EVE Search - Rockets, rockets everywhere and not a warhead to use.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Rockets, rockets everywhere and not a warhead to use.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jessica Logan	Posted - 2004.04.09 18:17:00 - [1] [Ahem] Anyway; rockets. What are they good for? o_O I trained up the Rockets skill thinking they were faster, cheaper missiles but I can't any rockets in the Bleak Lands. At all. Is it worth me looking for them? Or shall I just ignore them completely and move straight on to Cruise missiles?
Darker	Posted - 2004.04.09 18:36:00 - [2] Heavy msl's and beyond will be more usefull than rockets, higher dmg and range. But you could play around with rockets to get an idea of them .Get a dual+ launcher frig and do some dive bombings . You can buy the rockets bpc's off the market and make them yourself.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.04.09 18:50:00 - [3] They're for newbies and for 2,000 ISK bounty npc pirates to laugh at. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
vecdran	Posted - 2004.04.09 19:12:00 - [4] Edited by: vecdran on 09/04/2004 19:15:38 Eh, I use them, but only on the weak sub-10k pirates. They can be useful in a rocket launcher, launch 3 in under 3 seconds, sort of an instant 60-70 damage. Don't bother against bigger guys though. (Oh, and Jim, they******2k rats) The Civilized Civire
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.04.09 19:19:00 - [5] Edited by: Jim Raynor on 09/04/2004 19:30:42 Quote: Edited by: vecdran on 09/04/2004 19:15:38 Eh, I use them, but only on the weak sub-10k pirates. They can be useful in a rocket launcher, launch 3 in under 3 seconds, sort of an instant 60-70 damage. Don't bother against bigger guys though. (Oh, and Jim, they******2k rats) I think rockets would be okay if the launchers held more of them and fired faster, I mean 3 rockets? What the hell, should be more like 12. Turrets already outdamage them, might as well at least reduce the need reloading. There should be more launchers, especially one for light missiles, which in my opion SUCK in a m12, which fires slow. Since the m12 fires pretty damn slow, so really the only missile work using in it is cruise. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Darker	Posted - 2004.04.09 19:39:00 - [6] Edited by: Darker on 09/04/2004 19:41:34 Regardless the newbie use for them they are a starting point in using msl's and they are fun to use with frigs for a while. Agreed, rocket launchers should hold more and the m-12 could be a bit faster since even defenders have a hard time to come out of them quick enough.IMO, there should be another launcher between the rocket and the heavy launchers
Baun	Posted - 2004.04.09 19:43:00 - [7] Quote: There should be more launchers, especially one for light missiles, which in my opion SUCK in a m12, which fires slow. Since the m12 fires pretty damn slow, so really the only missile work using in it is cruise. Could not agree more. I would also add that it makes no sense that m-12s can only fit 2 heavy missles. Heavy missles have a slower rof and do just a little bit more damage than the average 150mm hybrid, yet you can only fit 2 of them in the best launcher you can fit on a frig. It makes no sense and forces everyone to use cruise. If nothing is changed when cruise missles become a BS only weapon then missle frigates (kestrel/crow/breacher/the bombers that are going to come out) are going to be the most useless ships in the game (aside from the Heron). The Enemy's Gate is Down
vecdran	Posted - 2004.04.09 19:58:00 - [8] I agree, if rocket launchers held say, 6 rockets, they would be MUCH more usefull. The crazy rate of fire is nice, but the capacity isn't :/ I still yearn for the days of those EVE trailer vids, where it appeared all missile launchers had a ROF of a second or less The Civilized Civire
Ithildin	Posted - 2004.04.10 10:23:00 - [9] Make the launchers have specific ammo, and then increase their volume. Rocket Launcher: Rockets, carries 5 (these have less than a second launch time which makes rockets have a rather nice damage over time, honestly, if rather short range. A boost in rocket damage is warranted) Assault: Rockets and Light Missiles, carries as much as 8 light. Std. Launcher: Light and Heavy Missiles, carries as much as 5 heavies. Heavy Launcher: Heavies and higher, carries perhaps as much as 3 torps Siege: Torps and Cruise missiles, carries perhaps 7 torps. (slightly slowed RoF) Make a more linear powergrid consumtion on them rather than 1, 2, 3, 50, 900 (or whatever it is), and then let them focus on reducing the ships CPU to something laughable instead ;) (yeah, and let Caldari ships have a general beefy CPU) -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
Verbal Kint	Posted - 2004.04.10 10:37:00 - [10] Never played much around with Missiles being Gallente and all. But trained launchers and Rockets not to long ago to go have fun in a Tristan. Rockets are nice as they are at the moment, but the Rocket launcher sucks a bit. The firing rate is way nice, but the capacity is just sad. Had imagined something like the Stalin Rocket thrower or those unguided missiles on the Apache, but alas I was left with a 3 round salvo.... Makes 'em useful against Frigs and not much else. If you had a 'serious' Rocket launcher with say 10 Rockets loaded up you could do Dive bombing runs on Battleships and actually do a bit of damage S V.K. Verbal Kint - Grumpy ol' c0ot.
Meau	Posted - 2004.04.10 10:51:00 - [11] Agreed. About halfing the rocket volume would be a worthwhile change.
Tatsue Niko	Posted - 2004.04.10 13:42:00 - [12] Edited by: Tatsue Niko on 10/04/2004 13:43:37 IMO Launchers should fire all missile in their storage at once. Ex.Lets say that there is enough room for 4 light missiles in my launchers and when i fire the launcher all 4 missiles would come out offcourse you will need to change the ROF but i think it would be worth it EDIT:some typos
Xtro 2	Posted - 2004.04.10 16:18:00 - [13] New players will take 1 look at the stats on Rockets, and Light Missiles, and come to the same conclusion every1 does, Rockets are next to useless, i did have SOME success with a kestrel fited with arbalest assault launchers and rockets, however the damage they do and the reload tmes makes them rubbish. Allow more to be loaded into rocket launchers, increase the rockets speed as their already poorly ranged anyways, its silly a frigate can mount cruise and totally waste other frigates, whereas Rockets which are clearly intended for frigates do nothing whatsoever. __________________________________________ Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights.
Gaiam	Posted - 2004.04.10 19:14:00 - [14] rockets should, in my opinion, fire in multiple numbers from different sized launchers, i.e. 1 from rocket launcher at rocket launcher rof, 3 from assault at standard rof, and like 5+ from a standard launcher at standard rof, standard missles should also launch multiple numbers from heavy launchers and siege, as well as heavy missles firing say 3 at a time from siege launchers.
Darker	Posted - 2004.04.11 01:11:00 - [15] Multiple msl's launches would be a bit overkil. As it stands heavy and siege launchers are fine but cruise msl's should only be used with bombers to come and cruiser/bs'. Current frigates and interceptors should be restricted to use heavy msl's and below but the m-12/rocket launchers capacity should be increased to make them more viable. On the other hand, looking at EvE - DB and if it's something to trust on, there are "future?" launchers with higher capacity than the current ones... ...maybe all we have to do ... is wait ?
Levin Cavil	Posted - 2004.04.11 10:04:00 - [16] Well I don't really like the idea of taking cruise away form frigs. If we make them use lower power missiles then a frigate vs frigate fight will be just like a bs vs bs fight. Frigate fightung is different than other kinds of fighting. This is a good thing, I'm all for the increased capacity and all that and having light missiles that really just can't be outrun but I think that the friagte should be allowed to keep its superweapon. A cruise can be outmanuvered and outrun so if you are a good pilot you get a web on your target to kill them. If you would rather take advantage of a kestrel and stay at range spamming lots of high speed missiles at frigates then I say great, it'll add alot more fun to frigate fighting. ------------------------------ <Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming
Cinnander	Posted - 2004.04.11 10:37:00 - [17] Edited by: Cinnander on 11/04/2004 10:39:53 IMO rocket launchers should be a quick and nasty way of dealing with [smaller] ships.. I envisage them like the rocket launchers you see on fighter jets that deploy lots of small rockets, fast. Perhaps 6 or 8 in a 4 second period? That way you could equip 4 of them and you've got a tasty hit & run, spray and pray thing :-) Or at least that way they'd be good for deploying those defender missiles without having to reload every shot. ATM they are to missile weapons what the civilian railgun is to hybrid turrets. ><))))¦> This is fishy .. You know what to do.
Xtro 2	Posted - 2004.04.11 19:09:00 - [18] Quote: Well I don't really like the idea of taking cruise away form frigs. If we make them use lower power missiles then a frigate vs frigate fight will be just like a bs vs bs fight. And so it should be, life expectancy of a frigate/cruise vs a frigate is about 1 volley of cruise, and new players arent gifted with the power of all skills required to fire them back or outrun them with mwd. __________________________________________ Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights.
Pneumothorax	Posted - 2004.04.12 00:43:00 - [19] Pft are you kidding? I fit one rocket launcher on my Condor and 2 on my Merlin before I switched to missles. Personnally I love rockets. They fire super fast, I mean my merlin shot 6 in 2 seconds. So cool. I do wish they would make more powerful rockets for higher level players but I believe that would unbalance the game as everyone would be using them. Also imagin 12 rockets with the same firing rate as the rocket launchers? Come on! They are noob weopons. Who needs to fire 12 rockets that fast? You'd go through ammo like beer goes through my bladder. And you wouldn't need that many anyway. I guess you could use rockets in a bigger launcher for bigger ships. Instead of one missle chancing a miss you'd have like 12 rockets, some would miss and some would hit, you do less damage but its better than one complete miss right? Sort of like the difference between a rifle and a shotgun heh. Plus you'd have to be close range so you risk getting your butt kicked. Maybe a bigger rocket launcher isn't so bad after all but make them so they need higher skills to use of course.
Ithildin	Posted - 2004.04.12 09:57:00 - [20] Quote: Well I don't really like the idea of taking cruise away form frigs. If we make them use lower power missiles then a frigate vs frigate fight will be just like a bs vs bs fight. Frigate fightung is different than other kinds of fighting. Um... well, the Raven's main armament is the Cruise missile. Do you not think the fact that a Rifter can use Cruise Missiles might stand in the way of making the missile a good battleship sized weapon? Don't get me wrong, I would love to fit three Ion Blaster Cannon I on an Incursus with a little reduced fire rate, but I think there is a reason I can't. However the new missiles will fit in the launchers, the rockets and light missiles need to be made a bit better to justify anyone putting some time and skillpoints into their skills. Rockets need to do more damage per volley (and no, not more range. They are suposed to be close range. See Ion Blaster/Autocannon) and light missiles need... I don't know. -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2004.04.12 10:52:00 - [21] Just on a side note, in modern missile combat most of a main short ranged anti-ship missiles are launched both from aircraft and by other ships, yet noone complains that that prevents missiles from becoming proper weapons for surface ships. The fact is, with guided munitions, it is possible to deploy firepower so precisely, that one doesn't need large stocks of it to be devastating. It only requires a few Harpoon missiles to get through to cripple or destroy a real life cruiser or carrier, and that's only about 500lbs of explosive a missile, and a mere 1500lbs a missile. Guided munitions are the only thing that makes light craft a genuine threat to the larger ships. Nerf that, and you'll never see a frigate or cruiser in PvP again. Harry Voyager
Darker	Posted - 2004.04.12 11:44:00 - [22] Edited by: Darker on 12/04/2004 11:53:49 Currently, a few frigates with multiple launchers using cruise msl's can pose a big threat to frigates/indys/cruisers and dare i say bs'.Sure it reflects the nimble crafts with deadly charges of today's world but frigates were/are the first step in player's ship development. To grant such power to them already makes me wonder what does the upcoming bombers,etc, bring new to the game. If the m-12 capacity is increased the DoT from heavy msl's will be considerable from a frigate point of view but not extreme. As it stands a cruiser doesn't have a fat chance against a couple(one?) of frigs armed with cruisers - they are fast ,can approach target web/scramble ,keep the distance while firing away... msl's don't touch them and drones can be put down quickly with some well aimed shots, not to mention not every cruiser has (considerable) drones or launchers. EDIT:Frigs are currently too easy to replace considering the damage they do with cruisers msl's (maybe with the exception of interceptor atm)and it's too easy to get the skills.
Zap Rowsdower	Posted - 2004.04.14 01:30:00 - [23] Quote: It only requires a few Harpoon missiles to get through to cripple or destroy a real life cruiser or carrier, and that's only about 500lbs of explosive a missile, and a mere 1500lbs a missile. A CBG can handle up to 60 or so incoming missiles. The Wahoo Shock Project
Sarkyn	Posted - 2004.04.15 14:08:00 - [24] I support the call for a valid role for all ships. And Frigates are 2 things: a) The first step on the newbie ladder b) A valid choice to come back to later in your career. As a newbie Frigate pilot, it will be a long time before I can equip either the defence (MWD) or offensive (cruise missile) capability that makes Frigates even vaguely effective. So I do not think we are "handing too much power to newbies". I will be able to pilot a Cruiser long before I can put a Cruise Missile in my Merlin. So, a frigate Cruise rush is something only an established pilot can consider. On the flip side, there are valid tactics and equipment setups to defeat a "Frigate/Cruise Rush". Anti-missile configurations of Cruiser deployment should be a valuable part of any fleet deployment. This variation and diversity all makes the game's combat more interesting, so why are people complaining? Because their build of Cruiser doesn't stand up well against a Frigate/Cruise rush? So change your build! Adapt, and fight alongside ships that aren't all just clones of each other. I vote for diversity in fleet deployments, and Frigates piloted like Fighters are a valid part of that. //Celestial Horizon/Sarkyn
nichts	Posted - 2004.04.15 14:24:00 - [25] OT How long needs a BS to target,lets say a Kestrel? I tell you the Kestrel have fired 4 - 8 Heavys (no experiance with the other hard once) befor even been locked or scrambled ;)
Tsual	Posted - 2004.04.15 14:32:00 - [26] What about changing Rocket stats to something like: Speed: 5000 m/s Flight time: 2 s Same range, better usable, as singel mwd frigat hunter. Ideal fast dumbfire low damage warhead, a bit slower then other turret fire, but good for short range engagement. -------------------------------------- Tsual - Miner from faith, frigat junky for life. Ritual of the Qua'nadhar.
Helmut 314	Posted - 2004.04.16 10:32:00 - [27] Rockets are fine as they are, great for finishing off low level npc cruisers with a dive bombing. Light or heavy missiles to take down shields (Sabretooth or Thunderbolt)while orbiting and then two assault launchers loaded with kinetic or explosive rockets to finish them off in a swoop to 10k. A bit dangerous, but very very fun. ___________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson

Pages: [1] :: 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.