Attack Hacks??

The same people who thought heat weapons should destroy a ship in seconds too, no need for lasers or bullets, just a hairdryer

latest
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Torpedos fly at 120m/s.. I can outrun them on foot! They are way more balanced than heat weapons.

A) Not when the targeted CMDR is in the mail slot

B)You can effectively "dive bomb" torps onto larger ships. Almost impossible to avoid.

The idea that 2400+ MJ of shields should be able to be defeated by one or two torpedo strikes is nothing short of absurd, especially considering how long those shields take to regen.


While we are at it, let's make it jus one weapon type, one shield type, one armour type, one ship type. This way everyone will be flying the same thing.

The straw man method is normally the calling card of flimsy arguments and weak ideas. No one is calling for what you've suggested, and in no way does your post justify the continued implementation of a broken game mechanic.
 
Last edited:
A) Not when the targeted CMDR is in the mail slot

Yknow with that video on page 1, unless the author was flying badly on purpose to show how a gank works, it should have been possible for them to thrust upwards. That missile/torpedo had literal seconds from hitting them, so it could have been dodged. The pilot goes upwards, the torp rams into the area above the mailslot and the station finishes them off.

B)You can effectively "dive bomb" torps onto larger ships. Almost impossible to avoid.

It's called "situational awareness" - this is a legitimate tactic with bombs even in real life.

Or point defenses.

The idea that 2400+ MJ of shields should be able to be defeated by one or two torpedo strikes is nothing short of absurd, especially considering how long those shields take to regen.

Think about how huge torpedoes are, the sheer amount of absurd power going into that explosion. That is why they are so slow compared to missiles. Dive bombing is a high risk/high reward tactic.

The problem here isn't the torps, the problem is the griefing. With perhaps a side order of shields taking way too long to regenerate.
 
Last edited:
Yknow with that video on page 1, unless the author was flying badly on purpose to show how a gank works, it should have been possible for them to thrust upwards. That missile/torpedo had literal seconds from hitting them, so it could have been dodged. The pilot goes upwards, the torp rams into the area above the mailslot and the station finishes them off.

Yeah, he was proving a point. Here's his suggestions thread where it came from:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...Holes-in-Station-Security-And-How-To-Fix-Them
 

Deleted member 38366

D
Together with the Thermal Shock nonsense, those insta-kill Weapons (dead Shield Gen or Power Plant = you're basically done) need a thorough rebalancing pass, so I hope they get them right in V2.2...
I mean, imagine Burst Lasers with Shield Penetration Special could Subtarget right through Shields at full Weapon Power... What would be the point of having strong Shields, let alone spend alot of time modding them?

ECM is useless (doesn't work with retracted hardpoints) and Point Defenses are easily overwhelmed from a min. Range attack.

IMHO : any special Weapon effect that becomes the actual Weapon is OP and needs rebalancing.
It should be a Bonus, nothing more. Certainly not become a meta-enabling game-changer or a source of loopholes in the combat mechanics - rendering even extremely well-modded Ships entirely defenseless.
 
Either your shield value isn't high enough and you didn't 4 pip or reverberating torpedos hit you.

If there's video evidence then it'll be easier to decipher but it might get flagged as N&S on this forum .-.
 
That video pretty much say why people don't play Open anymore. What even is the point of that gank? How is this even fun?
Destroying something worth A LOT of money is always fun... People just don't want to admit it :D
And I think even PvPers are getting tired of doing it.
 
Yknow with that video on page 1, unless the author was flying badly on purpose to show how a gank works, it should have been possible for them to thrust upwards. That missile/torpedo had literal seconds from hitting them, so it could have been dodged. The pilot goes upwards, the torp rams into the area above the mailslot and the station finishes them off.



It's called "situational awareness" - this is a legitimate tactic with bombs even in real life.

Or point defenses.



Think about how huge torpedoes are, the sheer amount of absurd power going into that explosion. That is why they are so slow compared to missiles. Dive bombing is a high risk/high reward tactic.

The problem here isn't the torps, the problem is the griefing. With perhaps a side order of shields taking way too long to regenerate.

1) Then the poster goes above 100 m/s, gets hit by a suicide eagle, destroyed by the station, and you all switch your arguments to "you shouldn't have been speeding; it's your fault you died." Can't outrun a torp going 99 m/s.

2) FDL wing interdicts Cutter or other large vessel, drops directly on top of target ship, torps launched just as the large ship comes out of its spin (because THAT was a great addition to interdictions), large ship shields drop almost instantly. Also take into consideration just how un-maneuverable large ships are comparatively. They arent dodging anything; their strength lays with their shields. Cascade torps completely erase that strong point for almost no drawback.

3) Point Defense? HA. Couldn't get two PD to reliable shoot down an incoming torp during an experiment in a controlled environment.

4) Dive-bombing torps is low risk, high reward. It doesnt take a lot to dive bomb a large ship, especially when that ship is unsuspecting or just coming out of an interdiction.


I really don't get why people still defend Reverberating Cascade torps or Heat weapons. They are both shining examples of incredibly bad game design and horrible game balance.
 
Last edited:
Reverberating Cascade Torpedos aren't the problem. Anywhere other than the air lock they're easy to avoid as long as you know about them. FDEV need to deal with their use at stations, not gimp a niche weapon with difficult application in real combat.
Not really ( i've used torpedoes once LONG time ago so i might not be right), you can just ram enemy ship and then launch them.
 
1) Then the poster goes above 100 m/s, gets hit by a suicide eagle, destroyed by the station, and you all switch your arguments to "you shouldn't have been speeding; it's your fault you died." Can't outrun a torp going 99 m/s.

2) FDL wing interdicts Cutter or other large vessel, drops directly on top of target ship, torps launched just as the large ship comes out of its spin (because THAT was a great addition to interdictions), large ship shields drop almost instantly. Also take into consideration just how un-maneuverable large ships are comparatively. They arent dodging anything; their strength lays with their shields. Cascade torps completely erase that strong point for almost no drawback.

3) Point Defense? HA. Couldn't get two PD to reliable shoot down an incoming torp during an experiment in a controlled environment.

4) Dive-bombing torps is low risk, high reward. It doesnt take a lot to dive bomb a large ship, especially when that ship is unsuspecting or just coming out of an interdiction.


I really don't get why people still defend Reverberating Cascade torps or Heat weapons. They are both shining examples of incredibly bad game design and horrible game balance.
Yup, same as heat weapons: It's just impossible to balance it.
They made large ships "paper destroyers" with only ridiculous shields to protect them. Then they added weapon that can oneshot shields of pretty much any ship, especially large one...
 
Back
Top Bottom