EVE Search - Add missile disruptors

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Add missile disruptors

» 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)
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:36:00 - [31] Originally by: Scordite Originally by: Tovarishch If you want to add an analog to the Tracking Disruptor for missiles... then feel free. Just give us the two modules that are also analogous to the Tracking Computer and Tracking Enhancer. How would they work? Missiles have 2 stats the disrupters could affect. One is explosion radius, and the module that has the reverse effect already exists, the target painter. The other is explosion velocity, and the module to counter it already exists, the webber. I'm not sure... to be honest. I use both turrets (many types across different characters) and missiles... and am pretty happy with both at the moment. They are different... and I like that. I suppose I could dream up some module for missiles that is similar to a Tracking Computer/Enhancer.... but I'm not the one arguing to have a counter to missiles created. As I said. I'm happy with things being different... and relatively balanced. All these cries for similarities are going to water this game down. People need to watch what they wish for or we're going to be stuck playing 'WoW in Space' soon. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Yazoul Samaiel Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:38:00 - [32] Originally by: Wrayeth Don't worry, you should have no problem with ravens now that javelins suck ass. You should be able to kill one easily with a HAC - tech 1 torps won't be able to do enough damage to break the HAC's tank, rage torps are still useless, and now javelin torpedos will inflict LESS damage to a HAC than tech 1 torpedos. Good show CCP. Trainging Torps 5 was a useless endavour then , cruise missiles will be the flavour for soem time untill torps get some rework but i think i get the argument which is prob that torps are not meant to hit anythign else than BS sized stuff or larger . "There is no such thing as innocence , only different degrees of guilt"
Wrayeth Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:50:00 - [33] Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel Trainging Torps 5 was a useless endavour then , cruise missiles will be the flavour for soem time untill torps get some rework but i think i get the argument which is prob that torps are not meant to hit anythign else than BS sized stuff or larger . That would be a bad argument, then. I don't see the short range turrets having any trouble killing cruisers and HACs. Even autocannons, which have really crappy damage per second, can make short work of a HAC. -Wrayeth "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" R.I.P. AC tempest R.I.P. Torp raven Thanks, CCP. R.I.P. My account, after the next cycle.
Yazoul Samaiel Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:57:00 - [34] Originally by: Wrayeth Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel Trainging Torps 5 was a useless endavour then , cruise missiles will be the flavour for soem time untill torps get some rework but i think i get the argument which is prob that torps are not meant to hit anythign else than BS sized stuff or larger . That would be a bad argument, then. I don't see the short range turrets having any trouble killing cruisers and HACs. Even autocannons, which have really crappy damage per second, can make short work of a HAC. Only if hac is webbed or painted to get some serious dmg on it . "There is no such thing as innocence , only different degrees of guilt"
Wrayeth Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.10.25 06:00:00 - [35] Edited by: Wrayeth on 25/10/2006 06:00:55 Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel Only if hac is webbed or painted to get some serious dmg on it . Yep. I'll just fill my midslots with... Oh, wait - that's right: the raven's tank takes up its midslots, leaving little to no room for webs and target painters. Dumbass. -Wrayeth "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" R.I.P. AC tempest R.I.P. Torp raven Thanks, CCP. R.I.P. My account, after the next cycle.
Dark PIne	Posted - 2006.10.25 06:05:00 - [36] Originally by: Scordite Originally by: Tovarishch If you want to add an analog to the Tracking Disruptor for missiles... then feel free. Just give us the two modules that are also analogous to the Tracking Computer and Tracking Enhancer. How would they work? Missiles have 2 stats the disrupters could affect. One is explosion radius, and the module that has the reverse effect already exists, the target painter. The other is explosion velocity, and the module to counter it already exists, the webber. If a turret ship is disrupted, it can counter the effect with a tracking computer (you are not always at the webber range). Similar module would be needed for missiles, should there be a "Explosion Suffocator" -module someday.
Tyler Lowe Minmatar DROW Org Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.25 06:05:00 - [37] Rather than a "missile disruptor", just make a dedicated midslot defender missile battery, and allow it to remain active, target in range or not for an activation cost. The main problem I see with defenders, is they are the only weapon counter that requires you give up some of your own dps. The concept itself is fine,IMO, just not the implimentation. There should also be, IMO, an advanced defender missile skill that increases the damage a defender does to a point where a level 4 modifier would allow a defender missile to take out a torp. J.A.F.O.
Yazoul Samaiel Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.25 06:09:00 - [38] Originally by: Wrayeth Yep. I'll just fill my midslots with... Oh, wait - that's right: the raven's tank takes up its midslots, leaving little to no room for webs and target painters. Dumbass. Dude i wont bother myself arguing with person who lacks manaers and respect ,keep calling ppl names and eventualy u will know who the real dumbass is !! "There is no such thing as innocence , only different degrees of guilt"
Bardi MecAuldnis Amarr Pirates of Destruction Union Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 06:10:00 - [39] How about making the defender missiles an automated system? Kind of like the Phalanx CIWS (I know EVE != Real Life). The moment a hostile missile enters the defender's range, it fires. It won't eliminate all incoming missiles, but it will lessen the damage a bit. Just a thought... --- Hey hey let's go kenka suru! Taisetsuna mono protect my balls! Boku ga warui, so lets fighting! LET'S FIGHTING LOVE!!!
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.25 07:01:00 - [40] Edited by: Skeltek on 25/10/2006 07:02:20 Originally by: Tasty Burger Originally by: Skeltek I¦m fed up with theese kinds of threads. What do ECM have to do with missileboats? An EW pilot cares a great sh*t wether his buddy is dealing the damage using a Raven, Rohk or a Tempest. What are you talking about? I'm talking about the fact that missile boats are nigh invulnerable to all EW except ECM. Damps can be countered by getting in closer. The only thing I can think of is the tracking disruptor, sensordampeners WORK against missileboats by reducing targetingrange. The missiles have delayed damage anyway, and your lockingspeed-decrease will always be nothing in comparison to the flighttime which missiles naturaly ALLWAYS have. You cannot use ECM efficiently any more against turretbased ships either. Missiledamage get¦s reduced GREATLY by the target¦s speed, so you can as well claim that it has almost the same effect as transversal velocity, but ohh no, missiles are inferior because they will not be able to hit a target wich does not have transversal either. Any idiot can approach you directly with a tech1 Frigatte without having transversal at all. Any velocityincrease will help you defend against a missile no matter whether it is transversaly alligned or not. Speed/explosionvelocity is WAY WORCE than transversal/tracking multiplier. You claim it is not possible to kill a Raven with a tech1 Cruiser? it is NOT impossible. And besides it is not a birthright or something to be able to kill a Raven with any tech1 Cruiser. Missiles simply are no turrets, it¦s something completely different. Your key argumentation is missiles not being affected by trackingdisruptors? You can greatly influence your missiledamage by increasing your velocity with a snakeset- or other implant. And with a snakeset, the game still does not care about you not flying transversal, it will still reduce the damage insanely even if you are flying straight at the target. Missileusers have OTHER problems instead of trackingdisruptors that you didn¦t look at. This is imho a teamgame, Ravens get easier tackled by Frigs than a Megathron can, also have many other disadvantages, which other ships don¦t have. If you would want to make all ships the same strong in any 1vs1, all ships would have to look the same, have the same tactical possibilities in any given situation and with any fitting. Hmm, maybe I should notifify here somehow that Ravens are the shiptype that was probably nerfed the most with the ECM changes; with it¦s armortank being crap, it¦s now lost it¦s main defence and will even have to use it¦s medium slots for tank, sensorboosting, and highjacking it¦s extremely high signature radius to hell. With far the worst signatureradius and scanresolution plus damagedelay there has ever been in Eve, you still get fixed on: "a Raven is totaly superior, because it¦s missiles allways hit. Let¦s invent something to reduce their firepower a lot" btw, shieldtank is highly vulnerable to lasers, has insane capneed and so on. Oh, and it will not be able to fit a tracking disruptor, since it need¦s it¦s slots for the shieldtank <.< I bet you have taken ALL the possibilities and disadvantages those ships have in any situation they might encounter into account, before you wrote here. Every resident of Eve has the possibilities to have a look at the capabilities of the ships before he trains them. All ships have advantages and disadvantages depending on the situation. If you wanted to fly a ship that has another advantages/disadvantages-distribution, you should perhaps have skilled differently. And I can only beg you to think about the fact, that Ravens have just lost it¦s main form of defence. No other ship will suffer more from the ECM changes I bet. kind regards, Skeltek ps: I don¦t fly Ravens and have caldari BS skill at level3 only, so basicaly I shouldn¦t really care about other ships than mine getting nerfed...
Lucian Corvinus Gallente Expert Systems	Posted - 2006.10.25 07:53:00 - [41] Edited by: Lucian Corvinus on 25/10/2006 07:54:13 Originally by: Tasty Burger Missiles dont have tracking and thus dont need such modules. They hit everything fine. Ever notice that missiles explosion radius is smaller than equivalent turret sig res? And the explosion velocity is much higher than what a turret would hit a ship moving at that speed. By the way target painters don't help turrets for ****. They help missiles enormously. Remember btw that missiles far outrange turrets. Add modules that reduce explosion velocity and reduce explosion radius, then you'll have your tracking missile disruptor thing. There is no way CCP will gimp missiles even further without adding a module to counter this, Unless they want eveyone to fly the same ships. I must say, with the nerf to javelin torps I think we will see a significant reduction in ravens in pvp. And btw, missiles explosion radius is NOT smaller or equivalent to turret sig resolution, torps and turrets both have 400. And if you are unable to wreck a battleship with mwd on, steaming directly at you, I have some serious doubts about your skills This is something a Missile would get a severe cut in damage. Who cares about missiles being able to outrage turrets. A cruise missile flying 260 km or a turret ship doing INSTA damage at 200-240km. I would pick the turret any day. No retard is stupid enough to wait the 40 seconds before the missile hits. Atleast the turret ship can insta pop frigs and inties at that range.
HordeZla Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.25 08:08:00 - [42] If you where to do this then you realy need to give missile boats a mid and low slot module to fall into line with turrets so for turrets there are tracking enharnsers and computers that increse range and tracking but missiles don't have it. Your idea is a fair one but if you are going to nerf something or more to the point an induividual there needs to be a way for the player to fairley counter it and to be fair, you allready have that tool and it's called transversial and speed. Not intended to sound like smack but may come across a little blunt. Try again!
foolers	Posted - 2006.10.25 08:24:00 - [43] Quote: If a turret ship is disrupted, it can counter the effect with a tracking computer (you are not always at the webber range) Except the tbonus a tracking comp is around 20-30% tracking boost, and tracking disrupters are more on the order of 50-60%. So tracking comps do NOT counter, but at best mitigate.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.10.25 09:50:00 - [44] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2006 09:54:40 Originally by: Tovarishch I'm all for counters to missiles as long as missiles receive modules that are specifically analogous to tracking computers and tracking enhancers. They already exist, it's called skills & target painters. While turret users have to use tracking comps to increase their range past 100 km missle users just have to train up their range skills. Turrets get +25% range from skills, missles +125% range. Ravens have no problems attacking targets 200 km away with precision cruises... And the tracking boost of tracking comps is pretty analogous with what target painters give missles. Originally by: Skeltek btw, shieldtank is highly vulnerable to lasers, has insane capneed and so on. Armortank is highly vulnerable to projectiles and an x-large SB + boost amp + lvl 3 in the shield compensation skill needs less cap/HP than armorreps and repairs more HP/sec than a dual LAR setup.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.25 12:30:00 - [45] turret: 400 sigradius target: 200 sigradius damagedecrease: in most cases about 2-6% max Torpedo: 400 exploradius Target: 200 signature damagedecrease: 50% I took nice sigradius numbers to make it better understandable, ingame values are bit different. As you can see, halving sigradius always reduces damage by half. Halving Sigradius does not half tracking like expected, but moves the hitprobability-at-distance curve by aproximately 20% to the right, thus merely changing the range at which hitprobability stays the same. Example for turrets: targetspeed stays constant hitprobability with target orbit at 20km: 50% hitprobability with target orbit at 40km: 70% with HALF targetsigradius: hitprobability with target orbit at 20km: ~45% hitprobability with target orbit at 24km: ~50% hitprobability with target orbit at 40km: ~65% hitprobability with target oribt at 48km: ~70% Turrets don¦t get affected by signatureradius much, missiles to it by an insane amount. I wonder how that would fit in the "missiles only have advantages and don¦t get affected by disruptors"-argumentation.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:05:00 - [46] Remove missiles at all from the game! Torpedo are removed already. We are waiting for cruise next nerf, heavy next nerf, etc.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:07:00 - [47] I would say adding a feature that decreases the rate of fire of missiles on to tracking disrupters and calling them weapon disrupters would work really good. Tracking disrupters are all about lowering DPS on turrets, this would lower dps on missle boats. I think it is a pretty fair resolution to the situation.
Lydia Browm Gallente	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:12:00 - [48] Ok you jam a Caldari ship he uses FOF target disrupters should make it so no matter what type of missile he uses its like 50% efficient you spawm some missiles at someone form 160km warp at 15 and fire anyohter volley thats 2 volleys hitting at once sometimes :o ___________________________________________ Cookies if you hijack or sign my sig. There tasty...
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:12:00 - [49] Heres a thought: fix Defender missiles up a bit, and introduce a point defence turret (i.e., a defender turret). I always did think it was odd that you could only be defended against missiles if you had a missile launcher yourself. Kinda discriminates against Gallente, who barely have 2 lanchers to rub together. -----------------------------------------------
Temo Jick	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:19:00 - [50] Tech 1 frigates V BS heavy turret boat doing 750m/s nice and close with their Tracking disrupter, inexplicably not webbed take 0% damage. Tech 1 frigates V BS Torp boat doing 1500m/s nice and close with their... sensor dampener for comedy value. Takes 50% less damage due to its speed and 90% less damage due it its size. Figures provided by the launcher guide http://www.eve-online.com/guide/en/g27.asp Now I was trying to make an argument for a missiles counter but in the case of frigates these numbers seem to show they donÆt need any help. DonÆt have time to look at the numbers for cruisers but I think its probably them who could use and benefit by the introduction of an anti-missile module.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:32:00 - [51] And decrease dps of missile twice, please. Let's raven will be so powerful as one half of Brutix. Also proposed to add to all turrets embedded ability for point defence against all missile types. This ability is activated all time, requires no skill, one turret(any size) 100% eliminates all missiles(any size) from the 4 launchers. In this case we at least get some type of balance.
Crumplecorn Gallente Aerial Boundaries Inc. Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:42:00 - [52] Originally by: Tovarishch I cannot begin to count the tens of thousands of missiles I have watched fly off into space as a pilot warps off or the target is annihilated before my missiles reach the target. This post highlights two very important anti-missile tactics the 'nerf missiles' lobby always seem to forget: A) Leave the fight B) Die ... ---------- IBTL \o/
Monica Foulkes Hooligans Of War	Posted - 2006.10.25 13:49:00 - [53] Just introduce Anti Missile Drones. The 8h skill buffer
SkottE SkottE Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.25 14:04:00 - [54] Originally by: Valhalior Ever tried an ECCM? im sorry but these things still stuck ___ Recruiting Miners! WTB Minerals!
SkottE SkottE Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.25 14:06:00 - [55] Originally by: Wrayeth Originally by: Yazoul Samaiel Trainging Torps 5 was a useless endavour then , cruise missiles will be the flavour for soem time untill torps get some rework but i think i get the argument which is prob that torps are not meant to hit anythign else than BS sized stuff or larger . That would be a bad argument, then. I don't see the short range turrets having any trouble killing cruisers and HACs. Even autocannons, which have really crappy damage per second, can make short work of a HAC. well thats the price missles get for being able to hit targets every single time. ___ Recruiting Miners! WTB Minerals!
Grim Vandal	Posted - 2006.10.25 14:09:00 - [56] i can feel your pain mates ... i'am a 54mill sp all out caldari combat char and really started to hate missiles for what they are ... they simply do NOT work as a primary weapon in my opinion ... besides that I would love caldari to favor missile systems however as a primary weapon they screw up the whole game ... I really am bored of my char, and it really bugs me that missiles probably wont be adressed anytime soon (next 2 years that is) ... the current "changes" do nothing cuz missiles are fundementally flawed ... they simply are not and do not "behave" like missiles ... shame on myself for being caldari Greetings Grim
Centurin Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e	Posted - 2006.10.25 14:24:00 - [57] 100% sign for the OP's idea. Doubt it will ever happen though because CCP is so obviously pro-Caldari it's sick. ----------------------------------------------- "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings" - Optimus Prime
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2006.10.25 14:34:00 - [58] Edited by: Taipan Gedscho on 25/10/2006 14:35:13 Originally by: Tasty Burger Perhaps also an Explosion Radius modifier of 0.8x because missiles naturally have lower 'sig res' than guns, BS guns have 400 while cruise have 300. has this been mentioned? > a smaller explo radius is actually MORE damaging, right? so you want the module to disrupt the missiles to do you more ouch for balancings sake, or did you just screw up?
Fr3nzi Caldari hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.25 14:58:00 - [59] Originally by: Taipan Gedscho Edited by: Taipan Gedscho on 25/10/2006 14:35:13 Originally by: Tasty Burger Perhaps also an Explosion Radius modifier of 0.8x because missiles naturally have lower 'sig res' than guns, BS guns have 400 while cruise have 300. has this been mentioned? > a smaller explo radius is actually MORE damaging, right? so you want the module to disrupt the missiles to do you more ouch for balancings sake, or did you just screw up? I think you are expecting the people who say missiles are overpowered and missiles need nerfing to actually use missiles once in a while
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2006.10.25 15:02:00 - [60] Originally by: Fr3nzi I think you are expecting the people who say missiles are overpowered and missiles need nerfing to actually use missiles once in a while lol, good point. sorry, my fault, then.

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.