These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#321 - 2013-10-17 01:29:57 UTC
Well, some of us enjoy running missile fits. So here's hoping...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#322 - 2013-10-17 04:58:49 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Well, some of us enjoy running missile fits. So here's hoping...

Oh I greatly enjoy it, but by now I know better than to get my hopes up.
Anthar Thebess
#323 - 2013-10-18 06:46:43 UTC
When we get multi-barrel med variant of railguns for Rokh?

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Katabrok First
Apukaray Security
#324 - 2013-10-18 14:23:14 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
When we get multi-barrel med variant of railguns for Rokh?

Like the dual 250 rails?
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#325 - 2013-10-18 14:33:26 UTC
Katabrok First wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:
When we get multi-barrel med variant of railguns for Rokh?

Like the dual 250 rails?


quite there are no medium bonused guns for battleships... RHML's are the wrong approach to adding a better tracking easier fitting missile option

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
XvXTeacherVxV
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#326 - 2013-10-18 19:13:43 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Katabrok First wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:
When we get multi-barrel med variant of railguns for Rokh?

Like the dual 250 rails?


quite there are no medium bonused guns for battleships... RHML's are the wrong approach to adding a better tracking easier fitting missile option


I think I agree. I'm wondering if it'd be better to kill the rapid missile series altogether, and then add tracking enhancers/computers for missiles instead.


I dream of a world where CCP:

- Removes rapid light missile launchers.
- Lets defender missiles switch to target drones in the absence of missiles to hit.
- Adds missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers.
- Changes tracking disruptors to also affect missile launchers
- and add two scripts just for disrupting missiles.

Come join me guys, it's beautiful here.
Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#327 - 2013-10-19 00:23:34 UTC
Sorry, but screw that. There are lots of inherent drawbacks with missiles already (you can always spot the gunnery folk).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Anthar Thebess
#328 - 2013-10-20 11:05:42 UTC
Introduce new ammo for cruise/torpedo launchers not next weapon systems.
Sell them in NPC stations.
If it will be OK . Seed the BPO.
If it will be OP - stop seeding the ammo.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#329 - 2013-10-20 23:01:10 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Introduce new ammo for cruise/torpedo launchers...

You had me up until this point. Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#330 - 2013-10-20 23:36:34 UTC
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Katabrok First wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:
When we get multi-barrel med variant of railguns for Rokh?

Like the dual 250 rails?


quite there are no medium bonused guns for battleships... RHML's are the wrong approach to adding a better tracking easier fitting missile option


I think I agree. I'm wondering if it'd be better to kill the rapid missile series altogether, and then add tracking enhancers/computers for missiles instead.


I dream of a world where CCP:

- Removes rapid light missile launchers.
- Lets defender missiles switch to target drones in the absence of missiles to hit.
- Adds missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers.
- Changes tracking disruptors to also affect missile launchers
- and add two scripts just for disrupting missiles.

Come join me guys, it's beautiful here.


No. Just no. Missiles already suck at pvp. Your suggestion would cause nobody to use them. Target speed and sig radius reduce the damage missiles cause already, not to mention that damage is not applied instantly as with turrets. Adding missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers would not work as most missile boats do not have a lot of low slots. Not to mention missiles were nerfed already last year.

The only thing missiles do have going for them right now is that they will always hit if the target is in range, even though that damage will be reduced by targets speed and sig radius. RMLs, LMLs, and rockets are about the only worthwhile missile platform worth using currently. I personally can't wait for RHMLs as it will make missile BS somewhat usable in pvp again, besides being relagated to a structure bashing platform.
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#331 - 2013-10-20 23:55:23 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
If you have questions or feedback let us know and I'll do my best to answer.

What's the ammunition capacity on these? And...
Can we get at least a partial missile velocity bonus (like 2.5% per level for heavy missiles)

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#332 - 2013-10-21 09:33:15 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Introduce new ammo for cruise/torpedo launchers not next weapon systems.
Sell them in NPC stations.
If it will be OK . Seed the BPO.
If it will be OP - stop seeding the ammo.



Like, for example, faction FOF missiles ? Once upon time you could get faction fof missiles from LP stores and at some point that stopped. They have not been reintroduced anywhere as far as I'm aware. Which is a pity as I noticed recently that (and let me add that I'm pleasantly surprised) after more than 8 years of complaining about it the FOF have been fixed and no longer attacks structures.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Arcos Vandymion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#333 - 2013-10-21 12:19:44 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

That the same kind of continuity CCP has avoided like the plague when it comes to pulse lasers?


God, lasers make me so autistic. We have small focused lasers, and focused medium lasers, and we have both light lasers and small lasers. I don't remember which CCP guy thought this was a good idea. We also have pulse energy beams.


Confirming that the entire laser naming scheme is a bane to good grammar and to noobs trying to figure out what to fit.

[Edit: Oh, and the word "maser" is ****ing stupid.


Hm ya right.

On topic: Missiles - yawn
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#334 - 2013-10-21 13:29:03 UTC
Carniflex wrote:
...the FOF have been fixed and no longer attacks structures.

Not entirely... they still attack the occasional structure.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
XvXTeacherVxV
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#335 - 2013-10-21 17:51:02 UTC  |  Edited by: XvXTeacherVxV
Estella Osoka wrote:


No. Just no. Missiles already suck at pvp. Your suggestion would cause nobody to use them. Target speed and sig radius reduce the damage missiles cause already, not to mention that damage is not applied instantly as with turrets. Adding missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers would not work as most missile boats do not have a lot of low slots. Not to mention missiles were nerfed already last year.

The only thing missiles do have going for them right now is that they will always hit if the target is in range, even though that damage will be reduced by targets speed and sig radius. RMLs, LMLs, and rockets are about the only worthwhile missile platform worth using currently. I personally can't wait for RHMLs as it will make missile BS somewhat usable in pvp again, besides being relagated to a structure bashing platform.



There's a lot of disparate thoughts in this post, so I'll address each of them by point:

"Missiles already suck at pvp."
False. Some missile systems are great, others not so much, but lots of them have very relevant pvp uses. 100mn tengus are great, RLML Caracals are great, even cruise ravens are nothing to sneer at anymore. Talwar fleets are an amazing combination of stupid, powerful and easy. Not every missile ship is amazing, but generalizations like this just make you look misinformed.

"Adding missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers would not work as most missile boats do not have a lot of low slots."
Tracking computers fit in mid slots. Beyond that, yeah, you'd have to make some choices but the point is you'd have the option instead of now where you don't.

"Target speed and sig radius reduce the damage missiles cause already, not to mention that damage is not applied instantly as with turrets."
"The only thing missiles do have going for them right now is that they will always hit if the target is in range, even though that damage will be reduced by targets speed and sig radius."
If only there was some kind of mod to help with this... someone should suggest a mod like that.

EDIT: I think it's strange that CCP spent time developing this mod that nobody (that I know of, which means they don't exist) asked for instead of polishing up things we HAVE asked for like TEs/TCs/TDs that affect missiles, or that high slot target painter my low-sec bomber desperately needs.
Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#336 - 2013-10-22 07:48:29 UTC
What happens in Vegas... stays in Vegas. Any chance for an update?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#337 - 2013-10-22 13:19:07 UTC
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:
Estella Osoka wrote:


No. Just no. Missiles already suck at pvp. Your suggestion would cause nobody to use them. Target speed and sig radius reduce the damage missiles cause already, not to mention that damage is not applied instantly as with turrets. Adding missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers would not work as most missile boats do not have a lot of low slots. Not to mention missiles were nerfed already last year.

The only thing missiles do have going for them right now is that they will always hit if the target is in range, even though that damage will be reduced by targets speed and sig radius. RMLs, LMLs, and rockets are about the only worthwhile missile platform worth using currently. I personally can't wait for RHMLs as it will make missile BS somewhat usable in pvp again, besides being relagated to a structure bashing platform.



There's a lot of disparate thoughts in this post, so I'll address each of them by point:

"Missiles already suck at pvp."
False. Some missile systems are great, others not so much, but lots of them have very relevant pvp uses. 100mn tengus are great, RLML Caracals are great, even cruise ravens are nothing to sneer at anymore. Talwar fleets are an amazing combination of stupid, powerful and easy. Not every missile ship is amazing, but generalizations like this just make you look misinformed.

"Adding missile equivalents of tracking enhancers and tracking computers would not work as most missile boats do not have a lot of low slots."
Tracking computers fit in mid slots. Beyond that, yeah, you'd have to make some choices but the point is you'd have the option instead of now where you don't.

"Target speed and sig radius reduce the damage missiles cause already, not to mention that damage is not applied instantly as with turrets."
"The only thing missiles do have going for them right now is that they will always hit if the target is in range, even though that damage will be reduced by targets speed and sig radius."
If only there was some kind of mod to help with this... someone should suggest a mod like that.

EDIT: I think it's strange that CCP spent time developing this mod that nobody (that I know of, which means they don't exist) asked for instead of polishing up things we HAVE asked for like TEs/TCs/TDs that affect missiles, or that high slot target painter my low-sec bomber desperately needs.


That would be homogenization.. THat is not always nice. THen missiles just become same as guns (or almost).

MIssiles are already among th e best PVP weapons, for the ones that fight outnumbered at least and like to use the brain.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
XvXTeacherVxV
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#338 - 2013-10-22 17:23:40 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


That would be homogenization.. THat is not always nice. THen missiles just become same as guns (or almost).

MIssiles are already among th e best PVP weapons, for the ones that fight outnumbered at least and like to use the brain.


Here's what it would mean:

- Missile pilots would have the option to trade tank or dps for more range or hitting smaller targets better.
- Tracking disruptor pilots wouldn't be totally useless against missile ships. (Doesn't sound very balanced to me)

If you think that's enough to make missiles just like turrets then I don't think you fully appreciate the differences, i.e.

- Missiles would still do consistent damage to any target in range instead of reduced damage at long range.
- Missiles would still never miss (unless outrun).
- The trajectory and speed of the ship firing the missiles still does not affect the effectiveness of the missiles (something that turret ships have to deal with because of tracking).

Tell me again how missiles would be just like turrets.
Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#339 - 2013-10-22 18:55:23 UTC
Doesn't look like we'll be getting any update re: some of the proposed suggestions (damage and rate of fire = yes, missile velocity, explosion radius and explosion velocity = no). Which really sucks for some of the hulls, because there won't be any real advantage to switch to RHMLs unless you're opting for a short-range setup.

I was curious about what the capacity will be, but I'll just have to estimate it at +50%(±) what the heavy version(s) hold.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#340 - 2013-10-22 23:13:25 UTC
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


That would be homogenization.. THat is not always nice. THen missiles just become same as guns (or almost).

MIssiles are already among th e best PVP weapons, for the ones that fight outnumbered at least and like to use the brain.


Here's what it would mean:

- Missile pilots would have the option to trade tank or dps for more range or hitting smaller targets better.
- Tracking disruptor pilots wouldn't be totally useless against missile ships. (Doesn't sound very balanced to me)

If you think that's enough to make missiles just like turrets then I don't think you fully appreciate the differences, i.e.

- Missiles would still do consistent damage to any target in range instead of reduced damage at long range.
- Missiles would still never miss (unless outrun).
- The trajectory and speed of the ship firing the missiles still does not affect the effectiveness of the missiles (something that turret ships have to deal with because of tracking).

Tell me again how missiles would be just like turrets.



Because when you turn the factors that you point in the effective values .. i/e damage per second applied.. their capabilities would be almost same as turrets.


All weapons so only that.. DAMAGE. If at end they tracking and damage mitigation are equivalent and etc etc.. a resultign in same damage per second. THey are the same thing for the majority of any argumentation.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"