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)
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:30:00 - [1] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 24/10/2006 23:32:20 Now that we can't jam caldari boats anymore because ECM sucks on non-caldari boats, we need something to stop the missile boats from being invulnerable. Missile disruptor II Explosion velocity modifier: 0.54x Velocity modifier: 0.54x 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. Add it, please. Thanks!
Luric Vizjier The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:34:00 - [2] I vote just slap this ability onto a Tracking Disruptor and make it slightly less effective. -----------------------------------------------
Nebuli Caldari Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:41:00 - [3] Suggested this very same thing about 6 months ago, Expect Myal Rykel or whatever his name is and come flame the idea to hell and back. Personaly still believe this should be added to tracking disruptors and make it a weapon disruptor, or make a new mod. As it stands missile dont realy have any counters, not as many as turrets anyway, and is the only racial EW not to effect all ship types. CEO - Art of War
Nebuli Caldari Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:48:00 - [4] Originally by: GrumpyCat Great idea!! Just one thing, as with all electronic warfare, there's a countermeasure, so CCP needs to add high and low slot items that decrease explosion radius and increases explosion velocity. I hope CCP puts this in kali 2. Its called a BCU :) CEO - Art of War
GrumpyCat	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:48:00 - [5] Great idea!! Just one thing, as with all electronic warfare, there's a countermeasure, so CCP needs to add high and low slot items that decrease explosion radius and increases explosion velocity. I hope CCP puts this in kali 2.
babylonstew Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:49:00 - [6] Originally by: Tasty Burger Edited by: Tasty Burger on 24/10/2006 23:32:20 Now that we can't jam caldari boats anymore because ECM sucks on non-caldari boats, we need something to stop the missile boats from being invulnerable. Missile disruptor II Explosion velocity modifier: 0.54x Velocity modifier: 0.54x 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. Add it, please. Thanks! Damps dont effect missile boats You cant use a minmatar ship to kill another minmatar ship according to your 'logic' either? and, while we are on the subject, lets have missile speed, tracking etc.. mods aswell then please Forum advice Linkage
babylonstew Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:50:00 - [7] Originally by: Nebuli Originally by: GrumpyCat Great idea!! Just one thing, as with all electronic warfare, there's a countermeasure, so CCP needs to add high and low slot items that decrease explosion radius and increases explosion velocity. I hope CCP puts this in kali 2. Its called a BCU :) BCU dont effect explosion velocity or radius, might want to go check that out Forum advice Linkage
Nebuli Caldari Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:56:00 - [8] Originally by: babylonstew Originally by: Nebuli Originally by: GrumpyCat Great idea!! Just one thing, as with all electronic warfare, there's a countermeasure, so CCP needs to add high and low slot items that decrease explosion radius and increases explosion velocity. I hope CCP puts this in kali 2. Its called a BCU :) BCU dont effect explosion velocity or radius, might want to go check that out Right it doesnt, but a BCU is a damage mod, this would work as an anti damage mod just like a tracking disruptor does to turrets. CEO - Art of War
GrumpyCat	Posted - 2006.10.24 23:58:00 - [9] Originally by: Nebuli Right it doesnt, but a BCU is a damage mod, this would work as an anti damage mod just like a tracking disruptor does to turrets. And there's tracking computers and enhancers that cap counter act a tracking disrupter. In eve everything can be counteracted. ECM <> ECCM, Warp Scram <> Stabs, Sesnor damp <> Sensor booster. So logically a module that affects explosion radius/velocity needs a module to counteract it.
Valhalior Caldari Beagle Corp R0ADKILL	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:10:00 - [10] Ever tried an ECCM? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:19:00 - [11] 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. You don¦t introduce an insta-drone-killing smartbomb either, just because the Galente Railguns have no countersystem. As a dedicated EW pilot, shouldn¦t really care about other player¦s weapons getting nerfed, but seeing the contental level of this thread¦at such a high level just made me stop and drop a post before I leave. This whole threadtopic is senseless imho. kindest regards, Skeltek ps: nerf skilltrainingtime(reduce it by 90% speed), in the long run skilltraining makes makes older players too powerfull in comparison to newer ones <.<
Roxanna Kell BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:21:00 - [12] Why not make all the races the same. its missiles you stupid nubs. how can u mess up tracking, on a launcher. Quote: "Don't touch the RED but
Inen Minmatar OLE Mining Corp Miners With Attitude	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:33:00 - [13] Originally by: Roxanna Kell Why not make all the races the same. its missiles you stupid nubs. how can u mess up tracking, on a launcher. Not that I agree with the topic but your statement is flawed. Missiles do have guidance systems. You cannot fire a missile without first locking on an opponent to direct the missile... Still, there's no need for a missile disruptor. Missiles already take time to get to you. And they only have BCUs so it's fair in that projectile users get low and mid tracking modules.
Robet Katrix Beagle Corp R0ADKILL	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:44:00 - [14] its real simple FIX DEFENDERS give them a ROF of about 16 seconds. they fire FOUR count em four defender missiles. the also go about 50% quicker than hey currently do. problem solved. missiles not nerfed, efective counter with balance.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:49:00 - [15] You people are ridiculous. Do you know how hard it is for a few cruisers to take down a raven compared to fighting a turret battleship? Tracking disruptors only work on turret ships. Defenders are useless and take up highslots anyway. It just isn't fair. How else can someone take on a raven solo in anything less than a battleship besides using ECM, which wont work well anymore? You guys are giving these flawed arguments. Turrets have a counter, missiles do not. ECM used to be the only way to halt a missile boat, now ECM sucks unless you're in a scorp or rook. Missiles don't get tracking computerish things because they already hit things easier and they already outrange turrets, stop whining. 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. By the way guys tracking computers do NOT counter tracking disruptors, the effect after disruption is absolutely miniscule. Same with sensor boosters vs dampeners. Missile boats at the moment are absolute hell for smaller ships, unlike turret ships that they can tracking disrupt.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:51:00 - [16] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 25/10/2006 00:51:40 Originally by: Robet Katrix its real simple FIX DEFENDERS give them a ROF of about 16 seconds. they fire FOUR count em four defender missiles. the also go about 50% quicker than hey currently do. problem solved. missiles not nerfed, efective counter with balance. They'd have to also: a. make defender AI smarter so that the right amount of defenders go after the right amount of missiles b. make them protect gangmates too, just like tracking disruptors make the entire gang safer from turrets Remember, defenders also suck at short ranges. At long range they all go for the same missile making them entirely useless. Defenders at the moment are just ****. Anyway, defenders would have to not use a launcher (what about ships with no launchers?). And plus... it uses a high, that gimps your damage. Tracking disruptors would still be a better choice.
Skeltek Caldari Asgard Schiffswerften Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:51:00 - [17] Originally by: Robet Katrix its real simple FIX DEFENDERS give them a ROF of about 16 seconds. they fire FOUR count em four defender missiles. the also go about 50% quicker than hey currently do. problem solved. missiles not nerfed, efective counter with balance. RoF of defenders has nothing to do with the current incapability of killing incoming missiles. The problem is that defenders always target the closest missile, so you get 20 defender chasing the closest missile. IF they succeed in killing that missile, they get destroyed. The next fired defender will try hitting the missile that was "right behind" the first one, which should by now have reached 2km distance to your ship. Of course it is quiet almost impossible to kill a missile that is 1/4 second away from hitting you.
susan ivonava Caldari Future Visions Inc.	Posted - 2006.10.25 00:55:00 - [18] dont tracking disruptors gimp either A) cap recharge, B) tank, C) Speed, prolly missed a few others but tbh, sick of these whine threads
Gamesguy Amarr Reunited O X I D E	Posted - 2006.10.25 01:02:00 - [19] Originally by: susan ivonava dont tracking disruptors gimp either A) cap recharge, B) tank, C) Speed, prolly missed a few others but tbh, sick of these whine threads ... do you play this game?
Paper Clips	Posted - 2006.10.25 01:10:00 - [20] Originally by: Gamesguy Originally by: susan ivonava dont tracking disruptors gimp either A) cap recharge, B) tank, C) Speed, prolly missed a few others but tbh, sick of these whine threads ... do you play this game? Was about to say the exact same thing. Do you only use missiles, that you have no idea on how the other weapons work?
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.25 01:56:00 - [21] /agree with Tasty Burger Missiles need a viable counter, similar to the ones that are already in place for turrets. Either make the Tracking Disruptor effect Launchers in some way (my preferred choice) or make a Missile Disruptor and make it the Minnie EW of choice. There needs to be a viable counter to missiles since defenders don't work and take up a missile highslot (that some ships dont have). Nyxus It's great being Amarr, ain't it?Ö
BustyBounty Caldari Vengeance of the Fallen Imperium Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.25 02:00:00 - [22] Edited by: BustyBounty on 25/10/2006 02:00:21 Quote: FIX DEFENDERS give them a ROF of about 16 seconds. they fire FOUR count em four defender missiles. you need a launcher hardpoint to use them? not all ships have one. they should just bring out an interdictor type ship that can drop a webifier bubble anyone remember when you could lock missiles and shoot them or web them? i always thought missiles looked really cool traveling at a few m/s ------------------------------------------ My opinions are my own and not that of the alliance I belong to.
Xori Ruscuv The Scope	Posted - 2006.10.25 02:06:00 - [23] /signed on OP's idea.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.25 04:07:00 - [24] Originally by: susan ivonava dont tracking disruptors gimp either A) cap recharge, B) tank, C) Speed, prolly missed a few others but tbh, sick of these whine threads Just goes to show you how much caldari ecm ****s know about the game besides ECM and missiles. It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?*
king jks	Posted - 2006.10.25 04:07:00 - [25] The problem with fixing defenders is that it only works with ships that have a missle hardpoint, so amarr and gallente get the shaft on that one, not so much gallente, but amarr have enough nerfs already. Why not make it look similar to sensor boosters (graphic) and have the same effect on missles as ECM used to have on ships, it would scramble the guiding system in a radius around the ship and all missles hitting it would suffer an explosion radius/velocity penalty because it isn't hitting the ship where its supposed to. I think the fact that missles have no tracking and never miss is evened out by the fact that turrets, while missing sometimes, have wrecking shots and generally more dps. The only thing is that it would have to be an AOE effect activated on a target, which is kind of contradictory, but the devs can figure it out.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 04:11:00 - [26] I'm all for counters to missiles as long as missiles receive modules that are specifically analogous to tracking computers and tracking enhancers. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Nordvargr GoonWaffe GoonSwarm	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:24:00 - [27] If there was a module I could fit specifically to help kill ravens, I'd fit it on every ship I fly. I hate ravens. I really wonder what CCP was thinking when they gave amarr an EW mod specifically to use against turrets and then they gave minmatar an EW mod specifically to HELP missiles.
Scordite	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:30:00 - [28] 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. ----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead.
Wrayeth Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:31:00 - [29] 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. -Wrayeth "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" R.I.P. AC tempest R.I.P. Torp raven Thanks, CCP.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 05:32:00 - [30] 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. I'm not sure where you are getting your info... but target painters are a huge help for both turrets and drones... aside from missiles. Also, missiles very well do have 'tracking'. It's built into the explosion radius and explosion velocity. While the terms used are not the same... it adds up to the same set of conditions - a variable that the target pilot can exploit in order to reduce damage dependent upon their ship size and speed. It's directly analogous to transversal. As for missiles outranging turrets... I'll trade you instant damage with an optimal and falloff (I use guns quite often... so I know what I'm asking for here) over flight time any day of the week. The argument that missiles can hit out at extreme ranges is only a laughably entertaining argument regarding NPCing and missions. 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. I shouldn't have to point these things out. This is common knowledge. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
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.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.25 15:35:00 - [61] Wow, more trolling and flaming. What is it with this place. One new shiny thing, and suddenly everyone's an expert on game design. Counters to missiles exist - defender missiles. Problem is, they're useless. (Except when NPCs use 'em, for some reason they're pretty effective then). Yes, it's not a midslot module that directly reduces missile damage (which is what an explosion radius mod will do, unless it's smaller missiles against larger ships) but it _does_ provide a combat option. Either that or some kind of 'missile smartbomb' - back in the day, you could smartbomb incoming fire. Again, given new high velocities, this is infeasible - your 'window' is small, and there's just a bit too much latency to pull it off with any real reliability. Or of course, you could use the 'standard' "Not getting hit by missiles" module - the microwarp drive. Turn it on, and maintain a couple of km/sec, and most of the heavier missiles just ping off you ineffectually. And yes, this works against turrets too, however it's still possible for a turret to pot a MWDing ship, if it's not on a high transverse, where it's ... well basically not if you're firing cruises or torps at it. Missles and Turrets are NOT THE SAME. They shouldn't ever be the same. I want _more_ variety, not less. Copy and paste of an option from another ship class and type doesn't mean it's balanced.
Lucian Corvinus Gallente Expert Systems	Posted - 2006.10.25 15:48:00 - [62] Edited by: Lucian Corvinus on 25/10/2006 15:53:55 Originally by: Centurin 100% sign for the OP's idea. Doubt it will ever happen though because CCP is so obviously pro-Caldari it's sick. LOL.. if CCP are anything it's pro gallente, the got all the win-buttons.. Raven is gonna get a severe nerf in this patch that's for sure Originally by: James Lyrus Missles and Turrets are NOT THE SAME. They shouldn't ever be the same. I want _more_ variety, not less. Copy and paste of an option from another ship class and type doesn't mean it's balanced. QFFT.. Every "add missile disruptor" lobbyist in this thread want to make missiles act like turrets, so they suffer the same drawback as turret, however they also want to keep the drawbacks that missiles have in themself.. These systems are alot different, and looking at what is going to happen to javelins, it seems to me that we won't see the same amount of ravens in pvp anymore. Perhaps a couple of cruise ravens, but I think alot of caldari missile users are gonna train for the rokh... \o/ everyone is using turrets, now we just need to nerf drones to hell also
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.10.25 16:39:00 - [63] As i said only a few posts ago- make defender missiles work properly, and invent a new module: defender turrets. Missiles are meant to have a counter already, it just doesn't work right now. -----------------------------------------------
Wrayeth Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.10.25 16:41:00 - [64] Any missile defense module would have to be a midslot item. -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.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.25 16:52:00 - [65] Originally by: Aramendel 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. QFT. People don't realize that missiles already have fantastic range, and target painters actually help them more than tracking computers help turrets, in some cases. Anyway. My point is, folks, that turret users get shafted bad by tracking disruptors, so bad that you sometimes don't even need to jam them with ECM. Missile ships don't have any counters: you cant nos them to stop them firing, cant TD them, ECM will now be impotent. Why should missile ships be unstoppable by EW? Defenders, even if they worked take up a highslot. It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.10.25 17:02:00 - [66] And dps form missiles are too high. Decrease it! And speed of missile is too high. Limit it to 100 m/sec. And missiles have no wrecking. It is not fair! Add to missiles anti-wrecking effect, i.e. 50% of times missile will hit for 50% of strength! And missiles have to small resolutions. Please, double it! And add to missile tracking too. And add to missile cap usage.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 17:12:00 - [67] Originally by: Aramendel 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. Please note my second response in the thread that is located toward the bottom of the first page. Target Painters and skills also apply to turrets. Which still leaves missiles down two modules from what turret users have available in order to augment their damage, tracking, and range. Once again... arguing that range on missiles is similar to range on turrets is worth a chuckle. Instant damage at very long range (which almost entirely negates the penalty of transversal on all but the smallest of targets) is in no way at all comparable to a missile traveling for ten, twenty, or even more than thirty seconds to reach a target. Ever factor that into the benefit that both turrets and missiles receive from modules or skills? And yes, to repeat, the benefit of target painters is helpful for missiles. What you are voluntarily ignoring is that Target Painters also help turrets. Where are the missile specific modules that assist pilots in augmenting their missile damage? Turret users have two specific modules that augment ONLY turret damage, tracking, and range - Tracking Computers and Tracking Enhancers. They also can use Target Painters, Webbers, etc. Missile users can only augment their damage using modules that benefit turret users also (Painters and Webbers). Explain how that is fair? Why is it that the concept of missile countermeasures is fair and balanced when there is an obvious lack of modules that are specifically designed for missiles that are analogous to the Tracking Computer and Tracking Enhancer? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (pun intended) to see that there are two modules missing for missile users. I have no problem with missile countermeasures being introduced... but to do so without rectifying this shortcoming would be entirely unfair. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 17:23:00 - [68] Originally by: Tasty Burger QFT. People don't realize that missiles already have fantastic range, and target painters actually help them more than tracking computers help turrets, in some cases. Anyway. My point is, folks, that turret users get shafted bad by tracking disruptors, so bad that you sometimes don't even need to jam them with ECM. Missile ships don't have any counters: you cant nos them to stop them firing, cant TD them, ECM will now be impotent. If you truly believe these statements... then there is no way to have a rational discussion with you. You aren't even playing EVE... nor have you read my previous posts in this thread that already counter these comments. This thread is simply irrational screaming to nerf missiles because you hate them... and hate Caldari (which is currently the trendy thing to do). There is no logic or 'balance' to your argument... as many folks (myself included) have already pointed out the weakness of your argument... yet you ignore the comments and continue on your crusade. Luckily the Devs have sense enough to realize what threads like this are when they come up. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
The Requiem	Posted - 2006.10.25 18:30:00 - [69] Originally by: Tovarishch Originally by: Aramendel 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. Please note my second response in the thread that is located toward the bottom of the first page. Target Painters and skills also apply to turrets. Which still leaves missiles down two modules from what turret users have available in order to augment their damage, tracking, and range. Once again... arguing that range on missiles is similar to range on turrets is worth a chuckle. Instant damage at very long range (which almost entirely negates the penalty of transversal on all but the smallest of targets) is in no way at all comparable to a missile traveling for ten, twenty, or even more than thirty seconds to reach a target. Ever factor that into the benefit that both turrets and missiles receive from modules or skills? And yes, to repeat, the benefit of target painters is helpful for missiles. What you are voluntarily ignoring is that Target Painters also help turrets. Where are the missile specific modules that assist pilots in augmenting their missile damage? Turret users have two specific modules that augment ONLY turret damage, tracking, and range - Tracking Computers and Tracking Enhancers. They also can use Target Painters, Webbers, etc. Missile users can only augment their damage using modules that benefit turret users also (Painters and Webbers). Explain how that is fair? Why is it that the concept of missile countermeasures is fair and balanced when there is an obvious lack of modules that are specifically designed for missiles that are analogous to the Tracking Computer and Tracking Enhancer? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (pun intended) to see that there are two modules missing for missile users. I have no problem with missile countermeasures being introduced... but to do so without rectifying this shortcoming would be entirely unfair. Why not make missle countermeasure inconsistent I mean, Turrets are incosistent in damage, pretty much random damage, so tracking disruptors just make it worse, but the good thing about missles is they are consistent! I would vote for improved defenders, because that basically takes out some missles that come for you, in essence they mitigate the damage. A tracking disruptor on missles would destroy what they have going for them O_O
Paul Castrin Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.25 18:56:00 - [70] Edited by: Paul Castrin on 25/10/2006 18:57:46 Interesting topic, not many new many ideas though. I will throw out some of my thoughts on what I think could fix the missile balance situation (for the record I have over 2 mil in missile skills so I do use them): 1) Mid slot defender missile launcher and have it REMAIN ACTIVE when activated regardless of active attacks. Ammo / charges would remain a factor of use (much like it is currently) but the ammo size should be decreased by a factor of 10. In balance remove the ability of regular launchers to use defenders. Rate of fire should be very high (think a Phalanx system or a missile calliope style launcher), and def missile damage would be halved thus needing multiple hits to counter the really big missiles (torps, CMs). 2) Mid slot anti-missile EWAR module. Works on the same premise as an ECM jammer, except it influences the chance of a solid hit by a missile. This could be replicated one of two ways: a) causes an actual miss or b) reduces the resulting damage after all other factors. Module would use cap to operate but the usage rate should be along the lines of a targeting disrupter. 3) Mid slot chaff / flare launcher. Effects would be similar as #2 but with reduced effectiveness and instead of costing cap to run it uses ammo thus more flexible for smaller ships. It could have different sizes (a la cap boosters) to reflect the need to have a larger system for larger ships. One way to replicate the effect is to have it lower the effective signature radius (vs. missiles only if possible) of a ship using it actively. As its ammo based the use would be dependant on how long your supply held out. The main problem, IMHO, with missile combat currently is that they are a no miss solution to hitting what youÆre shooting at. The ability to defend against them is limited to the extreme. Their only balancing factor is that they have a flight time. To balance out missiles there must be options to either make them miss (i.e. as is possible in RL) or to cause "near misses" (i.e. reduction of damage). Too much emphasis of late has been toward making them even more powerful without regard to how to defend against them (other than disengaging from combat). Missiles need a counter other than being forced to nerf their stats else they will continue to get undue attention from the rank file and cause the devs to continue to revise them. If players have viable options that require thought and skills to use you will have fewer whiners. Just look to turrets and when the last time they had the nerf bat swung at them. Just my thoughts, pick them apart as you will.
GrumpyCat	Posted - 2006.10.25 19:01:00 - [71] Its funny seeing noobs complain about caldari. If you can't a caldari missile boat with gallente ships or minnie ships (sorry amarr your ships suck), you really need to evaluate your fittings/skills/strategy. Now before you all call me a liar. Take a look at any of the top PVP alliances kill board. Bob,LV,MC, and RED. Look both at their fleet kills and their small gank squad kills. Notice they are missing caldari ships? I wonder why. Because caldari blows except for their railgun boats, eagle and harpy. The game shouldn't be designed around noobs who have no clue how fit their ships or how to use strategy to overcome tracking issues of turrets. In the right hands turret boats own. In the wrong hands they go boom.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.25 19:16:00 - [72] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 25/10/2006 19:18:59 Originally by: Tovarishch Originally by: Tasty Burger QFT. People don't realize that missiles already have fantastic range, and target painters actually help them more than tracking computers help turrets, in some cases. Anyway. My point is, folks, that turret users get shafted bad by tracking disruptors, so bad that you sometimes don't even need to jam them with ECM. Missile ships don't have any counters: you cant nos them to stop them firing, cant TD them, ECM will now be impotent. If you truly believe these statements... then there is no way to have a rational discussion with you. You aren't even playing EVE... nor have you read my previous posts in this thread that already counter these comments. This thread is simply irrational screaming to nerf missiles because you hate them... and hate Caldari (which is currently the trendy thing to do). There is no logic or 'balance' to your argument... as many folks (myself included) have already pointed out the weakness of your argument... yet you ignore the comments and continue on your crusade. Luckily the Devs have sense enough to realize what threads like this are when they come up. Irrational, huh? You don't get it. Target painters work in exactly the same way for missiles as tracking computers do for turrets. A 'missile computer' would be completely redundant except for a flight-time or velocity boost. I don't think you understand. You keep spouting the same nonsense about 'buhuuu caldari dont have missile tracking computers waahah' but you don't respond to the fact that while turret ships can be countered in myriad different ways, such as nossing, tracking disruptors, and such, missile ships cannot. Jamming is ineffective after kali. Perhaps instead of saying that I don't play EVE or know what I'm talking about you should tell me why missiles don't deserve a countermeasure. Anyway I'd agree with a missile computer if while increasing velocity it also decreased flight time by the same amount, so the range stays the same but velocity is improved. You don't need a tracking module because target painters already work wonderfully. If you don't realize that then you are ignorant. Also, claiming that TPs work good for turrets too shows you know jack about turrets. They don't. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.10.25 19:45:00 - [73] Edited by: Serapis Aote on 25/10/2006 19:45:31 Originally by: GrumpyCat Now before you all call me a liar. Take a look at any of the top PVP alliances kill board. Bob,LV,MC, and RED. Look both at their fleet kills and their small gank squad kills. Notice they are missing caldari ships? I wonder why. Because caldari blows except for their railgun boats, eagle and harpy. . Not really true is it and you know it. Crows...cerbs and ravens (pre torp nerf) figured very prominently in most small gangs for obvious reasons. Missles suck in fleet combat yes. Hence the Caldari railboat. But for medium to small scale engagements, caldari ships and missle ships are very good. Ravens were a bit overpowered due to tech 2 torps though and we all knew it. Thats over now. The people are asking a very sensible question though. For any other race you have any working EWAR to combat them. For Caldari you do not now unless you happen to fly with a caldari ewar pilot. To all those saying its okay how it is. I havent seen one person justify why missles ships should be immune to electroic warfare for the most part, while all other ships are not. The only arguements i have seen is the arguement that missles are different and have there own drawbacks. well so do the other weapon systems. Hybrids and lasers take cap, projectiles use too much ammo, and have low dps. So other weapons have drawbacks and also are countered by Ewar. I have not seen a real justification for the lack of ewar against caldari. Another good solution to me would be. switch the ewar bonuses Matari = sensor damps Gallente = ecm Caldari = TP Amarr = TD, and they are moved to a low slot (due to the relative lack of mids on Amarr ships) I would also consider moving TP to low slots, but instuting a stacking penalty or a cap on effectiveness when more the one TP is on a target. Just an idea.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 19:56:00 - [74] Originally by: Tasty Burger Irrational, huh? You don't get it. Target painters work in exactly the same way for missiles as tracking computers do for turrets. A 'missile computer' would be completely redundant except for a flight-time or velocity boost. I don't think you understand. You keep spouting the same nonsense about 'buhuuu caldari dont have missile tracking computers waahah' but you don't respond to the fact that while turret ships can be countered in myriad different ways, such as nossing, tracking disruptors, and such, missile ships cannot. Jamming is ineffective after kali. Perhaps instead of saying that I don't play EVE or know what I'm talking about you should tell me why missiles don't deserve a countermeasure. Anyway I'd agree with a missile computer if while increasing velocity it also decreased flight time by the same amount, so the range stays the same but velocity is improved. You don't need a tracking module because target painters already work wonderfully. If you don't realize that then you are ignorant. Also, claiming that TPs work good for turrets too shows you know jack about turrets. They don't. Feel free to point out where there is anything close to whining in any of my posts. If you must resort to using words like 'wah' and buuhuu' (also trendy) then do so with something to back it up... like facts. If the truth hurts... I'm sorry. But it's the truth. Nos - they hurt missile users as much as turret users because missile ships normally shield tank... which is more cap intensive than armor tanking. Minmatar missile boats arguably get hit hardest by nosferatus. Tracking Disruptors - One module that can be countered by two... Tracking Computers and Tracking Enhancers. ECM - You keep saying (for some odd reason) that jamming is ineffective in Kali? What in the world are you talking about? Do you think if I am out on a contract in my Falcon and I see a Caldari ship that I am, through some sense of racial cohesion, not going to jam them? Why do you keep saying this nonsense? Caldari ECM can jam Caldari missile boats. ECM hurts everyone equally. As for increasing missile velocity if a missile computer existed... while decreasing flight time. I'd say that would be a fair trade. However, I recall the Devs stating that missile velocity is pushing the limit where it is creating a heavy load on the server during large fights.... since missiles must be traked through flight... unlike turret fire. If you want to willfully ignore the fact missiles are at a disadvantage because of the fact they have no analog to Tracking Computers and Tracking Enhancers then there is no point in even responding to your posts... because you are essentially ignore an obvious fact that plays a huge role in balancing missile countermeasures. Also... how in the world you have convinced yourself that Target Painters do not work well with turrets is beyond my comprehension. Aside from the fact that I have nearly as many skill points in turrets as I do in missiles (over 20 million combined) and the fact that I use both turrets and missiles regularly... it only takes a few moments for any player to use the Turret Tracking Guide and adjust sig radius in the manner that a Target Painter would to discover how advantageous TPs are for turrets. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.10.25 20:14:00 - [75] Originally by: Tovarishch [ Also... how in the world you have convinced yourself that Target Painters do not work well with turrets is beyond my comprehension. Aside from the fact that I have nearly as many skill points in turrets as I do in missiles (well over 20 million combined) and the fact that I use both turrets and missiles regularly... it only takes a few moments for any player to use the Turret Tracking Guide and adjust sig radius in the manner that a Target Painter would to discover how advantageous TPs are for turrets. PS. The Turret Tracking Guide is here. Feel free to use it to adjust sig radius and learn how Target Painters effect turret damage. TP for turrets do help...but the difference is minimal in damage output compared to their effectiveness when used with missles. Thats a fact. The differene in damage with TP for turrets is not enough to justify the mid in most cases. Doesnt hurt if you have a mixed gang, and one TP ship and both missles and turrets in gang. But in general I would rather use the slot for something else. I could be totatlly wrong, i have just never seen enough of a difference to justify it. Do you fit a TP on any of your turret ships, and which ones?
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.25 20:22:00 - [76] Edited by: Tovarishch on 25/10/2006 20:24:57 Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Tovarishch [ Also... how in the world you have convinced yourself that Target Painters do not work well with turrets is beyond my comprehension. Aside from the fact that I have nearly as many skill points in turrets as I do in missiles (well over 20 million combined) and the fact that I use both turrets and missiles regularly... it only takes a few moments for any player to use the Turret Tracking Guide and adjust sig radius in the manner that a Target Painter would to discover how advantageous TPs are for turrets. PS. The Turret Tracking Guide is here. Feel free to use it to adjust sig radius and learn how Target Painters effect turret damage. TP for turrets do help...but the difference is minimal in damage output compared to their effectiveness when used with missles. Thats a fact. The differene in damage with TP for turrets is not enough to justify the mid in most cases. Doesnt hurt if you have a mixed gang, and one TP ship and both missles and turrets in gang. But in general I would rather use the slot for something else. I could be totatlly wrong, i have just never seen enough of a difference to justify it. Do you fit a TP on any of your turret ships, and which ones? Generally speaking, when flying either of my alts (which use turrets far more than Tovarishch), I use TPs regularly. Target Painters are a huge boon on the Ishtar and Deimos both... partly because TPs provide a better damage bonus for drones than a webber. Also, I like having a TP on my Typhoon... because the ACs and Torps both see a solid increase in damage on smaller targets. There are many occasions where I see a TP making a very useful difference. While the Turret Guide does a pretty decent job of illustrating what situations a TP will be useful with (or instead of) a web.... messing with ship setups that focus on a role are even better. The fact of the matter is that this misinformation that people are spouting that TPs do not help turrets... or help missiles more... is garbage. It's more anecdotal nonsense from people who are set on irrationally crusading against missiles. (That comment is not directed at you, Serapis. Your response was lucid, articulate, and based deeply enough in reality that I would not classify you as being irrational at all.) All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Charrette Nubs. Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.10.25 20:27:00 - [77] I think the real issue is that there is a steep ability curve between missiles and rails. So to new players it seems that missiles are clearly superior because it honestly does take a while to be useful with guns. however, in actual combat as opposed to what must be some sort of theoretical world most NERF MISSILES people live in, missiles are sorely, sorely lacking in combat. --->> terrible ROF --->> sub-par DPS.
theh15	Posted - 2006.10.25 20:32:00 - [78] If only some of u ***ing about missles would accually use them for a while, then tell us how u would feel having your 4-6 missles you launch every 30 sec which then take another 30 to hit target, and haveing your missles getting hit by 2+ defenders per player, if you do that and still think your overpoweered then come back ***ing.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.10.25 20:39:00 - [79] Originally by: Tovarishch Edited by: Tovarishch on 25/10/2006 20:25:46 Generally speaking, when flying either of my alts (which use turrets far more than Tovarishch), I use TPs regularly. Target Painters are a huge boon on the Ishtar and Deimos both... partly because TPs provide a better damage bonus for drones than a webber. Also, I like having a TP on my Typhoon... because the ACs and Torps both see a solid increase in damage on smaller targets. There are many occasions where I see a TP making a very useful difference. While the Turret Guide does a pretty decent job of illustrating what situations a TP will be useful with (or instead of) a web.... messing with ship setups that focus on a role are even better. The fact of the matter is that this misinformation that people are spouting that TPs do not help turrets... or help missiles more... is garbage. It's more anecdotal nonsense from people who are set on irrationally crusading against missiles. (PS. That comment is not directed at you, Serapis. Your response was lucid, articulate, and based deeply enough in reality that I would not classify you as being irrational at all.) I actually fit a TP on my Phoon too (forgot about that) but mainly for the difference in drone damage and missle damage. I mostly fly minnie though, and as I said before i couldnt see putting it on any of my other ships. I guess like everyone else I feel a bit overshadowed, by the caldari ewar. It works equal against all other races and its own. While the others do not. I was wondering if you saw my other post though. I havent seen a real reason why, there should be no ewar against missles in game. I understand missles are different, but to me they are not that different.
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.10.25 21:02:00 - [80] Originally by: Tovarishch Generally speaking, when flying either of my alts (which use turrets far more than Tovarishch), I use TPs regularly. Target Painters are a huge boon on the Ishtar and Deimos both... partly because TPs provide a better damage bonus for drones than a webber. Also, I like having a TP on my Typhoon... because the ACs and Torps both see a solid increase in damage on smaller targets. There are many occasions where I see a TP making a very useful difference. While the Turret Guide does a pretty decent job of illustrating what situations a TP will be useful with (or instead of) a web.... messing with ship setups that focus on a role are even better. The fact of the matter is that this misinformation that people are spouting that TPs do not help turrets... or help missiles more... is garbage. It's more anecdotal nonsense from people who are set on irrationally crusading against missiles. (PS. That comment is not directed at you, Serapis. Your response was lucid, articulate, and based deeply enough in reality that I would not classify you as being irrational at all.) The MTSNBN does help turrets, it would only be logical that it does. I agree with you, if you introduce guidance disruptors(fancy name for it ) then also introduce the equivalents of tracking comp/link/enhancer. It's only fair. And any bonuses being applied to current tracking disruptors/links, extend them to guidance mods too(just make it a weapon disruptor/link bonus instead). Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 01:23:00 - [81] 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. Really tasty, your posts...so many lies, damned lies and a total LACK of statistics that it's hard to know where to start. 1. Comparing explosion radius to turret sig res is entirely pointless. The equations work in an different way. 2. Explosion velocity has nothing to do with hitting th target....you really have NO idea how the missile damage equation works do you? 3. Target painters help turrets hit more often, and for more damage on ALL targets. Multiple target painters give a much bigger reward. Target painters for missiles ONLY give an advantage on undersized targets, and are effectively capped...it gets to a point where adding another 10 target painters wouldn't increase the damage you do AT ALL. 4. Missile outrange turrets. Yes. Until you add range modifiers onto those turrets...range modifiers that missiles do not get. Plus the missiles take 30 seconds to travel 240km...a turret shot is INSTANT. Just leave it alone ok? You're starting to sound like a rambling old man... --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 01:29:00 - [82] Fixing defenders won't solve anything by the way...it's just another can of worms waiting to be opened...Anti-missile camp won't be happy until they destroy 100% of incoming missiles even at point blank range, missile camp are going to be pushing it in the opposite direction. And again, since there is NO equivalent module that "shoots down" turret fire...how do you balance turrets vs missiles (or tracking disrupters vs defnders) The only logical solution is to scrap BOTH defenders AND tracking disrupters, and replace them with decoys...launched from a ship they draw ALL fire for a fixed period of time, or until destroyed, whichever comes first...that gives us a counter to drones, nos, scrambling, turrets AND missiles, all in one convenient little package. Decoys could be targetted by other players to hasten their demise. They'd have to be in three sizes (frig, cruiser, BS). The balance would be, rate of fire of the ship controlling the drone would be halved while the drone was active. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.27 02:01:00 - [83] Thats nice. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Flabida jaba	Posted - 2006.10.27 02:07:00 - [84] Originally by: Centurin 100% sign for the OP's idea. Doubt it will ever happen though because CCP is so obviously pro-Caldari it's sick. This kind of self serving, one eyed propagander achives what exactly ?? this is just mindless biased drivel... (yeah CCP have spent years lovingly crafting a game for all its player base while secretly trying to hamstring 75% of the game content????) grow up and ****off
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 19:11:00 - [85] Originally by: Tasty Burger Thats nice. Yeah I'm sorry, I was harsh. But this constant stream of posts about "OMG Nerf Caldari! Nerf Missiles! Nerf the Raven!" is nothing but pester power. There's no FACT behind the claims that missiles are overpowered, and if anyone EVER took the time to weigh up ALL the pros & cons of turrets vs launchers, all you'd see is that turrets are better for PVP, launchers better for PVE, and the launchers have less choice in fitout, so everyone complains that missiles are "easy mode" or "Cookie cutter" setups...and I can't argue with that...they ARE, because we have such a damnably small selection of options. Less actual weapons, less modules and less implants. Those are numbers you can MEASURE and they DON'T change depending on your setup. I apologise again for being harsh, Tasty...don't think of the complaint being aimed solely at you, just think of yourself as a representative for the faceless massses who think the grass is always greener on the other side. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2006.10.27 19:28:00 - [86] I like to use sensor dampers on caldari missile boats, it is actually the only module in the game that can complety prevent them from firing (you can fire FOF missiles while jammed with ECM but FOF cannot target anything past your own targeting range). If you have a Webbifier drone in your bay you can use that to make sure they will NEVER be able to close range to get a lock (unless your a flying brick), just recall it when they lock it and send it back when it moves out of their locking range.
Zac Solo	Posted - 2006.10.27 20:04:00 - [87] when are all the non-missile users gonna stop their whinning!!!as a player with over 9 mill skill points in missiles who has to watch them hit a vagabond for0.4 dse turreth precicion cruise or a fast frig for 1.2 damage i should be the one complaining!!!!!!!!i now use turrets for pvp!!!!!!enough said
Zac Solo	Posted - 2006.10.27 20:05:00 - [88] lol can't spell either shows how smart i was training up my missiles
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.27 21:27:00 - [89] Originally by: Christopher Dalran I like to use sensor dampers on caldari missile boats, it is actually the only module in the game that can complety prevent them from firing (you can fire FOF missiles while jammed with ECM but FOF cannot target anything past your own targeting range). If you have a Webbifier drone in your bay you can use that to make sure they will NEVER be able to close range to get a lock (unless your a flying brick), just recall it when they lock it and send it back when it moves out of their locking range. Christopher...I want to quote your post in BOLD, ITALIC, UNDERLINED because it makes so much sense. Here is a player who has used tools within the game to find a solution to a problem...how to beat a Raven. He could have just run whinging like a girl to the forums, but instead, he has used his BRAIN. CHRISTOPHER DALRAN, I salute you. (but I NEVER want to meet you in combat...I fly a Raven)... --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Alowishus	Posted - 2006.10.27 21:55:00 - [90] You people suck so much. I think everyone who gets this upset over any aspect of Eve (whether it be a suggestion someone makes that you don't like, or game mechanics that aren't optimal for you) needs a break. Especially all those "It's great being a [insert race], ain't it?" signature people. You guys should suspend your accounts and rest for awhile, Eve is going to give you a stroke.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.27 21:59:00 - [91] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Christopher Dalran I like to use sensor dampers on caldari missile boats, it is actually the only module in the game that can complety prevent them from firing (you can fire FOF missiles while jammed with ECM but FOF cannot target anything past your own targeting range). If you have a Webbifier drone in your bay you can use that to make sure they will NEVER be able to close range to get a lock (unless your a flying brick), just recall it when they lock it and send it back when it moves out of their locking range. Christopher...I want to quote your post in BOLD, ITALIC, UNDERLINED because it makes so much sense. Here is a player who has used tools within the game to find a solution to a problem...how to beat a Raven. He could have just run whinging like a girl to the forums, but instead, he has used his BRAIN. CHRISTOPHER DALRAN, I salute you. (but I NEVER want to meet you in combat...I fly a Raven)... You need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km disruptor range. You need one tracking disruptor to make a turret ship useless. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Alowishus	Posted - 2006.10.27 22:06:00 - [92] I think every race, weapon and ship should be exactly the same. Makes sense doesn't it?
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.27 22:08:00 - [93] I fully support this. Or even better, Increase flight time by 5x Slow speed by 5x increase damage by 5x slow rof by 2x make missiles targetable. Mind control and tin hats
LordZer00 Caldari Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.10.27 22:25:00 - [94] Originally by: Tasty Burger Originally by: susan ivonava dont tracking disruptors gimp either A) cap recharge, B) tank, C) Speed, prolly missed a few others but tbh, sick of these whine threads Just goes to show you how much caldari ecm ***s know about the game besides ECM and missiles. Yes, because the comment from that one person signifies the knowledge of every other player that flies a Caldari ship right? Oh, wait, no, but by your logic I guess that just goes to show you how much Minmatar Artie\AC ***s know about real life... See? It works both ways.... Please, try not to be such a complete idjit.
Monarana	Posted - 2006.10.28 11:07:00 - [95] Personlly I think missle disrupters should replace ecm's current function.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.28 19:56:00 - [96] Originally by: Tasty Burger You need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km disruptor range. You need one tracking disruptor to make a turret ship useless. Then for ****'s sake WHY aren't you petitioning to nerf tracking disrupters? --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.28 19:58:00 - [97] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Tasty Burger You need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km disruptor range. You need one tracking disruptor to make a turret ship useless. Then for ****'s sake WHY aren't you petitioning to nerf tracking disrupters? So you think tracking disruptors should be removed from game? Remove citadel torpedo flashes!
goodby4u	Posted - 2006.10.28 21:13:00 - [98] /signed But i dont think missiles are an iwin button,their much more affective at hitting anything without a web although and are in general easier to use,thats the strong points of missiles and although i think their should be a way to counter them it should be by a very little amount so people cant just stack on tracking and missile disrupts and be able to stop anything from hitting him hard besides drone users. That being said we still need a counter.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.28 21:23:00 - [99] Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Tasty Burger You need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km disruptor range. You need one tracking disruptor to make a turret ship useless. Then for ****'s sake WHY aren't you petitioning to nerf tracking disrupters? So you think tracking disruptors should be removed from game? Did I SAY that? Since when did "NERF" equal "REMOVE"? If this was just an attempt to wind me up, then congratulations you succeeded, but at the expense of making yourself look dumb in the process. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
goodby4u	Posted - 2006.10.28 21:37:00 - [100] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Tasty Burger You need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km disruptor range. You need one tracking disruptor to make a turret ship useless. Then for ****'s sake WHY aren't you petitioning to nerf tracking disrupters? So you think tracking disruptors should be removed from game? Did I SAY that? Since when did "NERF" equal "REMOVE"? If this was just an attempt to wind me up, then congratulations you succeeded, but at the expense of making yourself look dumb in the process. But sensor dampeners work with every ship(besides titans and such)tracking disrupts work only with turret boats,because they are focused they are powerful with that one thing their good at.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.10.28 21:41:00 - [101] Originally by: Tasty Burger Edited by: Tasty Burger on 24/10/2006 23:32:20 Now that we can't jam caldari boats anymore because ECM sucks on non-caldari boats, we need something to stop the missile boats from being invulnerable. Sensor damps? Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.10.28 22:24:00 - [102] Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Tasty Burger You need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km disruptor range. You need one tracking disruptor to make a turret ship useless. Then for **'s sake WHY aren't you petitioning to nerf tracking disrupters? Because that is ridiculous? Im fine with tracking disruptors, im not fine with missiles not having a counter. Originally by:** Malthros Zenobia Originally by: Tasty Burger Edited by: Tasty Burger on 24/10/2006 23:32:20 Now that we can't jam caldari boats anymore because ECM sucks on non-caldari boats, we need something to stop the missile boats from being invulnerable. Sensor damps? As I said... you need 3 sensor damps to get a raven below 20km, and thats if it has no sensor boosters. Remember that warp disruptors only go to 20km. If a raven can still lock and fire perfectly fine below 20km, well... you arent gonna be scrambling it are ya? Tracking disruptors work on turrets at all ranges with just one module. Long range? Optimal HALVED. Short range? You can't hit squat. One module. Dampeners are pointless when you intend to kill your target, not chase him away. I can't stress it enough, damps are pointless at close range, which is EXACTLY where you need to be to warp scramble something. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
James Cathin	Posted - 2006.10.29 00:13:00 - [103] Why not anti missile guns in high slots? How it would work: - We would not be able to use them to strike another ship. - The guns automaticaly target incoming missiles, they will be automatic wich means player has no control over them, they should use high slots, and have a chance of hitting missiles, the faster the missile is the less chance it has to take it down, and also bigger missiles need more shots to be taken down. I know its almost the same as defender missiles, the diference is in the ammo, it should use some crazy ammo like flares or something like that so it would break the missile guidance for a couple seconds, the higher the skill is the more time the flare lasts. Should work like a disruptor for missiles.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.29 14:15:00 - [104] Originally by: Tasty Burger Because that is ridiculous? Im fine with tracking disruptors, im not fine with missiles not having a counter. Missiles DO have a counter. It's called defenders, and whilst I admit it is nowhere near as effective as a turret disrupter, it IS an existing counter. Either petition to fix defenders, or to nerf turret disrupters back to where it's about equivalent to a defender rocket launcher. But...there's the problem...you'll be back here in a day complaining that the disrupter is too effective and the defender is not effective enough. If even ONE missile hits you when you have a defender active, you will complain. And, even if you accept balance, I won't...because you have tracking computers that can modify the effect of a tracking disrupter...what module will we get to modify the effect of a defender? So all you do is swap one argument for another. Same time, same channel, see you next week. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Araxmas Caldari Imperial Space Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.29 14:24:00 - [105] Why not do what we do, use a recon ship to ecm the raven. --------

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.