|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
   |
Posted - 2008.07.05 22:36:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: MalVortex
The numbers here speak for themselves. Nano-Hacs are untouchable by missiles (even the awkward Cerberus will have a free -36% to incoming damage); even if they do hit for 20%, they still have to go through T2 resistances and tens of thousands of EHP on top of any active tank / shield regen the ship will boast.
I'm afraid the numbers do not speak for themselves. Please provide actual nanofits on Hacs and Recons and give the damage reduction for them at maximum skills. Compare to the damage reduction if the nanoships had used their slots and rigs for a full tank, passive or active. Compare to their damage increase if they had used the slots for damage modules. Consider the advantageous choice of missile damage type and the existence of flare rigs and missile implants.
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 10:13:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Albaluna74
Originally by: Ruciza
I'm afraid the numbers do not speak for themselves.
Precision Light exp velocity: 3000m/s (frig weapon)
Precision heavy exp velocity: 1000m/s (cruiser weapon)
Precision Cruise exp velocity: 1000m/s (BS weapon)
Do numbers speak for themselves now?
No they don't. If the numbers really suggest to change something, it could as well be a nerf of precision cruise, not a buff of precision heavies. It's not that easy.
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage, just like half of the other threads on the forum. The OP is lacking for anything but numbers without any further context but nebulous/mystic (and populist) claims of the the overpoweredness of nanofits ('thousands of hp', 't2 resists', 'modern nanohacs'  ).
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:26:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 11:27:04
Originally by: Bleedingthrough
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 10:29:21
To have a convincing argument you need more than screaming for more damage.
lol?! The claims of the OP are IMHO totaly valid and his suggestions reasonable.
But: You lack some convincing arguements.
I don't need arguments, the OP has a point to make, not me. His argument is MORE DAMAGE! I ask for some substance.
|
Ruciza
Minmatar
The Feminists
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 16:25:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Ruciza on 06/07/2008 16:30:55
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Missile using cruisers and battlecruisers rely entirely on a frigate class weapon system to deal even modest amounts of damage to nano cruisers.
Irrelevant. It's about the absolute damage, not what you think is a "frigate weapon", which is an empty word in itself.
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Using a proper medium missile will generally result in negligable amounts of damage to the average non-pimped nano cruiser.
Irrelevant. What a "proper" missile is lies in the eye of the beholder. Empty words. No substance.
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
Gun users have more options available for engaging a nano ship. Using their own MWD to cut the angular velocity, painting the target, using tracking enhancers and computers and so forth. Missile users have one option: use precison lights or wait to die while watching your missiles follow a target until they burn out.
And you want to sit there and F1-F5 and kill everything in a 100km radius around you with your "proper missile" while picking your nose. While the others are using resources on tracking enhancers and do work to hit.
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
I have personally seen this discrepency in my own play time. When armed with HML's my Cerb manages to deliver an astounding 0 - ~10 damage per missile to the nano ships I've seen (specifically a Vagabond who ignored me and a Sac who murdered me). Since that day I've generally armed my Cerb with Assault Launchers because they are simply a better weapon system for the situations I find my Cerb in.
And why is this not WAD?
Originally by: Carth Reynolds
So, while the OP is indeed asking for more damage, I don't think it's unreasonable to want a cruiser class missile that can actually hit the average modern cruiser.
But why? Give us some fits and tactics to compare. Give us some situations and numbers on absolute damage.
|
|
|
| |
|