These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#241 - 2013-10-11 15:49:04 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
However, missile velocity is something that should definitely be included (Rattlesnake, Raven and Raven Navy Issue). These are all long-range platforms and it somewhat defeats the purpose to relegate them to mid-range setups.


^^ This
Jayne Fillon
#242 - 2013-10-11 16:01:42 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Jayne Fillon wrote:
So there you go. Torps versus big slow things, cruise versus far things, and RHMLs versus close fast and small.

Something seems off in your numbers. I can't see how RHMLs on a Typhoon would outperform cruise missiles by more than a factor of 2 against either type of battleship (AB and MWD). For starters, the explosion radius isn't going to come into effect, the explosion velocity is actually higher with cruise missiles and despite the higher rate of fire with RHMLs heavy missiles do less than half the damage.


On the typhoon the cruise missiles DID our perform RHML against battlecruiser sized targets and larger. With or without prop mod. Not sure if I mistyped or what.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#243 - 2013-10-11 16:09:51 UTC
CCP should remove heavy missiles and cruiser missile all together.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#244 - 2013-10-11 16:45:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Major Killz wrote:
CCP should remove heavy missiles and cruiser missile all together.

Yeah... thanks for playing.

Jayne Fillon wrote:
On the typhoon the cruise missiles DID our perform RHML against battlecruiser sized targets and larger. With or without prop mod. Not sure if I mistyped or what.

I'd be curious to see your spreadsheet with the formulas and how you arrived at the various calculations for each. Any chance you could link it?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Jayne Fillon
#245 - 2013-10-11 16:46:16 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
CCP should remove heavy missiles and cruiser missile all together.


Why not just remove missile launchers entirely, and medium projectile ammo for good measure?

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#246 - 2013-10-11 16:48:28 UTC
Mer88 wrote:
that cant be , once your explosion radius has match the sig radius of the target , any further decrease in exp rad wont increase your damage . I have shot angel BS many times with rage torpedo with 4 tp painted and do 1500 volley damage due to its speed was over 200m/s.

Don't know about you, but the third case of the missile damage formula says it clearly : (target signature / explo radius) * (explosion velocity / target velocity) ^(thing)

If signature of target is higher than explosion radius, then speed matter, but sig still matter too, and it matter as much as velocity.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#247 - 2013-10-11 17:21:57 UTC
Unless I'm mistaken, explosion radius only comes into play if the target's signature radius is smaller. If that's the case, it means we're primarily looking at explosion velocity as the determining factor.

Using a RNI and a target of a AB Cruiser (signature 175m) as an example, it would seem that compared to heavy missiles cruise missiles have 5% less explosion radius effect (185.63m vs. 105m), 17% less explosion velocity (103.5 m/s vs. 121.5 m/s) but yield approximately 20% more damage (when rate of fire is taken into account). I'm not sure how that works out to twice as effective. I can see RHMLs being marginally more effective, but not completely eclipsing cruise missiles. Especially considering that with the Typhoon cruise outperform RHMLs in instances where the signature radius exceeds that for cruise missiles.

I'm not disagreeing with the overall assessment, it just seems disproportionately weighted towards RHMLs for anything with a signature radius higher than an AB Cruiser. A casual glance would seem to suggest that cruise missiles and torpedoes would actually outstrip RHMLs for applied damage.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#248 - 2013-10-11 17:35:17 UTC
Quote:
A casual glance would seem to suggest that cruise missiles and torpedoes would actually outstrip RHMLs for applied damage.


Cruise, yes. Torps, definitely not. Mostly because Tops have such severe requirement for their damage application to reach maximum.

TMC had a really good article about it.

http://themittani.com/features/rapid-heavy-missile-launcher-analysis?page=0%2C3

The gist of it is that Torps are only remotely worth it under extremely ideal conditions, basically structure shooting. And the range tradeoff is quite simply not worth it. (because seriously, who does 10km brawls in battleship combat?)

Cruise still have their niche, extremely long range. Torps have now lost theirs, RHMLs have it now.

What's more, in less than ideal conditions under 30km range, RHMLs > all.

While I am all for having rules apply equally across the board, if these start getting velocity or travel time bonuses from their parent ships, they will, plain and simple, outstrip torps and cruise for all but extreme long range combat.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#249 - 2013-10-11 17:46:00 UTC
On a phone so forgive me for not checking, are these BS with rhml not putting out the same DPS as the (now rare) HML tengu? Aren't those a bit unused now because .... Terrible?
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#250 - 2013-10-11 18:32:06 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Unless I'm mistaken, explosion radius only comes into play if the target's signature radius is smaller. If that's the case, it means we're primarily looking at explosion velocity as the determining factor.


I'm afraid you are mistaken. Explosion radius matters if it is both larger and smaller than sig radius.

If explosion radius is bigger than target sig, then max % damage is equal to [sig]/[explosion radius]. This is a hard cap and can only be countered by fiddling with sig or explosion radius figures.

If explosion radius is smaller than target sig, then the quotient of [sig]/[explosion radius] acts as a multiplier to missile explosion velocity, allowing a missile to deal full damage even if its target is exceeding its explosion velocity. This means that a target that experiences 5x increases to sig and speed - such as by activating MWD - can receive the same damage as when MWD was off, assuming that the hard cap of [sig]/[explosion radius] is not in effect.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#251 - 2013-10-11 18:34:53 UTC
Some real world numbers... I ran a Tengu outfitted with a single cruise and heavy missile launcher against the following targets (Caldari Navy Mjolnir ammunition, so no bonuses):

i. AB Caracal (145m signature, 525 m/s)
ii. MWD Caracal (870m signature, 1515 m/s)
iii. AB Ferox (345m signature, 346 m/s)
iv. MWD Ferox (2070m signature, 961 m/s)

Here were the results:

• Heavy missile ... AB Caracal, 88 damage (142 adjusted damage)
• Heavy missile ... MWD Caracal, 150 damage (242 adjusted damage)
• Cruise missile ... AB Caracal, 72 damage
• Cruise missile ... MWD Caracal, 141 damage

• Heavy missile ... AB Ferox, 184 damage (297 adjusted damage)
• Heavy missile ... MWD Ferox, 184 damage (297 adjusted damage)
• Cruise missile ... AB Ferox, 194 damage
• Cruise missile ... MWD Ferox, 402 damage

Summary:

i. AB Caracal ... RHML, 97.2% more effective
ii. MWD Caracal ... RHML, 71.6% more effective
iii. AB Ferox ... RHML, 53.1% more effective
iv. MWD Ferox ... Cruise, 35.4% more effective

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#252 - 2013-10-11 18:40:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Gypsio III wrote:
[If explosion radius is smaller than target sig, then the quotient of [sig]/[explosion radius] acts as a multiplier to missile explosion velocity, allowing a missile to deal full damage even if its target is exceeding its explosion velocity. This means that a target that experiences 5x increases to sig and speed - such as by activating MWD - can receive the same damage as when MWD was off, assuming that the hard cap of [sig]/[explosion radius] is not in effect.

Very interesting. Appreciate the clarification, thanks. So would rigors then be more effective than flares? (since it's unlikely you'll exceed a target's velocity with explosion velocity alone)

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Iome Ambraelle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#253 - 2013-10-11 18:48:29 UTC
It really all comes down to tackle. If you have 1 x 60% web applied to target and 3 TP (2 if hull bonused for explosion radius) RHML only out performs Cruise on Destroyers and below with a close race if the cruiser/hac is AB. If you have full tackle 2 x 60% webs applied and even a single TP you wind up with about the same scenario (RHML are still even or slightly better on AB targets). Cruise still outperforms RHML at the BC level if you even bring a single TP or 1 web.

So basically, if you are solo, RHML will probably be more effective in the majority of engagements you find yourself in. However, if you fit tackle or bring a friend that can provide tackle Cruise is the better option.

Shield Tanking - Why armor tanking can't have nice things.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#254 - 2013-10-11 19:09:56 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Some real world numbers... I ran a Tengu outfitted with a single cruise and heavy missile launcher against the following targets (Caldari Navy Mjolnir ammunition, so no bonuses):

i. AB Caracal (145m signature, 525 m/s)
ii. MWD Caracal (870m signature, 1515 m/s)
iii. AB Ferox (345m signature, 346 m/s)
iv. MWD Ferox (2070m signature, 961 m/s)

Here were the results:

• Heavy missile ... AB Caracal, 88 damage (142 adjusted damage)
• Heavy missile ... MWD Caracal, 150 damage (242 adjusted damage)
• Cruise missile ... AB Caracal, 72 damage
• Cruise missile ... MWD Caracal, 141 damage

• Heavy missile ... AB Ferox, 184 damage (297 adjusted damage)
• Heavy missile ... MWD Ferox, 184 damage (297 adjusted damage)
• Cruise missile ... AB Ferox, 194 damage
• Cruise missile ... MWD Ferox, 402 damage

Summary:

i. AB Caracal ... RHML, 97.2% more effective
ii. MWD Caracal ... RHML, 71.6% more effective
iii. AB Ferox ... RHML, 53.1% more effective
iv. MWD Ferox ... Cruise, 35.4% more effective


What happens with precision cruise in the tubes?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#255 - 2013-10-11 19:21:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
What happens with precision cruise in the tubes?

I didn't test precision cruise (I don't have Cruise-V), but they have a 10% smaller signature and the same explosion velocity as faction heavies. So I imagine they'd fare 25-33% better overall. Without any missile velocity bonus I can't see using precision heavies for anything other than frigate defense, but I suspect they'd be quite effective.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
unidenify
Deaf Armada
#256 - 2013-10-11 21:28:20 UTC
hate when people start to compare specific ships for RHML/CM/TM yet left SNI out (SNI's bonus do apply to both CM/RHML)

anyway, I am too lazy to do deep math, and here is my dps for Navy Scorpion in test server
BS V
Heavy IV (I will add 5% to damage so it act as Level V)
Cruise V
6x Meta 4 Launcher for both CML and RHML
3 Caldari BCS + 1 BCS II
My SNI have 2 Rigor I and 1 Flare I

RoF
RHML: 3.07 sec
CML: 6.83 sec

Damage
RHML: 1728 (based on EFT)
CML: 4710

DPS
RHML: 562.86
CML: 689.6

Missile Stat
RHML Faction Caldari
Explosive Velocity: 143.9m/s
Explosive Radius: 83m
Velocity: 6,643.5 m/s
Flight time: 9.75 sec
Range: 64,774 m

CML Faction Caldari
Explosive Velocity: 122.59 m/s
Explosive Radius: 196m
Velocity: 7,261.5m
Flight time: 21 sec
Range: 152,491.5 m

one thing that concern me is heavy missile's velocity. why it is slower than Cruise?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#257 - 2013-10-11 21:46:55 UTC
unidenify wrote:
hate when people start to compare specific ships for RHML/CM/TM yet left SNI out (SNI's bonus do apply to both CM/RHML)... one thing that concern me is heavy missile's velocity. why it is slower than Cruise?

That's because the damage is effectively the same between the RNI and SNI. The velocity on heavy missiles is what it is (most cruiser and battlecruiser classes bonus it).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#258 - 2013-10-11 23:08:11 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Very interesting. Appreciate the clarification, thanks. So would rigors then be more effective than flares? (since it's unlikely you'll exceed a target's velocity with explosion velocity alone)


Yep rigours are superior to flares, and IIRC it's reflected in their calibration costs, although that might just be a CCP coincidence. The -15% to explosion radius from a rigour benefits you in all situations where you're not doing full damage, and a large enough bonus to explosion radius will enable any missile to do full damage to any target, regardless of its speed... although clearly in the case of a citadel torpedo hitting a Dramiel it'd have to be a pretty hefty bonus. Lol

In contrast, a bonus to explosion velocity has no influence upon the hard cap of [sig]/[explosion radius]. In the case of the citadel torpedo and the Dramiel, no matter what explosion velocity you assign to the torp, it will never do full damage to the Dramiel, it'll max out at the hard cap of [sig]/[explosion radius], something like 40/1500, 2.7%.

I think there's also a mathematical thingy where a 15% bonus to explosion radius is superior to a 15% bonus to explosion velocity, because the former involves division by 0.85, while the latter involves multiplication by 1.15, with the former giving a bigger bonus - think of the superiority of a 5% ROF bonus over a 5% damage one.
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition
#259 - 2013-10-12 00:49:00 UTC
So, the part where there isn't a hull in the Tier 3 BC class that can use Missiles... About that.

I'd love an oversized AML caracal. Maybe they had this on the drawing board, and is the actual reason for Naga flipping weapon systems?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#260 - 2013-10-12 01:12:11 UTC
TekGnosis wrote:
So, the part where there isn't a hull in the Tier 3 BC class that can use Missiles... About that.
I'd love an oversized AML caracal. Maybe they had this on the drawing board, and is the actual reason for Naga flipping weapon systems?

What about just retrofitting the Naga for large missiles? I'm sure no one would object... Lol

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