| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Skillz
   |
Posted - 2004.02.11 23:51:00 -
[1]
If you can fire cruise missiles from a Krestel, I want to fit a tachyon laser to a Punisher.
But I'd rather see CCP balance the frigates.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Psychopath
|
Posted - 2004.02.11 23:52:00 -
[2]
Very True 
A Corp 1 pirate I was meant to be, trim the sails and roam the sea |
BobGhengisKhan
|
Posted - 2004.02.11 23:56:00 -
[3]
Against minmatar frigs, kestrels eat balls. I don't really fly anything else
|
Baun
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 00:52:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Baun on 12/02/2004 00:55:19
Given that only 1 cruise missle can fit in a Frigate launcher, i dont think its unfair at all. It is also very different then being able to mount a multi shot (and more powerful) large turret on a frigate. Furthemore, cruise missles are ammunition not powerful mountable weapons in and of themselves.
The only reason i found cruise missles on frigates at all questionable is that they can easily destroy other frigates. The simple solution is to make frigates faster, alot faster, such that they can avoid cruise missles a majority of the time.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 00:57:00 -
[5]
Edited by: dalman on 12/02/2004 01:03:57
 Quote:
Given that only 1 cruise missle can fit in a Frigate launcher, i dont think its unfair at all. It is also very different then being able to mount a multi shot (and more powerful) large turret on a frigate.
The only reason i found cruise missles on frigates at all questionable is that they can easily destroy other frigates. The simple solution is to make frigates faster, alot faster such that they can avoid cruise missles.
Why is that, when "all" frigates can run 1 MWD and 2 ABs forever, getting them to speeds higher than the speed of cruise missiles?
Cruise missiles on Kestrels (and other ships) are just used for ganking industrials, and by groups of kestrels to make hit and run gankings of cruisers.
Now, if "Bombers" would be able to fit launchers that can hold 1 cruise missile each, I wouldn't complain. But normal frigates? NO!
The CAREBEARS won again. As usual. CCP intend to fix a problem, but then a thousand carebears screams out loud and CCP don't go through with the fix
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
Baun
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:01:00 -
[6]
true, i didnt really think about that. In that case, its already balanced.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:16:00 -
[7]
Quote:
The CAREBEARS won again. As usual. CCP intend to fix a problem, but then a thousand carebears screams out loud and CCP don't go through with the fix
As usual.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Trevedian
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:22:00 -
[8]
Quote:
If you can fire cruise missiles from a Krestel, I want to fit a tachyon laser to a Punisher.
But I'd rather see CCP balance the frigates.
I'd like to pilot a Large Secure Cargo Container w/ some lasers and MWD's slapped on it, takes forever to kill those things... I'd be more uber than I already am 
Sex0r > you're bounty turns me on.. you seem like the kind of amarrian to dominate me
|
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:27:00 -
[9]
Okay, now I'm really confused. How can it be carebears who wanted frigates to be more dangerous? Carebears are anti-fighting.
_______
"Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age." |
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:35:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Skillz on 12/02/2004 01:38:40
No, a carebear is anti anything the play style he wants to use. That's even if the overall balance is flushed down a toilet. It has nothing to do with PvP or anything.
Example: Carebear wants to mine low grade ores with no risk at all in imperial space. CCP eventually realize that it's very inflation causing.
CCP wants to have a balance between ISK/RISK, the carebears raise their fists and stomp their feet, CCP just backs away. As usual.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Slithereen
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:45:00 -
[11]
I think CCP would eventually rebalance it this way, though they won't make any changes in the small launcher until Bombers are ready.
Small Launchers will lose the ability to fire cruise missiles.
This is replaced by the "small" Cruise Missile Launcher, which can only hold One Cruise Missiles, but not Heavy and Standard misiles.
This Launcher can only fit on Bombers, but not ordinary missile frigs. It will require Bomber skill to install and use.
This way only Bombers can use torps and cruise missiles, but not ordinary missile frigs. This will make Bombers important.
I don't speak for CCP. These are just my predictions. Let's see what happens.
_______________________________________________
"Is it me or the bad guys just getting totally pathetic?"---Clover, Totally Spies,
"Hope is wasted on the Hopeless."---Mandy, The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy.
"Stars are holes in the sky from which the light of the Infinite shine through."---Confucius.
|
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:52:00 -
[12]
An other example is that you can set bookmarks 20km behind a gate, or in an asteroid belt so you get insta jump, insta dock and insta hauling ores. Now CCP has been talking this and that about nerfing bookmarks, it's always the same story. Now thank you carebear pest for ruining the game on a long term basis.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:53:00 -
[13]
Quote:
Okay, now I'm really confused. How can it be carebears who wanted frigates to be more dangerous? Carebears are anti-fighting.
For what purpose do you use Kestrels with cruise missiles?
Answer: Killing industrials.
If you can't risk using a cruiser worth 1.5M when you're killing helpless industrials worth 30M, what are you then?
Answer: A carebear. Be it a carebear-pirate, carebear-griefer or a carebear in the military of an alliance. It's still a carebear.
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
Kunming
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 01:58:00 -
[14]
Quote:
Edited by: Baun on 12/02/2004 00:55:19
Given that only 1 missle can fit in a Frigate launcher, i dont think its unfair at all. It is also very different then being able to mount a multi shot (and more powerful) large turret on a frigate. Furthemore, missles are ammunition not powerful mountable weapons in and of themselves.
The only reason i found missles on frigates at all questionable is that they can easily destroy other frigates. The simple solution is to make frigates faster, alot faster, such that they can avoid missles a majority of the.
Yeah I like the idea of fast frigates. They should be able to evade large missiles like cruise and torps, but they should also add some anti frig missile which is as fast as the fastest frigate, but does far less damage!
Intercepting since BETA |
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 02:08:00 -
[15]
A battleship and a frig are supposed to be like and elephant and a mosquito. They shoulden't be able to do anything to each other, under normal circumstances.
A frigate is supposed to be the work horse for a strike force, easy to replace and does the most of the job.
Today the battleship is the frigate. Nerf battleships but then the stuff strutter carebears would stomp their feet and raise their fists.
Please note that Carebears don't represent any majority, not even a significant minority. They are however very good at running their mouths so CCP thinks they 'have to listen'.
Social manipulation at an advanced level.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 02:27:00 -
[16]
BSs were supposed to be the heavy duty ships that bombard stations, but it came out that the game had to be released before it was finished so all ship balance is messed up!
Btw don't blame CCP for the early release, it was their investors that wanted to see some cold hard cash after 5 years of development!!!
Intercepting since BETA |
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 02:28:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Skillz on 12/02/2004 02:30:52
CCP does not serve it's end of getting cold hard $$$ by doing this.
Reason is very simple, not many people try to PvP in a frigate with their main char, so the first experience of PvP is that they go in their cruiser or worse, battleship and then it's, hahahahah, you died and then they think, well how nice, good bye.
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
Baun
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 03:13:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Baun on 12/02/2004 03:26:42
Quote:
Quote:
Okay, now I'm really confused. How can it be carebears who wanted frigates to be more dangerous? Carebears are anti-fighting.
For what purpose do you use Kestrels with cruise missiles?
Answer: Killing industrials.
Ya or for making overconfident pirates in cruisers look very stupid. Just ask Insane Angel.
My main question about this is; if frigates cannot fire cruise missles what threat are they to cruisers? How many frigates armed with standard (or named w/e) frigate weapons would it take to actually take down a decently equipped cruiser? Furthermore, how long would it take?
As I can see it, it would take something like a griffin locking it down, and probably 2 (maybe more)normally equipped frigates to do the job before running out of cap. If this is the case then what are the current frigates for? Fighting other frigates? Fighting Bombers?
If the former is the case then frigates are essentially useless in PVP, as frigates on both sides are only effective for engaging each other, in which case they are inconsequential in non frigate only fights. If the latter is the case then normal frigates will not be utilized at all as interceptors and gunships will be infinitely more useful for engaging and destroying bombers. Hence, only frigates in incredibly large numbers (perhaps other than bombers) will ever be a factor in fleet combat in which case all of this talk of integrated fleets being more effective is pure nonsense.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
Jebidus Skari
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 03:29:00 -
[19]
Quote:
For what purpose do you use Kestrels with cruise missiles?
Answer: Killing industrials.
If you can't risk using a cruiser worth 1.5M when you're killing helpless industrials worth 30M, what are you then?
economical 
|
Skillz
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 03:29:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Skillz on 12/02/2004 03:56:07
Of course you'd have to nerf the cruiser as well so the question would be, what can a cruiser do to very fast frigates apart from get their cannons to bear on target when their tracking speed allows it, at med ranged distances.
But then you'd have to NERF bookmarking and MWDs, woulden't you?
Keep on flaming, lamers.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 03:56:00 -
[21]
"My main question about this is; if frigates cannot fire cruise missles what threat are they to cruisers? How many frigates armed with standard (or named w/e) frigate weapons would it take to actually take down a decently equipped cruiser? Furthermore, how long would it take?"
To answer your questions: considerable, 3-4, about 3-5 minutes.
As for wanting to be able to mount tachyon laser on Punisher because you can fire cruise missiles from standard launcher... cruise missiles fired from standard launcher do damage comparable to dual heavy beam rather than tachyon. Fit pair of medium pulse lasers on Executioner rather than Punisher, throw in a damage mod... and each of your turrets will come just 10-15% short of matching the same dual heavy beam. Without the significant cost of the cruise missiles... so hardly something to complain about, i think?
|
Vel Kyri
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 07:27:00 -
[22]
I liked what someone said above - mosquito and elephant...
i would be happy with that.
problem is, in eve we have elephants that can not only fly - but are more just as agile as the mosquito...
errmmm... problem.
the problem is STILL speed and or tracking.
heavy weapons are (usually) supposed to be long range hard hitting weapons - at the ranges they are meant to be shooting they are killer - but in short range (less than 10k) they should have such crappy tracking that they can hit something going at about 1k/sec... at all.
i was very suprised when a battleship got a volley of wrecking shots with 1400mm projs on my kestrel going at 1.2k/sec at about 1k away flying past it...
if i am just sitting there i dont mind getting hammered - even if travelling at 15-30k away, but at 1k..
-----
|
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 07:53:00 -
[23]
The probability of scoring a wrecking hit is independent from range and tracking...
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
Imperishable
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 08:00:00 -
[24]
I'm all for making frigates stronger, not weaker. Battleships got only 1 real disadvantage (after all modules applied) - they cost much more than a frigate. Money is not that hard to make these days, if you know what you are doing, so almost all veteran players fly battleships. Why would they fly a frigate? sure, they may be useful in fleet battles, but EVE doesn't handle those very well, I bet most fights occur between 2-4 people. Frigates should be more powerful. Elite frigates should be less expensive.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 08:22:00 -
[25]
With the addition of the frigate MWD, getting hit by a missile means lag or just not paying attention.
I know a Rifter can orbit outside webifying range while inside warp scrambling range at speeds faster than a cruise missile. I've seen frigate pilots that know their ship fly head on into a storm of incoming missiles and not get hit.
And I'm positive the removal of cruise missiles from frigates will remove a significant portion of their ability to threaten larger ships. Saving industrials isn't worth that. A frigate pilot is at more risk than a battleship pilot. And both frigates and battleships are certain death for an industrial.
What next? Nerf all ships so only shuttles can destroy industrials?
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Juan Andalusian
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 08:25:00 -
[26]
Quote:
For what purpose do you use Kestrels with cruise missiles?
Answer: Killing industrials.
If you can't risk using a cruiser worth 1.5M when you're killing helpless industrials worth 30M, what are you then?
Answer: A carebear. Be it a carebear-pirate, carebear-griefer or a carebear in the military of an alliance. It's still a carebear.
Lol, i think you are struggling here Dalman. I normally respect your arguments and find them sound most of the time, but what are you talking about here?
If kestrel with cruises can only kill industrials why should it be nerfed?
Can't a solo incursus pulverise an industrial in roughly the same time?
Missiles, it's the easiest weapon type to counter, if one actually bothers to loadout properly and knows how to fly.
The only thing carebear related with kestrels are the poeple who fly them, cause most of them believe kessies are the most damaging frigates which is not the case.
**Pain is meant to be felt** |
Nicholas Marshal
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 08:27:00 -
[27]
I think large guns should basically have NO chance of hitting a frgiate. This would give the frigate a serious battlefield role.
Also, frigates MUST be able to use cruise missiles. This is essential - unless CCP intend eve to become a Battleship convention game.
|
DREAMWORKS
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 08:32:00 -
[28]
Quote:
Quote:
Okay, now I'm really confused. How can it be carebears who wanted frigates to be more dangerous? Carebears are anti-fighting.
For what purpose do you use Kestrels with cruise missiles?
Answer: Killing industrials.
If you can't risk using a cruiser worth 1.5M when you're killing helpless industrials worth 30M, what are you then?
Answer: A carebear. Be it a carebear-pirate, carebear-griefer or a carebear in the military of an alliance. It's still a carebear.
A industrial is ALWAYS its base price!
I can fit up hmb and modules, fill its hull with megacyte and make it 200mil for all i can. But a bestower will always be base price of 500k.
Sure its strange that frigates can fit cruise missles, but its 'JUST' the range and damage they need to count in pvp. CCP and many players wanted that frigates mean more in pvp and that cannot be done with medium lasers and projectile guns only. CCP and many players said: 5-6 frigates should be able to take out a battleship if teamwork is played well, and they succeed.
Some frigate pilots take on cruisers, because that speed and damage output together make them able to team up and be able to beat a cruiser if played well. Giving them only mini lasers that do 20dmg max will cause the cruiser pilot logged off before the shield dropped to half hp.
__________________________
http://www.nin.com/visuals/thtf_hi.html |
Dreez
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 08:36:00 -
[29]
Kestrels suck.., imo.
'Trying to argue logically with Evol is like trying to teach a pig to dance. It only makes you look foolish and really annoys the pig ' - Duke Droklar [OC]
|
Alynthir
|
Posted - 2004.02.12 09:21:00 -
[30]
Rifters are awesome. I like them much more than Kestrels.
As for the cruise missile thing, I've alwasy thought of frigates using cruise missiles like the WWII PT Boats of the U.S. Navy. I think it's great that cruiser pilots cannot dismiss a ship simply because "he's just in a frigate".
_____
CLS Civil Affairs Bureau
"Permanent = Today's Plan."
Training: Noob Instructor Level 5  |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |