| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
TheRealDavidPollock
   |
Posted - 2007.07.19 17:50:00 -
[1]
Edited by: TheRealDavidPollock on 19/07/2007 17:52:43
So when reading the desciption on assault it says.
"A launcher intended for use on cruiser-class spacecraft. While heavy assault launchers do not possess the sheer damage-dealing capability of regular heavy missile launchers, their blend of speed and attack power lends them application across a good range of tactical situations."
Now when comparing stats aside from the fitting being a bit different, the assault launcher maybe holds 1/4 less then the regular heavy missile launchers, yet the rate of fire is almost half. In theory giving you almost 2X the damage then the regular, but needing to reload 1/4 more of the time. If this is true is the description wrong? Sure you may need to reload more, but the killing is so much faster. Are assault generally better then regular? I don't think you can use FoF missiles on assault can you? Is that the only disadvantage?
Need some insight!
Edited for Spelling XD
|
Sparkius
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 18:01:00 -
[2]
I'm pretty sure assault missiles have short ranges, so it restricts their usability to certain circumstances.
<---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence." - Anoymous |
Xilimyth Derlin
Gallente
OldBastardsPub
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 18:02:00 -
[3]
Comparison:
Assault Missile Launcher :: Heavy Missile Launcher
as
Blasters :: Railguns
If you can get close, I've found that the DPS is higher (though abit more ammo consuming) with the assault launcher.
Really, it all depends, are you like my sister whom likes to stay back and kill things, or her boyfriend whom loves being right up in the action.
|
Vorketh Mordanil
Amarr
Brotherhood of Acquisitions
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 18:09:00 -
[4]
The difference in this comparison is that Assault launchers are the only short range platform that require more power grid (and by a lot) than their long range siblings.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Morreia
The Celestial Element
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 18:11:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Vorketh Mordanil
The difference in this comparison is that Assault launchers are the only short range platform that require more power grid (and by a lot) than their long range siblings.
Apart from cruise/torps, I never quite get this bit though.
|
TheRealDavidPollock
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 18:13:00 -
[6]
Alright that would make sense since it's not listed in the stats of the launcher. I thought the range of the missile directly depended on your skills and the missile itself. Thanks!
|
6Bagheera9
Shadows of the Dead
Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.19 18:22:00 -
[7]
/sigh
Light Missile: Long-range Light Guided Missile
Heavy Missile: Long-range Medium Guide Missile
Heavy Assault Missile(HAM): Short-range rapid-fire medium unguided missile.
Standard Missile Launcher: Figate Module, fires Light Missiles
Assault Launcher: Cruiser Module, fires Light Missiles, Higher RoF and magazine capacity than standard lauchers
Heavy Missile Launcher: Fires Heavy Missiles
Heavy Assault Missile Laucher: Fires Heavy Assault Missiles
|
Hannobaal
Gallente
Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom
Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.07.20 02:46:00 -
[8]
Originally by: TheRealDavidPollock
yet the rate of fire is almost half. In theory giving you almost 2X the damage then the regular,
No, cause Heavy Assault Missiles only do 2/3rds of the damage Heavy Missiles do. It's more like about 1/3rd more dps than Heavy missiles.
------------------
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |