Does a hull tank need desperatly their utility mounts? You could just use PDTs
Should certain weapons be more dangerous?
- Thread starter Snarfbuckle
- Start date
Does a hull tank need desperatly their utility mounts? You could just use PDTs
Pouring pack hounds on any target feels like playing GTAIII (when I cared for such games), cheating a tank into the game, and running over the cops. It's not fair or balanced but hot damn it draws a laugh.
I mean seeker missiles are a one-hit kill in air combat. So I don't think they are too overpowered in ED.
It's all about what defensive methods you give to ships to counter missiles.
It's all about what defensive methods you give to ships to counter missiles.
You've taken up residence as forum one-liner comedian, right?
1) Pure hull tanks are rare, and even rarer in PvE. Hybrid tanks still call for shield boosters and still get mauled by missiles
2) Chaff and heat sinks, the latter being very prominent for pure hull tanks so they can drop SR at will and to cool down the rail/PA-heavy setups they often use
3) Saying one type of ship could possibly equip several counters to a tool doesn't equate to a justification for buffing that tool. Why should seeker missiles be more powerful? They're already a high output weapon at the cost of relatively small ammo supplies, employed by pointing your ship roughly in the direction of another ship. The splash damage to external modules (where MRPs are less effective) cannot be understated, but its offset (ammo) can be circumvented through synthesis.
Well yes but IRL a giant 16T beam laser or machine gun would also be instant death. Why are we making comparisons between the durability of modern aircraft and several hundred tonne metal space boxes?
Seeker missiles already have an immense effect for the effectively nonexistant skill in using them, and any kind of effective counter requires giving up half your defensive utility (and is still circumvented by multiple launchers or packhounds)
Last edited:
Lol.. I bet your ammo restock cost more than the bounty was worth!
I can't say for sure. I tend to have hard times to see rethorical phrases.
1) Surely boosters help in that condition but AFAIK, hybrid hull tanks use bi weave which are designed to fall off relatively quickly. Once they fall you will have to wait for them to recharge, the more boosters you have, the slower that recharge will be. If you turn them off, recharge, and turn them on, your shields will be very low on health and I'm assuming a hybrid doesn't carry SCBs to recharge.
2) True, though some hull tanks use cooler weapons paired with efficient powerplants and low heat signature ships or stealth ships.
3) Are we talking about normal missiles or pack hounds?
On hybrid tanks: you have part of the idea, but not the whole story.
Firstly, effective hybrid tanking inherently begs for high resistances. The higher your resistances, the more your quickly regenerating shields count for. Other than a thermal shield mod, one or more booster(s) are the only way to add moar resistance.
Secondly, when broken your shields regenerate energy much quicker - nearly three times faster. The bigger your shields are, yes the longer your recharge will be; but if you can handle the distributor draw you're then taking advantage of a massive increase in uninterrupted shield generation for a longer period of time.
I'm not about to recommend everyone with a bi-weave iClipper starts equipping several HD boosters, but one or two resistance augmented boosters can be really good for a well built hybrid.
And I was talking about general seeker missiles. Packhounds themselves are so unbalanced many PvP players have honour rules against using them, but while standard seekers aren't exactly insta-gankers there's still little justification for any more capability.
That's what I was thinking, and for a competent NPC, I've seen better novice NPC's, that FDL didn't appear to be flying correctly at all.
Troy_McClure
Banned
Agreed, 2 PDs should be enough to deal with any 1v1 missile threat & double chaff should be able to deal with gimbals over the course of a fight! The latter ofc is no longer the case since engineers as a fight against a well-equipped PvPer will last 20+ minutes as long as neither party slips into a coma first.
...which brings me to the ever-so-slightly off-topic ridiculous 'utility inflation' ie the number of utilities needed now vs the same number of slots on ships at launch.
If you PvP in small/agile medium ships double chaff is a prerequisite to avoid a gimballed scrub winning a fight. Factor-in the increased advantages of engineered SBs, the change to SCBs heat characteristics - ergo, subsequent reliance on heatsinks & missile buffs leading to PDs becoming needed again.
Add in the latest Thargoid scanners, which is frustrating at best; since any discerning player cannot use utilities for scanners at any open hot-spot, as the opportunity cost is too great.
I think all scanners should be standard inclusive equipment, leaving the utility choices free for defence purposes & all ships - with the exception of the FDL & combat big 3 - should get an extra utility slot.
Spare a thought for the truly pathetic & pointless Eagle with ONE utility slot! [squeeeee]
Back on-topic: ALL FIXED WEAPONS SHOULD BE MORE DANGEROUS! (except all LR - which is ofc a bovine excrement feature)
Are you talking from expirience or just therotical knowledge?
I fly a hybrid hull tank fas exclusively and I do pvp 100% of my gameplay.
Seakers and hounds are lame weapons in PvP which in itself an activity showcasing skill, since there is no gameplay in pvp.
If you buff the click to win missiles/hounds all the scrubs will be exclusively packing 2-3 of them on any build.
I dont bother with PD or Ecm becsuse I dont want to fight someone who just holds the trigger and spams those crappy weapons.
I dont want to spend a valuable utility spot to defend OP weapon from skilless player.
Tbh and good that it is so, its very rare to see missiles or hounds on a pvp ship. Right now hounds and missiles are mainly used as trolling tool near the station.
A full rapid fire hound/missile conda spamming all its weapons at once on a poor trader 4kms away is an instakill.
Both, though it's been a long time since I've done somewhat serious PvP so it's not my cup of tea.
You could just buff dumbfire missiles, those are skill pure weapons.
Dumbfires are basically "cannons, but for externals". I run cannons a lot because I like to prioritize the power plant. Dumbfires would be viable if I wanted to prioritize engines instead (which tbh is probably equally valid as a win condition now that a powerplant loss merely disables).
Seekers though, honestly I just don't have any spare hardpoints for a secondary weapon that only has 6-12 rounds of ammo.
Seekers though, honestly I just don't have any spare hardpoints for a secondary weapon that only has 6-12 rounds of ammo.
Just re-purchased a pure hulltank FAS yesterday. It's the first time I've flown it in months. Not as agile in the lateral/vertical thrust department as I remember, but doing a test run in a HazRES put the first PvE-induced grin on my face that I've had in a while.
As I said earlier in the thread, I can get behind this. Dumbfire missiles are like PAs that can be shot down mid flight and are useless against shields. Still very effective but not the hold-button-to-win tools that seekers are once an opponent is down to hull.
Destroy all your weapons in a few seconds flat.
There is no distance penalty, just lock them at around 3 kms, hold the fire button and spam about 5 missiles in each hardpoint at about 10sec (G5 rapid fire mod), just relax and enjoy the show. Skill ftw!
Skill? Why back in my day we didn't even have guns on our planes, you wanted a kill you had to pull out your sidearm and pick the pilot out of the cockpit, now that's skill. Kids these days thinking all they need to do is clip a wing.
Come on now though, do that and if they don't get the kill they'll have burned all their ammo. Either have your shields up at that range to tank the damage, or use silent running to break the lock. Though it would be nice if ECM reduced the range you could be locked at instead of just being a virtual flare, would make it a more general-purpose module too.
Perhaps I haven't explained myself properly. The reason why some weapons are pre-nerfed and other pre-buffed is because all the weapons and combat related modules were initially tuned with PvP in mind, that's why we have completely silly things (from a verisimilitude point of view) like missiles that are actually firecrackers, shotguns oops frag cannons on spaceships, glorified miniguns that are more powerful in practice than explosive weapons like weapons, weapons range topping out usually at 3km, shield pills, etc etc etc etc etc. And yes, the engineers magical effects just added to the already high level of silliness of this game's combat mechanics.
Nothing in the combat part of the game was made with verisimilitude in mind. All was balanced, ormore precisely was attempted to balance, with PvP in mind (even if that balance attempt didn't achieve the intended results - which I agree they didn't, especially after engineers). But that was not what I was referring to anyway.
The OP asked why missiles, in reality a devastating weapon, is akin to a firecracker in this game. And I was trying to explain him that nothing in the combat part of this game ever had any intent on keeping verisimilitude, everything is just plain gamey in this particular matter in order to facilitate PvP duels or whatnot and trying to keep "skill matters" over "making sense" in this particular aspect of the game. So basically, things in the combat department don't make a slight hint of sense, because they weren't designed to make any.
Hopefully explained myself better this time.
Last edited: