These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
207 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

[Rubicon] Rapid Missile Launchers - v2

First post First post First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2013-11-08 11:22:34 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Rise
Hi!

As you guys know, we're introducing Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers in Rubicon for battleships that will echo the Rapid Light Launchers in design. Well, now that the current design has been out and available for discussion for awhile, we've taken on a lot of feedback and we don't feel completely satisfied with them.

The problem we're facing is that it's very hard to create a good balance between rapid launchers and their on-size counterparts(torpedo launchers, cruise launchers, heavy missile launchers and heavy assault missile launchers). Currently I feel we have the numbers high enough that they are almost always the right choice, but if we tune them down at all they will almost never be the right choice. We would much rather that the decision to use rapid launchers depended heavily on context and that you would choose them not because they were generally better than their competition but because your specific situation called for them.

Here's the plan to improve the situation:

Rapid Launchers (both Light and Heavy) will be changed to have a much higher damage per second number, roughly on par with Heavy Assault Launchers and Torpedo Launchers respectively, but their ammo capacity will be reduced and their reload time will be increased increased (think Ancilliary Shield Boosters). Some specifics:

Rapid Light Missile Launcher rate of fire set to:
Rapid Light Missile Launcher I ------------------------- 7.8s
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II ------------------------- 6.24s
Prototype 'Arbalest' Rapid Light Missile Launcher --- 6.24s
Other meta types not shown

Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher rate of fire set to:
Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher I ------------------------ 6.48s
Rapid Heavy Missile launcher II ------------------------- 5.185s
'Arbalest' Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher I ------------ 5.185s
Other meta types not shown

Reload time for both groups set to 40 seconds.

T2 Rapid Light Launchers can carry roughly 18 charges
T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers can carry roughly 23 charges

This translates to a Raven with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 926 dps
This translates to a Caracal with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Light Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 409 dps


Both ships would have around 50 seconds of up time followed by 40 seconds of reload meaning that over extended engagements their true dps would be a bit more than half of the dps number above.

This would provide new strategic gameplay for Rapid Missile users as well as their opponents. It would make these systems stronger against ships that can be killed inside the active window(smaller ships) but worse over longer fights, which would usually mean fights against ships in the same class or larger. It would generally be more interesting but would also leave more space for the main missile systems to thrive as well.

Let me know what you think and keep in mind that numbers may be adjusted slightly as we continue to test.
Thanks

@ccp_rise

#2 - 2013-11-08 11:27:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Beaver Retriever
Do it.

It'll be disruptive, at least.

I'm sure the soloers will still cry, but when are they not crying?
Pandemic Legion
#3 - 2013-11-08 11:33:39 UTC
Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea
#4 - 2013-11-08 11:35:51 UTC
intresting idea im not sure what to think of it....

did anything change at which bonuses do apply?
under this circumstance i'd say all bonuses should apply but its really hard to guess what would be ballanced
Shadow Cartel
#5 - 2013-11-08 11:36:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
....O_o this will be an asskicking and a half if you get 20 ships fit with these together

also, this is cool, they are actually "rapid" launchers now. I like it.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

C C P Alliance
#6 - 2013-11-08 11:36:54 UTC
Kat Ayclism wrote:
Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea


Would love if you expanded a bit.

@ccp_rise

Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2013-11-08 11:37:51 UTC  |  Edited by: GallowsCalibrator
Sounds pretty interesting, and the idea of front-loaded DPS for missiles works well (plus it combats similarity between weapon systems which is always a good thing). It also essentially produces a new class of ship; there's a lot of instances of ships being designed as taking down larger ships effectively, less so of the reverse.

May also make utility launcher slots (for those few ships with them left) a bit more of an interesting choice to fit with an actual launcher, seeing as they generally aren't at the moment.

Do it.

And if you need consistent damage application against smaller targets you can either A: fly a smaller ship or B: fit undersized launchers.
#8 - 2013-11-08 11:37:55 UTC
will role bonus on golem affect RHML ?

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

Caldari State
#9 - 2013-11-08 11:39:01 UTC
Bad idea unless you change damage bonus to blanket all damage types.. 40sec reload just to select a damage type?
#10 - 2013-11-08 11:39:23 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Kat Ayclism wrote:
Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea


Would love if you expanded a bit.


why would you choose to use a weapon system with 40second downtime (think about this in a 10% tidi 4 hour fight) when you could use a weapon system that does half the applied dps (Cruise missiles, or any gun ever) and you don't spend half the time playing with your largly flaccid gentry while you watch your reload timer.


Then the FC will call for the fleet to load Mjolnir instead.
C C P Alliance
#11 - 2013-11-08 11:40:26 UTC
zbaaca wrote:
will role bonus on golem affect RHML ?


Yes

@ccp_rise

Circle-Of-Two
#12 - 2013-11-08 11:40:37 UTC
40 second reload time is not a good idea at all, this will kill any solo roaming or pvp and will only be something used on a larger scale. Even IF used on a larger scale why would you when you can use guns that won't have the same reload issues.

The Cerberus has been fun again with the Rapid Light Launchers and has opened up the possibility of solo roaming or in small gangs, this will make them redundant again.

Please review it, maybe even 20 second reload time would be acceptable but 40 seconds is rediculous.
Goonswarm Federation
#13 - 2013-11-08 11:41:54 UTC
Bob FromMarketing wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Kat Ayclism wrote:
Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea


Would love if you expanded a bit.


why would you choose to use a weapon system with 40second downtime (think about this in a 10% tidi 4 hour fight) when you could use a weapon system that does half the applied dps (Cruise missiles, or any gun ever) and you don't spend half the time playing with your largly flaccid gentry while you watch your reload timer.


Then the FC will call for the fleet to load Mjolnir instead.


I don't think these are, or should be, considered as fleet-level primary damage dealers. Consider them as optional utility to make smaller ships f-off or die.
Shadow Cartel
#14 - 2013-11-08 11:42:41 UTC
Bob FromMarketing wrote:



Then the FC will call for the fleet to load Mjolnir instead.


with that in mind, i think it should be designed so if your charges reach 0 it takes 40 seconds to reload but to switch charge types (albeit without going back to a full reload) it would take the normal amount of time. (or no time, i dunno, that could be another bonus of using them)

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

#15 - 2013-11-08 11:43:42 UTC
GallowsCalibrator wrote:

I don't think



You're right!
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#16 - 2013-11-08 11:44:51 UTC
so, with 10% tidi thats...
Pandemic Legion
#17 - 2013-11-08 11:45:20 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Kat Ayclism wrote:
Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea


Would love if you expanded a bit.

You really need it expanded that that long of a reload time on a WEAPONS system is freaking horrid?

Yeah weapon types are situational and all, but this change makes the situation you'd ever want to use these in basically none. I wouldn't ever use this garbage when I could just use something else- hell, anything else that doesn't have a 40s reload time.

Caldari State
#18 - 2013-11-08 11:46:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Caitlyn Tufy
High damage application, 600 dps, 6k m/s burst Tengu. Yap, that will end well.
#19 - 2013-11-08 11:47:25 UTC
Shameless doublepost

Rise, what happens when this gets removed from a Fleet Doctrine concept because 40 seconds wasted is 40 seconds wasted, and touted as a small gang or solo doctrine, but then, any solo ship that would use this, mainly the Cerb and the 100mn RML Tengu, would want to stay on field and kill off tackle now is unable to for more than 50 seconds, and once tackled with no utility highs has no way of getting out.

This change will not only kill a play style, but will kill off a currently awesome and a potentially awesome weapon system in one well placed drooling proposal.
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2013-11-08 11:49:17 UTC
Lots of people not getting the potential of front-loaded dps against smaller targets in this thread I think.
207 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump