Player Features and Ideas Discussion

There is a module called Warp Scrambler. It disable ennemy MWD. It's short range, but HAM are short range missiles I heard.

Also, AB is a tank module someone use to mitigate incoming damage. I think it's fair if you need another module to counter the counter to your weapon, like a web.

The scram thing still apply, but I wasn't talking to you anyway as you are a pvp god able to blap a light drone with large artillery. I really wonder BTW why you still bother with missiles as their whole point is to have average performances in most cases, and you clearly don't deserve average if you can always have more with turrets.

And sorry to say it, but linked 100MN AB ship are not most cases. That might be the most cases YOU face, but EVE doesn't revolve around you, as godlike as you can be. As I said, for simple mortals there is also web and TP which can help you apply more damage, be it with turrets or missiles. Yes, because for the poor soul we are, turrets don't do 100% dps all the time, because we are so bad we can't always shoot in optimale with zero transversale as the ennemy inferior enough to us, if he is even inferior that is.

To finish, I'd say that missile damage being mitigated by speed and signature is a feature. That mean ONLY speed and sig affect missile damage, and that something you need to account for when you pick this weapon. If you expect to fight 100MN AB overlinked, drugged and implanted blingy, then choose another weapon, because he have exactly the counter to missiles. I thought that was obvious, my bad. Though now I understand the love for light missiles.

Oh, and 100MN AB, skirmish link and sig in general do affect turrets too. People just don't see it because of the mostly random nature of turrets (we call it statistics ; usually, people are more affected by bad experiences, but with turrets it seem to be the opposite).

Actually, these changes would make those 4 ships nearly ideal for the hit and run tactics necessary for a smaller gang to deal with a larger, less mobile force. It's all in knowing how.

Squeezing twice the damage into a smaller window of time, fewer ships needed, reload timer occurring when you will be either kiting or warping to reposition anyway, lure out another victim, rinse and repeat... think about it. You'll have to figure this one out on your own, because the people that know exactly how to leverage this won't be saying anything for a while yet... not til the results start showing up on their kill board.

Perhaps... if you increase launcher capacity to 25 and reduce reload time to 30, missile swap to 5, idk... maybe, just maybe... someone could even use it now and then.

I don't want to contribute about the pros and cons of burst against reload.
However, at least the current singularity implementation for RLML shows another significant nerf:

Powergrid usage increased from 47.7 to 69.3 per launcher with my skills, that is an increase by 45%.

Please check and reconfirm, still can't really believe it.

Blasters would be the most difficult to deal with if this came to be, although a Mega would be using medium sized weaponry. That being said, most Mega's get right on top of their opponent anyway... although the targets they would be going for would tend to be cruiser size, which complicates things yet again.

+1

So what I'm seeing here is a very subtle shove for all missile pilots to use a "real" weapon system (i.e. anything except missiles) while CCP continues to blow smoke up our asses that missiles are a perfectly viable weapon system for all sorts of uses and not the highly situational and almost always second rate weapon system that they effectively are.

EDIT: And also, that despite the majority of people that don't want this change, CCP is going to go ahead and ram it down our throats anyways and MAYBE fix it later. What kind of dumb ass decides to institute a major change like this, knowing that it's busted and people don't want it, in favor of being able to come back and fix it later? Why would you not decide to wait a bit, come up with a GOOD original change, and push that out later?

Citing again, because I might have not explain myself clearly ; bold is mine :
So, to sum up, you are saying that a "Fleet scimitar with halo set, under squimish links with a 100 MN AB" is "extreme", worst case" and "comon" scenario.

And this to deny what I am stating, which is that HAM hit cruisers fine. I don't need to quote again I guess.

So, not only I never said that a worst case had to be rare, but you also agreed that this case was extreme.

So what should I conclude ? That we should base the balance of HAM on these kind of worst case scenario ? Because that's why I understand when someone say that HAM are bad because of crap damage application and showing this as an example.

Whereas I showed that the vast majority of normal cruisers will take more than 90% of HAM dps while MWDing. Overload won't last forever. MWD overload is even very short most of the time, so capitalizing on it is, IMO, unreliable and definitely not a normal case. A HAC will also reduce missiles damage because of its MWD bonus, but that's not a normal case, because that's a special feature for this class of ship.

I am aware that there is a lot of counters to missile damage, like AB, links and all speed mods, but everything should have a counter. That is normal scenario, but they hurt missiles by design. If they would not counter missiles, missiles would be OP.

Take the worst case for turrets for exemple : as soon as a crucifier, a cheap T1 frigate, land on grid, you are screwed and won't do anything to the ennemy. Yet I see tracking disruptors almost each time I play. But as common as that can be, they are normal counters to turrets. Asking to buff turrets because of TD would be stupid. Stating that turrets are crap because of TD would be equally stupid.

In the same way, stating that missiles are crap and need to be buffed because of AB and skirmish links is stupid.

I recently started using RLML on my scyFI. Havent gotten any kills yet but had a couple fights that I had to disengage from. Damned ec300s. Anyway this is not the end of missiles, hams are close range, so I would fit at least a scram and web if fitting allows. HML are longrange, without web you need tp and rigor/flare rigs. I have a scyFI fit that applies dps the same as rlml but with HML. IF YOU WANT GOOD APPLIED DPS YOU MUST BE WILLING TO SACRIFICE EHP OR PAPER DPS. Same with turrets. You want tracking with large guns? Gonna need TE or TC or use metastasis rigs. Same principle on hams and hml. Missiles are hampered more because there are not modules that give applied dmg bonus' like TE or TC do. Missiles only have rigs. Wheres our ballistic targeting computer? That would make Hml more feasible for most. In terms of rlml I still think a rig that adds charges is best. Want to kill only frigs? Fill rigs with tank/dmg. Thinking you may run into larger targets? Add some rigs that give plus 2 charges each. Use additional cpu or pg as rig drawback. Simple. Its up to how YOU want to fit it.

Can anyone confirm it please? It's that's true, it will be an epic fail because you can nerf one or the other, never both. At least not for this one.