EVE Search - Anybody who WOULD want the 250km targetting cap removed?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Anybody who WOULD want the 250km targetting cap removed?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.04 06:26:00 - [1] I know most people on Ships & Modules think sniping is evil and boring and hate sniping and wish long range combat were entirely eliminated from EVE. So if you're one of those people, you don't need to bother posting, I already know you're here. However, I know that at least a few people like long-range combat, so I want to know: Would anybody here support removing the 250km cap on targetting, either with a higher cap or no cap at all? ------------------ Originally by: kieron Buy ISK for RL cash here! Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Hub Quantum Dark Synergy Inc. Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.04 06:38:00 - [2] Personally I think it's pretty stupid, the limit on locking should be what you can attain on a ship. That said the devs making "combat close range and last longer!" is all the rage nowadays, so doubt it'll happen.
Necrologic Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.08.04 06:39:00 - [3] The cap breaks the realism. I don't like it really.
turnschuh	Posted - 2006.08.04 06:49:00 - [4] no, because POS would shoot you out to 500km? and you could not warp in and preload, it would get even worse when pos attacking.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:05:00 - [5] Originally by: turnschuh no, because POS would shoot you out to 500km? and you could not warp in and preload, it would get even worse when pos attacking. A Deathstar POS that will insta wtfpwn any enemy on the grid?
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:12:00 - [6] Uh, right, this was a question to anybody who would like the targetting range cap removed so their SHIPS can shoot farther. I'm really not interested in what POS guns are limited to, they could be cut down to 25km for all I care. This thread is about sniping. ------------------ Originally by: kieron Buy ISK for RL cash here! Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
HappyKitten Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:14:00 - [7] POS targetting can't be capped below ship targetting range, so if you change one, you'd change the other. I'd rather see it removed, if not for the issue of POS loading.
Tiuwaz Minmatar Omacron Militia Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:16:00 - [8] i dont wish long range combat eliminated, but 250 km is by far enough Originally by: Oveur This is not the conspiracy you are looking for.
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:19:00 - [9] Originally by: HappyKitten POS targetting can't be capped below ship targetting range But POSes can be given optimal range penalties. ------------------ Originally by: kieron Buy ISK for RL cash here! Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Fi T'Zeh Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:19:00 - [10] Well something needs to be done, because we're about to be in a position where a new ship (the Rock) potentially has an OPTIMAL range greater than it's locking distance, which is absurd.. .... POST WITH YOUR MAIN !!!!11111one Real men use blasters
Mike Yagon Minmatar The Phoenix Legionaires	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:29:00 - [11] Originally by: Fi T'Zeh Edited by: Fi T''Zeh on 04/08/2006 07:26:21 Well something needs to be done, because we're about to be in a position where a new ship (the Rock) very easily has an OPTIMAL range greater than it's maximum possible locking distance, which is absurd.. 425mm railgun II + BS V + Sharp shooter V = 108.75km With spike ammo = 217.50km with a tracking module = 250.13km And that's only 1 tracking module. I actually think that the problem isn't the range cap, it's the absurdly overpowered Spike ammo. And I'm a thron pilot, so I ought to know just how broken it is.... The problem is with T2 ammo and the Rokh bonuses. The targetting cap is fine. You don't want guys sitting 500km from a gate thinking they're all that when they shoot down your industrial ships. ------ In Carebear We Trust
Kcel Chim Caldari Arcane Technologies The Five	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:40:00 - [12] the cap is fine as it is. Increasing it would require sentry guns to be boosted, pos range modified and capital shiprange upgraded (hitting a capital ship from 300km without giving it the chance to return fire would be silly, wouldnt it?). As far as the rokh is concerned, i think its optimal+falloff will go above 350km with t2 ammo and max tracking mods. Thats a range other ships cant reach in any way or setup so its obvious why it shouldnt be increased.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:42:00 - [13] T2 ammos could be stealth changed during the release of tier 3 BS, who knows? ---------------- Patience is a quality that most people seem to lack.
Kcel Chim Caldari Arcane Technologies The Five	Posted - 2006.08.04 07:54:00 - [14] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire T2 ammos could be stealth changed during the release of tier 3 BS, who knows? i wish they would prepare a major "combat balance patch" where ALL problems are fixed at once. This patchwork nerfing and buffing only leads to keeping the status quo. Missile nerf outdone by t2 missiles and skills is the prime example for it, not to mention the hp buff outdone by the release of t2 ammo. With all due respect for the devs and their hard work i dont see why it took them a year + to fix blasters. Even with thinktank and what not i wouldnt take longer then a week or 2 to come up with a solution. It simply is no fun to pay while you wait for a balance patch "in a few months". As those players effected by the imbalance issues have to actually play with this imbalance for that long, severely effecting their gameplay. If they nerf t2 ammo im all for it but im quiet sure it will just be toggled over by the next new items or ships or skills on the road, like many times before.
Mirasta Caldari Enigma Enterprises Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:02:00 - [15] I would love to see the 250km cap removed, Replaced with a 150-175km cap on ranges. Im so bored of 10 ships warpinging exchangeing a spatt of fire and then warping off. With a shorter cap combat becomes more fluid, but this is a debate for another thread
Jenny Spitfire Caldari LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:06:00 - [16] Originally by: Mirasta I would love to see the 250km cap removed, Replaced with a 150-175km cap on ranges. Im so bored of 10 ships warpinging exchangeing a spatt of fire and then warping off. With a shorter cap combat becomes more fluid, but this is a debate for another thread IMHO, it isnt the cap that needs fixing. ---------------- Patience is a quality that most people seem to lack.
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:14:00 - [17] Long range combat is boring. Whilst I dont tend to support anything that would make missiles more effective, I'd much prefer to see shorter range combat. But not stupidly short range; 100km max, or so. Scrapheap Challenge Forums
Jin Entres Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:22:00 - [18] The cap is artificial and should go. If range limitations are deemed neccessary, they should be implemented through other means (ship targeting range, guns' optimal range and all bonuses that affect either). ---
Eximius Josari Shadow Reavers	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:44:00 - [19] I think its too long ranged as it is. Victory is the weakness of the enemy.
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:46:00 - [20] Yes, it should be removed. There's a huge but here (but, not butt!). It shouldn't be removed until after they've pulled turret ranges back down to sane ranges. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:49:00 - [21] Originally by: Jin Entres The cap is artificial and should go. If range limitations are deemed neccessary, they should be implemented through other means (ship targeting range, guns' optimal range and all bonuses that affect either). A good point also. Scrapheap Challenge Forums
Infinity Ziona ISK LLC	Posted - 2006.08.04 08:57:00 - [22] Originally by: Mirasta I would love to see the 250km cap removed, Replaced with a 150-175km cap on ranges. Im so bored of 10 ships warpinging exchangeing a spatt of fire and then warping off. With a shorter cap combat becomes more fluid, but this is a debate for another thread Interdiction sphere missiles!! 'The alliance should not be a solo contentmobile' - Albert Einstein
dailyhazard Caldari Unauthorised.	Posted - 2006.08.04 09:26:00 - [23] Originally by: Mirasta I would love to see the 250km cap removed, Replaced with a 150-175km cap on ranges. Im so bored of 10 ships warpinging exchangeing a spatt of fire and then warping off. With a shorter cap combat becomes more fluid, but this is a debate for another thread tbh with ecm being pretty much nerfed, and people whining about sniping soon fighting outnumbered will become a thing of the past. Which sucks for me.
Giant Haystacks Ore Mongers	Posted - 2006.08.04 10:45:00 - [24] Originally by: Kcel Chim i wish they would prepare a major "combat balance patch" where ALL problems are fixed at once. i read that and thought immediately of swg's 'combat upgrade' fixing all poblems at once is impossible, the fixes always make new problems. also trying to do it all in one patch would mean fixes for some stuff being ready months before their released because other stuff for the same patch isn't ready.
Riho Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2006.08.04 10:46:00 - [25] i only hate the snipers at the damn gates... in fleet battles they are nice :) and i play a sniper thron allso, so i know a bit. removeing the cap would make ppl gate snipe more imo... tho i dont do it now and will not do it :P booring when u cant get to the damn loot if u dont have a alt :P
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.04 10:48:00 - [26] \o/ for longer than 250km engagements Mind control and tin hats
Benco97 Gallente On Ravens Wings	Posted - 2006.08.04 10:53:00 - [27] I think the cap should be removed, I can't coem up with a reason that sounds good when I write it though. Snug Radio - Fart like a Pirate
TuRtLe HeAd Apocalypse Enterprises	Posted - 2006.08.04 10:54:00 - [28] Just as long as Jamming Can't be done at that range i don't care. !
Altai Saker Omniscient Order Verisum Family	Posted - 2006.08.04 11:05:00 - [29] Not really a fan of sniping to begin with, and thats a little far for a covops to fly. Nothx
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.04 11:42:00 - [30] Edited by: James Lyrus on 04/08/2006 11:44:53 Originally by: Nikolai Nuvolari Uh, right, this was a question to anybody who would like the targetting range cap removed so their SHIPS can shoot farther. I'm really not interested in what POS guns are limited to, they could be cut down to 25km for all I care. This thread is about sniping. POSes are relevant IMO. A pos has an anchoring range of 50km. A large tower has a shield radius of 30. Which means you _can_ anchor modules outside the shield. Now, there's a good reason to do so. Put short range guns 50km out, and you have a larger 'killzone' and cover from your long range guns inside the shield. Except with an artificial 250km cap, someone could quite easily snipe from 240 km away from the mod, 290km away from the tower, despite having long range artillery that could return fire a that range. So for my money, artificially capping ranges is bad. Although personally I think combat ranges are too long anyway, and should all be dropped such that 'ultra extreme' range is >100km. I also think that if you've got gun sniping going on, you also need the capability for EW sniping to counter. Maybe not ECMs, but stuff like RSDs strikes me as being perfect, or would be if they didn't have a much much lower optimal.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.