These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

RLML and HML balance pass

First post First post First post
Author
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#201 - 2017-05-08 14:13:40 UTC
We could just revert RLMLs back to AMLs. Those were fine. I liked my AML Caracal back in 2012/13.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Lugh Crow-Slave
#202 - 2017-05-08 14:59:51 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
We could just revert RLMLs back to AMLs. Those were fine. I liked my AML Caracal back in 2012/13.



Sure you don't mean 2011/2012?


And why not explain what you liked particularly about them over the rlml
Aly Ankn
Short Bus Window Licker
#203 - 2017-05-10 16:30:00 UTC
Increase fitting for rapid lights by 10 for power grid and drop clip size to 17 or 15. With current change u knock out several lines of ships from use. Rapid heavies could have the clip size dropped to 22 any more and it becomes useless. These missiles need the current range to compete in combat. With delayed dps, reload time and the fact u can out run missiles should be plenty of reasons not to Nerf range.
Caitlyn Rempal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#204 - 2017-05-10 22:34:14 UTC
Starting to feel like a consensus in here :: it wass definitely not the Range that's the issue, and certainly not the re-load times which already feel punative ir the Rapid launchers -- the heart of the issue seems two fold -- the rapid Light missile launchers are just too easy to fit on the Caracal/Cerb/Orthrus line, making those ships too much of a powerhouse -- so change the fitting abilities of those ships to mitigate it -- not the weapon systems. and on the 2nd front -- the poor application of heavy missiles

You've already worsened the reloads on All Rapid launchers (which was un-needed to begin with not being the actual problem) -- and your buff, such that it is, to Heavies DMG is fairly pointless since they just can't apply w/o a ton of work.

Lastly, this notion that cannibalizing the flexibility of ships larger than our beloved Dessies is somehow a good idea feels like rubbish. Leave pilots the ability to fit their ships based on their piloting needs -- if they want to fit a 'smaller' weapon system, let them, they already sacrifice its hull bonuses for damage. I like, for example, having a battle ship with Rapid Heavies -- it allows them to go brawl with gangs of smaller ships.

Best regards all!
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#205 - 2017-05-11 10:23:32 UTC
Why not just a tiny nerf to light missiles? Rockets you need webs to make them apply full damate to a frigate but somehow I can oush explo radius for lights down to 14.1 without much effort. Thats a huge amount of apllied damage to even a speed boosted inty running a decent mwd (remember they take AB damage).
Cade Windstalker
#206 - 2017-05-11 12:58:12 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Why not just a tiny nerf to light missiles? Rockets you need webs to make them apply full damate to a frigate but somehow I can oush explo radius for lights down to 14.1 without much effort. Thats a huge amount of apllied damage to even a speed boosted inty running a decent mwd (remember they take AB damage).


Pretty much all missiles require some kind of application mod to apply full damage to a same-tier target.

Light Missiles aren't the problem, and Light Missiles on Frigates are pretty well balanced overall. The issue with RLML ships is that they can basically just nuke most smaller hulls, reload rinse and repeat because they have a much higher burst damage than normal Light Missile Launchers.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#207 - 2017-05-12 16:41:19 UTC
Caitlyn Rempal wrote:
Starting to feel like a consensus in here :: it wass definitely not the Range that's the issue, and certainly not the re-load times which already feel punative ir the Rapid launchers -- the heart of the issue seems two fold -- the rapid Light missile launchers are just too easy to fit on the Caracal/Cerb/Orthrus line, making those ships too much of a powerhouse -- so change the fitting abilities of those ships to mitigate it -- not the weapon systems. and on the 2nd front -- the poor application of heavy missiles

You've already worsened the reloads on All Rapid launchers (which was un-needed to begin with not being the actual problem) -- and your buff, such that it is, to Heavies DMG is fairly pointless since they just can't apply w/o a ton of work.

Lastly, this notion that cannibalizing the flexibility of ships larger than our beloved Dessies is somehow a good idea feels like rubbish. Leave pilots the ability to fit their ships based on their piloting needs -- if they want to fit a 'smaller' weapon system, let them, they already sacrifice its hull bonuses for damage. I like, for example, having a battle ship with Rapid Heavies -- it allows them to go brawl with gangs of smaller ships.

Best regards all!


Yeah, lets not reduce the fitting on those ships. Its already hard enough to fit HAMS or heavies onto a caracal or orthrus, plus tank and application. Problem is in the launcher fitting itself, period.
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#208 - 2017-05-12 21:21:10 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Why not just a tiny nerf to light missiles? Rockets you need webs to make them apply full damate to a frigate but somehow I can oush explo radius for lights down to 14.1 without much effort. Thats a huge amount of apllied damage to even a speed boosted inty running a decent mwd (remember they take AB damage).


Pretty much all missiles require some kind of application mod to apply full damage to a same-tier target.

Light Missiles aren't the problem, and Light Missiles on Frigates are pretty well balanced overall. The issue with RLML ships is that they can basically just nuke most smaller hulls, reload rinse and repeat because they have a much higher burst damage than normal Light Missile Launchers.


Well apart from increasing the . fitting costs of RLML to like 100 pg each your only other reasonablr recourse is to nerf light missile stats. I've been out of the loop for frigate pvp a while but I'd never suggest that lights needed an application mod to work properly. I'll have to graph it in pyfa when I get home tonight.
ValentinaDLM
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#209 - 2017-05-13 12:51:23 UTC
Range is not the problem fitting is.

Right now we don't have to make any compromises with rapid lights aside form burst damage, but whatever, fleets will just warp while reloading. HMLs have less burst damage AND don't apply to anything, while also being hardrer to fit. How is there even a choice there?

Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#210 - 2017-05-13 21:21:17 UTC
Boost heavy missile damage by another 5percent while we're at it. Not that long ago the volley damage for heavy missiles and fury lights was almost identical... with fury lights still applying better.
Aly Ankn
Short Bus Window Licker
#211 - 2017-05-14 04:24:52 UTC
ValentinaDLM wrote:
Range is not the problem fitting is.


Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.



If heavy missile fitting cost is not enough, bump it to heavy assault missile fitting. Would be a true sacrifice for ships to fit rapids for the great application over tank.


ValentinaDLM
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#212 - 2017-05-14 10:32:41 UTC
Aly Ankn wrote:
ValentinaDLM wrote:
Range is not the problem fitting is.


Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.



If heavy missile fitting cost is not enough, bump it to heavy assault missile fitting. Would be a true sacrifice for ships to fit rapids for the great application over tank.




That would probably work too, but it might harm the Caracal and Bellicose a bit much, but it would be fine IMO on the Orth and cerb, which both fit just so much tank relative to the damage and application they push out, a fitting compromise would be very nice on those.

Really though, the bellicose is already a terrible ship, doesn't paint as well as a vigil (optimal range bonus on TPs FTW) doesn't really have the PG for an armor tank, and doesn't have the slots to fit EWAR and a solid shield tank, can't lock far enough to be a decent fleet painter, and has almost no chance of fitting HAMs or HML without being useless at it's EWAR role. So, I don't really mind throwing the bellicose under the bus if need be, it is already not used often.
Ele Rebellion
Fat Dragon Mining Co.
Darwinism.
#213 - 2017-05-17 15:12:19 UTC
Can we assume that Rapid Torpedo Launchers will be unaffected?
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#214 - 2017-05-18 19:34:22 UTC
another batch of changes that will further skew the faction war LP market to Gallente's favor.

still not touching the Navy Vexor but you're going to nerf the Navy Osprey back into oblivion again, no changes to the useless navy caracal either. why don't you just give galmil free victory points and isk every time someone spins a ship in a station.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#215 - 2017-05-18 20:01:40 UTC
ValentinaDLM wrote:
Range is not the problem fitting is.

Right now we don't have to make any compromises with rapid lights aside form burst damage, but whatever, fleets will just warp while reloading. HMLs have less burst damage AND don't apply to anything, while also being hardrer to fit. How is there even a choice there?

Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.


>straight swap fitting cost of RLML with HAM's, and straight swap fitting cost of RHML with Torps,
>damage bonus to heavies,
>increase rapid launcher reload to 40 sec,
>improve application on both Heavies and Torps.

Heavies, Torps, and to a lesser extent HAM's are not fit for purpose. Rapid lights need the range bonus to be effective against smaller faster ships or it's far too easy to outrun the missiles and that's especially true if you don't have perfect 5/5 skills in missile range, so nerfing the velocity bonus makes them useless against small fast ships, and apparently they're also supposed to be useless against other cruisers ... so what are they for countering punishers and merlins or something?

also why even nerf the RLML navy drake at all? it's the only pvp viable fit for the navy drake and i don't understand what's wrong with it, it's basically a crappy cerb for people who don't have hac skill trained.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#216 - 2017-05-18 21:09:09 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
ValentinaDLM wrote:
Range is not the problem fitting is.

Right now we don't have to make any compromises with rapid lights aside form burst damage, but whatever, fleets will just warp while reloading. HMLs have less burst damage AND don't apply to anything, while also being hardrer to fit. How is there even a choice there?

Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.


>straight swap fitting cost of RLML with HAM's, and straight swap fitting cost of RHML with Torps,
>damage bonus to heavies,
>increase rapid launcher reload to 40 sec,
>improve application on both Heavies and Torps.

Heavies, Torps, and to a lesser extent HAM's are not fit for purpose. Rapid lights need the range bonus to be effective against smaller faster ships or it's far too easy to outrun the missiles and that's especially true if you don't have perfect 5/5 skills in missile range, so nerfing the velocity bonus makes them useless against small fast ships, and apparently they're also supposed to be useless against other cruisers ... so what are they for countering punishers and merlins or something?

also why even nerf the RLML navy drake at all? it's the only pvp viable fit for the navy drake and i don't understand what's wrong with it, it's basically a crappy cerb for people who don't have hac skill trained.


Velocity rigs, missile computer, missile TE all exist to resolve the issue you have with range. You sacrifice some tank or damage, which is fair. You dont need 350dps and 40k EHP to kill an inty now do?

Also, corax, kestrel, flycatcher. They all have range/application bonuses for light missiles. Maybe use those to blap inties instead of a caracal, orthrus, cerb?

Navy drake has more than 1 good fit. HAM navy drake is just fine.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#217 - 2017-05-18 23:23:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Fourteen Maken
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
ValentinaDLM wrote:
Range is not the problem fitting is.

Right now we don't have to make any compromises with rapid lights aside form burst damage, but whatever, fleets will just warp while reloading. HMLs have less burst damage AND don't apply to anything, while also being hardrer to fit. How is there even a choice there?

Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.


>straight swap fitting cost of RLML with HAM's, and straight swap fitting cost of RHML with Torps,
>damage bonus to heavies,
>increase rapid launcher reload to 40 sec,
>improve application on both Heavies and Torps.

Heavies, Torps, and to a lesser extent HAM's are not fit for purpose. Rapid lights need the range bonus to be effective against smaller faster ships or it's far too easy to outrun the missiles and that's especially true if you don't have perfect 5/5 skills in missile range, so nerfing the velocity bonus makes them useless against small fast ships, and apparently they're also supposed to be useless against other cruisers ... so what are they for countering punishers and merlins or something?

also why even nerf the RLML navy drake at all? it's the only pvp viable fit for the navy drake and i don't understand what's wrong with it, it's basically a crappy cerb for people who don't have hac skill trained.


Velocity rigs, missile computer, missile TE all exist to resolve the issue you have with range. You sacrifice some tank or damage, which is fair. You dont need 350dps and 40k EHP to kill an inty now do?

Also, corax, kestrel, flycatcher. They all have range/application bonuses for light missiles. Maybe use those to blap inties instead of a caracal, orthrus, cerb?

Navy drake has more than 1 good fit. HAM navy drake is just fine.


EDIT: I dunno actually. It's hard to argue against RLML nerf when they're just better in every way, but it's also clear tthat it's not simply a case of nobody is using heavies just because rlml's are so good.

this change hits caldari missile ships and more important the calmil lp store hard, they'll never get it perfectly balanced, but if they make changes to t2 ships they look at the t2 economy, if they make changes to t3 ships they look at the t3/wh economy, why can't they make an effort to keep faction war lp stores balanced?
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#218 - 2017-05-19 00:47:05 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
ValentinaDLM wrote:
Range is not the problem fitting is.

Right now we don't have to make any compromises with rapid lights aside form burst damage, but whatever, fleets will just warp while reloading. HMLs have less burst damage AND don't apply to anything, while also being hardrer to fit. How is there even a choice there?

Just make RLMLs have the same fitting as heavy missiles period.


>straight swap fitting cost of RLML with HAM's, and straight swap fitting cost of RHML with Torps,
>damage bonus to heavies,
>increase rapid launcher reload to 40 sec,
>improve application on both Heavies and Torps.

Heavies, Torps, and to a lesser extent HAM's are not fit for purpose. Rapid lights need the range bonus to be effective against smaller faster ships or it's far too easy to outrun the missiles and that's especially true if you don't have perfect 5/5 skills in missile range, so nerfing the velocity bonus makes them useless against small fast ships, and apparently they're also supposed to be useless against other cruisers ... so what are they for countering punishers and merlins or something?

also why even nerf the RLML navy drake at all? it's the only pvp viable fit for the navy drake and i don't understand what's wrong with it, it's basically a crappy cerb for people who don't have hac skill trained.


Velocity rigs, missile computer, missile TE all exist to resolve the issue you have with range. You sacrifice some tank or damage, which is fair. You dont need 350dps and 40k EHP to kill an inty now do?

Also, corax, kestrel, flycatcher. They all have range/application bonuses for light missiles. Maybe use those to blap inties instead of a caracal, orthrus, cerb?

Navy drake has more than 1 good fit. HAM navy drake is just fine.


that's not been my experience with light missiles, they need that 50% bonus to speed or they often fall short of small fast targets. as for the amount of tank ehp etc you need to kill an inty do you want to use that on other anti-support cruisers as well? navy omen doesn't need so much dps and tank to blap inties, nor does the scyfi etc.

if you look at turret ships the close range variants have better tracking and lower fitting costs to allow for better tank etc, that makes sense, but when it comes to missiles everything it's back to front. especially where fitting costs are concerned, RLML has better tank, better range, and better application than HAM fits... but ham's are not far off being viable.

as for RLML navy drake that wasn't my point... my point is the navy drake is not a problem ship, if anything it's rarely used as it is so why nerf? do you think the navy drake needs a nerf and if so why?

this affects the calmil lp store, and that means everyone in the militia. calmil already have a weak lp store and these kind of changes just make it worse for them


Bellicose, scyfi and other RLML platforms that don't have a velocity bonus have often fit 1-2 velocity rigs and work fine at hitting faster moving ships. Sure the snaked, max speed exodus inty will still prob outrun their missiles, but there will always be outliers. Bring a hyena or other web ship if you need to counter those.

Scyfi and nomen are navy cruisers, i'd expect them to have more tank than a t1 caracal. A caracal can just sit ontop of another t1 cruiser and do more damage and have a better tank with a long range weapon that applies perfectly. If you catch the typical anti-support nomen with a scram, its dead. All it has is a single AAR, its not buffer fit. Same with Scyfi, it doesn't have the cap to run an invuln+MWD, so its often run dual LSE with cap booster to sustain kiting. A typical scyfi tank is 32k EHP when kiting with RLML (full tank rigs, tank will be less if you drop a rig for velocity rig).

Scorch nomen and scyfi dps is less or equal to an RLML caracal (before drones), but scyfi has no velocity bonus and nomen is turret based and pretty squishy as is (16k EHP before AAR).

I'm not denying that missile launchers need a proper look at in terms of their fittings, cause torpedo/cruise missiles are backwards in terms of fitting and the rapid launchers need their fittings increased to actually prevent these super high tank fits. I'm just stating that the velocity bonus not applying isn't the end of the world. Other ships have been using velocity rigs just fine to compensate.

What i'm saying about the navy drake is that the RLML fit isnt the only PvP fit being used. HAM fit exists and works fine at applying to frigates. It potentially could work as a decent HML kiter with heavy buff (i'm trying to be optimistic) that comes at same time. HAM and Heavy fits remain unchanged and will be getting a buff, RLML loses 25% range, which you can easily recover with missile computer or rig+MTE variation if its that big of a deal.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#219 - 2017-05-19 01:01:05 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:

this change hits caldari missile ships and more important the calmil lp store hard, they'll never get it perfectly balanced, but if they make changes to t2 ships they look at the t2 economy, if they make changes to t3 ships they look at the t3/wh economy, why can't they make an effort to keep faction war lp stores balanced?


You have nosprey, caracal navy, RNI, SNI, hookbill, navy drake and griffin navy.

Maybe this isn't a problem with RLML, but they need to look at those hulls to make them more desirable? Tbh only a couple of those hulls need some help, like the caracal navy and RNI. Navy caracal is actually pretty fun to use, but its not nearly as good as a faction cruiser should be, but i put HAMs on it, not RLML. Not to mention, RLML CNI is unchanged with velocity nerf since it doesn't get a range bonus anyway. Nosprey will get hit, but can just as easily fit rigs like other ships for velocity.

Griffin navy and hookbills are all over, navy drakes get use (HAM fits too) and nosprey's are getting more use since they buffed the damage output on them. The battleships don't have much demand cause pirate battleships are so damn cheap and eclipse them, but both the SNI and RNI are good ships in their respective roles. But, thats not an issue necessarily with the LP market, its an issue because why buy a 500m SNI, when you can buy a 300m rattlesnake that does everything better? As for the RNI, a lot of people don't see the value in it, but its probably the best torpedo platform in the game, but it could use help in the tank/fitting department. Dropping the velocity bonus for a damage bonus and dropping some launchers to compensate would make it good for both RHML and torpedo's, plus it could fit a decent tank to go along with it.

Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#220 - 2017-05-19 11:09:19 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:

this change hits caldari missile ships and more important the calmil lp store hard, they'll never get it perfectly balanced, but if they make changes to t2 ships they look at the t2 economy, if they make changes to t3 ships they look at the t3/wh economy, why can't they make an effort to keep faction war lp stores balanced?


You have nosprey, caracal navy, RNI, SNI, hookbill, navy drake and griffin navy.

Maybe this isn't a problem with RLML, but they need to look at those hulls to make them more desirable? Tbh only a couple of those hulls need some help, like the caracal navy and RNI. Navy caracal is actually pretty fun to use, but its not nearly as good as a faction cruiser should be, but i put HAMs on it, not RLML. Not to mention, RLML CNI is unchanged with velocity nerf since it doesn't get a range bonus anyway. Nosprey will get hit, but can just as easily fit rigs like other ships for velocity.

Griffin navy and hookbills are all over, navy drakes get use (HAM fits too) and nosprey's are getting more use since they buffed the damage output on them. The battleships don't have much demand cause pirate battleships are so damn cheap and eclipse them, but both the SNI and RNI are good ships in their respective roles. But, thats not an issue necessarily with the LP market, its an issue because why buy a 500m SNI, when you can buy a 300m rattlesnake that does everything better? As for the RNI, a lot of people don't see the value in it, but its probably the best torpedo platform in the game, but it could use help in the tank/fitting department. Dropping the velocity bonus for a damage bonus and dropping some launchers to compensate would make it good for both RHML and torpedo's, plus it could fit a decent tank to go along with it.




in terms of the amount of lp spent navy cruisers are the most important market, and until the nosprey changes caldari had two absolute lemons that were practically useless. the nosprey became one of the best navy cruisers after the changes but still nowhere near the navy vexor... and now it gets nerfed while the navy vexor never gets touched? you think this is balance?

4300 navy vexors were destroyed in april. that's ~200billion worth of gallente LP flushed
650 Navy Ospreys destroyed in the same month. that's ~30billion worth of caldari LP flushed


the frigate market isn't as big as cruiser market but again gallente comet dominates the hookbill. both ships are popular since the hookbill got a damage buff but hookbills are still only used half as much as comets

in april 3153 comets were destroyed = 31billion isk worth of gallente lp flushed
same month 1857 hookbills lost = 19billion isk worth of caldari lp flushed.

the navy ewar frigates see about the same amount of usage, while navy battleships are pretty much irrelevant to the fw economy because they make up a tiny part of the LP destroyed, although caldari have 2 of the more useful it makes little difference. similar with navy battlecruisers, they're just too expensive to justify the cost in most pvp situations.

you can say loads of every caldari ship all over the place, but thats the reality. Caldari LP doesn't need more nerfs