LOCK REQUEST

[Varyag]

Yes they are powerful but they are a huge disadvantage if you fight someone who knows how to counter them, or if there is any lag at all or the server desides it is a no tracking day. I like that ships are not insta killed by them anymore but the increase in damage can be nerv racking sometimes.

I have ships that have and don't have them and I think the devs got them right when they balanced everything. Both setups have their bonuses.

The scariest thing you will meet with them is someone who has just one and knows when to fire it. You are pretty much done at that point if you don't learn to avoid or use them to your advantage.

---

"I looked up and all I saw was green death"

[Guest]

It would make sense to make Missile Launchers more likely to explode.

Gunboat Missiles, best you can or should do is dodge, CM, or TCD

Other tips vs Gunboats:
Don't joust them
Don't fly after them if they fly a straight line with no intention to turn
---(more than likely they are using rear/turret view to fire behind their ship as they thrust forward making you chase them, its what they want in that situation)
Don't fight them without support as a VHF.
---Either have a bomber, or 1-2 additional VHFs with you.
If its shields are down and you've got a sunslayer in your hands. Subtarget and fire with the shields down.
---Priority Targets: CM Launcher -> Razor -> Pulse -> maybe Thruster
------If you get all of those and he's still not dead, by all means hit the guns. He's a sitting duck without a thruster.

[tansytansey]

How about making the missile launchers more easily destructible? Weaken the missile launchers, so that a player could target the missile launchers once shields were downed. The other day, while fighting a gunboat in my VHF, I was swarmed with missiles. I attempted to sub target the launch equipment without any success...it would have been a good tactic.

Since missiles are the most effective things at blowing off equipment, all that would mean was the way to counter missiles is with other missiles.

---

http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv46/Ni...gcloudscopy.png
Image turned into a URL because it made your sig too tall. -Zuke
|Ashes and Draya's Epic Adventure|Ashes "Nighthawk" Yotaka|Nightfall|Eva Jones|
[5:50:49 PM] JakeSG (William Darkmoor) says: I like you, Ashes. You're more cynical than God.

[El Nino]

The scariest thing you will meet with them is someone who has just one and knows when to fire it. You are pretty much done at that point if you don't learn to avoid or use them to your advantage.

I've just noticed that a few days ago yes, just 1 missile, say cannonball (firestalkers and SW work nearly aswell), when you are an able pilot (check <X>), can totaly rape the opponent who does not have that said missile. So missiles are a bit unbalanced. No longer is the fighter pilot without a missile comparable to the one with one missile, if the second one has an allmissile loldout that can be countred, but countering just a single missile is pretty much impossible, as when flying all the time to evade that missile you take more than enough damage from guns and when not you get one right in your face.

I think Ammo limits on fighters should be brought down to around 50 missiles of all types combined. And that would be with cargolimiting. Pretty much the current balance forces you to either get a missile or suffer being not as good as you could.

Especialy what i noticed in missiles is that newbie pilots with that can't hit a broad side of a barn can hit a lot with missiles, and even be a bit effective. They naturaly die against a better pilot, but what with guns would be a 0 b/b lost with missiles it can be some 10 b/b lost to the far superior pilot. Wich is good I think.

The problem however is that when fighting newbie pilots with missiles they can be instakilled so fast that I bet it isn't funny to them. Heck a CB + Nuke + some gun damage and another CB in the mix, really rape. The last fight i was in, it took me 50 second to deplete an entire b/b supply of a fellow player. He was suppose to be good, (IMG called him a champion), but that just didn't work out.

There are several things we can do. Boost missile price, reintroduce cargo requirements, or just drop missile damages to old values...

Please comment and bring up some views on the subject, for missiles are to good right now. (or if you think they are just fine, comment why they should be so good)

---

Donate to the Poor Pilot's Fundation via Sirius Bank /givecash GreenHawk 1000000 now, and support poor pilots sirius wide!
Skype: jure.grbec
My primary char: Jose El Nino - Corsair Elder captain of the SS Greenhawk

Currently Inactive due to pursuit of life long dreams, will be back...*edited* As promised am back.

[Robert.Fitzgerald]

Cargo limits seem to be the best option - it's a shame when you vs a fighter with sidewinder, cannonball, firestalker and a starkiller torpedo (not all fighters equip a train CD to counter explosives).

I would like for them to maintain their damage, just the ships shouldn't be able to hold so much ammunition.

---

~Gateway Interstellar~ Gateway)Gibraltar
Gateway Corporate Profile - Gateway Message Dump - Gateway Recruitment - Gateway Faction Feedback

[zeinstruktor]

You see, dodging three missiles being spammed is much easier than dodging only one cannonball fired sparingly.

Only problem with reducing missile damage to 4.84 levels is that bombers won't feel anything when hit anymore... Missiles will be balanced against fighters however.

What if... We made the Supernova more susceptible to explosives? Say... Fall off after 5-7 cannonballs or 2-3 nuke mines. And reduce the cannonball's tracking, so they can't effectively hit from behind as they can now.

That way, bombers would only lose their SNAC against gunboats, or if they try to joust fighters. This solves multliple balance issues in one... Currently, bombers still rape GBs, and even fighters.
Leave the nova the same, if bombers want to be -truly- anti-cap, they can mount a nova and a SNAC, and won't really be affected against caps by losing their SNAC. Fighters will actually be effective against bombers, and bombers won't be used to SNAC fighters as often, as long as the fighter has a torpedo/missile/mine.

What do you think about this?

[Jihadjoe]

At the moment, using a CB and SW is like having an 'I win' button at your command.

Sure, it is counterable with a CD, or some very fast supernova work, but it's still far more dangerous for your opponent if you have two or three missiles.

I don't know how this can be resolved, but it's a real issue. One cannonball or one sidewinder, or even a paralyser + hullbuster missile seems to be rather more easy to deal with than CB/SW combos...

It's still fire and forget weaponary. Perhaps lowering turn rates and tracking?

I dunno.

---

[Thexare]

Please, go check that in 4.85. Missile damage was upped a lot. Most guns were upped as well (to 4.84 Kraken level), but nowhere near the explosives buff.

Yeah, and last I heard, the explosive vulnerability that plagued all vanilla ships was also removed. So overall, this is only a problem for the non-vanilla ships. For example, every single bomber.

I'll contribute some missile-related thoughts next time my Scimitar gets into a fight. Just stuck a Cannonball on it recently to see how I do with it.

[zeinstruktor]

In a bomber, you can absorb even the higher damage done by cannonballs.
However, fighters feel the sting twice as much.

Read my previous post about increasing SNAC explosion sensitivity. This will allow the missiles to be reduced to .84 levels, while still being effective against fighters AND bombers.

[Grumblesaur]

To end all spamming:

Have the missiles take energy per shot.

---

A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.