Battleship/Cruiser Missiles

[darthbeck]

@Harcourt.Fenton.Mudd

Alright, have you even thought this through?
A cruiser would be able to mount all GB razors and rape anything without sparing any energy.

A BS would mount 6 GB missiles and rape anything without using energy.

Things like that.

have you every fought the necrosis? it has four gunboat missiles. it rapes bombers. it is crazy. we dont need more of this

---

<span style="font-family:Century Gothic">Violence is Golden</span>

[Robert.Fitzgerald]

Battleship/Cruiser missiles are fine. Use them against hull, like they're intended to. Use pulses and other turrets on shields.

Missiles were specifically changed from anti fighter to anti cap because you simply pressed Q lots and the enemy bombers/fighters died. Now, you require solaris turrets, good aiming with secondaries and/or flak to deal with enemy bombers. Not to mention, having escorts really boosts your survivability as a capital ship.

---

~Gateway Interstellar~ Gateway)Gibraltar
Gateway Corporate Profile - Gateway Message Dump - Gateway Recruitment - Gateway Faction Feedback

[Harcourt.Fenton.Mudd]

have you every fought the necrosis? it has four gunboat missiles. it rapes bombers. it is crazy. we dont need more of this

So like I allready said, just have a pair of hardpoints that allow class 8 weapons as well, and suddenly you have a single PAIR of missles for anti-fighter use.


And as for the Flak, its less than optimal for true usage. Solaris is MUCH moreuseful for anti-fighter work.

[Robert.Fitzgerald]

Capital ships don't need more "anti fighter" weapons, they already have two dedicated ones which do work.

---

~Gateway Interstellar~ Gateway)Gibraltar
Gateway Corporate Profile - Gateway Message Dump - Gateway Recruitment - Gateway Faction Feedback

[Harcourt.Fenton.Mudd]

Capital ships don't need more "anti fighter" weapons, they already have two dedicated ones which do work.

Battleships have Flak and Solaris.

Cruisers have Solaris only.

their missles are next to useless against a decent pilot due to their torpedo like performance.

Only GBs having missles that are an actual thread makes next to no sense.

[Robert.Fitzgerald]

Cruiser and battleship missiles are actually threatening to their main targets - capital ships. They are not designed to be used against fighters, so it's perfectly balanced that they don't work against fighters.

It makes perfect sense for gunboats to have anti fighter/bomber missiles, as they are anti fighter/bomber ships. Cruiser and battleship missiles on the other hand are anti capital, as cruisers and battleships are anti capital.

It's not 4.84 anymore, the balance system has changed and some weapons are completely different now. Cruiser/Battleship missiles are one type which have been completely overhauled.

---

~Gateway Interstellar~ Gateway)Gibraltar
Gateway Corporate Profile - Gateway Message Dump - Gateway Recruitment - Gateway Faction Feedback

[Guest]

Threads like this, are why you:

Carry Pulse Cannons or Mortars as a Sirian
Carry Trebuchets as a Gallian

If it was an Energy Based missile, I can see some sense in it having do a load of shield damage. (By Energy Based I mean its not a physical projectile).

However I can only imaging Nomad Missiles fitting that, which they don't have capship missiles if im correct.

[Cellulanus]

I say we should re-name Battleship and cruiser missiles to Torpedoes!

[Muleo]

Or... swarm missiles!

[darthbeck]

are those normal?

---

<span style="font-family:Century Gothic">Violence is Golden</span>