These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Strategic Missile Launchers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#41 - 2012-06-06 18:31:31 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:
This is broken, here is why:

Pos modules. Sit 2 km outside pos shield, fire away. All the kills, none of the risk.

Which brings around the next question, of what problem does this solve? It doesn't make missile boats any better.

Wowzers.. you really missed an obvious detail here.

Think what it is you are attacking. BS sized ships that are not moving at all. Forget the POS, it can't help them.

Fight fire with fire.

Send your own lil forward observer in a cloaky ship, and have your own launchers in a different part of that system.

Your missile launchers can take out their missile launchers. They won't have time to react before they have to either stop firing and run, or just blow up.

And imagine what it would be like doing this with all BLOPs ships as launchers?

Only 5 launchers compared to the 6 in a raven, or 7 in the navy raven... but the cloaky insertion!

(True, it implies about half a dozen ships would be needed as launchers, and at Widow costs that is.... A LOT, but the style is awesome)
Katalci
Kismesis
#42 - 2012-06-06 20:27:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Katalci
Nikk Narrel wrote:
In straight up PvP activity, Caldari boats often have a disadvantage in fleets. They have delayed DPS when it comes to fitting missile launchers. Missile launchers is what many of them do best.

Stopped reading right there, because you clearly don't understand the many advantages of missiles, and how little of an effect travel time actually has.

edit: Read it and this is a godawful idea. Why would you think it would ever be a good idea to have ships fighting from safespots?
Sentinel zx
#43 - 2012-06-06 22:39:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentinel zx
+1 like it
I had a few ideas to your post


Quote:
The spotter is not targeting anything directly. The module I suggested would give the firing ships access to the spotter's overview for the purposes of selecting targets.


I would prefer the spotter would be targeting and transfer the target info to the Pilot of Dreadnought
(like they do this in Dust514 Planetary-Bumbum)


use able only for Dreadnoughts
Citadel Cruise Missile get this Warp effect bonus and that all Dreadnoughts gets a 3 Launcher hardpoints and like
Stealth-Bomber for using normal Torpedo
every Race get Bonuses for using this Cruise Missile
for Example:
Revelation get 5% bonus to Citadel Cruise Missile EM damage per level
Moros get 5% bonus to Citadel Cruise Missile Therm damage per level
Naglfar get 5% bonus to Citadel Cruise Missile Expl. damage per level
Phönix get 5% bonus to Citadel Cruise Missile kin damage per level

1. Ship must Anchoring before using the Warp effect from Citadel Cruise Missile (or its simply immobile in this time)
2.the spotter must be uncloak and must only targeting (no painters) the victim and would transfer the info to the 1 or 2 or 3 Dreadnought Pilots (at this time the victim have no idea that he is a target of the DP)
3.the spotter would able to transfer max 3-5 targets to DP, Target-Tranfer info would take 5-10sec after you activated it to transfer it to DP
4.the spotter must have this target-transfer module to be fitted and Launcher too (like in your OP)
5.after launching the Citadel Cruise Missile from DP they enter warp and appear 12km in front of the target
6.it would take 1-2sec for the Cruise Missile to recalibrate with the spotter the target coordinates and take action (after Warp the Citadel Cruise Missile will not stand still of course during the recalibration)
7.Citadel Cruise Missile speed will be reducing i think to 1000m/s that would means 11-12sec reactions time for the victim
8.Citadel Cruise Missile would be easily to target for small ships or defender missiles to shoot it down
(ok but why, after you Anchoring you Dreadnought the Citadel Cruise Missile would be recalibrate and upgraded in the Launcher, this means it will doubled your launch time increasing the Mass, Damage and Sig radius and make it target able)
9.if the spotter were detected and kilt DP lose Targets and your are not able to launch the Citadel Cruise Missile
10.if they already launched and the spotter is dead it would react as F.o.F after warp
11. not possible to use this inside a POS or in near a POS (only possible maybe 20km away from POS, Station and Gates)
12. The DP and Spotter should be in the same Fleet

Quote:
Requirements: The cloaked vessel may require a spotter module, and the launcher vessel may need one as well, in order to connect as described above. It may be limited to strictly CovOps class, possibly recon class. No SB or strategic cruisers?


hm.. i think making not to limited only to CovOps

may be only for
Assault and Heavy Assault Ships, Recon Ships, BC T1 (and may be T2), BS T1 and T2
(not for Interdictors, Strategic Cruiser and Logis and not for Capital ships of course)

Drawbacks
-Dreadnought if it anchored it will be very easy to detect with probes
-anchoring time maybe 30sec or 1 min
-Target- Transfer-Module would increase your sig to 500%
-Target-Tranfer-Range 2AU and could may be increasing with a skill to 10 or 20AU??

Ok Citadel Cruise Missile with warp effect is just an example may be it will be a new Missile typ required for this
Big smile
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#44 - 2012-06-06 22:41:57 UTC
Katalci wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
In straight up PvP activity, Caldari boats often have a disadvantage in fleets. They have delayed DPS when it comes to fitting missile launchers. Missile launchers is what many of them do best.

Stopped reading right there, because you clearly don't understand the many advantages of missiles, and how little of an effect travel time actually has.

edit: Read it and this is a godawful idea. Why would you think it would ever be a good idea to have ships fighting from safespots?

Because he doesn't PvP.

Honestly, his argument for these things being used outside POS shields was that "sitting 2km outside of a POS shield lets you see the shields, it does not protect you with them.".

I mean seriously, I usually try not to use kill boards or ad hominem attacks. But sometimes, just sometimes, when you are trying to explain to someone that they don't understand basic PvP concepts it really is the easiest way.

Nikk, we would abuse this idea. You might not understand how we would abuse it, that's fine, but trust me. We would abuse it. A lot.

And you're misunderstanding why the majority of missile ships aren't used. It isn't just because they don't have instant damage, it's because they have awesome range but they're slow as hell. Meaning for most missile ships (excluding the drake and tengu) your advantage only lasts the minute or so it takes the enemy fleet to get in range.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#45 - 2012-06-06 22:49:31 UTC
Sentinel zx wrote:
use able only for Dreadnoughts

Restricting this to dreadnaughts is pretty much the only way this idea could be even remotely balanced, and even then you'd have to prevent them from being able to target POS modules or structures or they'd just be abused for easy POS cleanups.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-06-07 04:04:29 UTC
The real problem with this idea is that you don't have to be on-grid and in danger to shoot people. Your spotter could be a drake with a tremendous tank, and you could have a bunch of navy ravens blockading a system. Or something stupid like that.

If you had said faster missiles that do less damage, I might have agreed. But warping missiles is just stupid.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#47 - 2012-06-07 14:41:54 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Because he doesn't PvP.

Honestly, his argument for these things being used outside POS shields was that "sitting 2km outside of a POS shield lets you see the shields, it does not protect you with them.".

I mean seriously, I usually try not to use kill boards or ad hominem attacks. But sometimes, just sometimes, when you are trying to explain to someone that they don't understand basic PvP concepts it really is the easiest way.

Nikk, we would abuse this idea. You might not understand how we would abuse it, that's fine, but trust me. We would abuse it. A lot.

And you're misunderstanding why the majority of missile ships aren't used. It isn't just because they don't have instant damage, it's because they have awesome range but they're slow as hell. Meaning for most missile ships (excluding the drake and tengu) your advantage only lasts the minute or so it takes the enemy fleet to get in range.

Oh, that's just precious!

The delightful assumption that because I don't have a laundry list of kill mails, that I don't participate. To be honest, you may be more active in PvP than I am, I don't really care.

But to seriously use ad hominem tactics, so incredibly out of context, is amazing. You successfully listed every death I had screwing around going back to 2007. And you included the scorpion kill where they got lucky on their timing.

Yep, all 4 of em.

And not a single scimitar or basilisk listed.

On a logi pilot.

Now, true, I know logi pilots who sneak in toy guns just to be listed, but as a non fleet fit that was too cheap to bother with.

I also do a lot of support for mining ops, and fly a significant amount of covert ships. You did find the mail from when I came back from a wormhole in a cheetah deep in enemy null, and decided to do a cannonball run.
(It was worth it, it took them two sets of gate camps before they caught me, very well done on their effort)

Context, Simi, it's all about context.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#48 - 2012-06-07 14:48:28 UTC
Katalci wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
In straight up PvP activity, Caldari boats often have a disadvantage in fleets. They have delayed DPS when it comes to fitting missile launchers. Missile launchers is what many of them do best.

Stopped reading right there, because you clearly don't understand the many advantages of missiles, and how little of an effect travel time actually has.

edit: Read it and this is a godawful idea. Why would you think it would ever be a good idea to have ships fighting from safespots?

You don't do fleets?
If you did, then you would know that when the fc calls primary, he expects immediate damage. Not the eventual DPS from missiles to show up after the fact.

Too bad, it's a great part of the game.

Now, roams are different. Drakes are fantastic for these, and it shows. But you don't use the same tactics in a roam, so the missile delays are not a significant issue there.

This is for fleet ops.

And to Simi, of course we know people will try to take it and spin it into something else!
Look at the hairball that came out of cynos, called hot dropping. The devs are still wincing on that detail.

Fortunately, this is tied to enough inconvenient restrictive details, that it is unlikely to become anywhere near as bad.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#49 - 2012-06-07 14:55:05 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
The real problem with this idea is that you don't have to be on-grid and in danger to shoot people. Your spotter could be a drake with a tremendous tank, and you could have a bunch of navy ravens blockading a system. Or something stupid like that.

If you had said faster missiles that do less damage, I might have agreed. But warping missiles is just stupid.

Think outside the box you are in, and consider the sandbox.

This tactic is easily self countering, since the most effective tool to use against launcher ships are more launcher ships.

Or have we so quickly forgotten the counter to hot dropping, which really is able to place DPS quickly with little warning.
(Clue: it's to do a counter hot drop)

As well, this tactic requires targets to stay on grid a minimum of thirty seconds, and most targets can leave pretty quickly.

Hot dropping is a far more effective way to administer ganking level DPS.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#50 - 2012-06-07 14:58:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Simi Kusoni
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Because he doesn't PvP.

Honestly, his argument for these things being used outside POS shields was that "sitting 2km outside of a POS shield lets you see the shields, it does not protect you with them.".

I mean seriously, I usually try not to use kill boards or ad hominem attacks. But sometimes, just sometimes, when you are trying to explain to someone that they don't understand basic PvP concepts it really is the easiest way.

Nikk, we would abuse this idea. You might not understand how we would abuse it, that's fine, but trust me. We would abuse it. A lot.

And you're misunderstanding why the majority of missile ships aren't used. It isn't just because they don't have instant damage, it's because they have awesome range but they're slow as hell. Meaning for most missile ships (excluding the drake and tengu) your advantage only lasts the minute or so it takes the enemy fleet to get in range.

Oh, that's just precious!

The delightful assumption that because I don't have a laundry list of kill mails, that I don't participate. To be honest, you may be more active in PvP than I am, I don't really care.

My point was not so much that you don't participate in PvP, a lot of people on these forums do not participate in PvP and still have a great deal of knowledge and experience that is highly relevant (MXZF is a good example, the guy I quote in my signature.)

My point was that you both armor and shield tanked a Raven, flew a covert ops with nanofiber, overdrive, no prop mod and a full rack of shield extenders, shield tanked and multi-spec fitted a scorpion and flew a flycatcher without a bubble launcher, a single light missile launcher and completely empty low slots and a mid slot missing.

None of these are particularly great signs of understanding core PvP concepts, which is something that is very important to understand when proposing potentially exploitable new mechanics.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
But to seriously use ad hominem tactics, so incredibly out of context, is amazing. You successfully listed every death I had screwing around going back to 2007. And you included the scorpion kill where they got lucky on their timing.

Yep, all 4 of em.

And not a single scimitar or basilisk listed.

On a logi pilot.

The fact that you have been playing since 2007, and yet shield and armor tanked an un-rigged deadspace fitted Raven as recently as two weeks ago is horrifying.

But, for what it's worth, I only usually use examples such as this when it is relevant. The point that I am trying to illustrate is that for the last few pages a few people who regularly PvP have been highlighting exploitable flaws to you, not merely myself, and that perhaps you should listen to them.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
Now, true, I know logi pilots who sneak in toy guns just to be listed, but as a non fleet fit that was too cheap to bother with.

I also do a lot of support for mining ops, and fly a significant amount of covert ships. You did find the mail from when I came back from a wormhole in a cheetah deep in enemy null, and decided to do a cannonball run.
(It was worth it, it took them two sets of gate camps before they caught me, very well done on their effort)

Context, Simi, it's all about context.

Yes, and in this context you do not fly missile boats in PvP. Even your PvE fit was T1 fitted, so I presume you haven't trained missiles up much at all. Which is a pretty valid point in all fairness.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#51 - 2012-06-07 15:02:09 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
You don't do fleets?
If you did, then you would know that when the fc calls primary, he expects immediate damage. Not the eventual DPS from missiles to show up after the fact.


Uh huh, yeah. If even your FCs don't understand basic game mechanics, I can undrestand where you get ideas like that.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#52 - 2012-06-07 15:23:04 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
My point was not so much that you don't participate in PvP, a lot of people on these forums do not participate in PvP and still have a great deal of knowledge and experience that is highly relevant (MXZF is a good example, the guy I quote in my signature.)

My point was that you both armor and shield tanked a Raven, flew a covert ops with nanofiber, overdrive, no prop mod and a full rack of shield extenders, shield tanked and multi-spec fitted a scorpion and flew a flycatcher without a bubble launcher.

As you wish.
The raven: This was the first battleship I ever bought. It was PvE fitted for missioning back in 2006, before I even went into Null. I had left it in a station, not seeing it till last week when I got the chance to travel to it again. (The station had changed hands, and was recently back in blue control) Figuring to have some fun with now disposable assets, I insured it to platinum, and did a cannonball with it. (Yeah, I get bored and do that sometimes, it lets off stress of being over disciplined in other areas)
The CovOps was used in a WH for two months, and fitted accordingly. Gotta say, the fit was effective for that environment.
The Scorpion: That was a requested specialty fit for E-WAR. Kudos to the smart bomb, It ate one of the three ships that started that fight. Longer story than you might expect, but it seems I upset them by getting away from the first encounter...
The flycatcher: Now your going back a ways... I was probably testing PvP survivability fits... I recall picking the sabre as my operational dictor back then.

Simi Kusoni wrote:
None of these are particularly great signs of understanding core PvP concepts, which is something that is very important to understand when proposing potentially exploitable new mechanics.


....Bunch of quoted stuff from my post....
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Yes, and in this context you do not fly missile boats in PvP. Even your PvE fit was T1 fitted, so I presume you haven't trained missiles up much at all. Which is a pretty valid point in all fairness.

Assumptions assumptions... as pointed out above, the raven was from 2006, and had been left in a remote station in 2007.

I do fly missile boats. I don't normally die in them while I PvP, since I am usually asked to fly support.
(Logi mostly, scouting when bored)

You are actually flattering me, in a backhanded manner. You have no idea how much I fly around hostile pilots in low and null. And looking at my losses on the KB, it could easily be assumed I never undocked.

Not used to flattery.... /blush

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#53 - 2012-06-07 15:40:25 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I do fly missile boats. I don't normally die in them while I PvP, since I am usually asked to fly support.
(Logi mostly, scouting when bored)

So you fly missile boats in PvP, but you also never fire the missiles or at the very least nothing you fire at dies.

Yes, that certainly excuses flying multi-tanked, un-rigged, dead space fitted T1 battle ships.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
You are actually flattering me, in a backhanded manner. You have no idea how much I fly around hostile pilots in low and null. And looking at my losses on the KB, it could easily be assumed I never undocked.

Not used to flattery.... /blush

Not really, I'm just pointing out that you don't PvP, which is why you don't understand basic/commonplace concepts like assigning fighters from just outside POS shields.

Again, I'm going to reiterate this, on top of the extremely questionable fits you've just made a littany of excuses for you've illustrated numerous times in this thread that you simply don't understand basic PvP tactics.

You don't understand why sitting outside POS shields would be useful, why missiles are not popular (hint: instant damage application doesn't matter) and you seem unable to comprehend how overpowered certain tactics would be if they used off-grid ships for DPS.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#54 - 2012-06-07 15:57:48 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I do fly missile boats. I don't normally die in them while I PvP, since I am usually asked to fly support.
(Logi mostly, scouting when bored)

So you fly missile boats in PvP, but you also never fire the missiles or at the very least nothing you fire at dies.

Yes, that certainly excuses flying multi-tanked, un-rigged, dead space fitted T1 battle ships.

ROFL... you misread that.
I do fly missile boats, yes. In PvP, yes. In conditions where I am firing, however, it is usually with a shield transporter, not a launcher.

My scouting ship does have launchers, nice pretty ones.
If the DPS was ever needed over the intel I provided, there would be killmails too.

But since I am not a DPS focused pilot looking to sneak up on targets, but a genuine scout, the enemy just gets to stare at my name in local, and wonder who I just contacted with their targetable details.

Simi Kusoni wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
You are actually flattering me, in a backhanded manner. You have no idea how much I fly around hostile pilots in low and null. And looking at my losses on the KB, it could easily be assumed I never undocked.

Not used to flattery.... /blush

Not really, I'm just pointing out that you don't PvP, which is why you don't understand basic/commonplace concepts like assigning fighters from just outside POS shields.

Again, I'm going to reiterate this, on top of the extremely questionable fits you've just made a littany of excuses for you've illustrated numerous times in this thread that you simply don't understand basic PvP tactics.

You don't understand why sitting outside POS shields would be useful, why missiles are not popular (hint: instant damage application doesn't matter) and you seem unable to comprehend how overpowered certain tactics would be if they used off-grid ships for DPS.

You seem quite open with your assumptions about my play style, and I have been oddly up front and honest with my responses.
(Litany of excuses? Really? Does it give you some comfort denying that others may have a different play-style, and you guessed wrong about the reasons? Sorry if the truth is not convenient, but I have been honest here)

And what are you going on about with assigning fighters? This is not that topic. If it helps, I don't fly carriers at all.

And in a large fleet, instant damage DOES matter. It affects the alpha, and often is a one shot kill on the target.
If enough of that damage is delayed, then the enemy primaried get's to include more of their DPS in the alpha from their side.
Assuming they had instant damage on that side, your side took more damage. A good FC would try to leave you with only delayed DPS ships, so the effect became greater as the fight progressed.

Now repeat this in every exchange subsequent to the first described. The extended effect is enough to change the outcome of a fleet encounter.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#55 - 2012-06-07 16:28:03 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
ROFL... you misread that.
I do fly missile boats, yes. In PvP, yes. In conditions where I am firing, however, it is usually with a shield transporter, not a launcher.

My scouting ship does have launchers, nice pretty ones.
If the DPS was ever needed over the intel I provided, there would be killmails too.

But since I am not a DPS focused pilot looking to sneak up on targets, but a genuine scout, the enemy just gets to stare at my name in local, and wonder who I just contacted with their targetable details.

That.... honestly doesn't make sense.

You fly missile ships with shield transporters on? The fact that a basilisk has a few launcher hard points does not make it a missile ship.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
You seem quite open with your assumptions about my play style, and I have been oddly up front and honest with my responses.
(Litany of excuses? Really? Does it give you some comfort denying that others may have a different play-style, and you guessed wrong about the reasons? Sorry if the truth is not convenient, but I have been honest here)

Sorry but not fitting modules to most of your ships, and both armor tanking and shield tanking them, does not really constitute a play style.

The point is that there is considerable evidence in this thread that you do not engage in PvP, this is supported by a quick glance at your kill board. There is no evidence to the contrary, and whilst with some players I would be more than happy to give them the benefit of the doubt you have, and continue to, demonstrated fundamental misunderstandings of basic PvP concepts even after they have been explained.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
And what are you going on about with assigning fighters? This is not that topic. If it helps, I don't fly carriers at all.


This was the reason you gave to another player as to why attacking from off-grid, over 14AU away, while sitting 2km outside POS shields was not a bad thing: "sitting 2km outside of a POS shield lets you see the shields, it does not protect you with them.".

I think any PvP player reading that understands why it is a silly statement.


Nikk Narrel wrote:
And in a large fleet, instant damage DOES matter. It affects the alpha, and often is a one shot kill on the target

(...)

If enough of that damage is delayed, then the enemy primaried get's to include more of their DPS in the alpha from their side.
Assuming they had instant damage on that side, your side took more damage. A good FC would try to leave you with only delayed DPS ships, so the effect became greater as the fight progressed.


The time from you firing the shot to the shot landing does not effect the alpha.

It effects the time taken for the DPS to be applied from everyone pressing F1. The alpha is the same. If you had asked for the alpha of cruise launchers to be increased, perhaps that would be a reasonable request, but to extend the range to over 14AU?

And why would you have missile and turret ships in the same fleet? Unless you're talking about a small kitchen sink fleet? In which case you aren't going to be alphaing anything anyway.

Also, I guess you've never flown in a drake/tengu fleet. As I said earlier in the thread:

Simi Kusoni wrote:
And you're misunderstanding why the majority of missile ships aren't used. It isn't just because they don't have instant damage, it's because they have awesome range but they're slow as hell. Meaning for most missile ships (excluding the drake and tengu) your advantage only lasts the minute or so it takes the enemy fleet to get in range.

That's why nano ravens used to absolutely own, and why they got nerfed. And it's why drakes and tengus are still popular*.

(*Well, that and the resists/low signature radius)

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#56 - 2012-06-07 18:33:19 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Off topic garbage

You are deliberately going off topic, extremely ad hominem, and you clearly have no on topic defense.

Save yourself the disgrace of the attempt at sidetracking this topic with details not relevant to it.

Anyone with half a brain knows you do not scout in a logi boat, so you gave yourself away tactically. To those not paying attention to comments on this, I was referring to a scouting boat having the launchers, (not the logi), as should be obvious.

The rest of your recent points have already been refuted, and are no more than unsubstantiated talking points by now.

Please go elsewhere, and find something you do understand to debate on.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#57 - 2012-06-07 19:13:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Simi Kusoni
Nikk Narrel wrote:
You are deliberately going off topic, extremely ad hominem, and you clearly have no on topic defense.

Save yourself the disgrace of the attempt at sidetracking this topic with details not relevant to it.

Anyone with half a brain knows you do not scout in a logi boat, so you gave yourself away tactically. To those not paying attention to comments on this, I was referring to a scouting boat having the launchers, (not the logi), as should be obvious.

The rest of your recent points have already been refuted, and are no more than unsubstantiated talking points by now.

Please go elsewhere, and find something you do understand to debate on.

I like how you skipped over the part where you don't understand what alpha is, or why missile ships are unpopular. Not to mention that fact that you believe the points people have made in this thread have been solved. They haven't, they are giant glaring issues in the implementation of this proposal:

Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
The real problem with this idea is that you don't have to be on-grid and in danger to shoot people. Your spotter could be a drake with a tremendous tank, and you could have a bunch of navy ravens blockading a system. Or something stupid like that.

If you had said faster missiles that do less damage, I might have agreed. But warping missiles is just stupid.

(Your proposal is actually worse than the above poster believes, in your proposal the spotter wouldn't even need to decloak. The drake can just fit tank+points and hold them while a bunch of off-grid ships DPS. In null a HIC would be even worse than a drake.)

PinkKnife wrote:
This is broken, here is why:

Pos modules. Sit 2 km outside pos shield, fire away. All the kills, none of the risk.

Which brings around the next question, of what problem does this solve? It doesn't make missile boats any better.

(Again, this doesn't solve any of the real issues with missiles. And it is a suggestion made primarily because you don't understand why people don't fly missile boats.)

Operation Stink-eye wrote:
To lock on and engage the target, a capital sized ship would need the locking module. Which would also broadcast the capital over the same range.

(...)

I see this being a capital to capital sized weapon and being useless for smaller ships, maybe getting a few lucky shots off on a stationary BS at 20AU? ;P

(...)

I must say though, as fun as linking two grids like this is, it's not one of the most important things in the universe.

TL;DR: Broadcast and capital lock modules. Big stuff shooting big stuff on different grids. Not really important.

(...)

*From Velicitia, edited due to 5 quotes limit: would be *waaaaaaaaaaay* OP for hisec ... though as a "feature" of a dreadnought it could be interesting (siege up, use a spotter, stupid long range damage).

(Another two posters identifying that this idea could, possibly, be balanced for dreadnaughts. Although it still isn't really *needed*.)

AFK Hauler wrote:
Uncloak and "paint" them with a cyno-type painter for the cruise missiles to track.
Gives the target some time to react and defend - or GTFO.

(Another poster pointing out a major issue, to which you respond by not changing your idea at all. Instead simply deciding to give them a non-overview debuff to watch out for, which is pointless anyway when we'd not let them warp off. We'd have a massive EHP ship like an overtanked drake point them while the cloaker paints them.)

There are more, but I can't quote that many.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#58 - 2012-06-07 19:42:52 UTC
Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#59 - 2012-06-07 19:43:38 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Trolling shamelessly

He explained alpha. You chose to ignore it. = TROLL

He explained how large fleets don't like missile ships for alpha DPS. You chose to ignore it. = TROLL

He already pointed out it was possible to use this at a gate camp, even though existing gate camps already are just as good, if not better. You chose to ignore it. = TROLL

You brought up unrelated personal data, which he apparently responded to. Bad move on his part giving your effort any credibility in an unrelated topic. Standard tactic for TROLL

You are pretty shameless at rehashing points which at best your opinion was different on. Standard tactic for TROLL

If you want to debate, I suggest you either make new points, or ask for clarification on older ones.

That god-awful wall of text TL:DR is nutty looking.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#60 - 2012-06-07 19:47:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Simi Kusoni
Mary Annabelle wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Trolling shamelessly

He explained alpha. You chose to ignore it. = TROLL

He explained how large fleets don't like missile ships for alpha DPS. You chose to ignore it. = TROLL

He already pointed out it was possible to use this at a gate camp, even though existing gate camps already are just as good, if not better. You chose to ignore it. = TROLL

And his explanations were incorrect, as highlighted by myself and other posters.

Mary Annabelle wrote:
You brought up unrelated personal data, which he apparently responded to. Bad move on his part giving your effort any credibility in an unrelated topic. Standard tactic for TROLL

It isn't personal data, it's data concerning his experience in PvP. Which is lacking, as is shown both in this thread and in his combat record.

Mary Annabelle wrote:
You are pretty shameless at rehashing points which at best your opinion was different on. Standard tactic for TROLL

The points made are the same ones I made, I deliberately didn't quote my own remarks in this thread to highlight that a lot of people have highlighted exactly the same issues with this idea as me.

Mary Annabelle wrote:
If you want to debate, I suggest you either make new points, or ask for clarification on older ones.

That god-awful wall of text TL:DR is nutty looking.

That god-awful wall of text is tl;dr because the issues highlighted with this proposal have been so numerous.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]