| Author |
Torpedos |
Maskerade
Grand Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 21, 2002
Posts: 638
From: Canada
|  Posted: 2006-03-25 00:31
The thing is Goth the list you gave...
Quote:
|
Okay, basically im saying this, i want to be able to mod out Torpedos instead of Missles for the following ships
1. Sensor Corvette
2. Assault Frigate
3. Missle Cruiser
4. all Kluth ships
5. Combat Destroyer
6. Interdictors
7. Heavy Cruiser
8. UGTO Frigates
9. UGTO Assault Dessie |
|
Includes alot of other ships. In terms of beta and things that you or others have an issue with you should be specific. Missile Cruisers, Heavy Cruisers, Frigates, Corvettes may be combat ships but not necessarily assault ships and are design with balance in mind. In terms of Interdictors, I for one am flat out against creating assault ships out of support vessels. Combat ships, well there may be an arguement there for teh swapping of weapon types but ship balance must be considered or you end up with cl2k kulth dessies, Missile (torp) Dreads, UGTO Heavy "just try and kill me we me reapiring myself while I kill your dread and everyone else in the mv" supply ships.
_________________
- Maskerade
|
Malorn
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: December 11, 2003
Posts: 42
From: USA Eastern Time
| Posted: 2006-03-25 08:08
Dear god, I leave it alone for one day and the thread gains a page and a half!
Ok, judging from what I'm reading, we have a lot of people who feel strongly about this one way or the other. And neither side is willing to give ground, or even consider doing so. However, I have my own viewpoint, and I'm rather attached to it.
Personally, I think that (A) the ICC AC is well able to take care of itself, as has been pointed out, those shields are a major boost. (B) the ICC Combat Dessie needs a lot of help. And yes, replacing the damn missiles with torps would solve most of the problems. As I noted earlier, missiles aren't very useful unless you have at least 6 launchers.
Other issues to date, hmm? I agree that torps on long-range missile ships is confusing and messes with balance. I also agree that mounting missiles on a combat ship smaller then a dread is wasted space.
Ummm, give me a sec, there's a bloodly lot of posts here.
Oh yes, Jack is currect about the EAD issues, at least in part. We spent a little while shooting him while he was in EAD and his armor went down a little too fast. Especially considering that all I had was a missile cruiser, something that at range of 300qu he should be able to remove without thinking about.
Also, Jack, weren't you *gone* or something? 
Anyway nice to see that you can be brought to post, even if it takes massive bugging. 
(Declares in a mighty voice) "Behold, Jack has returned."
(Very quiet voice) "Again"
[ This Message was edited by: Malorn on 2006-03-25 08:09 ]
_________________
There are things in this world that man was not meant to know . . . and we have most of them convieniently arranged alphabetically by title.
|
Coeus {NCX-Charger}
Admiral, I can't read,
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: February 16, 2004
Posts: 3635
From: South Philly
| Posted: 2006-03-25 14:33
Quote:
|
On 2006-03-23 20:05, Rogue Wolf wrote:
missed the memo that stated that either all of the ships had been finished, that all of the modding code was implemented, or that the resource coding was done.
|
|
Its that whole "Beta isn't finished so stow your opinions" crap that gave us 483. Give your opinions and thoughts on how it should go NOW otherwise it will never happen.
WB Jack.
I have since come to the conclusion that it isn't the upgrade paths that need to change, but the ship layouts themselves.
We need to "upgrade" back to 480-482 style ships, IMO.
That said, I'm revoking my comments on missiles/torps for the moment, and awaiting word on the public opinon on how ship layouts should be & the official word on whether they are changing or not.
_________________
Darkspace: Twilight
|
GothThug {C?}
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 29, 2005
Posts: 2932
| Posted: 2006-03-25 16:23
Heavy Cruisers already have 2 Torp Tubes, basically what im saying is Remove the remaining 2 Missle Slots and you got a Ultra Heavy Cruiser much like the battle cruiser but whatever this post is falling on blind eyes anyways 
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-03-25 20:18
I'm not back, I was just bugged into 'watching' this thread.
to clear more things up, the BC is a brawler. It's meant for medium - close range combat, speed and damage over time, pretty much like the TC, only a little bit less damage.
Same with the HC and AC. AC has more defence than the HC, and also has more short range weapons to deal with the TC and such. But the HC, has to keep true to its roots and go for that long - medium range setup. This is why it's given it's missiles. It is NOT an AC, and it is not meant to fit the same role as the UGTO's BC. They are TWO completly different factions, like trying to compair apples and pairs.
The ICC ship setups spew long range setups, and you guys just aren't using them to that affect. I see CD's, and HC's modded for close range combat, when they where designed to be bread and butter ICC to the core, aka, long - medium range attack vessles. Compairing these ships with the BC and BD just makes no sense, as the way you have to play the two different factions with these 'similar' ships, is completly different.
Think about it.
ICC have high defence capabilities, combined with mostly long range setups on a lot of their ships. This gives them the capability to do damage before the enemy gets close to them, and they ARE meant to be a planet hugging faction. They are a DEFENCIVE faction. I believe this was the reason they where given the bomber dread, because people believed that it would be hard for them to advance being a (almost) completly defencive faction. USE the ships to their strengths, and stop trying to mutilate them into what they're not meant to be. Use the cannons and missiles to take down their armour and such before they get their weapons into firing range, and when they do, use the torps and beams to do that extra little bit of damage.
Now, UGTO don't have very many long range ships, bar the missiles cruiser and carrier dread (missile cruiser makes no sense to me, ICC are the missiles faction, same as ICC having a carrier cruiser, but, whatever). Now, our missiles and fighters can easily be faught against by using that oh-so-godlike pulse wave. It may do no damage, but JESUS, it can knock down ANY projectiles around you... That makes our carrier and missile ships sort of useless and hard to use, we can only really use them in support when the enemy is overwhelmed or too busy to notice. And the UGTO fighters are NOT that great, ICC ones are currently the flavour of the month (patch) due to their long firing range and fast RoF (this equals more damage in total).
Now you take into consideration that UGTO cannot touch you at long range in any superior way, and you have a very nice faction indeed. If the damage was the same as a UGTO ship, you'd be the ultimate faction. But, balance is needed, and so you're weapons are toned down because you have high defence, and superior range.
About 15 minutes ago whilst I was playing another game, I came up with the idea that lower level IT missiles track better, but do less damage, meaning that missiles on smaller ships would not be useless (it's piss-easy to dodge missiles in anything smaller than a station if you're doing it right). Because levels scale by hull now, this means that dreads will have a VERY hard time hitting smaller ships, but smaller ships won't do didly-squat damage to bigger ships because of the reduced damage. This makes those missile slots even more usefull to you ICC.
I hope you read that last point atleast twice, because it would just about make the configs of the current ICC ships ace (combat dessie with uber tracking missiles anyone?).
- Jack
_________________
|
GothThug {C?}
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 29, 2005
Posts: 2932
| Posted: 2006-03-26 02:07
i'd still prefer Torps over missles anyday
_________________
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2006-03-26 11:31
i havent flown the MC, but i think it already is full missiles.
NOT, NEVER, EVER should the MC be able to swap its missiles to torps!
EDIT: GothThug the beam thingy on AC, i think beams arent upgraded yet, but they will get more powerfull.
[ This Message was edited by: Sixkiller *S2* on 2006-03-26 11:31 ]
_________________
|
GothThug {C?}
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 29, 2005
Posts: 2932
| Posted: 2006-03-26 18:59
The Missles on the MC arent FULL nor were they ever, they're broadside, 1 Front, and 2 back whateva
_________________
|
Griffinhawk
Vice Admiral
Joined: January 20, 2003
Posts: 137
From: Barberton, Ohio
| Posted: 2006-03-28 15:43
The reaon they want to be able to swtich is because once you break the line of ships spaming missing you start doing the close in fighting using the torpedos and Cls
_________________
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2006-03-29 05:45
I didn't read the whole thread, I admit. However, like Enterprise pointed out, there are cases where Switchability screws things up.
So my idea (that which I have long favored, thinking modding is more of a headache than a good thing):
Why not have a Destroyer with missles, a destroyer with cannons, and a destroyer with torps. Maybe one with a mix too, for kicks. Oh, and one with mines.
What I'm getting at is - why bother making exceptions to modding (you can't swap unless the name has Assault, your rank is 2RA and higher, and its the second tuesday of the month) when you can just make more ships to fill the roles modding would create?
Sure, you lose modding. Whoopteedo. I'd rather just be able to pull out the ship designed for the role I want (maybe with a few tweaks: engine types, armor, etc.. but with upgrades like now - painless) than have to spend more time in orbit of a planet changing all the weapons.
Plus, it makes the game look more exciting to have twice the number of ships.. 
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2006-03-29 05:50
Also, despite Coeus' crusade to never encourage waiting on beta (which I do understand and at least partly agree with), there are some things which should get a bit of patience - for example the whine earlier about not being able to upgrade certain engines or drives or whatever.
It would certainly make sense to be able to do so, and I imagine that the only reason its currently not possible is due to incomplete code. Something like that is just obvious, to me.
Layout issues, valid.. within reason (ships are admittedly not done, but that doesn't mean we should ignore them). Just upgrade paths are kinda in limbo.
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-03-30 07:22
Aye, some upgrade paths aren't even complete yet.
_________________
|
HaVoX
Fleet Admiral
Joined: September 07, 2003
Posts: 269
From: Florida whoo hoo
| Posted: 2006-03-31 09:42
Quote:
|
On 2006-03-29 05:45, Shigernafy wrote:
I didn't read the whole thread, I admit. However, like Enterprise pointed out, there are cases where Switchability screws things up.
So my idea (that which I have long favored, thinking modding is more of a headache than a good thing):
Why not have a Destroyer with missles, a destroyer with cannons, and a destroyer with torps. Maybe one with a mix too, for kicks. Oh, and one with mines.
What I'm getting at is - why bother making exceptions to modding (you can't swap unless the name has Assault, your rank is 2RA and higher, and its the second tuesday of the month) when you can just make more ships to fill the roles modding would create?
Sure, you lose modding. Whoopteedo. I'd rather just be able to pull out the ship designed for the role I want (maybe with a few tweaks: engine types, armor, etc.. but with upgrades like now - painless) than have to spend more time in orbit of a planet changing all the weapons.
Plus, it makes the game look more exciting to have twice the number of ships..
|
|
Bravo!
More ships with specific types of design for intened missions is a beutiful idea as well as doing away with certian kinds of modding.
_________________
![]()
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
