These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon] Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vicar2008
MCMLXXVI
#101 - 2013-10-07 18:44:05 UTC
What is the Skill book train for this and how does it fit into the missile tree etc, so what do we need to get the launchers and training multipliers etc?
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#102 - 2013-10-07 18:48:53 UTC
New RHML Raven > all Cruisers/Battlecruisers?

Also its kinda unfair that Turrets dont get Large Weapons with Medium Ammunition for example Dual Heavy Pulse Lasers.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
stoicfaux
#103 - 2013-10-07 18:54:48 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
Sooo.. 12s rof for HML. 7.45 for RHML.

12 / 7.45 = 1.61. RHML has 61% moar DPS than HML. For the Raven with it's RoF bonus, that's 1.61 / .75 = 2.15 times the DPS of a standard HML. Or, 1.61 / .75 * 6 launchers = 12.9 effective HMLs. (CNR would be the same. Golem's 100% damage bonus won't apply, so this a Golem nerf.)

So... if you're a carebear who puts 4x CN BCUs on their Raven hulls, that's 339 DPS with Fury (not including reload time) * 2.15 = 728.9 DPS.

With 5% rof and dmg implants, that's 2.15 * 375 DPS = 806 DPS with RHMLs as they currently stand (sans ammo reloading.)

With 2xMissile Speed II and 1xFlight Time rigs, that's ~75km of range.


2 BCUIIs w/CN: 2.15 * 228 = 490
2 BCUIIs w/Fury: 2.15 * 267 DPS = 574
3 BCUIIs w/CN: 2.15 * 256 = 550
3 BCUIIs w/Fury: 2.15 * 300 DPS = 645



Real quick math in my head fancies that the difference between these systems and precision cruise is sufficiently negligible that you'll be better off with cruise. That was my CNR though.


Edit: I suppose they may be worried about precision weapons in the heavy class but ..... Seems a bit thin.

Good point.

Raven with 4xCN BCUs:

RHML Raven with Prec ammo, three speed/range rigs:
* 630 DPS Er = 93.75 Ev = 145.5 range=~50km

RHML Raven with T1 ammo, three speed/range rigs:
* 630 DPS Er = 121.5 Ev = 105 range=~100km

RHML Raven with Fury ammo, three speed/range rigs:
* 729 DPS Er = 180.75 Ev = 102 range=~75km

Raven with Precision Cruise, three Rigor I rigs:
* 668 DPS Er = 136.8 Ev = 124.5 range=~111km

Raven with T1 Cruise, three Rigor I rigs:
* 668 DPS Er = 152 Ev = 103.5 range=~222km


RHML with Fury ammo provides a 9% DPS boost over T1/Prec cruise, but T1/Faction/Precision cruise can sport better explosion radius/velocity numbers via Rigors. OTOH, T1/Prec RHMLs DPS numbers aren't that far off from T1/Prec cruise missile DPS. Range is a factor with RHMLs though.

Well, from a PvE perspective, RHMLs aren't going to be FotM except for those who have HML V trained but can't be bothered to train T2 cruise missiles.

edit: made edits.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#104 - 2013-10-07 19:24:11 UTC
Yes - and there's also the phoon which gets the cruises application bonuses.

I suppose it's a trade between being able to spank tiny or huge targets. Too much overlap IMO though - the core differences are precision heavy vs fury cruise, the rest are as close as makes no odds (to my eyes)
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#105 - 2013-10-07 19:33:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Lloyd Roses
Garviel Tarrant wrote:


[...]
RLML's are like if you could use small railguns on a thorax with an increased rate of fire and full dps bonuses. Except lml's are overpowered.

If you want to do a cerb vs cerb comparison i suggest you try doing a dps comparison between two cerbs fighting while running mwd. One with HML's and the other with rlml's.

Now try adding links.

Now try to see how they would do against a small frigate gang.

The entire premise of your argument is false.



Just to put your argument into relations:

a light-missile / rangerigged hawk using lights reaches out to some 60-70km using lights? For very decent, delayed 160ish dps (very optimistic), while a railhrapy tops that by 35km, and only loses 40dps in comparison. Spiketracking at 80-100km is very acceptable.

The one thing that LMLs are good at is *kiting*. Fin, nothing more. They suck hard on the dps side compared to rockets, and there is like 5 ships you can fit light missiles to:
talwar, hawk, condor, (kestrel), hookbill. The other missile ships (breacher, corax, *worm*, and whatever else got misssile highs) are such crap when not using rockets, either due to fittings or lacking sufficient bonus, that those five should suffice to do any LML comparison. The Corax is just plain bad, though I heard some people got kills with it against thrashers. Out of experience, those thrasher pilots should be burned and never mentioned again.
Talwar is a gangship. Hawk is smallgang at best. Condor is dangerous for its tackling/ewar/mobility, but you gotta be joking telling us that LMLs are an actual threat. The fact that you can't run and that it will kill you eventually though is problematic. I do not know what a kestrel does, besides dying. Never saw it doing anything but dying. It's the caldari-rifter, I'm unconcerned. The hookbill used to be flown with LMLs a lot, but I rarely see any of those that don't use rockets anymore. Maybe the 8/15-hookbill pilot found out that since some patches ago (ewar shift), buying a 200mil hookbill isn't always a victory against anything anymore.

__________
And now to go on to rapid heavies versus cruise/torps, and my expectations ♥

The base DPS of rapid heavies is around 60% beyond regular heavies. So an unbonused rapid heavy launcher would roughly be 54dps each at all V using navy, which is around the same as cruise missiles do right now. RHML also care less about the hostile velocity, by around 50%. Their sig resolution is three times better compared to torps, 2.5times to cruises. So their advantage appears massive, at the cost of only range. Since their raw damage is near identical, below a simulation of RHML and cruises (one launcher each, RHML by fitting a HML to a tengu and loading navy scourge, is just like a RHML, just the range accidentaly extended)
Shooting an interceptor http://puu.sh/4KaNx.png , with mwd http://puu.sh/4KaQf.png // both apply no damage whatsoever.
Shooting a HAC http://puu.sh/4KaSo.png , with mwd http://puu.sh/4KaTx.png // RHML soooo stronk at shorter ranges
Shooting a Battleship http://puu.sh/4KaZl.png // finally, cruises are on par
Please note that the range is wrongly indicated and shows like twice of what heavies actually have.

Judging just from that, the RHML seems slightly to strong. It can shoot back at near skirmishranges (less than 70), got miraculous application even compared to the cruises that already are considered *fine*. Worst thing is that you will not get anything out of cruises unless you're straight further away than 70k, which is where cruises got any raison d'être at all.

I doubt that this current RHML does the game that much good, they just seem to obsolete cruises, which obsoleted torps for a large part. With the introduction of these, battleship sized missiles might even be split into RHML (pvp), cruises (pve, blobfleet F1-pvp) and torps (structure shooting and weird ways of running anoms/L4s).

Assuming that those stats I took aren't miscalculated massively, RHMLs seem to be a very bad idea. When comparing rapid lights to HAMs, the discrepancy is some 50-60%, not 35% like for those, comparing RHML to torps. // For the record, the comparison of 7.45s to 12s RoF yielded those 61% extradps.
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
#106 - 2013-10-07 19:51:33 UTC
Can we please fit these to stealth bombers? Please?

I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.

Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#107 - 2013-10-07 19:53:27 UTC
Streya Jormagdnir wrote:
Can we please fit these to stealth bombers? Please?


You are dirty. I wanted the same though, but kept quiet.

We'd also be totally satisfied with just cruises :D
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#108 - 2013-10-07 20:01:15 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:


[...]
RLML's are like if you could use small railguns on a thorax with an increased rate of fire and full dps bonuses. Except lml's are overpowered.

If you want to do a cerb vs cerb comparison i suggest you try doing a dps comparison between two cerbs fighting while running mwd. One with HML's and the other with rlml's.

Now try adding links.

Now try to see how they would do against a small frigate gang.

The entire premise of your argument is false.



Just to put your argument into relations:

a light-missile / rangerigged hawk using lights reaches out to some 60-70km using lights? For very decent, delayed 160ish dps (very optimistic), while a railhrapy tops that by 35km, and only loses 40dps in comparison. Spiketracking at 80-100km is very acceptable.

The one thing that LMLs are good at is *kiting*. Fin, nothing more. They suck hard on the dps side compared to rockets, and there is like 5 ships you can fit light missiles to:
talwar, hawk, condor, (kestrel), hookbill. The other missile ships (breacher, corax, *worm*, and whatever else got misssile highs) are such crap when not using rockets, either due to fittings or lacking sufficient bonus, that those five should suffice to do any LML comparison. The Corax is just plain bad, though I heard some people got kills with it against thrashers. Out of experience, those thrasher pilots should be burned and never mentioned again.
Talwar is a gangship. Hawk is smallgang at best. Condor is dangerous for its tackling/ewar/mobility, but you gotta be joking telling us that LMLs are an actual threat. The fact that you can't run and that it will kill you eventually though is problematic. I do not know what a kestrel does, besides dying. Never saw it doing anything but dying. It's the caldari-rifter, I'm unconcerned. The hookbill used to be flown with LMLs a lot, but I rarely see any of those that don't use rockets anymore. Maybe the 8/15-hookbill pilot found out that since some patches ago (ewar shift), buying a 200mil hookbill isn't always a victory against anything anymore.


The hookbill isn't used for lml stuff because its fittings make it very hard and it isn't significantly better than a condor/kestrel.

And yes, lml's lose in dps to rockets.. I don't see your point there.

As for the rail harpy vs lml hawk is a double range bonus vs a single range bonus. The biggest difference is application. Compared to other long range small weapons lml's apply very well and require absolutely minimal skill to apply (Since you don't have to worry about your tracking)

The rail harpy vs lml hawk is the closest comparison you're going to get with lml's vs other long range weapons. Try any t1 frig or faction. A comet can be made pretty decent but thats largely because of drones. Did i mention that lml's also have pretty damn good alpha?

lml's are by far the best long range small weapon system by far. RLML's are just silly because they basically turn cruisers into oversized destroyers... that also happen to have more speed than destroyers.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Miasmos
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#109 - 2013-10-07 20:26:25 UTC
Looks to me like HMs will be getting a buff to put them in line with long range medium weaponry. After that happens, RHMLs would be pretty good. If CCP plans on buffing HM damage, the RHML stats make perfect sense.

The PVE theorycrafting could prehaps include a Bay Loading Accelerator II - 2x Flare setup in the relevant battleships.
The PVE theorycrafting could prehaps include a FOF setup just to see how much dps you can pull off an afk setup made to apply the damage evenly on different target sizes. Even 500 decently applied dps might prove useful under the right circumstances.
The PVP theorycrafting could prehaps include precision alpha battleships. Would RLMLs be just better vs. frig-dest-cruiser?
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#110 - 2013-10-07 20:28:33 UTC
Reading over 6 pages, I don't see an argument for why other BS damage application bonuses should apply. RHMLs fire heavy missiles, which are innately balanced around hitting a cruiser-sized (or larger) target. Thus, the missile's base explosion velocity and signature radius (modified by skills) are balanced around hitting those sized targets. RHMLs are being introduced to give battleships a cruiser-sized weapon system so they can have some defense vs. a cruiser or BC, since their missile systems are sized to attack other battleships, with slower overall velocities and larger signatures.

Buffing a heavy missile's base explosion velocity and signature radius would make it overpowered vs cruisers or BCs, which would overbuff the RHMLs by bumping the dps being provided by RoF bonuses. There really doesn't need to be more bonuses being provided, and I'm sure the adoption of the RoF bonus is simply to give those battleships an edge (where the others get tank/gank supplemental bonuses).

Also, since there are more than a few comparisons of which battleships receive no bonus to RHMLs as a result of only allowing rate of fire bonuses to be included, just have a look at missile cruisers and how many of them don't have a bonus for RLMLs. Just the Caracal stands out in the T1 lineup from all available missile cruisers (and BCs) that *can* fit missiles and yet don't have a bonus for RLMLs. Anyone complain that Drake's don't have a bonus for RLMLs or that application bonuses don't apply?

RLMLs are fine. They'll be a great "wildcard" addition for missile BSs.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#111 - 2013-10-07 20:40:52 UTC
surely being able to have heavy missiles getting 180 explosion radius on T2 furies is OP????????

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Hideyoshi Kinoshita
Perkone
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-10-07 20:40:58 UTC
Where is Meta 3 RHML?

and Shaqil's RHML is a bit weird as I do not know Shaqil has Officer Torp or Cruise missile Launchers now.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#113 - 2013-10-07 20:42:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
So how good will these be? Like will there be any reason to use "cruise missiles" instead of these?

EDIT: Also rapid light missile launchers ARE NOT overpowered. The weapon system has been in game FOREVER. The rapid missile launcher-Caracal has been used in game forever as a anti-frigate platform.

The issues surrounding light missile-Frigates is something else. The Condor for example has an EASY TIME fitting electronic warfare modules and what not. NERFING powergrid and CPU would be a good way to remove that issue. Have no idea why it's easier to fit a Condor than a Hookbill...

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#114 - 2013-10-07 20:56:31 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
So how good will these be? Like will there be any reason to use "cruise missiles" instead of these?

EDIT: Also rapid light missile launchers ARE NOT overpowered. The weapon system has been in game FOREVER. The rapid missile launcher-Caracal has been used in game forever as a anti-frigate platform.

The issues surrounding light missile-Frigates is something else. The Condor for example has an EASY TIME fitting electronic warfare modules and what not. NERFING powergrid and CPU would be a good way to remove that issue. Have no idea why it's easier to fit a Condor than a Hookbill...


The Caracal isn't what it used to be mate.

Also in case you didn't know lml's got buffed.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Kane Fenris
NWP
#115 - 2013-10-07 21:02:50 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Reading over 6 pages, I don't see an argument for why other BS damage application bonuses should apply. RHMLs fire heavy missiles, which are innately balanced around hitting a cruiser-sized (or larger) target. Thus, the missile's base explosion velocity and signature radius (modified by skills) are balanced around hitting those sized targets. RHMLs are being introduced to give battleships a cruiser-sized weapon system so they can have some defense vs. a cruiser or BC, since their missile systems are sized to attack other battleships, with slower overall velocities and larger signatures.

Buffing a heavy missile's base explosion velocity and signature radius would make it overpowered vs cruisers or BCs, which would overbuff the RHMLs by bumping the dps being provided by RoF bonuses. There really doesn't need to be more bonuses being provided, and I'm sure the adoption of the RoF bonus is simply to give those battleships an edge (where the others get tank/gank supplemental bonuses).

Also, since there are more than a few comparisons of which battleships receive no bonus to RHMLs as a result of only allowing rate of fire bonuses to be included, just have a look at missile cruisers and how many of them don't have a bonus for RLMLs. Just the Caracal stands out in the T1 lineup from all available missile cruisers (and BCs) that *can* fit missiles and yet don't have a bonus for RLMLs. Anyone complain that Drake's don't have a bonus for RLMLs or that application bonuses don't apply?

RLMLs are fine. They'll be a great "wildcard" addition for missile BSs.


this may be the case but missile velocity (and if there would be such thing flight time) bonuses sould apply cause the arent projection bonuses in terms of sig/speed.
Marc Callan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2013-10-07 21:02:56 UTC
The Meta-3 RHML is the "YO-5000".

And it looks like, as with the RLML, it just needs the skill set for standard heavy launchers (plus Missile Launcher Operation III) for T1, and Heavy Missile Specialization for the T2 unit.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." - Kurt Vonnegurt
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#117 - 2013-10-07 21:17:56 UTC
it would be better if instead of just usual meta tiers we could actually get a more role based system of mods like the ships have gotten.

meta 0 - base mod lowest skill requirement and cheapest
meta 1 - slight improvement on meta 0
meta 2 - same as meta 0 but much easier on fittings
meta 3 - best ROF but worst on fittings and slight range penalty
meta 4 - same as meta 0 but with bonuses to missiles explosion velocity
T2 - allows use of T2 missiles requires more fittings than meta 0

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#118 - 2013-10-07 21:26:13 UTC
I'm aware of the changes that were done to light missile launchers. Was it needed? No. However, it wasn't a big deal and wasnt significant. Fleets of light missile Caracals were just as dangerous as they are now. However, there use was NOT as popular as they are now.

Caracals are fine and so is the Rapid light missile launcher-Bellicose; they seem to explode easily enough too.

Also the comparison with Destroyers is pretty stupid. That said. So are cruisers out pacing f*cking destroyers which is ret@ded.

Here's another stupid argument.
AT RANGE A FLEET OF RAIL-THORAX **** FRIGATES = / To reach them you have to go threw a 50km sphere of death..

In fact the rail-Thorax was DOING Ridiculous things like tracking mwding HARPY @ less than 17k because the silly ship is as fast or faster than a Harpy (before the recent changes to rails)... Which meant IT could reduce any tracking issue and had a superiority in range dictation. DId I mention doing NEAR 500 dps up to 30K?

CCP has and is doing MAD ret@rded sh!t but the CAracal, Bellicose and rapid light missile launchers isn't one of them. Except their velocities being too high.

Since the assault frigate changes there has been MORE IMBALANCES IN GAME NO LESS. Some say it started with Strategic cruisers or Tier 3 battlecruisers v0v

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Ranamar
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#119 - 2013-10-07 22:41:44 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
edit:

Forgot to mention something important - Battleships with Damage bonuses (like Raven and Typhoon rate of fire) will have those bonuses applied to the new launchers. Any bonuses to damage projection or application will NOT be applied (such as Raven missile velocity or Typhoon explosion velocity).


Light missile range (for RLML platforms) is bonused on the Caracal. Why isn't heavy missile range bonused for RHML Ravens?

I have no dog in the "RLML is OP" fight because I'd rather HAM-fit my Caracals if I can get away with it, but I'd like some consistency here.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#120 - 2013-10-07 23:30:27 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
Why isn't heavy missile range bonused for RHML Ravens?

That's the million dollar question. While the base specs with full skills aren't bad (62.9km, 105m explosion radius, 121.5m explosion velocity) I was really hoping for a "cruiser killer". I guess a person could run a set of T2 hydraulics and a T2 flare, but it would be nice if they received at least the explosion radius and explosion velocity bonuses and at least a 25% velocity bonus (where applicable). Ideally the velocity bonuses as well to free up the rig slots for shield and armor buffing.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.