Posted - 2008.07.16 19:52:00 - [3]

 

missiles are different

cruise launchers are also easier to fit then torp launchers

however, rockets are easier to fit than standards.

not a big deal.

Posted - 2008.07.16 20:39:00 - [5]

 

Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn

---

missiles are different

cruise launchers are also easier to fit then torp launchers

however, rockets are easier to fit than standards.

not a big deal.

---

yes it's a big deal. can at ccp please explain to use why heavy assault launchers were custom fit for sacrileges and caldari ships can't seem to fit them?

nighthawk? cerberus? what's the deal? nighthawk especially..

Posted - 2008.07.17 03:50:00 - [7]

 

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Originally by: Jim Raynor

---

Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn

---

missiles are different

cruise launchers are also easier to fit then torp launchers

however, rockets are easier to fit than standards.

not a big deal.

---

yes it's a big deal. can at ccp please explain to use why heavy assault launchers were custom fit for sacrileges and caldari ships can't seem to fit them?

nighthawk? cerberus? what's the deal? nighthawk especially..

---

Being able to fit HAMs + MWD to a caracal without a fitting mod would go a long way to making it a 'learning' combat cruiser - as it is, having to lose a BCS, means all your benefit disappears again.

---

yes it's pretty stupid that HAM + Caldari doesn't mix. It's like they made these launchers soley for the Sacrilege.. its the only ship that fits them well.. what's up with that? Caracal needs a third low slot..

Posted - 2008.07.17 07:42:00 - [9]

 

Originally by: Jim Raynor

---

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Originally by: Jim Raynor

---

Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn

---

missiles are different

cruise launchers are also easier to fit then torp launchers

however, rockets are easier to fit than standards.

not a big deal.

---

yes it's a big deal. can at ccp please explain to use why heavy assault launchers were custom fit for sacrileges and caldari ships can't seem to fit them?

nighthawk? cerberus? what's the deal? nighthawk especially..

---

Being able to fit HAMs + MWD to a caracal without a fitting mod would go a long way to making it a 'learning' combat cruiser - as it is, having to lose a BCS, means all your benefit disappears again.

---

yes it's pretty stupid that HAM + Caldari doesn't mix. It's like they made these launchers soley for the Sacrilege.. its the only ship that fits them well.. what's up with that? Caracal needs a third low slot..

---

Would you sacrifice a mid slot for that?

Posted - 2008.07.17 20:14:00 - [11]

 

Originally by: Arana Tellen

---

Oh yeah and I would love to be able to fit a buffer tank/ neutrons / MWD to my thorax, but I cant.

---

This doesn't even apply for two reasons.
1. You have smaller short range guns to use and you don't lose a damage bonus for fitting them. Missiles do not have a smaller variant with other benefits such as tracking.
2. Fitting a lower tier gun does not cause you to lose a damage bonus your ship may have, some people like to point to the damage type for missiles, but most ships that have a damage bonus have it to one damage type of missiles they lose out when fitting other damage types.

HAMs and Torps both are the only short range weapons that are harder to fit than their long range equivalent so either HMLs and Cruises are to easy or HAMs and torps are to hard to fit.

This is even more exaggerated by the lack of powergrid on most caldari ships compared to same class ships of other races, though I do realize missiles use less grid than guns in general.

What your complaint is much more akin to those caldari who think they should be able to fit the uber shield tank of doom, 3-4 damage mods, and tackle. which would probably be overpowered.

Randlof

Posted - 2008.07.17 22:20:00 - [13]

 

Originally by: Straight Chillen

---

The HAM and Torps do quite a significant bit more dmg then the longer range ones, which is why they require more PG.

Thats why my Neutron blasters require more PG then my ions, because their better. Adapt & survive

---

And that is why your neutron blasters require more PG then your railguns? Oh wait, they don't, get lost you troll.

Posted - 2008.07.18 10:51:00 - [15]

 

Originally by: Akane Miyamoto

---

Actually the cerberus fits nicely with HAMs

---

uhm no, it doesnt

Posted - 2008.07.18 19:26:00 - [17]

 

Originally by: FlameGlow

---

Originally by: Straight Chillen

---

The HAM and Torps do quite a significant bit more dmg then the longer range ones, which is why they require more PG.

Thats why my Neutron blasters require more PG then my ions, because their better. Adapt & survive

---

And that is why your neutron blasters require more PG then your railguns? Oh wait, they don't, get lost you troll.

---

LoL. let me ask you something, how far do your HAMS go?, How Far do your Torps go? 20km and 30KM if ur skills are worth a damn its alot farther then blaster could ever hope to hit out to, even with Long range ammo. Ontop of that, They always hit if they can catch the target. Thats where your extra 40PG comes from. So seriously quit your ****ing *****ing I would love if i could do an assured 500dps in my mega from 30 klicks out but it doesnt.

Also, i donno if u ever thought to consider this.... But their Missile Launchers, Not turrets. Why would they need to follow the same fitting scheme?

If anything i would hope CCP raises the PG req of the long range ones, just to spite you

Posted - 2008.07.19 06:54:00 - [19]

 

Caldari love their ranged missiles. Amarr love their short range missiles.

Working as intended?

Posted - 2008.07.19 11:10:00 - [21]

 

Pulselasers ? Goddamn no ! Give us the Laser Rokh, and then make it the only ship able to fit Tachyons !

Posted - 2008.07.19 21:59:00 - [23]

 

I examined some numbers, comparing heavy missiles and heavy assault missiles.

The extra grid use of HAMs hurts, but it managable. It's not that bad.
However, the extra DPS you get from HAMs seems to be too small to justify all the sacrifices. If HAMs could do another 8% more dps, it would be seriously worthwhile

Posted - 2008.07.21 18:51:00 - [25]

 

Posted this in the caracal thread but I think it illustrates why HAMs need a PG reduction OR Caldari need a PG boost. I'm in favor of the latter, tbh:

"The caracal, like most of the caldari ships, tbh, really needs more PG. Playing around in EFT, I threw together a fit that would be comparable to, say, a gank ruppy.

Ruppy fit:

1x 1600mm plate
3x Gyro II
1x DC II
1x Y-T8 MWD
1x WD II
1x X5 web
4x 180mm AC w/rep fleet emp
1x assault launcher
1x standard launcher

4x Hobgob II
1x Hammerhead II

Does about 450 dps. Range on those guns is 1 km with 12 km fall off, so your real dps, depending on where you're fighting, will probably average about 2/3 of that, which is still pretty respectable.
Moves about 1500ms with a 10 sec align time
Has about 21,000 ehp with a 7500 hp armor buffer.
Caps out in 1 min 21 seconds.

Contrast a comparably fit caracal:

2x BCS II
2x LSE II
1x Y-T8 MWD
1x WD II
1x X5 web
5x HAM II w/ CN Terror

Does about 350 dps at 24km. Very, very respectable given that this is missile damage.
Moves about 1400ms, 7.7second align time.
Has 15,000 ehp (HUGE em hole) and an 8,500 hp shield buffer.
Caps out in 1 min 27 seconds

Not too shabby, is it? Thing is, you won't even come close to fitting all of that on there. That caracal fit at MAX skills, is short 45 cpu and *300* pg. Drop one of those LSEs to make up for the gank advantage that HAMs offer over projectiles, and you're STILL short 182 PG. At MAX skills. Granted, you could drop the webber to make the cpu fit, but the fact is it just can't compete. Those ruppy figures were generated using one of my corp mates skills and fits. He had room to spare, plenty of cpu and plenty of pg left. It may not even be considered an awesome fit. I don't know. I don't fly them. I'm using one of the fits found on our corp forums. Fact is, it is FAR superior to the caracal in your standard gank/tank role."

Posted - 2008.07.21 21:43:00 - [27]

 

Originally by: Straight Chillen

---

do realize, that a buff to PG, would require a cpu reduction, which is what your tanks heavily rely on, to keep everything balanced. Be careful what you wish for

---

The rupture has 325 cpu, base.
The caracal has 350.

The rupture has 860 pg base.
The caracal has 530.

I'll gladly sacrifice 25 cpu for 330 pg. Fair trade.

Posted - 2008.07.22 20:39:00 - [29]

 

Originally by: Mahn AlNouhm

---

Originally by: Straight Chillen

---

do realize, that a buff to PG, would require a cpu reduction, which is what your tanks heavily rely on, to keep everything balanced. Be careful what you wish for

---

The rupture has 325 cpu, base.
The caracal has 350.

The rupture has 860 pg base.
The caracal has 530.

I'll gladly sacrifice 25 cpu for 330 pg. Fair trade.

---

650MM arty I 27 CPU 200 PG
HAM I: 45 CPU 120 PG

A rupture needs more PG due to the way its fit.

I do agree that caldari could use a slight boost to PG, but lowering the PG requirement of the HAM launchers is not the right way to go. and well to be honest, i just want to be able to fit 8x425 t2 Rails on my rohk with out having to put a PDU on it to power JUST the guns.

Again some caldari ships need a PG boost, but lowering the HAM PG is bad, as plenty of ship can fit them easily enough, and that would jsut be giving them even more of an advantage over the others.