These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fixing HAM and HML

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#41 - 2013-11-03 12:27:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Chessur
Major Killz wrote:
Some serious glorification of "ElITE" and "small community" here. More than anything I can't wait till off grid bonuses are removed and limited by a spherical range. I believe 80% of the pilots who now consider themselves "ELITE" will soon (In early 2014) find themselves average at best.


Doubtful, as CCP has already stated that fixing links is going to requite a ton of code rework. Moving links on grid, is a huge boost to blob warfare, and hurts solo / small gang. If links were moved to on grid, small gang pilots would have to waste a real pilot to sit in a ship and burn around on grid doing nothing. This is not conducive to good gameplay.

Quote:
A whole generation of pilots dependent on mechanics surrounding warfare links and strategic cruisers. Players able to engage targets around 40,000m and just orbiting other players in Condors, Caracals, Tier 3 Battlecruisers and near impervious to damage. I must say even flying with said pilots feels dirty. I cannot have a conversation about the current meta and combat dynamics without referenced stats and facts based on bonuses provided by warfare links.


Well new skirmish links push T2 unheated points to 31k. Or around an RF disruptor with out links. Most people flying with links, will be within 31K, or slightly longer than OH unheated T2 point range. I can promise you that clicking the orbit button will get you killed quickly. Manual piloting is the only way to survive vs extreme odds.

Lastly, kiting ships are not impervious to damage. I can promise you that there are many gangs out there that can hurt a ship MWD'ing at 30ish K quite badly. I don't understand why you feel dirty, flying with such pilots- everyone has it in their power to go to the character bazzar, and get a link alt- or to train one up. It is normal game mechanics. Do you also feel dirty if someone in your gang has a 90% web? Or what about a long range neut?[/quote]

Quote:
Which is one of the reasons I TRY NOT TO interact with established characters/entities that consider themselves "ELITE" at all or at least to seriously. Which is also hard because I have so many ingame friends within said entities. The other main reason is it's more challenging leading or flying with less experienced and skilled pilots against more experienced and skilled pilots.


So most of your friends are 'elite PvPers' but you feel dirty, and smack the on eve-o forums? Its more challenging flying with retards than good people? I can understand if you like herding cats, but if you take a small gang of people and go and find a proper fight (local at 250+, fleet outnumbered 5/10 v1, they have more logi / ecm in their fleet than you do fleet members) I promise you that will be more challenging than just about anything else in eve.

Quote:

[b]Anyway

HML ARE FINE. Heavy missiles have have a good place in PVE and in large scale engagements (6 - 200). I use a Tengu with heavy missiles for exploration (combat sites) and missions (sisters of Eve).


We are not talking about PvE. PvE is pointless to talk about, and was not a part of this discussion. Large scale engagements are a poor measuring stick for a weapon system. no tank, LmL talwards, sniper corms, are all horrible small gang and solo sihps- yet are used in a fleet. HMLs only work in a fleet because as I have stated before, you have recons to help with application.

Quote:
The last time I used heavy missiles in combat was on a Navy Caracal solo (had a good run) and CFC blob (early Delve deployment and Fountain campaign with Caracals).Ofc I still know "ELITE" pilots who are still using HML-Drakes (Drake blobs are still serious business) successfully but with off grid bonuses of course. HAMS ARE ALSO FINE. They work and hit what they're suppose and do good damage to what they're not suppose to provided a stasis webifier is applied of course


CNI is horrible, and even when HML fit will do less dps to most everything when compared to RLML. So this is not helping your case in the least.

I can promise you, that if someone is still using an HML drake- they are in no way 'elite' and have fallen off the wagon. The drake is a horrible PvP ship, and should not be flown.


Considering that HAM"s are relegated to 'get a web on it, or else' I consider it a very horrible cruiser weapon system. HAM's should be able to apply full damage to cruisers with out using a web. Currently, the damage they provide when compared to RLML's is atrocious. This makes them not 'fine', because the only cruiser based missile system in the game is RLML. This type of one dimensional play style leads to stagnation and boredom.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#42 - 2013-11-03 12:34:04 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Chessur wrote:
Mnemosyne Gloob wrote:
Chessur wrote:
Of course, but the vast majority (of the very small community that is elite PvP) do not.


That's the same argument the tengu pilots used when HML got toned down. And the same argument you see cropping up when changes to how links will work are discussed. Sure i find those videos nice to look at and fun to watch, but they are rare cases and as you just said it's a very small community. Should balance work be done towards the minority?


Balance. A word thrown around in a sandbox MMO, as if eve could some how be balanced. A small minority of eve players have taken PvP to an art form. They are students of the game, and have constantly tried to improve their PvP knowhow over years of practice. The use every single advantage available to them. along with good situational awareness and piloting skill to post amazing kills and fights.

The thing is, every single thing they are doing, are available to everyone else. If you take an average line member pilot and give them my links, my implants, my drugs and my cerb with fittings- they still couldn't do what I do, and there is no way they could engage what I fight.

It is really funny to me, that such a small minority of pilots can cause such a uproar within the community at large and force all of these balance changes. People refuse to belive that they are bad, and were just flat out played. It must be some game breaking mechanic, why a single tengu killed their 30 man fleet- certainly not their incompitance.

I belive that is the main problem, but if we really want to talk balance, then why are we worried about the minority here? I rarely if ever see deadspace 100MN dual linked, snaked and crashed tengus flying around. What about all of the null blocs use of ships and fleet comps? What rule of measurement do you want to use to determine balance? Is it the current FOTM ship / fleet? What was used in the AT? Or what was said recently by a goon senior FC?

Take away the links against another pilot with a single account and you'll likely get owned. You're winning primarily because you're using skirmish links and for no other reason. If you're so amazingly great, drop the links and show us how you do ;)


As stated in my other post, i go on many duo / group roams with people I pick up from random small gang / solo channels. even though they are flying with the exact same links as I am, they still derp their ship way more often. A good player can leverage links to a more successful level than a bad one. Known fact. Links are there to help you push the envelope, and engage things that would normally be out of your ships reach. If you take links away, I can assure you that I could still farm kills just as easily, however I would be forced to run / disengage from more fights as thing escalated. This is because links allow a ship to greatly increase its engagement profile.

What links are not however, is an automatic 'I win' button. People that think this is the case, are still ignorant to the fact that piloting skill comprises 70% of an engagement. This typical links are OP tears, is just what i was talking about a few posts ago: The reason why your kitchen sink **** blob was face stomped by a small gang, was not because of the link factor- it was because of the fact that you were simply outplayed, made poor decisions mid fight, and are **** poor pilots.
Danny John-Peter
Blue Canary
Watch This
#43 - 2013-11-03 13:24:48 UTC
It varies, in small scale engagements tanking links can be a crutch, there is very little one can do to counter them other than kill the link ship which isn't usually not possible.

Skirmish links less so as they obviously still require good piloting to be put to good use.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#44 - 2013-11-03 14:09:50 UTC
Danny John-Peter wrote:
It varies, in small scale engagements tanking links can be a crutch, there is very little one can do to counter them other than kill the link ship which isn't usually not possible.

Skirmish links less so as they obviously still require good piloting to be put to good use.



Well I disagree. I find skirmishing A LOT more challenging without warfare link bonuses. Even dealing with the regular numbers I do without warfare link bonuses.

The other thing is that most pilots that use them think what I do regularly as impossible without bonuses from warfare links. None of these pilots believe you can solo these days without said mechanics. In fact. Anytime I role with them without said mechanics they are bad.

Here's another logical argument from pilots I engage that use them. Many of them know I do not really use an alt with warfare links. So they freely engage and attempt to destroy me because of said advantage. They often taught me in local if they defeat me or I avoid them. I often tend to avoid characters I know to use warfare links. Now, there are sometimes I do have an alt throwing me bonuses for a specific engagement. On the way to and from those engagements I will use the bonuses because v0v

When I use them against those pilots who constantly receive warfare link bonuses. You never hear the end of it. I'm called a pus*y, ****ot, loser and many other nasty things. Now, I tend not to say anything in local when I solo these days, not even GF. Sometimes however, I tend to ask players questions.

So I asked, One of said dude who uses warfare links a lot after I exploded him and he starting saying nasty things about me in local. Why is it ok for you to receive warfare link bonuses and I cannot? Dudes answer was everyone knows You (meaning me) does not use warfare links. So I asked. So, you engaged me because you knew I had no links? Yes. So, if you knew I had no links you wouldnt engage me? Yes, because you're a ****ot...

These are the kinds of people who now believe they're ELITE and or AWESOME solo pilots. The MAJORITY of them well tell you solo is not possible without links or to engage large fleets in a small fleet without links. Yet there are pilots and entities who still do.

You can believe what you want of course. However, I tend to be correct about many things in game. When off grid bonuses are removed from this game. A lot of these players will go back to roaming with falcons, Guardians or another combat character who's cloaked. Links DO make skirmishing A LOT easier. At Least for me v0v and from what I can see from others. It does for them to because they become near inept without links. Even the act of roaming WITH A SCOUT is subject to what they feel as certain death. This is the kind of arguments you hear from NEAR EVERY PILOT WHO USES WARFARE LINKS. No one can tell me different because they make these statements openly anytime it comes up.

I have no issues with dudes rolling with a falcon alt or whatever else. I do not have an issue with off grid bonuses. I use them myself. ESP when leading fleets from 2 - 100 dudes.

Anyway.

Missiles are in a good place and don't need to be touched.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#45 - 2013-11-03 14:39:04 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Also, Drake:

- 400 and 500 damage per second.
- 40 to 60,000m range
- 1850 m/sec (2650 heated); even more with another nanofiber
- 16,000m (heated) stasis webifier range
- 65 to 75,000 effective hitpoints.

Seems just as lame as always. Which is probably why it's still in use. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

Also, I cannot honestly say the pilots who're still using these ships do more innovative things than most ingame. As well as myself. Rail Thorax solo? I did that right after the changes to Thorax. Rail-Deimos solo? Started rocking that 2 years ago. Apparently now Phobia are in the Test Server rolling around in rail-Deimos. Cerberus? I was rolling in said fleets murdering dudes as soon as expansion went live. Rail-Deimos, Rail-Thorax and RLML Cerberus was all I was on about and same with bros. Well, They were on more about Ishtar, Rail-Proteus (cerca 2011), Beam-Harbingers and Eos.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Tetsuo Tsukaya
Perkone
Caldari State
#46 - 2013-11-03 14:39:25 UTC
Chessur wrote:
Mnemosyne Gloob wrote:
Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:
[The amount of damage that is evaded due to links and sig radius reductions is incredibly stupid.


So it's not a problem of missiles, but links? Now we are getting somewhere.

But yeah i know nothing concerning missiles, i will admit that. I am just annoyed by the tone of some people, who paint it such that "kiting is good, everything else is bad" - which is for their playstyle it is that way.

It's the whole 'i'm using links and kiting boats to upengage gangs alone' attitude, which in rare situations might happen, but mostly they will still just gank the poor guy who gets trapped in their extended point range. But maybe everyone should play that way since it is the way to fly spaceships and soon all there will be is condors, krakakals, tengus and whathaveyou staring at each other. :)


Kiting is better than brawling for small gang 100% of the time. To argue against, would simply be illogical.

As for your fallacious viewpoint that all of the 'elite' pvp players using links, implants, drugs, and kiting setups engage solo pilots- you would be sadly mistaken. Look at any of the good PvP organizations. Turn Left, Genos, Hydra, Exodus, The Hatchery, and some of the awsome PvP vids from 'worst player ever' and Gonrin. They are engaging against the odds 99% of the time.

When I take random pilots in the 'bringing solo back' game channel with me to go duo / in gang with me- they are blowm away at the level of PvP you can achive once you are good. Most of them derp and die, when flying- but its always fun and a learning experience. A friend of mine and myself have recently joined FA, and created a special group within the fail alliance- all to help teach and grow their PvP base. We have taken line members, and thrown them into 3v30 fights, with local at 250+ and shown them how to engage.

Just because you are not at this level, doesn't mean that you should smack talk it. Stop making assumptions about a style of PvP you have never experienced or paticipated in. Are there players that only engage in 'dirty' 1v1s when they have dual links, and snakes? Of course, but the vast majority (of the very small community that is elite PvP) do not.

Also as an aside, if you openly admit that you know nothing of missiles- stop trying to speak on the subject. Listen for a change, and stop letting your erroneous belifes and ego get in the way of your development as a pilot.


lol this is so much bullshit. Those corps you mentioned are the absolute worst corps in the entire gang for "solo" with a link alt, to the point that tons of people make a point of not engaging them because they present "1v1" but are the worst abusers of cheesy game mechanics you can find. There are so many groups that actually do promote solo flying and solo pvp but those aren't it.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#47 - 2013-11-03 15:02:54 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Tetsuo Tsukaya wrote:
Chessur wrote:
Mnemosyne Gloob wrote:
Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:
[The amount of damage that is evaded due to links and sig radius reductions is incredibly stupid.


So it's not a problem of missiles, but links? Now we are getting somewhere.

But yeah i know nothing concerning missiles, i will admit that. I am just annoyed by the tone of some people, who paint it such that "kiting is good, everything else is bad" - which is for their playstyle it is that way.

It's the whole 'i'm using links and kiting boats to upengage gangs alone' attitude, which in rare situations might happen, but mostly they will still just gank the poor guy who gets trapped in their extended point range. But maybe everyone should play that way since it is the way to fly spaceships and soon all there will be is condors, krakakals, tengus and whathaveyou staring at each other. :)


Kiting is better than brawling for small gang 100% of the time. To argue against, would simply be illogical.

As for your fallacious viewpoint that all of the 'elite' pvp players using links, implants, drugs, and kiting setups engage solo pilots- you would be sadly mistaken. Look at any of the good PvP organizations. Turn Left, Genos, Hydra, Exodus, The Hatchery, and some of the awsome PvP vids from 'worst player ever' and Gonrin. They are engaging against the odds 99% of the time.

When I take random pilots in the 'bringing solo back' game channel with me to go duo / in gang with me- they are blowm away at the level of PvP you can achive once you are good. Most of them derp and die, when flying- but its always fun and a learning experience. A friend of mine and myself have recently joined FA, and created a special group within the fail alliance- all to help teach and grow their PvP base. We have taken line members, and thrown them into 3v30 fights, with local at 250+ and shown them how to engage.

Just because you are not at this level, doesn't mean that you should smack talk it. Stop making assumptions about a style of PvP you have never experienced or paticipated in. Are there players that only engage in 'dirty' 1v1s when they have dual links, and snakes? Of course, but the vast majority (of the very small community that is elite PvP) do not.

Also as an aside, if you openly admit that you know nothing of missiles- stop trying to speak on the subject. Listen for a change, and stop letting your erroneous belifes and ego get in the way of your development as a pilot.


lol this is so much bullshit. Those corps you mentioned are the absolute worst corps in the entire gang for "solo" with a link alt, to the point that tons of people make a point of not engaging them because they present "1v1" but are the worst abusers of cheesy game mechanics you can find. There are so many groups that actually do promote solo flying and solo pvp but those aren't it.


Yet those people, along with pandemic legion are the people consistently winning AT's. And while I will admit that AT"s are not a direct representation of 'in game' PvP, there are many simmilaritys where parallels between piloting skill can be drawn. Let me guess, drugs, implants, and scouts don't fit into you 'bushido' Sphonor (Space honor) Code of conduct?
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#48 - 2013-11-03 15:08:55 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Major Killz wrote:
Also, Drake:

- 400 and 500 damage per second.
- 40 to 60,000m range
- 1850 m/sec (2650 heated); even more with another nanofiber
- 16,000m (heated) stasis webifier range
- 65 to 75,000 effective hitpoints.

Seems just as lame as always. Which is probably why it's still in use. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

Also, I cannot honestly say the pilots who're still using these ships do more innovative things than most ingame. As well as myself. Rail Thorax solo? I did that right after the changes to Thorax. Rail-Deimos solo? Started rocking that 2 years ago. Apparently now Phobia are in the Test Server rolling around in rail-Deimos. Cerberus? I was rolling in said fleets murdering dudes as soon as expansion went live. Rail-Deimos, Rail-Thorax and RLML Cerberus was all I was on about and same with bros. Well, They were on more about Ishtar, Rail-Proteus (cerca 2011), Beam-Harbingers and Eos.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal


Drake is not applying that much DPS
RLMs shoot just as far as the drake
Drake is too slow to be used in the current cruiser meta, All BC's are these days. it does NOT go 1850 MS.
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
Look at this typical dual web, nano drake. No links, no implants. Now tell me where you are getting your make believe numbers.

http://i.imgur.com/UpC0ZlO.jpg

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
stats are as follows:

43K EHP
422 Unheated DPS, with CN heavy + 5 warrior II
1187 M/S Unheated Speed

Drakes are ****. That 422 DPS you see, will hardly be applied to cruisers, unless you are dual webbing them. I don't even want to think about trying to hit a frigate. Its painfully obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about. Just stop wasting everyone's time.

The only way you can get close to 1800MS with a drake, is Skirmish mindlinked, skirmished, HG snaked, with quafe, and zors hyper link, and 2 Nanos. Drake is a slug. And should not be used.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#49 - 2013-11-03 17:51:01 UTC
I'm just amazed that claims about missiles being balanced keep getting thrown around by him but links pose a huge moral quandry.

clearly something is going over my head how the optimal weapon for a missile cruiser is infact a frigate weapon..
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#50 - 2013-11-03 20:02:04 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The rules:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#51 - 2013-11-04 08:50:22 UTC
Taking some of the discussion from this thread I'll be making a post in the assembly hall about re-doing the missile formula. While rockets and lights seem to work fine as you scale the missile up they become much less effective even against their native targets. I'll be sure to reference the graph from the rhml thread as well as run some scenarios to support my proposal. I'd like to thank everyone for the input and insightful discussion so far
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2013-11-04 09:19:14 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Taking some of the discussion from this thread I'll be making a post in the assembly hall about re-doing the missile formula. While rockets and lights seem to work fine as you scale the missile up they become much less effective even against their native targets. I'll be sure to reference the graph from the rhml thread as well as run some scenarios to support my proposal. I'd like to thank everyone for the input and insightful discussion so far


There is no need to reinvent the wheel, velocity and radius are weapon stays.

The formula is fine, hell, HAMs aren't as bad as they are made out to be.

Heavies were over nerfed, particularly in light of the medium turret buff, and torpedoes are unmitigated crap on anything but as bomber.
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2013-11-04 11:09:27 UTC
Chessur wrote:

The only way you can get close to 1800MS with a drake, is Skirmish mindlinked, skirmished, HG snaked, with quafe, and zors hyper link, and 2 Nanos.

This reminded me of your Cerb with 2 nanos, could you tell why those are necessary? I mean, without them you are still faster than BC's and fast cruisers can catch you anyway. Would it be wrong to fit DC and one damage mod instead?
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#54 - 2013-11-04 12:07:52 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Taking some of the discussion from this thread I'll be making a post in the assembly hall about re-doing the missile formula. While rockets and lights seem to work fine as you scale the missile up they become much less effective even against their native targets. I'll be sure to reference the graph from the rhml thread as well as run some scenarios to support my proposal. I'd like to thank everyone for the input and insightful discussion so far


I hope that you are using the damage application graphs that I had created for the RHML thread, the other graphs that were posted, were nonsensical.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#55 - 2013-11-04 12:10:09 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Taking some of the discussion from this thread I'll be making a post in the assembly hall about re-doing the missile formula. While rockets and lights seem to work fine as you scale the missile up they become much less effective even against their native targets. I'll be sure to reference the graph from the rhml thread as well as run some scenarios to support my proposal. I'd like to thank everyone for the input and insightful discussion so far


There is no need to reinvent the wheel, velocity and radius are weapon stays.

The formula is fine, hell, HAMs aren't as bad as they are made out to be.

Heavies were over nerfed, particularly in light of the medium turret buff, and torpedoes are unmitigated crap on anything but as bomber.


So you're saying that even though the formula is fine certain missiles are still bad just because they're bad? What about citadel missiles? Those are complete jokes and not because they don't have enough damage (even that is debatable).

I totally disagree I think missiles are broken at the mechanical level.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#56 - 2013-11-04 12:11:42 UTC
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:
Chessur wrote:

The only way you can get close to 1800MS with a drake, is Skirmish mindlinked, skirmished, HG snaked, with quafe, and zors hyper link, and 2 Nanos.

This reminded me of your Cerb with 2 nanos, could you tell why those are necessary? I mean, without them you are still faster than BC's and fast cruisers can catch you anyway. Would it be wrong to fit DC and one damage mod instead?


The dual nanos help a ton with a agilty, throw on the defensive web- and you can generally keep faster HAC's / T1 cruisers from scramming you- when flown correctly.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#57 - 2013-11-04 12:13:12 UTC
Chessur wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Taking some of the discussion from this thread I'll be making a post in the assembly hall about re-doing the missile formula. While rockets and lights seem to work fine as you scale the missile up they become much less effective even against their native targets. I'll be sure to reference the graph from the rhml thread as well as run some scenarios to support my proposal. I'd like to thank everyone for the input and insightful discussion so far


I hope that you are using the damage application graphs that I had created for the RHML thread, the other graphs that were posted, were nonsensical.


I haven't looked at that thread in a while. Could you link them here so I have it all in one place? I intend to reference this thread directly
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2013-11-04 12:33:24 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Taking some of the discussion from this thread I'll be making a post in the assembly hall about re-doing the missile formula. While rockets and lights seem to work fine as you scale the missile up they become much less effective even against their native targets. I'll be sure to reference the graph from the rhml thread as well as run some scenarios to support my proposal. I'd like to thank everyone for the input and insightful discussion so far


There is no need to reinvent the wheel, velocity and radius are weapon stays.

The formula is fine, hell, HAMs aren't as bad as they are made out to be.

Heavies were over nerfed, particularly in light of the medium turret buff, and torpedoes are unmitigated crap on anything but as bomber.


So you're saying that even though the formula is fine certain missiles are still bad just because they're bad? What about citadel missiles? Those are complete jokes and not because they don't have enough damage (even that is debatable).

I totally disagree I think missiles are broken at the mechanical level.


Have you flown with cruises recently? More and more cruise fleets keep popping up, both raven and phone.

But yes, I'd wager CCP had normalized statistics for hit/miss/potential/applied damage for all systems.

Like I said the mechanic works, but there could be a bit of play with the weapon stats.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#59 - 2013-11-04 12:39:12 UTC
Just because it's functional doesn't make it good. In the days before 1.1 I tested cruise rni against many targets... and they were bad. Missiles requiring support ships to function correctly feels like a failure somewhere
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#60 - 2013-11-04 12:54:56 UTC
Ok I have made another set of graphs. Here are the variables:

Cruise Phoon: 3 BCS, 2 T1 rirgors, 5% damage + 5% Application implants, Standard Crash
RHML Phoon: 3 BCS, 5% damage + 5% Application implants, Standard Crash
RHML Rigor Phoon: 3 BCS, 2 T1 rirgors, 5% damage + 5% Application implants, Standard Crash
RLM Cerb: 3 BCS, 2 T1 rirgors, 5% damage + 5% Application implants, Standard Crash

In these graphs, but the cruise and RHML rigor phoons share rigors. The Cerberus and RHML phoons do not. I have also (On the RHML Rigor phoon) Used precision missiles when possible.

Please keep in mind when looking at these graphs- that a precision HML with no velocity modifier has a range of 28/30 K. Remember that cruise missiles of the same type have close to a 75K range. These graphs show every variable on both ships completely the same.

Finally here are the fittings of a 3 BCS dual T1 rigor RHML Phoon, when compared to a 3 BCS dual T1 rigor Cruise phoon:

Cruise phoon with 3X BCS + T2 launchers + 2 T1 rigors:

CPU: 447.44 / 800
Grid: 8173.2 / 15625So these graphs are showing the best case for RHML's. The thing to remember though, is that when shooting against smaller / frig / dessi targets- the RHML are using dual rigor, and precision missiles. Precision missiles on the RHMLs have a range of 28K. Cruise have a range of 75K. So if you are in a battleship- imagine trying to kill light tackle only when they are 28K away from you... Its not playable.

Also RHML's are not playable, becuase they are not saving you a ton of CPU or Grid. No where on your BS can you fit an extra extreme amount of tank (LIke you can see on the RLML ships cerb / scyfi / caracal). The RHML's are wasting as many rig slots as the cruise phoon, in order to help apply damgae. Its a pathetic missile system.

RHML Phoon With 3X BCS + T2 launchers + 2 T1 rigors:

CPU: 412.71 / 800
Grid: 6537 / 15625

So you are saving 35 CPU and 1636 Grid. Which in my opinion, is simply not worth the dual rigor on the RHML. You still don't have enough CPU to use what little gird extra you have. You could place 1 extra 1600 mm Plate / Large anci repper. Thats it....

Graph 1:

http://i.imgur.com/eS49n5q.png

Graph 2:

http://i.imgur.com/Dj7JWe3.png