[NGTM-1R]

Eh? I can fit 10 MX-50s in the Valk's missile bank, but 15 Interceptors...I think...*goes to check the tables*

Edit: Cargo size 4.0 for both. Odd...I could swear I've seen what I mentioned above.

[FireCrack]

well who cares, cause the mx-50 sucked

Rockeyse are awesome though, they are realy good on the second mission of the first loop where all the fighters explode, a single rockey should take em down each in their weakened state.

[Roanoke]

Maybe I was using 'em wrong, but I always found Intewrceptors to be horribly inaccurate.

[Unknown Target]

I love rockeyes, in single and multiplayer, because once you get behind an enemy, five or six of them will take them out immediately.

[Carl]

Originally posted by Roanoke
Maybe I was using 'em wrong, but I always found Intewrceptors to be horribly inaccurate.

did you wait for them to lock on?

[ChronoReverse]

Originally posted by Unknown Target
I love rockeyes, in single and multiplayer, because once you get behind an enemy, five or six of them will take them out immediately.

Except that's almost all the rockeyes you can carry XD

Against the AI, Interceptors are rather horribly accurate IMO.  The AI simply isn't any good at dodge missiles


Damnit, how did I somehow double post like that?

[TopAce]

Rockeyes are good at long-range against cruiser turrets and sentries.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Maybe I was using 'em wrong, but I always found Intewrceptors to be horribly inaccurate.

     I think all of the missiles had pretty subpar tracking in FS1. The best weapon was the Hornet by far I believe. The Interceptor often missed, as did the Phoenix-V which Bombers could avoid fairly easily. And then of course there was the Fury, which as far as I can tell, really sucked. (not that the Fury had any tracking ability, it was just a crappy missile)

[Drew]

in FFA or TVT matches, rockeyes totaly kick ass.

Just unload both banks on that shekmet and laugh.

Lightspeed was always better though.

[TopAce]

Originally posted by Akalabeth Angel
Maybe I was using 'em wrong, but I always found Intewrceptors to be horribly inaccurate.

     I think all of the missiles had pretty subpar tracking in FS1. The best weapon was the Hornet by far I believe. The Interceptor often missed, as did the Phoenix-V which Bombers could avoid fairly easily. And then of course there was the Fury, which as far as I can tell, really sucked. (not that the Fury had any tracking ability, it was just a crappy missile)

Most community members stated they hated the Hornet. I am among them.

[Solatar]

The only thing I like the hornet for is attacking light cruisers (Cain, Fenris, Aten, rarely Lilith) if I'm in a heavy fighter.

[phatosealpha]

So, it's not just me who's had bad experiences with FS1 tracking.

Y'know, coming to FS2, at first I never used anything but dumbfires - furies may suck, but I can hit something with a fury.  Actually, most things I can hit many times.  And not much damage * many times beats mucho damage + miss every time.

I was amazed when I tried out harpoons and later trebuchets.  A missile that would actually hit something, that I didn't have to aim myself.

[phreak]

i actually use tempests if its an interecpt mission.  of course i'll fly the herc2 since it can carry 400(!) of them and you really only need about 10 to kill a bomber.  coupled with a couple Prom Standards and its deadly.

[Andreas]

The tracking was just right in FS1 IMO. Hornet's are good against larger targets, like freighters and cruisers, coupled with primaries. And you can score hits with missiles in FS1, just don't expect them to do 360* turns like the ones in FS2

Besides, real men stick to primaries anyways

[TopAce]

Originally posted by Ai No Koriida
...Besides, real men stick to primaries anyways

Not unconditionally, what do you think why someone chooses the Hercules Mark II? This tactic is the best if you fly an interceptor, I admit. I follow this book personally, given the fact I cannot simply fly Heavy Fighters and Bombers so fine. I can only kill a Dragon in two seconds without missiles... kidding.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by TopAce

I can only kill a Dragon in two seconds without missiles... kidding.

It's not really too hard to kill a Dragon, a couple of good shots with something effective against shields will put it's shields out of comission, after that, death is instantenious.

[MicroPsycho]

I'm partial to primaries. I only use missiles for a distraction, or finishing shot at a distance.

[TopAce]

Originally posted by Ai No Koriida

It's not really too hard to kill a Dragon, a couple of good shots with something effective against shields will put it's shields out of comission, after that, death is instantenious.

The ML-16, you mean?
Sorry, I am in a witty mood today.

[Akalabeth Angel]

I can only kill a Dragon in two seconds without missiles... kidding.

Yeah, it takes me two seconds to hit ~k too.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by TopAce


The ML-16, you mean?
Sorry, I am in a witty mood today.

Nah, I was thinking more like Banshee or S-Breaker. But ML-16? Sure, it's fine with me.