Seeker missiles.

  • Thread starter Deleted member 110222
  • Start date

Deleted member 110222

D
Within my circle of friends, I'm the only one who uses seeker missiles. Not counting Packhounds mind.

I'm just curious... Does anyone have any idea how common, or indeed rare, the use of seeker missiles is?

I swear by them, but have never found anyone else who does! XD
 

Mxpower76

Mxpower76
I'm a missile fan. They seem pretty effective against the small ships at my local CNB. Plus I think they make ED feel like a real world flight sim. I've thought about buying a T10 again just to have a multi cannon missile boat.
 

Sylow

Sylow
The differerence between seekers and pack hounds is small than many people think. Packhounds win out on damage after a few seconds, and pull far ahead in damage when seekers go into the reload phase. That is, if you can afford the higher heat cost of packhounds. In contrast, while many people religiously believe that packhounds are better against point defense, the opposite is true. When point defense is in play, normal seekers are at an advantage.
.
That all being said, i have both missile types on some of my ships, but it's always ships which don't expect prolonged combat. If you're hauling cargo and fending off one attacker at some time is your goal, then missiles can be a useful asset. You need other weapons to drop the shields, then shower the enemy in missiles. Also enjoy that most enemies are basically unarmed after just a few seeker hits. But for all my actually combat oriented ships, where sustainability also is a factor (especially when hunting in a RES or the likes), missiles are not a reasonable option. Their ammo supply is too low for that.
.
 

verminstar

Banned
verminstar
Love seekers still trying to unlock the engineer fer them, which means I think of them as finisher type weapons. Problem on longer missions like wing missions is ye can run outta ammo and cant synth while under fire, so inevitably they are replaced by guns which are merely more practical...but less satisfying than sending a pair of seekers after someones hull after decimating their sheilds with fixed beams.

Once I unlock that last engineer, we shall see cos as much as I love them, they simply aint practical on any of my ships in terms of what g5 guns can do instead. Its a work in progress ye know how it is ^
 

CMDR Corlas

CMDR Corlas
I like the idea of missiles, but the damage / ammo ratio just always seems way too out of whack for me when I could put a cannon or a plasma accelerator there and get way more mileage out of it.
 

Ethaidan

Ethaidan
Bob Lighthouse said:
There's some stigma associated with them in PVP, since they are so effective against hull oriented builds and the skill/damage ratio is on the "easy mode" side.
Click to expand...

I do not accept the foundation underlying that stigma. Yes, they can be effective against hull builds. So what. When you design yourself a hull build, you should know that. Equip extra PD. Just like when you design a build with missiles, you know it limits your combat options regards effectiveness vs shields/shield builds and overall staying power in drawn out combat.

Just because some people have found that their favorite min/max combat build, which can be very devastating vs certain builds and in certain combat situations, has a devastating (and pretty uncommon) counter-build, which is weak prey to many other builds... boo hoo hoo.
 
Last edited:

Vedmo

Vedmo
I have an FGS missile boat with seekers in the 2's, dumbfires in the 1's and a beam laser in the 3, it is a lot of fun! One of my trade cutters has seekers in all the 2's. I also have a couple of 2small 2medium hardpoint ships with a missile or two installed.
 

Sylveria

Sylveria
If I equip missiles on a ship, it's always seekers.

Dumbfire missiles may have a slight damage advantage, but in a technologically advanced era I find it difficult to believe we'd be ejecting them without some sort of guidance system. (people also use them for stationary ground targets) Usually I only equip missiles on ships that handle poorly in dogfight engagements, and "fire and forget" is a good distraction while I'm planning my next move. Passive weapon systems aren't to be underestimated when it comes to ships that have poor handling, after all. :)

If ya know you aren't going to win an engagement, don't try. Pick your own battles.
 

Glock_N_Load

Glock_N_Load
Un1k0rn said:
Within my circle of friends, I'm the only one who uses seeker missiles. Not counting Packhounds mind.

I'm just curious... Does anyone have any idea how common, or indeed rare, the use of seeker missiles is?

I swear by them, but have never found anyone else who does! XD
Click to expand...
I use them (engineered/synthesized ammo) and love them. Of course against NPC. Open players have point defense and ECM so not much use. Maybe on smaller ships that don't have a lot of slots for anti missile mods. They use to be really bad but got a buff a year or so ago.
 
Last edited:

Tarman

Tarman
It's missiles. That seek. What's not to love?

When I ran a mission AspX, I had a whole faceful of them in the small slots, with twin beams for shield busting. It wasn't good for prolonged combat but it could kill smaller aggressors and bloody the noses of larger ones till the cops got there or they took too much damage to want to stick around.
 

Quantis Trap

Quantis Trap
I use regular small seekers on two of three smalls on my Chieftain and Challenger ships mainly to kill small ships and SLFs.

I also use pack-hound racks on the two outside mediums of my battle Cutter.

I like seekers along with fixed weapons because they also ignore chaff.
 
Last edited:

Bob Lighthouse

Banned
Bob Lighthouse
Ethaidan said:
I do not accept the foundation underlying that stigma. Yes, they can be effective against hull builds. So what. When you design yourself a hull build, you should know that. Equip extra PD. Just like when you design a build with missiles, you know it limits your combat options regards effectiveness vs shields/shield builds and overall staying power in drawn out combat.

Just because some people have found that their favorite min/max combat build, which can be very devastating vs certain builds and in certain combat situations, has a devastating (and pretty uncommon) counter-build, which is weak prey to many other builds... boo hoo hoo.
Click to expand...



It's just another symptom of the over-riding imbalance in the game, and makes for less variety itself.
The game is already skewed towards shield builds and it promotes rock paper scissors mentality.

That said, my most used build is an FGS and it has drag and emissive seekers on it most of the time.
But I do also fully accept that IS easy-mode compared to the rails that also go in the c1s.

I'd like to see more variety, but I don't think the seekers help in their current form.
 

Crimson Kaim

Crimson Kaim
People don't use missiles for a good reason: They are overpowered and it's a shame to use them. There is absolutely no relyable protection against seekers, let alone packhounds. PDTs miss way too often to counter seekers and don't hit at all vs packhounds. You cripple your opponent's combat capability without killing them, forcing them to retreat. You won nothing, you wasted their time. NPCs don't even notice when they have no weapons and will gladly continue circling you like a mosquito without a stinger.

Lastly, seekers are so easy to use (it's literally pushing a single button) and have a 100% hitrate against all kinds of agile opponents which can not be dodged at any given scenario. If yo uare lucky, there is an asteorid to hide behind. If not, running in a straight line is the best you can do or equip as many boosters as possible.

Seekers are a noob weapon that allows any pilot to be effective against opponents where they shouldn't be. Unless you opponent is running 5k + MJ of shields .. which is another balance discussion by itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom