Must be a mod missiles your talking about - hellflurys aren't in the normal game at all........
However - gimmie 2tiz and 2 cannonballs and you will be space dust......end of topic! btw - that is in the first pass............no-one has survived long enough to make it past the 10th pass (but point taken - by that time i have spent 20missiels costing 7k each). However - how else do you whoop up to four players in eagles without having to regen .....? (and no mods obviously). Missiles have their place for multiplayer combat - especially against multiple opponents - as do torps - which i am equally as dangerous!!!
Chips
p.s - don't even bother ranting bout how you can dodge the missiles....lol - you do the dodging - and you aint doing any shooting - i will though - and you will lose that way............(yes i have grown cocky!)



*support your local missiles factory - without em i would die!*

My armament of choice for dueling is 3 Tizonas and 3 Cannonballs.
Of course, that's horrid for non player fighting and is costly.
But 3 Cannonballs will take out anything, one shot, no bot usage to worry about.

The last word is mine. Always.

westline264, "G" is just a unit for measuring acceleration which happens to be equal to 1x the acceleration due to gravity on Earth. If you are accelerated enough you will still black/red out in space at the same G limit that your body can sustain on Earth.

Inertia is an object's RESISTANCE to acceleration.

Edited by - CW on 14-08-2003 08:39:53

Hellfury torps are part of the Rebalance mod, not the original game. But IMHO it dunna matter whether it's mod/unmod, SP or MP, missiles are almost useless when u r fighting high-lvl ships, bot or human. I can take missile hit after missile hit and dish it out as well and they do bugger all and are generally a waste of money. Sometimes they have their uses but I survive ok without them. I wouldn't like to depend on them 'though. Fly without me Salamancas and Skyblasts? Bob Hope I will..

btw CW i thought Inertia was a Tawakalna's resistance to doing anything his wife wants him to do except play FL until 4 in the AM.

must remember my password:- D I V O R C E

Now There is where Missles would come in handy! The question is, would you fire at the spouse or the lawyer? Either way you'll be paying out a lot more than 7grand, so you may as well send them a decent volley!

"I'm a mushroom cloud laying motherfuka, mutherfuka."
-Samuel L. Jackson

Tawakalna, I took out an Eagle with a single cannonball missile. I stripped his shields, and afterburned towards him. He had engine killed and was turning away from me to face someone else when I rammed the cannonball through the back of his ship, taking full hull to nothing. That was one hell of a quick fight. While afterburning, launch a cannonball into an unshielded enemy. You will be pleasantly surprised.

I've recently noticed that lag can make missiles fail to track.

I have been using a missile loadout (and tailored evasive strategy) on one of my eagles for a while, and have never had a problem with scoring hits. However, today I tried a Drake missile variation which unwisely depended on missiles for shield-breaking (I know, I know..). What I found is that the visual lag that comes from turning very quickly can cause the missiles to utterly fail to track. It's not so much that they miss, but rather that they don't turn or track *at all* - they just travel in a straight line right by their target. It seems most evident when used from the drake as a platform. I haven't noticed this failure when using my eagle, but I have also noticed this problem when using a starflier. Even the hornet missile causes problems on my drake on occasion - traveling in a straight line despite it's impressive turn rate.

I'm sure my barely mediocre (Gforce4/1 Ghz/512 mb 133 mhz ram) system had something to do with it. However, has anyone else noticed this utter failure to track when missiles are mounted on an agile platform?

Also, is there maybe something I'm not aware of that is making the missiles fail to track their targets, that I'm not aware of, but somebody else is?



Edited by - Navigation_Boy on 15-08-2003 06:28:44

even though i dont use missiles in multiplayer they dont suck.....i finished the game with just missiles
but hey thats just my opionion
catchya

Once you pull the pin, Mr Grenade isnt your friends

Flak that's the only time I ever use them! head on with some fool whos shields are down and got some hull damage, any other scenario and it's just a waste of a few thousand creds!

Guns guns guns (and torps)

In FS2 however I lived off my missiles. But then they were much better and could hit their targets most of the time, esp. Trebuchets and Swarmers, which of course were very Macross-stylee!

..you think you're done with the past; but the past isn't done with you..

I personally find missiles (especially the captured ones) quite useful at the beginning when your guns do hardly any damage, take a starflier and go after the police over Manhatten and you will see what I mean. It takes an anonyingly long time to down enough police to get even with the bad guys without missiles.

When the cash starts flowing in, I ditch missiles for torpedos.

Ditch the lasers - they are cr*p. If you are on a budget then use 3 x Lavablade Mk I (that gun has the same combat value as the class 3 Justice Mk III, if not more) but if you have money then use 1 x Adv. Stunpulse + 2 x Javelin launcher (more fun than the Lavablades but you have only 25 shots - and no margin for error ).

Missiles are one of the most realistic aspects of the game. I mean if you fire side on to an enemy it will most likely miss but if it hits the damage is kind of 'Who knocked?'. If you use the chicken tactic, however, the missle will most likely blast away the target's cockpit.

depends on what ur using.. if its against you, it sucks. if its giving a facial with a cannonball, then it rulez.

Nothing like wearing down a bounty hunter's hammerhead's shields and giving a sunslayer facial.. then hearing that metal breaking.. and ARRRGHHHH!!