EVE Search - Remove defender missiles.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Remove defender missiles.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2004.05.19 00:36:00 - [1] You heard me, remove them from the game altogether. Otherwise you might be tempted to actually make them work someday, and that day the Caldari race will be rendered obsolete. Not only will people have a defence against our missiles in the form of shield hardeners and all the usual fixin's, they'll also have the ability to reliably intercept them with defenders. So please. Remove them.
DigitalCommunist	Posted - 2004.05.19 00:54:00 - [2] Er, you know hardeners work for any damage, including turrets, smartbombs and drones.. right? _____________________________________ Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning. "Can I be a consultant for EVE II?" - WhiteDwarf
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2004.05.19 01:35:00 - [3] Er, you know that defenders are an additional layer of protection on top of those hardeners?
Bella Verde	Posted - 2004.05.19 01:44:00 - [4] Missiles already have benefits.
Kalast Raven	Posted - 2004.05.19 01:55:00 - [5] Someone somewhere thinks that missiles are ultra powerful and they need ways of defending against them far in excess to anti-turret measures. Let's examine defensive techniques first. Only methods which negate delivery of damage should be considered. Methods of ignoring or tanking damage apply to any damage thus missiles and turrets and smartbomb does not matter. Vs. turrets Jamming Dampening Moving in a untrackable path so turret misses. Tracking Disruption, making the above easier. Moving beyond range, or under range. Vs. Missiles Jamming (prevents non-fof, forces operator to spend time reloading and then using a sub-par weapon type.) Dampening (prevents FOF) Having another collidable object in missile path. Defenders Smart Bombs Outrunning the missile. Now, what counter measures exist against these defenses? Turret users can : Use tracking computer. move to an appropriate range. Web targets which move at a unmanagable speed. carry appropriate sensor boosting and eccm equipment. Missile Users can : Overwhelm defender missiles or smartbombs missile defenses with more missiles than defenses can handle. Web targets which move at an unmanagable speed. I think the system is fair. Based on existing skills, gunnery is the higher level weapon for high skilled characters to maximum damage, and missiles are for those who dont want to invest millions of skill points in combat techniques. However with balance changes missiles will become a weapon which requires skill like turrets. So overall things will work fine no doom and gloom needed. ------- K. Raven
RiGHTy	Posted - 2004.05.19 02:32:00 - [6] Guardian Elder shoots off a lot of Defender missiles when you fire torpedo's at it... destroying most of the torps/cruise. I dont seem to be able to do the same though. Dont forget though that using defender's takes up a slot and a lot of work reloading (since you'll want a small launcher with good ROF for defender missiles) so, I dont really see the bad part in them at all only bad part about them is that they dont work at all
Kzandra Damar	Posted - 2004.05.29 15:33:00 - [7] Actually... one point that was made was excellent, and one I myself have reacted too before.. and if you think about it it is pretty darn silly. This is about collidable objects, such at astoroids and things like that.. beamweapons, projectileweapons and hybridweapons pass right though them without any problems at all, but missiles do not, they explode. If there is any change to be made here it is that, make it impossible to shoot right through a rock no matter what weapon is used, EXCEPT possible in the case of missiles, for some reason they act a lot like dumbfire missiles, which they are not far as i know. An expensive, hightech missile worth thousands of credits should at least have the ability to dodge and evade stationary targets in it's path. As is today it's just ludicrous.
Hellek	Posted - 2004.05.29 15:41:00 - [8] lol, if missiles would be improved because they cost a bit more than other ammo, CCP should make the apoc 5-10% better than all other tier2 BS as it costs 5-10% more than all others
hellwarrior	Posted - 2004.05.29 16:26:00 - [9] dampening doesn't stop FoF..... lol..
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.05.29 16:28:00 - [10] Originally by: hellwarrior dampening doesn't stop FoF..... lol.. It used to though and the fix was never included in a patch log I hate it when CCP change such crucial elements without advertising it anywhere except Chaos. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.05.29 16:29:00 - [11] Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 29/05/2004 16:30:25 Defender missiles would only be useful if they seriously upgraded the controlling A.I. Defender missiles need to be able to be launched quickly, can deflect missiles aimed at gang members, and don't disrupt your ship from warping. This would make Kestrels/Caracal's useful in fleet battles as mobile missile defence platforms. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
John McCreedy	Posted - 2004.05.29 16:32:00 - [12] I suggested this in another topic and it deserves a mention again in my opinion. With the missiles changing so they're appropriate to ship class, Defender Missiles should also be class specific. It is unfair that a missile fired from a Frigate can take out a Missile the size of a Torpedo. There should be small, medium , Large and Heavy Defender types. Anti-Light, Medium, Cruise and Torpedo Defenders. These should also be limited to class size so that to fit a Large Defender so you could take out a Cruise Missile, you need a Cruise Launcher. To take out a Torp, you need a Seige etc. This would bring a new level of tactical depth to ship set up. If an Appoc, Mega, Tempest or Raven wish to counter Missiles they have to sacrifice an Offensive Weapon. Same goes for the other classes. What it also does is balance the RoF of the Defender against that of the Missile. One Defender per Missile. Make a difference
LJSilver	Posted - 2004.05.29 16:34:00 - [13] Quote: Actually... one point that was made was excellent, and one I myself have reacted too before.. and if you think about it it is pretty darn silly. This is about collidable objects, such at astoroids and things like that.. beamweapons, projectileweapons and hybridweapons pass right though them without any problems at all, but missiles do not, they explode. If there is any change to be made here it is that, make it impossible to shoot right through a rock no matter what weapon is used, EXCEPT possible in the case of missiles, for some reason they act a lot like dumbfire missiles, which they are not far as i know. An expensive, hightech missile worth thousands of credits should at least have the ability to dodge and evade stationary targets in it's path. As is today it's just ludicrous. Yup, CCP got this backwards. Direct fire weapons (turrets) should be blocked by asteroids. Indirect fire weapons (missiles) should go around them. Kinda silly the way it is now. http://www.liketelevision.com/web1/classictv/longjohn/longjohn210.gif
Ithildin	Posted - 2004.05.29 17:28:00 - [14] Originally by: John McCreedy I suggested this in another topic and it deserves a mention again in my opinion. With the missiles changing so they're appropriate to ship class, Defender Missiles should also be class specific. It is unfair that a missile fired from a Frigate can take out a Missile the size of a Torpedo. There should be small, medium , Large and Heavy Defender types. Anti-Light, Medium, Cruise and Torpedo Defenders. These should also be limited to class size so that to fit a Large Defender so you could take out a Cruise Missile, you need a Cruise Launcher. To take out a Torp, you need a Seige etc. This would bring a new level of tactical depth to ship set up. If an Appoc, Mega, Tempest or Raven wish to counter Missiles they have to sacrifice an Offensive Weapon. Same goes for the other classes. What it also does is balance the RoF of the Defender against that of the Missile. One Defender per Missile. Erm, think of a missile as a very small ship whose only purpose is to blow up. Do you make it have shields and lots of armour? No. Thus it should be rather easy to blow up by defenders. Even torpedoes. The only thing that really speak against the small defenders is the difficulty of making them hit a fast moving missile. Just some RL (yes, I know this is a game) examples that spring to mind: there is a defender missile that works so well at tracking and destroying incoming missiles that it can be used to destroy incoming turret shells. There are also a lot of ship-based high-speed turrets that are used to eliminate incoming missiles. The counter to countermeassures is not heavier missiles is smart and/or fast missiles. Such as the one that detects when counter-measure system locks on, and then goes straight up to several hundred meters so the countermeasure system looses the lock on it, before diving down on the target again. Now, back on track: to counter missiles with defenders you need to sacrifice attention and firepower. -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
John McCreedy	Posted - 2004.05.29 19:07:00 - [15] Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: John McCreedy I suggested this in another topic and it deserves a mention again in my opinion. With the missiles changing so they're appropriate to ship class, Defender Missiles should also be class specific. It is unfair that a missile fired from a Frigate can take out a Missile the size of a Torpedo. There should be small, medium , Large and Heavy Defender types. Anti-Light, Medium, Cruise and Torpedo Defenders. These should also be limited to class size so that to fit a Large Defender so you could take out a Cruise Missile, you need a Cruise Launcher. To take out a Torp, you need a Seige etc. This would bring a new level of tactical depth to ship set up. If an Appoc, Mega, Tempest or Raven wish to counter Missiles they have to sacrifice an Offensive Weapon. Same goes for the other classes. What it also does is balance the RoF of the Defender against that of the Missile. One Defender per Missile. Erm, think of a missile as a very small ship whose only purpose is to blow up. Do you make it have shields and lots of armour? No. Thus it should be rather easy to blow up by defenders. Even torpedoes. The only thing that really speak against the small defenders is the difficulty of making them hit a fast moving missile. Just some RL (yes, I know this is a game) examples that spring to mind: there is a defender missile that works so well at tracking and destroying incoming missiles that it can be used to destroy incoming turret shells. There are also a lot of ship-based high-speed turrets that are used to eliminate incoming missiles. The counter to countermeassures is not heavier missiles is smart and/or fast missiles. Such as the one that detects when counter-measure system locks on, and then goes straight up to several hundred meters so the countermeasure system looses the lock on it, before diving down on the target again. Now, back on track: to counter missiles with defenders you need to sacrifice attention and firepower. We can debate real life all day. In real life Frigates can carry both Torpedos and Cruise Missiles. Does this mean that the game should? That's open to debate at best but the point is that this is a game and not real life. If they wish to make Missiles class-specific then all Missiles should be class specific or not. For good or for bad, Missiles are a primary weapon system for most Caldari ships and although they should be counterable, there should be limits to that. What I'm proposing is a system that counters missiles without rendering Missile Boats (i.e. Most Caldari Ships) useless. To fit a defensive set up you need to make sacrifices to your offensive set up. If you want to Target Jam a Turret based ship, you're unable to shield tank. What they should do is make ECCM more useful rather than penalising Missile users. Make a difference
Aequitas Veritas	Posted - 2004.05.29 20:47:00 - [16] If defenders are fixed and have such a small size that lets two small defender launchers, which can be used as the 7th and 8th high slots on battleships, can launch a whole deal of them and can take out most of the incoming missiles that will just be too big of a disadvantage for missile users. You shouldnt be able to just "fill up" your high slots and get a very good defence against missiles, at least not all of them. I wouldn't object to defenders being good at taking out torpedoes which are dealing a whole deal of damage, but then again we allready have smartbombs which still are very good at taking them out. Cruise missiles, though, should not easily be shot down as their damage is at level with guns. In the case of making target specific defenders that can only be launched against a particular type of missiles, its a good idea. But rather I'd make a launcher that ur only able to fit to frigates and cruisers that can launch defenders, and defenders which are able to fire against all hostile missiles. that would give cruisers a new mission in the game as well. And battleships cant fit a "fillup slots" type of launcher that is a very efficient defence against all types of incomig missiles. Instead they should rely on Smartbombs that gives excellent protection against Torpedoes and not good protection against Cruise Missiles. A battleship shouldnt be able to fit two small fastlaunching launchers and take out all incoming missiles. seriously, thats just wierd. then there should also be small point defence laser that can shoot down incoming shells as well. Ravens can't fit more launchers, thus not getting a defence against missiles, and it would then be fair that it had a module that could be fitted in a gunnery slot and give it protection as well...
Sal' Enth	Posted - 2004.05.29 20:49:00 - [17] I disagree with the idea of removing Defenders. True Hardeners help reduce the damage of a missile hit, but if you're in a frigate and being shot at with Heavy or Cruise missiles, then Hardeners aren't going to help much. True, most of the time you can outrun a missile in an appropriately exquiped frig, but an extra layer of defence when you run out of cap is never a bad thing. And no, don't make defenders class specific. If some poor cruiser is being pounded by a missile BS and the cruiser's defenders can't blow up the incoming missiles, that's Bulls***. Defenders should stay pretty much the way they are. No need to complicate things unnecessarily.
GREATONE	Posted - 2004.05.29 21:38:00 - [18] Originally by: John McCreedy I suggested this in another topic and it deserves a mention again in my opinion. With the missiles changing so they're appropriate to ship class, Defender Missiles should also be class specific. It is unfair that a missile fired from a Frigate can take out a Missile the size of a Torpedo. There should be small, medium , Large and Heavy Defender types. Anti-Light, Medium, Cruise and Torpedo Defenders. These should also be limited to class size so that to fit a Large Defender so you could take out a Cruise Missile, you need a Cruise Launcher. To take out a Torp, you need a Seige etc. This would bring a new level of tactical depth to ship set up. If an Appoc, Mega, Tempest or Raven wish to counter Missiles they have to sacrifice an Offensive Weapon. Same goes for the other classes. What it also does is balance the RoF of the Defender against that of the Missile. One Defender per Missile. your joking right it whould be like the stingers in real life if they want to take aout a nuke they must use a bigger stinger missile thats just funny a torpedo or missile will explpode on impact if you cant see that i dont know what you see sorry but i just had to comment on that one
JoCool	Posted - 2004.05.29 22:06:00 - [19] I agree - remove Defenders from the Game please. Or give them another job. Like auto-seeking drones attacking you.
Galen Dvorak	Posted - 2004.05.29 22:38:00 - [20] Edited by: Galen Dvorak on 29/05/2004 22:57:04 Edited by: Galen Dvorak on 29/05/2004 22:48:16 I agree - remove Defenders from the Game please. Or give them another job. Like auto-seeking drones attacking you --------------------------------------------------------------------- Lol. Yes, lets just nerf everything that doesn't automaticly give Caldari ships an edge. Why don't we just give all Caldari ships a button to UI "Destroy all incoming Drones". Lets not even go to issue of long range attack capabilities and short range defence issues.
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2004.05.29 22:46:00 - [21] Excellent idea, Galen - there are entirely too few counters to drones, they're too much of an instant-win button; effective when ECMed, too hardy to destroy with smartbombs, never miss their target, steady heavy damage - by comparison, missiles seem designed to fail. Change defenders into anti-drone missiles. Effective ones, something that one-hit-kills a heavy drone - then there'll be an actual valid reason to taking some aboard.
Galen Dvorak	Posted - 2004.05.29 23:03:00 - [22] Must be also the reason why missile boats with a little drone space aren't used so much in PvP. They truly must suck.
John McCreedy	Posted - 2004.05.29 23:37:00 - [23] Quote: your joking right it whould be like the stingers in real life if they want to take aout a nuke they must use a bigger stinger missile thats just funny a torpedo or missile will explpode on impact if you cant see that i dont know what you see Reality check: This is a game not real life. It's a balancing issue. By making defender Missiles class specific, you're removing a large weapon from a Battleship in order to do this. As it stands it can be fitted to the 7th or 8th High Slot on a turret based BS (Megathron or Appoc for example) but at what penalty? None because all you have to do is fit a Rocket or Standard Launcher for next to nothing. If I want to fit a Weapon Disruptor on my Raven, I need to give up a shield or Warp Scrambler. If you need to fit a Cruise or Seige Launcher then you need to make sacrifices too. This is why it's unbalanced and they should be size specific or remove them alltogether like the original poster said. Make a difference
GREATONE	Posted - 2004.05.29 23:50:00 - [24] ok john here is the thing missiles are the best wepon around and you complain i cant see why also missiles do go of with impact it whould be silly if they dident and dont talk about your settings thats completely up to your ship race etc same for all races its a balance you need to found like the rest of us i cant fitt my mega like i whould want to noone can same for every ship ingame why whould your ship be diffrent ? and about missiles there is alot to pick from that take out diffrent things pick the right one instead and you blow away most of us ...you cant take away all races defense against them im sure you see that your self it whould be like my guns did get max hit everytime then i kill everything in my way is that fair?
GREATONE	Posted - 2004.05.29 23:54:00 - [25] Originally by: GREATONE ok john here is the thing missiles are the best wepon around and you complain i cant see why also missiles do go of with impact it whould be silly if they dident and dont talk about your settings thats completely up to your ship race etc same for all races its a balance you need to found like the rest of us i cant fitt my mega like i whould want to noone can same for every ship ingame why whould your ship be diffrent ? and about missiles there is alot to pick from that take out diffrent things pick the right one instead and you blow away most of us ...you cant take away all races defense against them im sure you see that your self it whould be like my guns did get max hit everytime then i kill everything in my way is that fair? and offcorse i get penelty i cant use that slot for something else i personaly dont use this def missiles i use smart bombs but i cant agree with you on this one
GREATONE	Posted - 2004.05.29 23:55:00 - [26] impact is impact then they go boom very simple
Man'corr	Posted - 2004.05.30 00:04:00 - [27] ahh the wisdom of your words istvaan. could you please remove EW as well ccp. Missles are immune to EW but turrets are totally useless then. So EW is an extra layer of defense againt turrets and not missles. As such I think you will remove EW soon from eve as it is totally unbalancing gameplay. All of above post was formulated wth 100% honesty and 100% sarcasm. Now i only need to get drunk The 3rd turret is the Malediction is missing. Plz make as much noise as possible so that CCP gets us a remedy for that, possibly before X-Mas this year.
John McCreedy	Posted - 2004.05.30 00:40:00 - [28] Originally by: Man'corr ahh the wisdom of your words istvaan. could you please remove EW as well ccp. Missles are immune to EW but turrets are totally useless then. So EW is an extra layer of defense againt turrets and not missles. As such I think you will remove EW soon from eve as it is totally unbalancing gameplay. Man'corr, although your reply wasn't aimed at me, it's a common misconception that it's the missile users fault that f.o.f. missiles are ammune to jamming. The answer is not to penalise missile users, rather it's to improve the pretty useless ECCM modules so that turret users gain the same addvantages as missile users. Make a difference
GREATONE	Posted - 2004.05.30 00:59:00 - [29] i suggest that you read dev blog john and missile is still the best wepon out there if ccp like to even the odds thats good for the game maby not for you personaly but for the game it is
John McCreedy	Posted - 2004.05.30 01:09:00 - [30] Originally by: GREATONE i suggest that you read dev blog john and missile is still the best wepon out there if ccp like to even the odds thats good for the game maby not for you personaly but for the game it is Which one? The one about the ECM/ECCM changes? Allready have. But here's the thing Greatstone. Agree or disagree, that isn't a problem. But tell me why you disagree. Give me a logical and well thought out argument as to why I'm wrong and maybe, just maybe you may bring me over to your way of thinking. So far you've presented no argument for your case. Missiles maybe the most powerful weapon but they are more easily counterd that Turrets at the moment. If they improve ECCM, turrets will no longer be as vunerable to jamming as they are now. However, you can still fit a weapon desinged to go on a frigate and fire something that takes out my torpedo. The fitting requirements are what need to be balanced and the fairest ways to do this is by making Defenders for each missile class. Make a difference

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.