Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 11:57:00 -
[1]
Here is my opinion regarding Heavy assault missiles :
In my opinion they are useless because they have a range problem. In fact you can hit maximum at 18km if you have maxed your skills
In my opionion they should be between heavy and cruise but they are not.
CCP , are you planning to make these missiles more usefull ?
PS : You have a good indicator to understand that they are useless : watch the market price of those missiles and especially of launchers !
|
Aramendel
Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 13:22:00 -
[2]
WTS: clue.
They have bigger dps as HMs, ergo they have a shorter range. If you want to get high ranges with them use jav HAMs, those reach up to 70-80k. But do in exchange only slightly mroe dps than HMs.
|
Arthalion Thoidon
Caldari Splint Eye Probabilities Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 13:29:00 -
[3]
First off, I want to make it clear I've never used a single heavy assault missile to date.
Now that's out of the way. I have to say you probably don't understnd what the role which HAM's are supposed to fill is. If like you say they should be halfway between heavy missiles and cruise missiles they would be long range missiles, but HAM's were introduced because for years there was no cruiser sized short range high damage missile. The gap between rockets and torpedoes has now been filled, at last.
If we put the various missiles in 2 lists ( short range and long range ) based on ship class it'll look like this: Long range: Standard ( frigs & dessies) , Heavy( cruisers & battlecruisers), Cruise( Battleship) Short range: Rockets(frigs & dessies), HAM( cruisers & battlecruisers) torpedoes( Battleship) Citadel torps( caps)
|
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 13:39:00 -
[4]
It is completly useless because on inty you fit MWD but on Cruise or on Commands it sucks too much capa.
Really, Heavy assault have a lack of range and 40 to 50 km would be nice.
|
ArmyOfMe
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 14:39:00 -
[5]
you do understand that ham's are ment to be shortrange high damage right? the same way pulse, blasters and autocannons are shortrange
|
Fswd
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 14:52:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Fswd on 22/09/2007 14:52:33 Well the HAMs were needed to make missiles more in line with the other weapon systems: small, med, large and short and long range. Missiles were lacking a short range "medium gun" before HAM. --- Free exotic dancers for mods that mod my sig
*Snip* Please do not discuss moderation in your signature. -Yipsilanti ([email protected]) <-- freebie for you |
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 15:31:00 -
[7]
Yeah but these missiles are totally useless
Have ever seen fleet battles using these kind of missiles ?
Dont forget that caldari ship are more used for PVE than PVE.
Therefore you ll understand that they are useless at all !
|
Gartel Reiman
Project F3
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 15:55:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Aramendel WTS: clue.
QFT. Seriously, have you noticed a pattern here? Everyone is explaining the role of HAMs and why they have a short range, but you keep dismissing this out of hand and saying "well, I think they're useless therefore they must be."
Consider what everyone else is telling you - if you want to claim they're useless, then provide some figures that suggest they could be better at their role while keeping with the balance of weapons overall. What you're doing now is just going to be fruitless.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 16:19:00 -
[9]
my blasters dont hit stuff at 60km FIX CCP NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 16:56:00 -
[10]
Do not compare missiles with others weapon because philosophy is not the same.
When you speak about missiles you must have in mind that capa is lower on caldari ships.
Heavy assaults should be half way cruise missiles
|
|
Amuko
Amarr Happy Little Roid Huggers
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 17:01:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Stilgard Here is my opinion regarding Heavy assault missiles :
In my opinion they are useless because they have a range problem. In fact you can hit maximum at 18km if you have maxed your skills
In my opionion they should be between heavy and cruise but they are not.
CCP , are you planning to make these missiles more usefull ?
PS : You have a good indicator to understand that they are useless : watch the market price of those missiles and especially of launchers !
Only 18km on a cruiser sized weapon system, ONLY?@!2. Man missile users are spoiled, I know they do less damage than, as example, blasters, but still, 18km is a lot for a medium sized weapon system, seriously.
|
ArmyOfMe
hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 17:47:00 -
[12]
Edited by: ArmyOfMe on 22/09/2007 17:47:04
Originally by: Stilgard Do not compare missiles with others weapon because philosophy is not the same.
When you speak about missiles you must have in mind that capa is lower on caldari ships.
Heavy assaults should be half way cruise missiles
why shouldnt we compare missiles to guns?
You have no idea how much i would love to have medium blasters with 18km range that never miss
|
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 18:09:00 -
[13]
because missiles are more used for PVE and not PVP.
Secondly, fit a MWD and you ll not be able to shield tank.
Close range is more for Armor tankers not for shield tankers
|
Harris
Warspite Developments
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 18:16:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Stilgard When you speak about missiles you must have in mind that capa is lower on caldari ships.
Do you mean Capacitor? I thought missiles didn't use capacitor. So what's your point?
Originally by: Stilgard Heavy assaults should be half way cruise missiles
No they shouldn't, they should be a short range high damage version of the short range high damage turret variants.
Which is in fact what they are.
|
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 18:21:00 -
[15]
I mean capacitor for shield tanking.
If you want to use them correctly, you have to use a MWD and you ll jeopardize your shield tanking
|
Harris
Warspite Developments
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 18:27:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Stilgard because missiles are more used for PVE and not PVP.
But not exclusivly so. Just not so good at long range battles. But it doesn't matter as these are short range missiles, like rockets.
Originally by: Stilgard Secondly, fit a MWD and you ll not be able to shield tank.
So you have a choice - gank or tank.... like other short range platforms. A passive tank is similar to using a plated setup for armour tankers.
Originally by: Stilgard Close range is more suited for Armor tankers not for shield tankers
But not eclusively so. Gank or tank, your choice.
HAMs were bought in to give missile users a short range high damage option. And now you're complaining that they are a short range high damage option. If you don't like to use them, use heavy missiles. What's the problem?
|
Ciphero
The Cruciform
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 19:13:00 -
[17]
Khanid ships don't shield tank. -- Violent games don't make people violent. Lag does. |
Balcura
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 20:05:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Balcura on 22/09/2007 20:05:09 Only 1 issue as stated before in a different thread... HAM's fill a rocket role in the cruiser class weapon range.
The issue... Unlike rockets, balsters, pulses and autocannons HAM launchers take MORE grid and CPU. At this point people then mention Torps, but torps have 1 major difference, they are capable of hitting targets 80km away (cruises at 210km) or about a 60% range reduction, fire slower have slower speeds and longer flight time SO NOT THE SAME AS TORPS.
If HAM's had similar power requirement ratios to that of rockets vs std missiles you'd see them on the battle field more often as they would allow for better tanks. HAM's were poorly though out and implemented in a manner that they are relitively unused.
|
xXx Vice
Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 21:05:00 -
[19]
I think HAM are really good.
|
Brodde Dim
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 21:50:00 -
[20]
I agree HAMs could use a small boost, but certainly not when it comes to range.
Rockets have about 25% of standard missiles range, but do about 133% damage. HAMs have 25% range and do allmost 125% damage compared to heavies.
|
|
sableye
principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.09.22 22:23:00 -
[21]
only thing I agree with I think and haven't looked at numbers is they should probably take less grid I believe in all other weapon systems shorter range always equels taking less grid.
Join The Fight With Promo Today |
Dahak2150
Chaos Monkeys Monkey Religion
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 01:21:00 -
[22]
Originally by: sableye only thing I agree with I think and haven't looked at numbers is they should probably take less grid I believe in all other weapon systems shorter range always equels taking less grid.
Torpedoes. ----------------
Originally by: "Cyberus" cause its has no sence anyway your brains is simply wont accept that anyway.
|
Testosterone Bomb
Red Ballz
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 03:35:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Testosterone Bomb on 23/09/2007 03:35:48 Dudes , you are being so baited :)
Stilgard - Bro , why you leave off that Band of Brothers tag , anyone since you have been playing since 2004 , I am sure you understand the role of a HAM ,
May those in IAC / AAA that fly against you Fly Safe
|
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 09:00:00 -
[24]
What's the tag is doing with the topic ?
|
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 11:05:00 -
[25]
Quote: You have no idea how much i would love to have medium blasters with 18km range that never miss
I'd love to have missiles that always hit as well, but it's not gonna happen.
And OP, yes, you are clueless. HAMs are great.
|
Cal Morg
Gallente Morpheus industries
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 11:42:00 -
[26]
Comparison of the basic T1 items without skills:
Light Missiles 18.75 km 5 dps
Rockets 4.5 km 6.25 dps
-76% range +25% damage -50% PG -40% CPU
Heavy Missiles 37.5 km 10 dps
Heavy Assault Missiles 9 km 12.5 dps
-76% range +25% damage +20% PG -5% CPU
Cruise Misssiles 75 km 13.6 dps
Torpedos 37.5 km 18.75
-50% range +37,5% damage +40% PG +33% CPU
So since the last change, HAM are more in line with rockets. The range and damage have the same changes to their long range counterpart. However the fitting requirements are quite different. The main problem I see for HAMs: they need more PG and you need a MWD to get into range. PG that most Caldari ships don't have without removing every kind of tank (and even then, some need fitting mods).
Now let's look at Torpedos: fitting is also quite harder than Cruise Missiles, but they have double the range (50% to 24%) compared to the other 2 short range missiles. This way, they are useable without a MWD to get into range.
|
Stilgard
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 13:48:00 -
[27]
Agree with last answer. But caldari ships are not done for close range exept frigs and interceptors
|
MyOwnSling
Gallente RONA Corporation FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.23 16:20:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Stilgard Agree with last answer. But caldari ships are not done for close range exept frigs and interceptors
You tank with your midslots, not your lows (unless passively tanked), so you should be able to fit speed/agility mods in the lows to help with that, whereas gallente or amarr have to truley sacrifice some of their tank, passive or active to attain that. ------------- Stop whining.
Originally by: Puupuu dude... your face...
|
Kailiani
Fracked Up beyond All Recognition
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 03:45:00 -
[29]
Try em on a cerberus
|
45thtiger011
Gallente The Perfect Storm
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 06:45:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Stilgard I mean capacitor for shield tanking.
If you want to use them correctly, you have to use a MWD and you ll jeopardize your shield tanking
Excuse me? with the possible exception of minmatar (who do a worse job of it) Caldari are the ONLY race who can tank indefinitely on zero cap!
beside which, i'd say players from all of the races worry about they're cap, caldari aren't any sort of exception!
you can't just claim that one race is more important than the others.
Basically, if you don't like the way the race your using flys, then train another race!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |