EVE Search - Torpedos

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Torpedos

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.18 10:56:00 - [241] Originally by: UnitedStatesOfAmerica Originally by: Damned Force Edited by: Damned Force on 18/10/2007 07:54:35 The change is now almost perfect. You seriously think 9km for t1 torps with no support skills is perfect? Might as well change Siege launchers to Sling shots yes, the damage dealt with the new t1 torps in a t2 launcher is comparable with antimatter charges in T2 neutron blasters, so i think for such damage is 9km base range acceptable
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:07:00 - [242] Originally by: UnitedStatesOfAmerica Originally by: Damned Force Edited by: Damned Force on 18/10/2007 07:54:35 The change is now almost perfect. You seriously think 9km for t1 torps with no support skills is perfect? Might as well change Siege launchers to Sling shots Going off of this infomation http://www.uploadhouse.com/fileuploads/614/61490829b825ef4008c8be0bdead17eff3b92f.jpg WTB gunnery skills that increase BOTH optimal and falloff by 10% per level, and I want two of them that stack please. Torps are pretty freakin OP in the current state. As it stands they're legions better than pulse lasers, and no you dont need to lose a mid, its called a painter drone.
Damned Force	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:12:00 - [243] Originally by: Gamesguy Originally by: UnitedStatesOfAmerica Originally by: Damned Force Edited by: Damned Force on 18/10/2007 07:54:35 The change is now almost perfect. You seriously think 9km for t1 torps with no support skills is perfect? Might as well change Siege launchers to Sling shots Going off of this infomation http://www.uploadhouse.com/fileuploads/614/61490829b825ef4008c8be0bdead17eff3b92f.jpg WTB gunnery skills that increase BOTH optimal and falloff by 10% per level, and I want two of them that stack please. Torps are pretty freakin OP in the current state. As it stands they're legions better than pulse lasers, and no you dont need to lose a mid, its called a painter drone. Ok, OK, yes, the torps are good damage now. but from this would not be caldari's uber, so dont need to freak out :)
Ancy Denaries Caldari Isseras Manufacture	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:21:00 - [244] I'm Caldari. I totally approve of this change.
Inflexible Rytiri Lva	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:30:00 - [245] Edited by: Inflexible on 18/10/2007 11:31:08 My opinion is, that new torps are ok, it's raven who needs serious rework. As a short range ship it needs massive agility boost, maybe some fitting and slot layout changes. Torpraven is AFAIK only BS with 2 empty unusable slots. It's not only immobile, but also unable to tank and tackle same time. As a short range BS it needs MWD, scram, web (everyone needs web, especialy slow ship) and - thanks to new torps - target painter. Slot layout permits to fit dualrep armortank if you throw away damagemods, but powergrid is simply too tight.
Daelin Blackleaf No Joy Corp Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:33:00 - [246] Looks a lot more appealing now the explosion radius has changed. Two issues: > Rage Torps: They're not worth it compared to faction. > Caldari Ships: Still suck in the velocity and mass department.
Inflexible Rytiri Lva	Posted - 2007.10.18 11:40:00 - [247] Originally by: Ruato Ive been thinking about this and i simply cant figure what problem they are trying to fix with this change. They are 2 problems: Caldari BS being overpowered in PvE and underpowered in PvP. And this is step in right direction. I'm missile specialized user and I like this change. Only thing which is beyond me is explosion radius nerf.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.18 12:11:00 - [248] Originally by: Inflexible Edited by: Inflexible on 18/10/2007 11:31:08 My opinion is, that new torps are ok, it's raven who needs serious rework. As a short range ship it needs massive agility boost, maybe some fitting and slot layout changes. Torpraven is AFAIK only BS with 2 empty unusable slots. It's not only immobile, but also unable to tank and tackle same time. As a short range BS it needs MWD, scram, web (everyone needs web, especialy slow ship) and - thanks to new torps - target painter. Slot layout permits to fit dualrep armortank if you throw away damagemods, but powergrid is simply too tight. no if the torps remain exactely as tehy are on sis right now, the raven does not need a slot layout change. a lil more agility would be aproved. i find it odd that a raven with 1 plate is still les agile than a mega with 2 plates and 3 x trimark... still we gotta be careful 30k + 950 dps is a huge advantage over real closerange boats that operate within a 5-10k optimal radius..
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.18 12:15:00 - [249] Edited by: d026 on 18/10/2007 12:16:39 Originally by: Inflexible Edited by: Inflexible on 18/10/2007 11:59:56 Originally by: Ruato Ive been thinking about this and i simply cant figure what problem they are trying to fix with this change. There are 2 problems: Caldari BS being overpowered in PvE and underpowered in PvP. And this is step in right direction. I'm missile specialized user and I like this change. Only thing which is beyond me is explosion radius nerf. because giving the raven + 1 med for tank instead of a tp would push it over the top hp wise.. still one thing that really bothers me is that there is no slave equivalent for shield. giving all armor tankers a huge advantage over shield tankers because they can profit more from theyre increased armor resist. (and no, nobody active tanks in a gank setup its all about buffer so crystals are completely useless in this regard..)
Gavin Darklighter Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.10.18 12:17:00 - [250] Jav torps now have about 1/3 the range of Jav HAMs on Sisi. Honestly I don't have any problem with this, but now that torps are truely a short range weapon can they please get short range weapon fitting requirements?

Inflexible Rytiri Lva	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:01:00 - [251] Originally by: d026 because giving the raven + 1 med for tank instead of a tp would push it over the top hp wise.. I was thinking about low slot actually, but I agree with you that it can be potentialy dangerous change.
Will Stronghold Firing Squad	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:05:00 - [252] First of all theres nothing wrong with the Torps the way they are. I would love for them to stay as they area. If they need change, then this is a bit overdone. I would recommend their flight speed to be raised to be inline with the rockets and HAM-s and the signature size should go back to what it is on Tranquility or all the missile skills apply to them so taht you can train the Giuded Missile Precision to help with the signature size problem.
suzy homemaker	Posted - 2007.10.18 13:22:00 - [253] The problem here is that missiles systems and caldari were different. Other races were mostly med range or short range. Caldari were long range and med range. Rockets, Hams , and Torps should be MEDIUM range weapons with less damage than the short range counterparts such as blasters etc. Or the Caldari Agility must be drastically increased. Suzy
Inflexible Rytiri Lva	Posted - 2007.10.18 14:20:00 - [254] Originally by: suzy homemaker Or the Caldari Agility must be drastically increased. There is much better solution actually - decrease agility of other races. It will solve majority of problems caldari have in PvP. But one can only dream... PS: It become heavilly offtopic BTW.
KTOZ Caldari Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2007.10.18 15:05:00 - [255] Edited by: KTOZ on 18/10/2007 15:11:43 Cant we just take off ravens from the game? It s strange to force such slow ship to be on short range, or to take out his tank and put a mwd or afterburner on PVP. Other races can do it becoz they are mostly armor tankers wiht free med slots, but Ravens are slow, and defensless whit their new range on torps, against faster ships. damp and orbit, stay at15-20k and game over, even if he have maxed skills?! Or we force ppl to do not use torps if they dont have support ships?! What about ppl who ve maxed their torp skills? Or who ever cant fit all T2 launchers coz of cpu need or just skill lacking for T2 launchers. We have to give ppl to choie to use T1 or T2 not force them by taking out the diversity of options. Now it will be imposible to do PvE in plex's or missions without using cruise missiles. But this is not all; we also are forcing ppl to fit painters additionaly. warp scram + painter + ab or mwd, and we got 3 slot for tanking. Well i can understand maybe a reasonable decrease in range in exchange with rof, but if ur missiles doesnt not reach the target, doasnt matter how many torps ur firing. I think ccp should reconsider the amonth of the range they are taking off, or atleast make some balance with the other races.. The other races can be long range or short (short as blaster ships ) but if they are at short range at least they can fit MWD without problem, they snipers do instant dmg and much more then cruise missiles. But Ravens lacking med slots to fit painters or mwd/ab. Well still want to say lets wait and see the final results before getting that exited and whining everywhere, but i dont really feel confortable with that nerf idea Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Kreul Intentions ([email protected])
Alexander Knott Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.18 16:20:00 - [256] I'm relatively indifferent to the torpedo changes. I'll miss torps for ratting, but I guess this was coming. On the other hand, torpedoes having the exact same range as HAMs makes no sense to me nor does Javelin HAMs having 36.75km range vs 13.5km for Javelin Torpedoes (80.8km vs 29.7km with skills). ----- "I like to loot, especially going to the can of the battleship, sometimes there is a surprise inside, sometimes there is only carp..."
UnitedStatesOfAmerica	Posted - 2007.10.18 17:56:00 - [257] Originally by: Damned Force Blasters dont hit every time, have less DPS and have trackin, but tracking and range can be incrased. Torps have slight higher damage, dont need tracking and hits every time, but need sooner reload and that takes long time which drops the dps, the range and the explo speed cant be incrased by any mod. So good equal. I think is good ballanced. -Torps don't hit every time. Trust me, they do miss. There is this thing call Velocity on Torps. Very important to know. -Torps should have more DPS, cause it's more mass. F=MA, the crazy thing is bullets in this game go insanely faster then they should be anyways. But I won't complain about realism on a internet spaceship MMO. I don't think this makes it equal, it make the Torps worthless. Everyone that actually use Caldari will start using Cruises after this change.
Tammarr	Posted - 2007.10.18 22:09:00 - [258] Its a sad day for the ravens, matar pilots cry of joy however. An in between current and this oversized change would have been expected, be happy the empire missionrunners that happily pay their ccp bill dont read to much on the forums. Give 55-60km range with max skills and reduce the rof on current sisi to compensate the damage back to more sane levels :(
Kazamidori Division 9 Golden Leaves Izanagi Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.18 22:13:00 - [259] I've just noticed that there's been a minor adjustment to tech2 torps. Rage: 530m explosion radius from 600m in TQ Javelin: 350 explosion radius from 400m in TQ Javelin: 2700m/s base speed from 3750m in TQ Rage will now basically do full damage against battleships with single TPII/named with appropriate skills. Javelin is slightly nerfed due to slower maximum velocity, and non-bonused ships will have trouble hitting faster ships, but will do overall more damage against BCs. Though, if torps get slightly more range, Raven would have unfair advantage over other ships considering t1 torps do quite a bit more damage as is. However, it certainly doesn't seem fair for ships like Phoons to be limited to 20km range. 24km seems more OP. --- Izanagi Alliance
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.18 22:36:00 - [260] Originally by: Inflexible Edited by: Inflexible on 18/10/2007 11:31:08 My opinion is, that new torps are ok, it's raven who needs serious rework. As a short range ship it needs massive agility boost, maybe some fitting and slot layout changes. Torpraven is AFAIK only BS with 2 empty unusable slots. It's not only immobile, but also unable to tank and tackle same time. As a short range BS it needs MWD, scram, web (everyone needs web, especialy slow ship) and - thanks to new torps - target painter. Slot layout permits to fit dualrep armortank if you throw away damagemods, but powergrid is simply too tight. No you're still stuck on the active tank or armor tank+ew mindset, try this: 6x Siege Missile Launcher II (CN torpedos) 1x Quad Lif MWD 1x Warp Disruptor II 1x Large Extender II 2x Invul II 1x Fleeting web OR Medium inject. 3x BCU II 1x 1600mm plate 1x DCU II 2x TP-900 Heavy Painter Drones, 5x Warrior IIs. 3x Core Defense Field Extender I 1027 DPS, max velocity 1013 m/s, effective hp 106k, has point, then either a web or an injector(only need injector for running the mwd for longer than 3-4 cycles). For gangsetup, drop the web for an injector and point for a shield extender and you can hit 121k effective hp(needs a very cheap 1% pg implant, maybe the 3% one if you dont have awu 5), if you really want you can also lose the injector for another extender/invul/em hardener(doesnt matter), which will bring you to about 137k effective hp. Dropping the 1600mm plate means you wont need pg implant, and you will lose about 5k effective hp if you replace with PDU. Comparing to the neutron plated mega, it has about 200 less dps, has about the same amount of effective hp, but more versatility(5 warriors compared to ogres) and can start doing damage much earlier as well as change damage types.

Daelin Blackleaf No Joy Corp Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.19 00:36:00 - [261] That's quite a respectable set-up, however how does it fare once the target painter drones have inevitably been destroyed?
Magazaki	Posted - 2007.10.19 00:43:00 - [262] Edited by: Magazaki on 19/10/2007 00:43:49 I am all for the change. The only successful pvp uses the raven had were close range anyway, and god knows it didn't need any help for pve. Only 3 notes: First, as already said, since they are now true short range weapons, could they pretty please with sugar on top get short range weapn fitting too? Second, can we please get a modicum of consistency and have the same analogy of range for rocket>ham>torp, jav rocket>jav ham>jav torp? Third, can we please keep the signature radius where it should be, i.e. 400m as all other bs sized weapons? -----sig----- Originally by: Kaemonn:Signature Originally by: kieron: off duty You dont have to swallow! Win...
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.19 00:53:00 - [263] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf That's quite a respectable set-up, however how does it fare once the target painter drones have inevitably been destroyed? just fit a tp and skip the web/scram/injector if you dont like the drone idea..
Danjira Ryuujin	Posted - 2007.10.19 01:02:00 - [264] Originally by: suzy homemaker The problem here is that missiles systems and caldari were different. Other races were mostly med range or short range. Caldari were long range and med range. Rockets, Hams , and Torps should be MEDIUM range weapons with less damage than the short range counterparts such as blasters etc. Or the Caldari Agility must be drastically increased. Suzy WHAT!? How does changing 1 weapon make a battleship close range? You can still use cruise missiles you know. Consider the rokh, is it a close range battelship? It has railguns, and then it has the option of using blasters. Blasters on the rohk have similar range to torpedos on the raven.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.19 01:46:00 - [265] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf That's quite a respectable set-up, however how does it fare once the target painter drones have inevitably been destroyed? Against 400 sig battleship(say mega), you lose about 100 dps, its not really a big deal since your opponent has to take the time to kill your painter drones(which are quite fast). You can do the same to his heavy drones with your warriors. It remains to be seen if bandwidth will help or hurt this setup. If raven stays at 75 bandwidth but gain more drone space then this becomes even more viable. I have this feeling that those 5 heavy drone bs(bar the domi) wont be able to field them anymore with bandwidth...
Kazamidori Division 9 Golden Leaves Izanagi Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.19 04:39:00 - [266] I'd think the best comparison for Raven post-change would be against other gank BS which tend to use buffer tanks quite often. I've tested against several ships of similar calibur (plate geddon, blasterthron, gankphoons, gankpests, etc), and although with a little creativity, any of those ships can beat a Raven 1v1, in a gang Raven would be equally effective. -120k overall passive buffer -800dps vs. BS with a single TPII or 650dps vs. BC/CL -additional 150dps from drones which could either by used as utility/ECM/TPing. -Weapon doesn't use cap <-- very important Of course, it'll be hard to compete with BS like the Rohk/Mael/Aba which can tank something like 800~1k dps(depending on fit/implant) and still churn out 800dps, but Raven can be fit similary if it sacrifices the MWD. Its just that having this new option is very nice:) --- Izanagi Alliance
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.19 10:01:00 - [267] i did some extensive testing with my new torp raven against my mates plated gank mega. we fought all fights at point blank (neutron optimal) in the follwoinf setups: raven: 3 x Ballistic Control System II 1 x 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I 1 x Damage Control II 1 x Large Shield Extender II 1 x Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets 2 x Invulnerability Field II 1 x Warp Disruptor II 1 x Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron 6 x Siege Missile Launcher II /w Bane TI 2 x Light Neutron Blaster II /w Void S 3 x Core Defence Field Extender I 5 x Hammerhead II HP: 108k DPS: 1018 SPEED: 978m/s Mega: Standard Plate Setup HP: 102k DPS: 1242 SPEED: 880m/s I lost all the figths but was always close to kill him. If i had used TII torps or faction, had shot his ogres, i would have been able to kill him from time to time. Ihmo to the current TQ raven this is such a huge improvement.
Mareine	Posted - 2007.10.19 10:49:00 - [268] the new torpraven sounds like a gank-bs... get a good tackler and someone with targetpainter in your gang and every raven will be a nice addition for your damage AND can tank also... maybe not perfect for 1vs1 one.. but for a gang it'll really good i'll fear the new ravens in pvp
Brixer Dai Dai Hai	Posted - 2007.10.19 11:06:00 - [269] Guess this means starting to fit caldari jammers instead of the gallente one.. Those Ravens won't do much damage when jammed
Vigaz	Posted - 2007.10.19 11:27:00 - [270] Originally by: Ancy Denaries I'm Caldari. I totally approve of this change. I find CCP's lack of justice disturbing...



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: 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.