| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
magic0
   |
Posted - 2004.05.29 23:48:00 -
[1]
I don't know if anyone has suggested this idea yet, but how about giving the ships that don't have missile launcher hard points an option to defend against missiles besides using smartbombs.
My idea for this is a missile defense turret of some sort that has a huge capacity for anti-missile ammo, a high rate of fire, and pretty good tracking speed, but only targets missiles on it's own once you activate it. Sort of like the guns they have on ships in the navy now to defend against missiles. Flames and comments welcome. 
|
Ripley13
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 00:28:00 -
[2]
Actually, I like this idea. Some sort of point defense... I would sacrifice a high slot to stick in a high rate of fire weapon that will automatically target and attempt to destroy incoming missile salvos.
|
Istvaan Shogaatsu
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 00:32:00 -
[3]
Yes, because Eve doesn't have enough ways to screw missile users over. Great idea. Oh oh, can we also add an invincible anti-missile shield that blocks all missiles? Oh, and a device which clogs up enemy missile launchers with taffy. Can we just invent a way to give Eve players who mount missile launchers TERMINAL LUNG CANCER maybe?
|
Ripley13
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 00:40:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
Yes, because Eve doesn't have enough ways to screw missile users over. Great idea. Oh oh, can we also add an invincible anti-missile shield that blocks all missiles? Oh, and a device which clogs up enemy missile launchers with taffy. Can we just invent a way to give Eve players who mount missile launchers TERMINAL LUNG CANCER maybe?
A little bitter, aren't you? Well cry somewhere else. There should be some working means of defending against missiles. They do a LOT of damage per shot, and the only way to defend against them right now is defender missiles... which don't work right. If a salvo of 4 cruise missiles is incoming and you launched defenders at them, they would all head towards the closet missile and (maybe)smack it down leaving three to hit you. At the moment, defender missiles aren't that useful... and a point-defense turret for battleships would be a nice anti-frigate deterrant too. And we're not talking some uber kill-anything-it-hits turret... just quick firing laser that might or might not hit incoming missiles. This would be great for indy's too... and it wouldn't stop missiles from being used. A larger salvo of 3-4 would still get through easily, with maybe one or two missiles shot down. It could depend on the pilot's skill, how often the point defense turret hit.
|
magic0
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 00:48:00 -
[5]
Yes, I didn't say it WOULD destroy the missile, more of an ATTEMPT actually. Just like defender missiles, only it gives the ships without missile hardpoints a viable anti-missile option. It wouldn't mess with missile users in any way, it would be the same as if you engaged someone using defenders, except it would probably be a little more effective as the defenders don't work well right now. Also the turret is not an end all solution to missiles as it can only track and shoot one missile at a time, but just like defender missles, the more of them you have the better chance you have of taking out enemy missles. So basically you trade offensive power for defensive abilities.
|
Niklas Luhmann
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 09:38:00 -
[6]
I've talked a lot about this with one of my corp mates, who's a strong advocate for the idea.
What I see right now in PvP is bs fights at 80k range, chains of missiles launched, and when they arrive, the lesser bs goes down or warps out. Great fun.......
So - point defense. A great idea, which imo would lend to even more custom setups. Not wanting to sacrifice offensive power, attack forces might designate point defense ships to protect the group, but with little offensive punch otherwise.
|
R Dan
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 14:38:00 -
[7]
hmm missile defender turrets....
Fair enough i suppose
BUT
only if i can have turret defender missiles!
(or equilivent)
kthxbye
Bite me....for i taste good :)
|
Istvaan Shogaatsu
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 14:45:00 -
[8]
Hey, sure. If you wanna do this, give the Caldari battleships six or seven turret slots so we can avoid using missiles altogether.
|
Cadman Weyland
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 16:46:00 -
[9]
Smart Bombs are erratic and Defenders are useless.
Ships need Point Defence weapons
1. Guns. such as the Phalanx or Goalkeeper on current warships, be they rapid fire Lasers, Gatling guns or a shotgun style Blaster.
2. Missiles. A relook is needed at defenders. Replace them with something fired from an assualt launcher or a new type of launcher. Modern warships have Anti Missile missiles, be they the large Sea wolfor Sea Sparrow or the new smaller RAM launcher ther US Navy is testing. (small multi shot rockets with blast warhead.
3. Towed Decoys and Chaff. All modern millitary aircraft be they Combat or Support have Chaff dispensors to try and confuse incoming missile attacks. Chaff to screw rader guided and Flares for Heat guided. Newer aircraft (and a number of naval ships)are also carrying Towed Decoys. They emit a larger signature and the missiles (torpedoes) go for those not the aircraft.
The guns, missiles would have t be a high slot option, probaly the towed decoy too (though maybe a med).
Director of Empire Ops and Chief Carebear |
Cadman Weyland
|
Posted - 2004.05.30 16:50:00 -
[10]
maybe i just like the idea of using some of the less well known ships in combat as support craft.
Aurgors, Celestis, Arbitrators, Bellicose etc could all be used for fleet support with the modules i suggested. Use them in conjunction with the more common vessels. Provide missile cover and support to the main combat ships.
Director of Empire Ops and Chief Carebear |
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 01:43:00 -
[11]
bye bye Raven
---------------------------
CEO: Black Sea Industries
|
Ripley13
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 03:09:00 -
[12]
I hate how everyone reacts to these new ideas as if they were the end of the world. An antimissile turret wouldn't break the game, it would give us some sort of defense against a very powerful weapon that currently has no defense.
|
Istvaan Shogaatsu
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 03:19:00 -
[13]
No defense eh? Let's list the things that can be used to defend from missiles, that don't work on any turreted weapons.
- Warping away before they arrive.
- MWDing away before they arrive.
- Using a roid or base as cover.
- Using a newbie alt to catch missiles.
- Smartbombs.
- Defenders.
|
Darkwolf
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 03:25:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
- Using a newbie alt to catch missiles.
*laughs*
"Go long! Go long! KABLAMMM!!!"
Originally by: Ripley13
it would give us some sort of defense against a very powerful weapon that currently has no defense.
You have to be joking. There are more defenses against missiles than any other weapon class, and not the least of them is simply warping away before they get to you.
My experience of 80km battles between missile users? They shoot missiles at each other for a while, then both warp off before the missiles arrive, and you get a lovely fireworks display, which doesn't do much at all.
|
ZYMOTICAL
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 06:00:00 -
[15]
Sounds pretty ****in boring. Why even bother shooting the missiles off if you know you're both going to warp away? This sort of combat isn't related to player skill at all... it comes down to continually doing the exact same thing and whoever makes the first mistake dies.
|
Del Narveux
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 10:06:00 -
[16]
Sounds like a good idea, but as others have mentioned there are already a lot of ways to deal with missiles. If you cant fit a defender tube, get a smartbomb and get good with it.
_________________
[SAK] And Proud Of It!
aka Cpt Bogus
Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? |
Dallenn
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 13:13:00 -
[17]
This is not trivial to do! Depending on how Eve is implemented, the devs would have to figure out how they get the turrets to target missiles, how the firing is activated, is the collision engine involved or how do you know they are to hit, and then the effects have to be right... Players added anti-missile defenses to Homeworld 2, and there were quite a few issues depending on what exactly one wanted. Projectile defenses were easy and worked fine, beam defenses less so...
The major balance issue would be that suddenly Amarr ships are going to have a new form of effective missile defense, while up to now they have suffered from the lack of defenders. In general terms, if your ship fits 3 out of its 4 turrets for dedicated anti-missile defenses, that is going to be a weak setup if your enemy does not show up in caracals and kestrels after all.
I have seen PD turrets in many games, so how original is it, after all? Decoys and chaff could be more interesting, you could add a new missile skill which makes it less harder for the missile to be fooled, or some missiles could be smarter in their targeting (eg. T2 missiles...).
We seek the Chosen ones / Roleplaying in Eve /
Idea Lab favourites
I am Paratwa / Of the Ash Ock
A Guardian of time / The firestorm / That purifies |
Max Hardcase
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 14:57:00 -
[18]
Smartbombs will be next to useless come the next castor patch.
Defender missiles will also be useless given the new missile speeds.
|
Cadman Weyland
|
Posted - 2004.05.31 22:02:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Cadman Weyland on 31/05/2004 22:04:31
well if point def turrets are too difficult to sort they really need to look at the ship deployables ie flares/ chaff/ decoys.
With missiles being speeded up smart bombs will be pants unless they alter the explosion so it lingers or generates a defensive screen around the ship. Hmm..thinks imagine huge shotgun round that goes off around yer ship to try and damage inc missiles with fragments rippling off for a nice distance.
Edit...doh that is pretty much what a smart bomb does 
The simple answer is a chaff/decoy launcher that uses a high slot.
Director of Empire Ops and Chief Carebear |
Baejon
|
Posted - 2004.06.03 20:55:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Baejon on 03/06/2004 20:57:29
Below are my thoughts on the issue, 1 is probably the easiest to implement.
1. defender missile launcher, exactly same as standard missile launcher, except takes a generic high slot and can only hold defender missiles. add an increase in rate of fire to defender skill.
2. defender missiles leave ship heading toward a missile, rather than leaving through front of the ship
3. if missiles had a random jink (perhaps implemented as a random change in their computed translational velocity), then I would like to see a point defense turrent, with a new skill. If implemented, I think it should have a firing rate of about once every 5 sec and range of 20000km, with a damage multiplier of 1, and auto targets.
The random jink could be computed as an additional random penalty to the point defense turret.
The auto targeting could use the same code as when a defender missile selects it's target when the turret fires.
I picked 20000km for the turret so it would have 2 shots at the fastest missile when the patch comes out.
Either the turret should use defender missles for ammo, or there should be a variety, for each ammo type.
4. If 1 and 2 were implemented, it would essentially the same as 3.
5. With a more effective defense, missile costs and space should be lowered.
Baejon |
Sulyana Baiur
|
Posted - 2004.06.03 21:47:00 -
[21]
I come from nowhere with ideas.
I've been pondering the anti-missile turret with some consideration the past few days, after being run down by missile boats continually. Being as fair play should be allowed, and inventing something to gun down missiles somewhat unbalancing for those with the gun...
Here's my thought.
We'll call them "slot hogs". Anti-Missile systems could be race specific, or just require sm. med. lrg. energy/rail/projectile. The idea is, there's a short range one, a medium range one, and a long range one. Which one you mount is up to you.
The catch? They cost almost no CPU or power (though higher for the medium and long range one) but they eat a medium slot. Yeah, it'd be nice to mount two close range anti-missile turrets, but if you're flying a thorax, guess what? You're resistant to missiles, but not guns.
Specifics? The Railgun antimissile turrets lock on to a single enemy and target his missile ports. So it's basically a missile camper, it watches one foe for launching (at med-to-long range) and then rapid fires some hybrid ammo at the missile port to try and kill the missiles. This could make the railgun one very popular because it causes the missiles to detonate right in front of the guy launching them. Drawbacks, well. Once the missiles get any closer they're basically useless.
The Projectile antimissiles just like eating your ammo. You activate them, and they eat some cap and just sit there indefinitely. As soon as they fire, you have to turn them on again (or set them to auto) because they just fill the air with ammo to try and gun down missiles and short-to-medium range. The nice thing about these is that they might be multi-purpose (fitting in high, med, or low slots) due to their undoubtably minmatar origins. Drawbacks? They will consume ammo at an incredible rate, despite being very effective at missile stopping.
Laser? I was thinking maybe something that dealt a significantly higher amount of damage (thus more successful at destroying large missiles like torps and cruises) but cost more cap than the rail or projectile. The deal here is, all races can use them, but these would be affected by the Amarr -40% cap thing. So you'd get a bunch of Amarr ships with the ability to swat a missile or two off all the time. (well, a good portion of the time) I think this would help the Amarr with their suckage problem. (from what I've read in the forum, their ships are butt)
p.s. All amarr deserve another turret slot. Because.
Sulyana, She who Yammers on.
|
Selak Zorander
|
Posted - 2004.06.03 23:22:00 -
[22]
I could see this and as a balance make it so that it has a lower chance to hit.
Instead of having to see if the turret can hit the target (assume if tracks gun barrel just fine) but the ammo is not accurate. For Instance, every time the turret fires, there is only a 25% chance it will hit the missile. Then you reset and get another 25% chance with the next shot. It would be like playing a table top game and having to get a 1 on a D4 in order to hit. If you dont like 25% give it a lower chance to hit but give it an insane firing rate. Say it has a 10% chance to hit but fires every half a second and auto targets one missile at a time. Would that be a perfect defense, not by a long shot. Put it in a high slot and it reduces overall offensive fire power.
Another Idea is to make it like a mini flak cannon. To do this right, it would just try to get an explosive shell to land with a radius about 20 times the signature of the missile. if the missile has a 5 meter signature, then a flak cloud could explode anywhere within 100m of the missile and if the missile is within say a 5m of the flak explosion then bye-bye missile, again is this is not supposed to be highly accurate but does stand a chance.
Just some possible thoughts.
|
Sulyana Baiur
|
Posted - 2004.06.04 06:43:00 -
[23]
That's pretty much what I had in mind, it would vomit forth rounds into space in hopes that one would hit.
And your idea about flak rounds is something I think that Defender missiles should do. Rather than doing the ridiculously stupid "chase the missile for a while" tactic, they should explode showering the target with pointy things and fire, hopefully damaging electronics or warheads or fuel cells or something.
I hate watching defenders track missiles, it's so futile.
Maybe make a new, better defender missile, the interceptor missile?
|
Zaldiri
|
Posted - 2004.06.04 11:24:00 -
[24]
Seems pretty stupid that now in the 21st century we have guns on our warships that have a decent succes rate at shooting down missles. But in the 116th century (or whatever) we cant even manage that.
Rise of Valhalla is now recruiting. We are looking for players of any level of experience. Please contact me or SSJ2VEGETA |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |