20km is pointless in PvP. And he kills a puppy for everytime someone says 10-15km is short range in the context of a cruiser. Blasters and AC's have an optimal of around 1 or 2km... Pulses get 6km. And you want to do the same kind of damage from 15km away ? Without having to worry about tracking or really getting hit at all? WHAT ?!? BALANCE PEOPLE BALANCE. Considering that there a number of caracal set-ups that can get in a stand up fight with any of the ganka cruisers and give a very good account of themselves with the current selection of missiles, do we really think that releasing a more damaging version of them that still outranges all the other close range guns is the best option ? Teh Sky is teh falling!!!111 Maybe tux should give them really high fitting requirements, so that you wont be ABLE to fit a full tank eh? And make sure that you have to fill in a couple of PDU/PDS's to even fit them . AND last, but not least important, make sure the missiles dont go further than 15k or so. /Mav Spirits in the night! ALLLLL NIGHT!!!
Ernest Graefenberg	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:06:00 - [52] Originally by: Valea Silpha Blasters and AC's have an optimal of around 1 or 2km... Pulses get 6km. And you want to do the same kind of damage from 15km away ? Without having to worry about tracking or really getting hit at all? WHAT ?!? BALANCE PEOPLE BALANCE. While I agree on the main point that unconditional hits in the sub30k range are a huge bonus that the Cerberus enjoys, you're totally off-base with your optimals (or in the case of autocannons, effective range. Jesus, who quotes optimal for ACs). Just off the top of my head : Heavy Pulse II with Scorch : 22.5km Heavy Neutron II with Null : 6450m (+5k falloff) / 8k effective 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II : 17k Optimal+falloff before ship bonuses / ~9k effective range (ie outside webrange for ships with bonuses)
Grim Vandal	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:11:00 - [53] Originally by: Meridius Cerberus needs a boost? Doesn't stand up to pulse lasers or autocannons? Oh no you're right, it has 10-20x the range and does slightly less damage. Buhu? Nerf heavies then you can have your assault missiles, right now there is absolutely no need for the Cerb (or Caracal for that matter) to do anymore damage. Quite sad to see you post this actually. so true and I fly caldari exclusivly since beta ... the dps of missiles might not hold up to guns but besides that there is no ***** other defense against missiles but to tank ... this *** fact makes them overpowered! understood? no you havent jim otherwise you wouldnt have posted that crap ... sure I'm a**got in your eyes now but belive me I share the same oppinion about you ever tried to "dodge tank" a missile, especially a heavy missile? that's where they shine, and ubber shine they do. it makes any cruiser setup without a tank absolutley worthless against a cerb (caracal) ... it's all too easy and I'm utterly bored of it @ tux it's fine assault missiles get implemented but god damn it the missile formula sucks major ass , I really hope you are gonna revamp the missile system again Greetings Grim
Hugh Ruka	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:14:00 - [54] Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg Originally by: Valea Silpha Blasters and AC's have an optimal of around 1 or 2km... Pulses get 6km. And you want to do the same kind of damage from 15km away ? Without having to worry about tracking or really getting hit at all? WHAT ?!? BALANCE PEOPLE BALANCE. While I agree on the main point that unconditional hits in the sub30k range are a huge bonus that the Cerberus enjoys, you're totally off-base with your optimals (or in the case of autocannons, effective range. Jesus, who quotes optimal for ACs). Just off the top of my head : Heavy Pulse II with Scorch : 22.5km Heavy Neutron II with Null : 6450m (+5k falloff) / 8k effective 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II : 17k Optimal+falloff before ship bonuses / ~9k effective range (ie outside webrange for ships with bonuses) moreover, there was nowhere the proposal to deal 600 or so DPS at those ranges I think ... cruisers can very well keep their range (in contrary to bs) so it is not that bad to involve some of piloting skill in the new missiles ... ------------------------------ if you want peace, prepare for war ... ------------------------------ Removed due to offensive content - Laqum I realy liked my signature. Oh well
James Adams	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:15:00 - [55] Ok, this whole "But you can't scramble from that far away" stuff is bull and you know it. Every time someone says he wants 1on1 fights he gets jumped by the exact same crowd yelling BRING A FRIEND. Ok, we now have a Cerberus vs. Deimos at 50km with an interceptor friend each. They get webbed and scrambled up at 40km, and the Deimos is now ***** helpless until it can get rid of the interceptor, while the Cerberus is pounding the ** out of the Deimos. And it's not a 100% certainty to land right on top of your target, and it's always nice to get a headstart on damage. Say what you want, but range DOES matter.... and you know it
Wotar	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:23:00 - [56] Remove missiles from the game. Problem fixed.
cytomatrix	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:38:00 - [57] Move caldari to SiSi. problem solved.
Reatu Krentor	Posted - 2006.05.16 12:38:00 - [58] Originally by: Retrax Edited by: Retrax on 16/05/2006 10:53:24 Hmmmm.... Do we get new large capacity, high ROF, light missile bays, to replace current assault launchers? Will there be new large capacity, high ROF, heavy missile bays for battleships? Will there be a new 'Assault Missiles' skill? why would there be new launchers using frig missiles for cruisers or bs launchers using cruiser missiles? If that would be brought in, give me turrets that have the same effect(frig amount of tracking on a cruiser gun). new skill is prolly what will come, would be the logical way anyway(ccp and logic? ). Originally by: Retrax But here's an idea: since turrets have no need for seperate skills depending on ammo, or upon, for example, blaster or railgun, except of course in specialization, then neither should assault missiles have a new separate skill. The new assault missiles should also fit into whatever size launcher, i.e. standard assault missiles should fit into standard launchers. Doesn't blaster ammo fit into railguns, except of course for T2 ammo? Why not with assault missiles? Why have a new set of launchers? Just make new missiles with the adjusted range, explosion properties, dps, etc. and keep the skills and launchers. Well, of course specialization skills and T2 ammo would be in order.) you have 3(4 with capital) skills per missile type, there is the unguided missile and there is the guided missile, just like there are projectiles, hybrids and lasers(ok so there is 2 skills missing in the tree, the cruiser sized rocket and the capital sized guided missile). A new skill would kinda be needed for the cruiser sized rocket for it to make sense with the rest. As for launchers, I wouldn't mind there being multiple launchers for the same missile type, like a low capacity fast rof standard launcher, could put modifiers built-in to the launchers like with turrets. - phew! dodged the mods on this sig!
Cmd Woodlouse	Posted - 2006.05.16 13:00:00 - [59] Edited by: Cmd Woodlouse on 16/05/2006 13:05:49 Originally by: Hal Mondo Originally by: Jim Raynor waaaa waaaa waaaa! Dont really see your point mate. Fair enough on the cruiser size rockets, or whatever, but you may as well be moaning about the low dps on the eagle. Different advantages for different ships. Cerb is a good mission runner, but will get pwned in short range pvp with a demios/zealot etc.... Kind of obvious really. PS. troll, flame, flame a properly fitted cerb is an absolute hac-killer. Atleast Vagabonds stand 0,0 chances against them, also zealots and deimoses can have serious problems... EDIT: at ANY range! --------------------------------
Nafri	Posted - 2006.05.16 13:17:00 - [60] It could be soo easy. Adjust range for different kind of missles. Introduce missles with different flight range. i.E. Heavy missle "-50%" flight time Heavy missle "+-0%" flight time and so on. Then also adjust damage a bit, give the longer ones a bit more damage than you would normally expect (like with projectiles) and then you can introduce short range missle launchers, WHICH are really short range (5km with the highest damage ones, 10km with medium range and 20km with the longest range ones). That would also enable us to make usefull tech2 missles and stop the "rofl, Im flying a raven, dumb megathron noob" scenarios where a Raven basicly owns every other BS in a direct 1vs1 unless its a ECM/Nos dominix. If you introduce the aussault missles like you made torpedos, the cerberus and caracal will dominate the cruisers like the raven dominates the Battleships in small scale combat. A 500 DPS, 50km range ship is ****! Summertime - Campingtime!

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