EVE Search - Heavy Assault Missiles - a new skill subset

All Channels

Revelations Testing and Development

Heavy Assault Missiles - a new skill subset - WHY?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ramptrick Caldari Art of War Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.11 03:42:00 - [31] Originally by: XoPhyte Edited by: XoPhyte on 10/11/2006 22:24:57 I am not exactly clear as to why the new heavy assault missiles (for close range damage) are again another skill subset for Caldari. Seriously we have enough skill subsets, and now we need to train for the 425 II's on the rokh But in all seriousness, the heavy assault specializations should be an extension of the heavy missiles V skills, not yet another skill subset. To give you an example, for both close range and long range missile skills (not including specializations) we currently have.... Rockets (close range frig - 5 day) Standard missiles (long range frig - 10 day) Heavy Missiles (Long Range Cruiser / Battlecruiser - 15 day) Now Heavy Assault (Close Range Cruiser / Battlecruiser - 15 day) Torpedoes (close range battleship and now nerfed - 20 day) Cruise missiles (long range battleship - 30 day) Now by these estimations to get all close range and long range missile skills we have a 90 day training path to get all those to level 5 Now if you look at something like Amar.... Small energy weapons (completes both beam & pulse setups - 5 day) Medium energy turrets (long & short range cruiser - 15 day) Large energy turrets (long & short range BS- 30 day) Total time: 50 days. All you need for the t2 variants of close and long range combat is the different specialization skill book, not a completely different skill subset. Add in the mix that our new rokh bs forces us to train for the hybrid turrets we have another 40+ days of training for a grand total of 130 days for caldari, 50 days for other races. I don't see how that is reasonable. Sure you can bring up that the t2 variants of missiles don't require previous speciliaziation skills like hybrid turrets. But I remind you now that the rokh is a railboat, we have to train the hybrid's to lvl 5 and all the subsequent specializiation skills to IV. I'm not complaining about the rokh or the rails (it's about time caldari will be effective in fleet combat) but please for the love of god, remove yet another skill subset for caldari with the heavy assaults. Well as gallente i think it takes longer to train for turrets than it does missles!!! i trained for large T2 425's which the preskills are huge and takes alot of time, but for you if you jut wanted to train for T2 cruise missles you can wihout training all the other skills so please get your facts correct before moaning on the forums about caldari is so unfair!!
Lurtz Caldari Gunrunners and Gamblers	Posted - 2006.11.11 14:12:00 - [32] Originally by: XoPhyte Edited by: XoPhyte on 10/11/2006 22:36:09 Yes but so do I. And yes I mentioned in the original post about not needing the proceeding specialization skill. However this now changes for all caldari pilots with the Rokh BS as we all need to train for the 425 II's, and therefore need all subsequent specilization skills as well. My point is, just don't add the heavy assults with yet another stupid skill subset. Need to train 425 II? No. you don't have to fly a Rokh. and some of us Caldari have it already and have been flying a megathron because of the lack of a Caldari gunboat.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.11 20:29:00 - [33] Edited by: Grey Area on 11/11/2006 20:45:19 Originally by: Benglada Id agree to that if you could only hold 30 missiles =) And I'd be quite happy to only carry 30 missiles if each one could deliver repeated damage like drones do. Drone and missiles are DIFFERENT. But they ARE balanced, and drones, like turrets, give you a lot of CHOICE as to what you do with them. Every missile user has to fit the same **** setup because there is such a lack of options. Edit: I don't see ANY hardwiring implants for drone use. I regard this as the same limitation of choice that missile users are subjected to, and happily support any drone user who wants to ask for an introduction of hardwiring implants to improve drone performance. --- 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 - 2006.11.11 20:42:00 - [34] Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne Originally by: Grey Area but why can't we have a low or mid slot module that affects explosion velocity or explosion radius? also: have you ever stopped to think why turrets get those modules? could it maybe have something to do with this "tracking" you dont want to talk about? if you want to get modules that improve your launchers performance thats fine with me as long as the base performance of those launchers gets reduced in turn. you dont have those mods because missiles dont need them. As I said, you really don't think before you post. First, i am perfectly happy to talk about tracking, inasmuch as it is the attribute that guns have which prevents them damaging small, fast targets, and which can be modified by tracking computers AND subroutines. You're right, missiles don't have it. They have either explosion radius or explosion velocity, which is the attribute that prevents MISSILES from damaging small, fast targets - but they get NO modules to adjust it...and you have the NERVE to talk about balance? So, why don't missiles need to ne nerfed to allow for this extra module I hear you ask...well it's simple really...to FIT said module, I am going to have to take something OFF my ship...probably a ballistic control unit...so unless I'm asking for an extra slot on all missile ships (which I am not), the simple EXISTENCE of the module does NOT increase the power of a missile ship...BUT if I am going out hunting in 0.0, where I know a pack of pirates hunts in cruisers, then using three "insert name of explosion radius reducing module here" may well serve me better than the sheer grunt of three ballistic controls. And it's really NO different than the turret situation...you can fit EITHER three damage modifiers, or three tracking subroutines, or a mixture thereof...so which point would you like us to use when we are calculating for balance? Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne how about using smaller missiles instead to hit smaller targets? A very glib remark...how about we remove tracking computers and subroutines from teh game and then ask you to fit smaller turrets? Doesn't sound quite so good to you in reverse I guess... Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne if you want a mod to improve explosion velocity feel free to reduce the base value on all missiles in return to make up for this change. unless you just want to boost missiles a bit because they are too weak or somesuch thing. I've explained this above, but I'll do it again. Currently a turret user can fit either three damage modifiers or three tracking subroutines in his low slots. What he CHOOSES to fit depends on what target he expects to encounter. if he has fitted all three damage mods and gets hit by a 'ceptor or assault frigate swarm, he has made the wrong decision...but if he has fitted the tracking mods he will fare better. The missile user can ONLY fit the damage mods. We cannot tailor our damage to suit smaller targets. I do not wish to increase DPS across the board...I simply wish to be able to VARY it depending upon what target I can expect to encounter - in exactly the same way that a turret user can. Now then...please go back and read that again before posting. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.11 20:50:00 - [35] Caldari are the proud owners of the only dedicated missile boats in the game, the best tank in the game, the best EWAR ships, the best PvP rail ship in the game (now) and have been given an entire new module tree. I'm not complaining- anyone can use it, theres no reason why Caldari shouldn't get good content. But I'm not going to cry any rivers about needing to train new skills to use new modules. You don't have to use the Rokh if you don't want to train turrets, you dont have to train ECM if you don't want to use EWAR boats, and you dont have to train the new HAL- you've got by well enough up until now. Be happy you HAVE something nice to play with. /me sobs over the crappy Gall ships and various nerfs......... -----------------------------------------------
Litus Arowar Amarr Obsidian Asylum Pure.	Posted - 2006.11.11 21:04:00 - [36] Edited by: Litus Arowar on 11/11/2006 21:06:05 Edited by: Litus Arowar on 11/11/2006 21:05:31 Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne Originally by: Grey Area but why can't we have a low or mid slot module that affects explosion velocity or explosion radius? also: have you ever stopped to think why turrets get those modules? could it maybe have something to do with this "tracking" you dont want to talk about? ...[EDIT char limit snip]... Now then...please go back and read that again before posting. good luck hitting inties with large guns at anything but 200+kms... while precision cruises will tear any inty a new one... you think tracking enhancers make large guns hit small targets? they make large guns hit large targets from farther away, small targets don't need to worry about it too much this whole thread makes no sense... your basic premise is that you now get the choice of going missiles or guns (with the rokh) and you're whining that you have to train for the rokh... sure, you're doing it indirectly, but there's a reason you throw it into every post you make... don't fly the rokh then, fly the raven, fly the drake... you got one more weapon type, and you aren't happy with it? oh and as for the variation argument, you have lots of room for variation on your raven... you can go with shield or armor tank; you can go with cruises or torps; you can pick the types of drones; you can choose your damage type; you can choose painters, ecm, or webs... and this is just with the most common setups so don't whine about having one more skill to train, one that only requires the addition of a spec skill... I'm an amarr frig pilot and I had to train gallente frig, small hybrids with specs, drones, minmatar frig, projectiles, and will soon be training shields for passive tanking... and that's just to be competitive cytomatrix> Try sitting inside a big frickin ball filled up with glue and tubes stuck up your nose and your arse. Then compare RL and Eve.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.11 21:42:00 - [37] First, I'm not whining about training Railguns OR the missile skills. I'm fine with it. Second... Originally by: Litus Arowar oh and as for the variation argument, you have lots of room for variation on your raven... you can go with shield or armor tank; you can go with cruises or torps; you can pick the types of drones; you can choose your damage type; you can choose painters, ecm, or webs... and this is just with the most common setups Why do you always bring it back to ONE ship...but anyway; Any Battleship can choose to shield or armour tank...they all have decent enough low/mid slots to mount a reasonable defence. We can go with cruises or torps...that's like saying a Mega can go with Rails or blasters. But there are THREE individual large tech 1 Railguns, four named variants of each, and THREE tech II railguns. That is EIGHTEEN weapons...blasters are the same. There is ONE crusie launcher, four named variants and the tech II...so that is SIX weapons. We have precisely ONE THIRD of your range of choice. Any ship can pick it's type of drones. Yes we can choose damage type. So can the Minmatar. So can Gallente by choice of drones. I'm not seeing any great missile advantage in the choice department, only a LACK of choice in the laser department...but then they have infinite ammo to balance that out. Any other ship can ALSO choose painters ECM or Webs...turrets in addition can choose trackin computers and low slot trackin enhancers. So turrets have more CHOICE again. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.11 21:51:00 - [38] With drones, there are only 3 sizes, with only 4 types (read= ammo types) plus their t2 counterparts. Give me more drone choices, then we can talk PS, check the huge Drone thread up in the stickies for all the problems with Drones atm, then tell me missiles are the underdogs......... I still fail to see the problem with having to train a new skill for a new module. Its not like you have to train it, if you don't want. -----------------------------------------------
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.11 22:56:00 - [39] Originally by: Grey Area First, i am perfectly happy to talk about tracking, inasmuch as it is the attribute that guns have which prevents them damaging small, fast targets, and which can be modified by tracking computers AND subroutines. You're right, missiles don't have it. They have either explosion radius or explosion velocity... yeah that would be all nice and good if tracking only worked on small and fast targets. unfortunately it also works on any other target that manages to create enough transversal speed to you. also notice that there are modules called tracking disruptors. try and use them against a turret user and you will notice how even big and slow targets dont get hit as much. And yes i'm right: theres no such thing for missiles. also: tracking computers/enhancers dont affect the signature resolution of guns. so why should there be mods that improve the explosion velocity of missiles? Originally by: Grey Area the simple EXISTENCE of the module does NOT increase the power of a missile ship... BUT if I am going out hunting in 0.0, where I know a pack of pirates hunts in cruisers, then using three "insert name of explosion radius reducing module here" may well serve me better than the sheer grunt of three ballistic controls. maybe not the overal power but it will increase the damage done to smaller ships. last i checked there are already precision missiles and a skill to be used for that. if you had such a mod you could combine it with those missiles to deal a lot more damage on smaller targets. and not just if they stand still or at range as it is with guns but in every situation. last i checked we're supposed to fit the correct sized weapons for that. as theres no precision ammo for turrets i assume you would have no problem with removing precission missiles to keep things balanced then? you lose the precision ammo which works nicely without even fitting an additional mod on your ship but get the ability to fit a mod to do this. actually i like this more than the way it is now. Originally by: Grey Area And it's really NO different than the turret situation...you can fit EITHER three damage modifiers, or three tracking subroutines, or a mixture thereof...so which point would you like us to use when we are calculating for balance? there is NO module to affect the signature resolution of guns. Originally by: Grey Area A very glib remark...how about we remove tracking computers and subroutines from teh game and then ask you to fit smaller turrets? yeah because that would have exactly the same effect you would need to remove tracking computers/enhancers, increase optimal range on guns and remove tracking from the game before you get anywhere near balance this way. Originally by: Grey Area Currently a turret user can fit either three damage modifiers or three tracking subroutines in his low slots. What he CHOOSES to fit depends on what target he expects to encounter. if he has fitted all three damage mods and gets hit by a 'ceptor or assault frigate swarm, he has made the wrong decision...but if he has fitted the tracking mods he will fare better. you should try and hit a competent ceptor pilot with crusier or even bs sized guns and tracking enhancers sometime. or even with frigate sized guns without those enhancers. its not as simple as just sticking the modules on. for missiles it would be this simple. pretty much like all things are with missiles. Originally by: Grey Area We cannot tailor our damage to suit smaller targets. I simply wish to be able to VARY it depending upon what target I can expect to encounter - in exactly the same way that a turret user can. have you ever considered training the missile-only skill to reduce the effect of target signature-size vs explosion radius/signature resolution? or maybe use this missile-only precision ammo? those are two things turret uses can not do to prepare for smaller targets.
XoPhyte Out Siders Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.11 22:57:00 - [40] Originally by: ramptrick so please get your facts correct before moaning on the forums about caldari is so unfair!! Or how about you learn to read and see that I have already addressed that? Originally by: Shamis Orzoz Most people in eve would rather win than have a good fight
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.11 23:25:00 - [41] Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne yeah that would be all nice and good if tracking only worked on small and fast targets. unfortunately it also works on any other target that manages to create enough transversal speed to you. Which means your trackin computers work on ALL targets. OMG! OVERPOWERED! NERF! Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne also notice that there are modules called tracking disruptors. try and use them against a turret user and you will notice how even big and slow targets dont get hit as much. And yes i'm right: theres no such thing for missiles. Defender launchers. Yes, I know, they are broken unless you are an NPC. Stop ignoring them and petition for them to be fixed. the trouble is, then you lose another of your neat little arguments, don't you? Personally I think tracking disrupters are hellish overpowered. but why should I petition to have them fixed? I don't use turrets Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne there is NO module to affect the signature resolution of guns. Don't get hung up on what the attribute is CALLED. The GREATEST effect on damage reduction for missiles is Explosion Radius, the velocity factor is very much secondary. The GREATEST effect on damage reduction for guns is TRACKING, with the signature radius being secondary. Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne have you ever considered training the missile-only skill to reduce the effect of target signature-size vs explosion radius/signature resolution? Had it to level 5 for some months now. I'm not arguing about the skills...you get motion prediction (or whatever) and we get Guided Missile Precsion. Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne or maybe use this missile-only precision ammo? This would be the same ammo that effectively stops cap recharge ENTIRELY? Yes, great when I'm being Nos'd to death by three or four assault frigates. Not. I don't dispute that the option is there...but there is a VERY heavy penalty to be paid for using it. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Faricar Caldari Infinite Innovations Astral Wolves	Posted - 2006.11.12 00:09:00 - [42] Edited by: Faricar on 12/11/2006 00:09:10 All i have to say is... GOT: GET OVER IT
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.12 00:31:00 - [43] Originally by: Grey Area Which means your trackin computers work on ALL targets. OMG! OVERPOWERED! NERF! since you obviously didnt get what i was trying to point out: turrets need to combat tracking even against same size/speed targets...missiles just hit in this case. for full damage. every time. Originally by: Grey Area Defender launchers. alright: assuming defenders would work they would take out some of the missiles fired at you. reducing the damage you take a little bit but not nearly as much as a tracking disruptor would. provided your ship has launcher hardpoint(s) to fit them in the frist place. also defenders will need time to reach an enemy missile before it reaches your ship. making defenders useless at short range. tracking disruptors if used properly have the ability to cripple optimal range (med range targets may not be able to hit you at all) and tracking (if you get some transversal going even a shortrange enemy will miss a lot). a tracking disrupted target will be tracking disrupted no matter whom he targets. as such it helps defend your entire gang not just yourself. also notice how tds use medslots. now while some ships dont have many of them all ships have at least 1 medslot they could in theory use for this. a lot of ships dont have any launcher hardpoints. Originally by: Grey Area Don't get hung up on what the attribute is CALLED. The GREATEST effect on damage reduction for missiles is Explosion Radius, the velocity factor is very much secondary. The GREATEST effect on damage reduction for guns is TRACKING, with the signature radius being secondary. thats actually not always true. its very much situational which of those attributes has a higher effect. Originally by: Grey Area Had it to level 5 for some months now. I'm not arguing about the skills...you get motion prediction (or whatever) and we get Guided Missile Precsion. yes and then you also get Target Navigation Prediction. 2 skills to improve those 2 attributes you want to improve even further with modules. in fact i would rather compare this one to motion prediction as both are somewhat depending on the targets speed while there is simply no way for a turret user to reduce the signature resolution of his guns. Originally by: Grey Area Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne or maybe use this missile-only precision ammo? This would be the same ammo that effectively stops cap recharge ENTIRELY? Yes, great when I'm being Nos'd to death by three or four assault frigates. Not. I don't dispute that the option is there...but there is a VERY heavy penalty to be paid for using it. launchers dont require any cap to operate at all. so even with lower recharge you still stand a very good chance to take down some smaller targets. also: a turret ship will do what exactly to easily dispatch those same 3 or 4 nossing assault frigates it cant hit? if a missileboat encounters smaller enemies it cant damage enough with t1 ammo then at least you do have the option to switch to precision ammo. so there is a penatly. big deal when the alternative is to just sit there and die anyway.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.12 00:49:00 - [44] Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne while there is simply no way for a turret user to reduce the signature resolution of his guns. Thanks for that...I've been quoting exactly this in another thread. You cannot control the sig resolution of your guns. This is the ONLY aspect of your own weapons that you cannot control. I think you should have a "Turret Resolution" skill that reduces it by some % per level, AND a "Turret Resolver" module that reduces it as well. That would mean you can control EVERY aspect of your guns, not just by skills, but by modules as well. But of course, in return, you have to give US the same options. you are right, we are not missing any skills, but in terms of modules we have NO control over; Explosion Radius of missiles Explosion velocity of missiles Flight time of missiles Velocity of missiles Of course the last two could be contained in a single module...increase velocity, but reduce flight time...range is reduced, but the missiles get there faster. Hopefully now you can see just how imbalanced the situation is. And introducing the moduels does NOT cause imbalance...since an existing module would have to be removed from the ship to install the new one. Your "Turret resolution" skill of course, WOULD be an across the board increase to DPS. And you know what? I don't care. It SHOULD be introduced. If it leads to a temporary imbalance, then so be it...I am sure CCP would act to correct it later. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.12 01:07:00 - [45] Originally by: Grey Area yet more stuff alright i just read the other thread you started on this same stupid idea. yes i know you cant decide to prepare for smaller targets while fitting your ship. in turn you get to decide to fit precision ammo while flying your ship and you dont even suffer as much when fighting a small/fast ship at close range compared to turrets. do you really believe that missiles are so far behind turrets against smaller targets that they need this boost? honestly by now i think you have no idea on how turrets really work in the game. have you ever tried hitting an interceptor or other fast frig with bs or crusier sized guns. you say we can just stick some tracking mods on to improve our chances. yeah thats right they will go up from about 0.01% to 0.02% if your lucky. to actually hit the target you will still have to reduce transversal regardless of what fancy tracking mod you fit.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.12 12:53:00 - [46] Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne do you really believe that missiles are so far behind turrets against smaller targets that they need this boost? Not as plainly as you put it, no. Basically missile ships get to fit for more damage...and no balance vs whether that damage is against larger ships or smaller ships. Turret users can choose a weapon that has better tracking to start with. I don't mean a SMALLER weapon...I mean one of the two or three variations that you have in EVERY size class of weapon. THEN you can install a tracking computer, which improves tracking by up to THIRTY percent. If that's not enough, you can stuff low slots with tracking subroutines adding even MORE improvement. Do you know how much, as a percentage, a STATIONARY interceptor's damage from a Torp is reduced by? 92.8%. If I fire a target painter at it...90.6%. That's at ALL ranges from zero to maximum, and there is NOTHING we can fit on our ship that changes it further. The need for the modules is to vary the loadout of missile ships. If one particular loadout turns out to be imbalanced, then sure, the stats of the modules or the base of the missiles would need to be adjusted. But that alone should not be sufficent reason to prevent the introduciton of the modules. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
GPerson Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2006.11.13 03:56:00 - [47] On a somewhat off-topic note, there are 19,200,000 sp in the missile skill tree. Compare that to the 45,568,000 sp under the gunnery tree. whistles quietly and walks out of the room I like my sig... ~~~Sig Stuffs Here~~~ I highly recommend drunken posting. Oh yeah, you just lost The Game
Swamp Ziro EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.11.13 06:48:00 - [48] Edited by: Swamp Ziro on 13/11/2006 06:49:28 As a minmatar, this thread had me laughing out loud XD *takes a look at the typhoon again. . Hahahahhahah Yeah ok , poor Caldari... =( EDIT: Seriously, when you have to train 3 weapon types and 2 tanking types THEN come whine.
Melicien Tetro	Posted - 2006.11.13 09:54:00 - [49] I'm going to offer the contention that you shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth. I mean, really. CCP has just granted the caldari some real pvp potential, and you want to not have to train as much for it? I thought it was pretty realistically balanced, as far as sp requirements per cubic liter of rape-dizzle. My two iskies.
Bellum Eternus	Posted - 2006.11.13 10:21:00 - [50] Originally by: Melicien Tetro I'm going to offer the contention that you shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth. I mean, really. CCP has just granted the caldari some real pvp potential, and you want to not have to train as much for it? I thought it was pretty realistically balanced, as far as sp requirements per cubic liter of rape-dizzle. My two iskies. You really have to feel sorry for Caldari players, what with being born with silver spoons in their collective mouths, never having to work hard to achieve success. They're just not used to having to do something like skill in two or three different trees to be successful. Poor little Caldari. It's a celebration beeootch!
Bambi Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.13 10:40:00 - [51] Edited by: Bambi on 13/11/2006 10:53:47 Why plan to fly a Rokh if you dont have the skills for it, sounds stupid to me. If all you have is missile skills buy a Raven. The Rokh has a differnet role to a Raven, get used to it. Oh yeah you could tell the GM's to give you all the skills you want to level 5 in 1 day so life was fair... (sorry having a bad day needed a rant) Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad. EVE-Log
Pinky Denmark	Posted - 2006.11.13 11:43:00 - [52] Missiles is better in some ways (you can spec in specific missile fast - which is to help other races train up specific secondary weapon systems fast) as hitting even small fast targets, however we get a very reduced damage (though better than nothing). However when turrets are pointed on a valid target they do much better damage than missiles - and you have many types of guns to select from to get a more balanced fitting.
Melicien Tetro	Posted - 2006.11.13 12:56:00 - [53] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Melicien Tetro I'm going to offer the contention that you shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth. I mean, really. CCP has just granted the caldari some real pvp potential, and you want to not have to train as much for it? I thought it was pretty realistically balanced, as far as sp requirements per cubic liter of rape-dizzle. My two iskies. You really have to feel sorry for Caldari players, what with being born with silver spoons in their collective mouths, never having to work hard to achieve success. They're just not used to having to do something like skill in two or three different trees to be successful. Poor little Caldari. Preach it, brotha. They should be happy that any of their skills are carrying over to those crime against EVE Heavy Assault Missiles.
Etienne Merten	Posted - 2006.11.13 14:23:00 - [54] Flame wars...sometimes interesting, rarely useful. Bottom line, if you don't like the new skill, don't train it. If some other race's boat is better, train that! I am a Gallente who was flying Megathrons with ~4,000,000 SP in gunnery, and I don't use rails or blasters anymore...I trained in Caldari ships and missile tech and use that. I must say that I did do that because I can deal more DPS faster that way...but then again, nothing stopped me from using Caldari equipment when it's better. Balance is always going to be an issue. It can never be resolved entirely. Oh, well! Change is continual. Adapt, overcome. Whatever you think is the best, train for that. Eventually, your character will be uber regardless of the change. Where's the problem? Just my 2 cents. Flame away!
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.13 14:46:00 - [55] Originally by: GPerson On a somewhat off-topic note, there are 19,200,000 sp in the missile skill tree. Compare that to the 45,568,000 sp under the gunnery tree. whistles quietly and walks out of the room Silly boy. The Gunnery tree is split into three...hybrids, lasers and projectiles. no one SERIOUSLY trains for all three. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Swamp Ziro EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.11.13 14:55:00 - [56] Yes, but many people train for a gun spec, missiles and drones.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.13 16:17:00 - [57] I would say mopst people are either missiles and drones OR gunnery and drones. Caldari now have an excuse to train up large hybrids for the Rokh...Regardless of that though, it's still true that it takes you longer to train to level 5 in missiles than it does in Hybrids, Lasers OR Projectiles. 1,792,000 SP more to be exact. I really must look at how many SP are in the drone tree for comparison. Note that I for one am NOT ***ing about new missile skills...it is turret users who always *** that they can't jump straight to BS weapons becasue they have to specialise in others first. And it's true. But we have more SP if we want to max out missiles, so as far as I'm concerned, it's balanced. Having to train more skills is always a pain...but we are getting more weapons in return...weapons that we DESPERATELY need. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Old Geeza The Retirement Home	Posted - 2006.11.13 19:06:00 - [58] Turrets Gunnery 5 (5 days) Sharpshooter 5 (10 days) Motion Prediction 5 (10 days) Small Turret 5 (5 days) Medium Turret 5 (15 days) Large Turret 5 (25 days) Small Close Turret 4 (3 days) Small Long Turret 4 (3 days) Medium Close Turret 4 (5 days) Medium Long Turret 4 (5 days) Large Close Turret 4 (8 days) Large Long Turret 4 (8 days) Total: 5 + 10 + 10 + 5 + 15 + 25 + 3 + 3 + 5 + 5 + 8 + 8 = 102 days Missiles Missile Launcher Operation 5 (5 days) Rockets 5 (5 days) Standard Missiles 5 (10 days) Heavy Missiles 5 (15 days) Heavy Assault Missiles 5 (15 days) Torpedos 5 (20 days) Cruise Missiles 5 (25 days) Rocket Spec 4 (3 days) Standard Missile Spec 4 (3 days) Heavy Missile Spec 4 (5 days) Heavy Assault Missile Spec 4 (5 days) Torpedo Spec 4 (8 days) Cruise Missile Spec 4 (8 days) Total: 5 + 5 + 10 + 15 + 15 + 20 + 25 + 3 + 3 + 5 + 5 + 8 + 8 = 127 days _______________________________________ Sign the petition against jump queues!
bldyannoyed Standard Operations Building Services Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.13 20:22:00 - [59] You Caldari lot should thank your lucky stars your missile skill tree works the way it does. The Devs said at fanfest that the ONLY reason u dont have to train T2 missiles up the smae way as turrets is an OVERSIGHT on their part. They have said they want to bring them inline with turrets but cant think of a way to do it without gimping all the people that already have some T2 missiles trained. So if i were you i'd stop drawing attention to it.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.13 21:19:00 - [60] Edited by: Grey Area on 13/11/2006 21:20:43 If that's the case, then what are they going to give us in return for the extra time we have to spend training them? Or is this finally the admission we have been waiting for, that the Devs just hate missiles? 3rd possibility...you're just blowing smoke, and they never actually said that. --- Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.