| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nick Parker
   |
Posted - 2004.06.26 17:59:00 -
[1]
Hi all. I was looking back through old dev Posts and I saw something about "Micro" (I think) Cruise or siege missle launchers. After the Patch Missle launchers became useless on Cruisers, except to load out defender Missles or the Occasional time you need FOF missles to try and hurt drones. Caracal Has the Best Sensors for the Caldari (With the Worst signature radius Of course) And really can't Follow the traditonal caldari Strategy of Stay the Heck away from things and Blast it into Oblivion. Now It can only Fire Heavy missles at best. I miss Having Torps and Cruises on that ship. Anyways I read that the Devs were Going to Make a Micro/ small Cruise Missle launcher for Missle ships. Requires Cruiser Stat usage to Keep Kestrels from Being A real annoyance. Anyways NO such Luck . Any word On that would be Greatly Appreciated
|
Perry
|
Posted - 2004.06.26 20:04:00 -
[2]
Good Idea, but dont forget to give us a Micro Tachyon Beam, i want to fit five Tachyons on a Maller and gank others with them. [/sarcasm]
|
Del Narveux
|
Posted - 2004.06.26 21:05:00 -
[3]
I would actually like to see a cruiser sized torp/CM launcher, with about the same fitting requirements as a 250mm rail, so youre limited to one or two of them. As for heavies, they wont be so bad once they give us the extra range they promised.
_________________
[SAK] And Proud Of It!
aka Cpt Bogus
Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? |
valkir
|
Posted - 2004.06.27 06:29:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Perry
Good Idea, but dont forget to give us a Micro Tachyon Beam, i want to fit five Tachyons on a Maller and gank others with them. [/sarcasm]
that sounds kinda cool i wonder how micro tachyon beam would sound 
Error 7.0b1 - The item could not be deleted because it was missing The world will end in five minutes Please log out.
WARNING: Keyboard Not Attached. Press F10 to Continue
|
DJTheBaron
|
Posted - 2004.06.27 10:31:00 -
[5]
theres nothing to stop frigates mounting limited cruise if it were done the way of todays combat aircraft, externally, but if you take a hit there they might go boom boom, but that wont be including due to the graphics needed which would add to lagg i imagine
anyway bomber class frigates will be coming out soon enough
__________________________________________________
Scum, your all scum. |
Jeswyn
|
Posted - 2004.06.27 12:38:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Nick Parker
...After the Patch Missle launchers became useless on Cruisers...
Am I right when I assume that you didn't even try to fit a Caracal with Heavy Launchers?
|
Gaijin Lanis
|
Posted - 2004.06.27 14:35:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Gaijin Lanis on 27/06/2004 14:38:08
Originally by: Del Narveux
with about the same fitting requirements as a 250mm rail, so youre limited to one or two of them.
.... What? I'll just go back to my thorax, fitted with five 250mm rails, and pretend you didn't say that.
Anyway, theres just something silly about giving cruisers the ability to use unlimited range weapon systems.
|
Aitrus
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 02:47:00 -
[8]
I think cruise missiles and torps were removed from frigates and cruisers for a reason. DOn't expect them back.
Start training heavy missile to V, then you'll be just as damaging.
Heavy missile = 150 dmg.
with heavy missile V and Cruiser V (on a cruiser with a missile damage bonus)
150*1.25*1.25 = 234 dmg. (More if you fit a missile damage mod)
(Keep in mind that smaller launchers have a faster ROF than cruise and seige, and that the missiles are supposed to be higher velocity than they are now)
The only difference between missile boats now from pre-patch, is that you actually need to train skills to be good with them. The fact that the only smaller ships people used in PvP were the missile boats was a BAD thing.
|
Nick Parker
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 04:33:00 -
[9]
I agree With most of you, but Rat hunting in Low Sec space SOlo (which My Dumb Butt is fond of doing) Often required A boatload of Damage fast from Cruises and Torps. Now I had to switch over to a Moa from a caracal and the SHip is collecting dust. Actually All I want is for CCP to Fix the Missle skills so that Heavy missles vary in range by skill. And Why did CCP raise the Bounties on Missle Spamming rats (the Inferno in Particular)? Stay at 46 k away from them and chew them with your weapon of choice. The Only Gurista Rats even remotely challenging now are the MOrtifiers and Nullifiers. Lastly Mini Tachyons would be a Great idea as Long as I could have Micro 1400mm Artillery
|
Del Narveux
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 05:44:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Gaijin Lanis
.... What? I'll just go back to my thorax, fitted with five 250mm rails, and pretend you didn't say that.
Would that be the Thorax which has zero missile slots? 
_________________
[SAK] And Proud Of It!
aka Cpt Bogus
Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? |
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 05:59:00 -
[11]
Cruise missiles were removed for a reason. I agree fully with that reason.
EVE doesnt need micro L smartbombs, micro Tachyons or micro 1400mms...
|
Del Narveux
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 09:24:00 -
[12]
But missles arent, or at least, they shouldnt be, directly comparable to guns. If it was up to me, I would give frigates heavies, and cruisers cruise and/or torps, but if it was up to me I would be doing a *lot* of weapons-related things very differently.
_________________
[SAK] And Proud Of It!
aka Cpt Bogus
Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? |
Gaijin Lanis
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 09:42:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Del Narveux
Would that be the Thorax which has zero missile slots?
Screw missles, My rails' DOT is comparable to heavies.
|
valkir
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 09:53:00 -
[14]
Originally by: illuminati
Cruise missiles were removed for a reason. I agree fully with that reason.
altho painfull to the caldari who love to fly the caracal
i agree there was a reason altho i got exactly no clue what it is.
Originally by: illuminati
EVE doesnt need micro L smartbombs, micro Tachyons or micro 1400mms...
not to high on micro L smart bombs that one made exactly no sence at all.
i think micro tachyons would be sweet speaking of tho tachyons are a higher grade laser.
a micro 1400mms how would that be remotely posible id be thinking more twords a high power'd 425mms auto cannon maby a sniper version
and not the scout.
Error 7.0b1 - The item could not be deleted because it was missing The world will end in five minutes Please log out.
WARNING: Keyboard Not Attached. Press F10 to Continue
|
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 10:06:00 -
[15]
Quote:
but if it was up to me I would be doing a *lot* of weapons-related things very differently
Rest assured you are not the only one, but neither you nor I made this game you see, hehe...
|
Starplier
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 18:34:00 -
[16]
when you think about it, the post-patch changes made some sense, but not alot. yes, missile-spamming was really becoming a problem, but that doesnt mean you just take away heavier missiles entirely! the micro-cruise launcher is perfectly reasonable. give it the capacity for like 1 or 2 cruise missiles, and give it an extremely long recycle time, but get it back. Just make a long tube to strap onto a frigate or a cruiser or something. how hard can that be? and as for the crap with 'micro-1400mm', ok man, that is like soooo irrelevant. you can stick a missile launcher or an RPG on a bycicle if you are that desperate, but I'd like to see you try to do that with an anti-tank gun.
_______
|(\_/)| Will someone please claim this rodent?
|(O.o)| he crawled into my sig and now I cant
|(> <)| get him out.
------- |
Gaijin Lanis
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 19:21:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Gaijin Lanis on 28/06/2004 19:24:42
Edited by: Gaijin Lanis on 28/06/2004 19:22:51
Originally by: Starplier
and as for the crap with 'micro-1400mm', ok man, that is like soooo irrelevant. you can stick a missile launcher or an RPG on a bycicle if you are that desperate, but I'd like to see you try to do that with an anti-tank gun
I'd like to see you get a launcher system designed to fire 5.56m (18ft) long, 58.81cm (20.4 in) wide 1192.5kg (2650lb) missles on a bike. (tomahawk cruise missle dimensions)
|
Tsual
|
Posted - 2004.06.28 20:35:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Del Narveux
But missles arent, or at least, they shouldnt be, directly comparable to guns. If it was up to me, I would give frigates heavies, and cruisers cruise and/or torps, but if it was up to me I would be doing a *lot* of weapons-related things very differently.
Instead of taking away certain missile typs from certain ships, the devs should have rather countered this by increasing missiles price to very high ammounts, making them economical a horror.
Or in other words:
When a cruise missile would have a base price of 1 million would you realy spend (at least) 2 million to destroy a frigat or even 5 or 10 million to crumble a battleship?
Though this might be rather a question like those on the egg and the hen.
--------------------------------------
Tsual - Miner from faith, frigat junky for life.
Ritual of the Qua'nadhar. |
valkir
|
Posted - 2004.06.29 00:42:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Gaijin Lanis
I'd like to see you get a launcher system designed to fire 5.56m (18ft) long, 58.81cm (20.4 in) wide 1192.5kg (2650lb) missles on a bike. (tomahawk cruise missle dimensions)
i thaught those where in game {tempest}
Error 7.0b1 - The item could not be deleted because it was missing The world will end in five minutes Please log out.
WARNING: Keyboard Not Attached. Press F10 to Continue
|
Haratu
|
Posted - 2004.06.29 09:45:00 -
[20]
Imagine a soldier who carries a 'micro' inter-continental missile on its back... That is what a kestrel looks like with a cruise missile.
I roleplay... there is this computer game called "Earth - The First Genesis" where i play a character in the early 21st century. |
Stella Centauri
|
Posted - 2004.06.29 10:09:00 -
[21]
Heavies are micro cruise missiles ffs
---------------------------------------
Stella - If your boss gets to choose. |
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2004.06.29 10:28:00 -
[22]
Modern Frigates already launch cruise missiles of the same size and damage potential as the cruise missiles we launched from updated Iowa Class Battleships. It's stupid to think that somehow in the future we have completely forgotten how to mount a big guided missile to anything smaller than a ship-of-the-line.
Shoot, even our aircraft are capable of launching battleship missiles and torpedoes. The B-52 has racks fro 6 externally, in addition to its internal bomb load, and the F-15E has the lift capacity to carry 8 if properly modified.
But somehow, the Eve generation of missiles is so unweildy, that it takes battleships dedicating their entire power and computing systems to them, for them to be even usable.
Harry Voyager
|
Stella Centauri
|
Posted - 2004.06.29 11:13:00 -
[23]
and our airplanes also use 1400mm howitzers and launch their missiles @ 100km range hitting them @ 100% ratio?
---------------------------------------
Stella - If your boss gets to choose. |
Tsual
|
Posted - 2004.06.29 15:02:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Harry Voyager
Modern Frigates already launch cruise missiles of the same size and damage potential as the cruise missiles we launched from updated Iowa Class Battleships. It's stupid to think that somehow in the future we have completely forgotten how to mount a big guided missile to anything smaller than a ship-of-the-line.
Shoot, even our aircraft are capable of launching battleship missiles and torpedoes. The B-52 has racks fro 6 externally, in addition to its internal bomb load, and the F-15E has the lift capacity to carry 8 if properly modified.
But somehow, the Eve generation of missiles is so unweildy, that it takes battleships dedicating their entire power and computing systems to them, for them to be even usable.
Harry Voyager
ahem *coughs* this game is not about realism it is about tactic and leadership, would it be about realism, you would to have organize and pay for supplies, pay dockign fee and organize crew as well as pay them plus a load of paper work.
(And god damn yes there is crew in bigger ships, ffs read the jovian wet grave story again if you think not.)
--------------------------------------
Tsual - Miner from faith, frigat junky for life.
Ritual of the Qua'nadhar. |
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2004.07.01 17:52:00 -
[25]
Having a micro cruise launcher is like the standard missile launcher used to be. Its over powered...
---------------------------
CEO: Black Sea Industries
|
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2004.07.01 17:52:00 -
[26]
Having a micro cruise launcher is like the standard missile launcher used to be. Its over powered...
---------------------------
CEO: Black Sea Industries
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 01:05:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Stella Centauri
and our airplanes also use 1400mm howitzers and launch their missiles @ 100km range hitting them @ 100% ratio?
Our airplanes use Tomahawk cruise missiles, that can hit targets from over 100km distant with enough intelligence to routinely hit 2m^2 sized targets with a 2000lb+ warhead. If you want I can find you pictures.
Our airplanes do not use 14" guns. Neither do our 14" guns fire multi-million dollar rounds. For refference, a 14" gun typically lobs a 1400lb shell, somewhat less than a 2000lb warhead.
Even the AGM-65 drops a 125lb warhead on its target, a greater round than even a 6" gun (wieghing in at 5 or more tonns) can lob.
The fact is missiles give a small ship the ability to launch more damaging rounds than the average battleship main gun. Arguing that frigates can't mount 14" guns doesn't change the fact that Tomahawk cruise missiles still deliver a greater payload.
Harry Voyager
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 01:05:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Stella Centauri
and our airplanes also use 1400mm howitzers and launch their missiles @ 100km range hitting them @ 100% ratio?
Our airplanes use Tomahawk cruise missiles, that can hit targets from over 100km distant with enough intelligence to routinely hit 2m^2 sized targets with a 2000lb+ warhead. If you want I can find you pictures.
Our airplanes do not use 14" guns. Neither do our 14" guns fire multi-million dollar rounds. For refference, a 14" gun typically lobs a 1400lb shell, somewhat less than a 2000lb warhead.
Even the AGM-65 drops a 125lb warhead on its target, a greater round than even a 6" gun (wieghing in at 5 or more tonns) can lob.
The fact is missiles give a small ship the ability to launch more damaging rounds than the average battleship main gun. Arguing that frigates can't mount 14" guns doesn't change the fact that Tomahawk cruise missiles still deliver a greater payload.
Harry Voyager
|
Mandaus
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 03:35:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Harry Voyager
Originally by: Stella Centauri
and our airplanes also use 1400mm howitzers and launch their missiles @ 100km range hitting them @ 100% ratio?
Our airplanes use Tomahawk cruise missiles, that can hit targets from over 100km distant with enough intelligence to routinely hit 2m^2 sized targets with a 2000lb+ warhead. If you want I can find you pictures.
Our airplanes do not use 14" guns. Neither do our 14" guns fire multi-million dollar rounds. For refference, a 14" gun typically lobs a 1400lb shell, somewhat less than a 2000lb warhead.
Even the AGM-65 drops a 125lb warhead on its target, a greater round than even a 6" gun (wieghing in at 5 or more tonns) can lob.
The fact is missiles give a small ship the ability to launch more damaging rounds than the average battleship main gun. Arguing that frigates can't mount 14" guns doesn't change the fact that Tomahawk cruise missiles still deliver a greater payload.
Harry Voyager
And this has what to do with EVE exactly?
But if you do insist on using real world comparisons, go find the name of the CRUISE missle that hits a plane in flight. I think you will be looking for a while. |
Mandaus
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 03:35:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Harry Voyager
Originally by: Stella Centauri
and our airplanes also use 1400mm howitzers and launch their missiles @ 100km range hitting them @ 100% ratio?
Our airplanes use Tomahawk cruise missiles, that can hit targets from over 100km distant with enough intelligence to routinely hit 2m^2 sized targets with a 2000lb+ warhead. If you want I can find you pictures.
Our airplanes do not use 14" guns. Neither do our 14" guns fire multi-million dollar rounds. For refference, a 14" gun typically lobs a 1400lb shell, somewhat less than a 2000lb warhead.
Even the AGM-65 drops a 125lb warhead on its target, a greater round than even a 6" gun (wieghing in at 5 or more tonns) can lob.
The fact is missiles give a small ship the ability to launch more damaging rounds than the average battleship main gun. Arguing that frigates can't mount 14" guns doesn't change the fact that Tomahawk cruise missiles still deliver a greater payload.
Harry Voyager
And this has what to do with EVE exactly?
But if you do insist on using real world comparisons, go find the name of the CRUISE missle that hits a plane in flight. I think you will be looking for a while. |
fume
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 08:05:00 -
[31]
Lets screw balance and all just so we can play a more realistic game. SInce it's been a couple of (thousand) years since today when the game happens, the cruise missiles gotta hit @ at least 10000km, and do TEH damage, so lets just make one-shot-one-kill with 10000km-going missiles. And put them on frigates too, cuz that'd be realistic. wtf, why are we even flying around in ships? let drones do the fighting, while we sit in the station. That would be much more fun.
I'll take the first of them launchers when they come out please
|
fume
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 08:05:00 -
[32]
Lets screw balance and all just so we can play a more realistic game. SInce it's been a couple of (thousand) years since today when the game happens, the cruise missiles gotta hit @ at least 10000km, and do TEH damage, so lets just make one-shot-one-kill with 10000km-going missiles. And put them on frigates too, cuz that'd be realistic. wtf, why are we even flying around in ships? let drones do the fighting, while we sit in the station. That would be much more fun.
I'll take the first of them launchers when they come out please
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 12:58:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Harry Voyager on 02/07/2004 13:07:37
Originally by: Mandaus
And this has what to do with EVE exactly?
But if you do insist on using real world comparisons, go find the name of the CRUISE missle that hits a plane in flight. I think you will be looking for a while.
She is arguing that since frigates can't carry 1400mm guns, they should not be able to carry cruise missiles.
As for your anti-aircraft cruise missile, check out the SA-10. Launch weight of 1,480kg, and 10m long, this is about as big as the aircraft it shoots down.
Now for air launched, we've got the AIM-54, with a 138lb warhead sitting on a 1000lb missile, and a length of about 4m, and that thing has a big enough boom to turn most planes into confetti from a detonation about 20-30m away. From what I understand, for a time we even had an Air to Air nuclear device in our inventory, with a kill radius on the order of a mile.
A handy site on US guided munitions: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/index.html
Hm, I was wrong about the Tomahawk's warhead, it's merely 1000lbs, rather than 2000 as I though. It is, however, lighter than the SA-10 anti-aircraft missile.
Harry Voyager
Addendum: My mistake, it's the AGM-86 line that's air launched, rather than the AGM-109 Tomahawk. That being said, it still weighs in at 1450kg, wit h the C model weighing in a 1950kg and capable of delivering a 5-150kT nuclear warhead.
Apparently the program to produce the air launched version of the AGM-109 got cancled, for various political reasons (i.e. USAF doesn't want Navy missiles, and Navy doesn't want USAF missiles.)
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 12:58:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Harry Voyager on 02/07/2004 13:07:37
Originally by: Mandaus
And this has what to do with EVE exactly?
But if you do insist on using real world comparisons, go find the name of the CRUISE missle that hits a plane in flight. I think you will be looking for a while.
She is arguing that since frigates can't carry 1400mm guns, they should not be able to carry cruise missiles.
As for your anti-aircraft cruise missile, check out the SA-10. Launch weight of 1,480kg, and 10m long, this is about as big as the aircraft it shoots down.
Now for air launched, we've got the AIM-54, with a 138lb warhead sitting on a 1000lb missile, and a length of about 4m, and that thing has a big enough boom to turn most planes into confetti from a detonation about 20-30m away. From what I understand, for a time we even had an Air to Air nuclear device in our inventory, with a kill radius on the order of a mile.
A handy site on US guided munitions: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/index.html
Hm, I was wrong about the Tomahawk's warhead, it's merely 1000lbs, rather than 2000 as I though. It is, however, lighter than the SA-10 anti-aircraft missile.
Harry Voyager
Addendum: My mistake, it's the AGM-86 line that's air launched, rather than the AGM-109 Tomahawk. That being said, it still weighs in at 1450kg, wit h the C model weighing in a 1950kg and capable of delivering a 5-150kT nuclear warhead.
Apparently the program to produce the air launched version of the AGM-109 got cancled, for various political reasons (i.e. USAF doesn't want Navy missiles, and Navy doesn't want USAF missiles.)
|
Joe Redpawn
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 13:24:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Joe Redpawn on 02/07/2004 13:26:48
Actually they based this on how big your ship is where the missles should go. They saw an unfair advantage that people like me were slapping torpedoes on heavy missle launchers on cruiser ships like Moas.
They wanted to put a stop to that and say "Okay, torpedoes and cruise missles can ONLY be used on ships with the highest power" namely the Caldari Scorp or Caldari Raven, since the Caldari is the only one as far as I know that is allowed to have torpedoes.
So they set torpedoes and cruiser launcher missles to only be used on "Seige Launcher" since that launcher's power is 1200 requirement.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Joe Redpawn
Order of Chivalry Corp, EVE | EVE Online Rocks
MADBLAST.Com | Joe Cartoon.Com | XM Radio |
Joe Redpawn
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 13:24:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Joe Redpawn on 02/07/2004 13:26:48
Actually they based this on how big your ship is where the missles should go. They saw an unfair advantage that people like me were slapping torpedoes on heavy missle launchers on cruiser ships like Moas.
They wanted to put a stop to that and say "Okay, torpedoes and cruise missles can ONLY be used on ships with the highest power" namely the Caldari Scorp or Caldari Raven, since the Caldari is the only one as far as I know that is allowed to have torpedoes.
So they set torpedoes and cruiser launcher missles to only be used on "Seige Launcher" since that launcher's power is 1200 requirement.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Joe Redpawn
Order of Chivalry Corp, EVE | EVE Online Rocks
MADBLAST.Com | Joe Cartoon.Com | XM Radio |
Cutter John
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 19:58:00 -
[37]
they took cruise/heavies from frigates, and cruise/torps from cruisers for one reason... range.
base optimal on 250mm railgun is 24k, add to it iron ammo and a bunch of tracking comps and skills you might get 50k-60kmax.
with a cruise missile on a caracal you were capable of ranges far exceeding that.. whatever you could get with several sensor boosters.
thats why there isnt a cruise launcher for cruisers. not for any realism reasons, or because they had too much dot (they could easily have made a slow firing cruise misile launcher to compensate for the dot). they just didnt want the missile ships to have that range.
My Idea Thread
|
Cutter John
|
Posted - 2004.07.02 19:58:00 -
[38]
they took cruise/heavies from frigates, and cruise/torps from cruisers for one reason... range.
base optimal on 250mm railgun is 24k, add to it iron ammo and a bunch of tracking comps and skills you might get 50k-60kmax.
with a cruise missile on a caracal you were capable of ranges far exceeding that.. whatever you could get with several sensor boosters.
thats why there isnt a cruise launcher for cruisers. not for any realism reasons, or because they had too much dot (they could easily have made a slow firing cruise misile launcher to compensate for the dot). they just didnt want the missile ships to have that range.
My Idea Thread
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |