These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Missile Launchers - v2

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#61 - 2013-11-08 13:13:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
CCP Rise wrote:
Let me know what you think and keep in mind that numbers may be adjusted slightly as we continue to test.
Thanks


Initial thought: You're drunk.
After that... numbers.

Current triple-BCS RLML Caracal does 266 DPS
Future one will do 409 DPS before reload.
This is 53.8% more. It's a 35% ROF bonus.

Future RLML shoots 18 missiles, then reloads for 40 s. With current triple-BCS Caracal ROF of 3.79 s, future Caracal will have 2.46 s ROF. It fires 18 missiles over 44.3 s, then reloads for 40 s. Total time is 84.3 s, total max damage is 18 x 201.58 = 3628, for average 43.0 DPS per RLML, making 215.0 DPS from a Caracal's five launchers, relative to old 266 DPS.

Summary: Burst DPS increases by 53.8%, prolonged DPS decreases by about 19.1%.

UPDATED FOR FAILMATHS. RLML clip size is 18, not 23.

So, yeah, that's much more of a trade-off. Hmmm. It's tough on soloers and reloading, but more powerful in gang.

Hmmm, seems to be an interesting idea that doesn't work very well. It looks simultaneously overpowered and underpowered - frustratingly useless when you're having to reload, frustratingly OP when you're a frigate on the receiving end of intense RLML spam. What?
Kaeda Maxwell
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#62 - 2013-11-08 13:14:17 UTC
Daneel Trevize wrote:

All those crying about their precious 'solo' RLML Cerbs & Tengus aren't kidding anyone. It's like the HM drakes & tengus before, they will usually be in a small gang, built to use multiple links, and harvest t1 noob frigate killmails (and then cherry-picking the remaining defanged gang), all the while claiming ~elite smallgang pvp~ and never having to think about diminishing their own damage application via transversal.


I hope you're just trying to charge the debate here, because I like you, but calling people that disagree with you crybabies in your opening post would be considered poor form.

One of the charms of the rlml caracal is that with a single nano you actually don't need links at all for it to be a viable solo kiting ship, the cerb is a tad slow for that, but the navy caracal is plenty fast without links too. And yes a benefit of missiles is that their damage application isn't subject to range or tracking, which in turn is why they have lower base damage and can be destoyed by stuff like smartbombs. It's not like there are no downsides to missiles.

Natalia Sidorovich wrote:


I enjoy flying Caracals into frigate gangs and shredding them quickly. This change will significantly increase the speed at which I can do that, and provided I am not bad and get tackled, kiting around during the reload, or bailing after the charges are done won't be terrible.

For those saying this is change bad because it means RLML ships cant deal enough damage to same size ships, isn't this kind of the idea? It's a frigate sized charge.


Frigate sized charge but the RLM launcher is a cruiser sized weapon system. Currently the trade off when you use it to fight cruisers is that while you do rather poor base damage you'll apply almost all of it even against small relatively fast targets, whereas both HAM's and HM's only apply partial damage (and unless heavily webbed down HM's actually get out performed by RLM's a lot of the time). For brawling HAM's are almost always the superior weapon choice in my experience, but when kiting RLM's really, really shine (but mostly because HM's can't actually apply damage very well).

***

Rapid Heavy Launcher in their original shape I feel would be fine if the weapon they actually fire applied it's damage properly. That would also really help the normal Heavy launcher to actually seem like viable alternative to HAM's or RLM's. Seriously it's a good thing Drake bonuses don't apply to RLM's or I swear RLM PvE drakes would be a thing, that's how poor HM's are at the moment.

A good example is the Cyclone were the coice isn't between RLM and HAM but between HAM and HM; if HM's were a tiny bit better Heavy Missile Cyclones would actually be a completely viable thing, currently however putting HAM's on the is a total no brainer.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#63 - 2013-11-08 13:15:10 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


You're not nearly as clever as you think you are. Lol
Job Valador
Professional Amateurs
#64 - 2013-11-08 13:15:42 UTC
Daneel Trevize wrote:
Shinah Myst wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
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).

No. ASB-like reload time is a hack, not a solution. If you can't balance them, don't introduce them.
I believe that's the crux of the matter, that all Rapid missile systems break the fundamental Eve balancing traits of fragility of plaform vs effectiveness of applying dps. Destroyers get 8 guns, but are relatively fat & slow. BCs get more turrets than cruisers, but again are less mobile and take more damage. Even tier3/A BC are fragile on paper for their potential dps.
"rapid" weapons are obviously about packing 8 or more effective, bonused smaller weapon systems onto a more durable ship. If they can't just remove rapid lights outright, then rapid heavies (and dare I say rapid cruises for capital ships) will need such a serious change to be balanced, to be a fair tradeoff consideration.

All those crying about their precious 'solo' RLML Cerbs & Tengus aren't kidding anyone. It's like the HM drakes & tengus before, they will usually be in a small gang, built to use multiple links, and harvest t1 noob frigate killmails (and then cherry-picking the remaining defanged gang), all the while claiming ~elite smallgang pvp~ and never having to think about diminishing their own damage application via transversal.
Edit: page1 replies have already nailed it, that these weapons systems aren't for a fleet's main dps, they're support. Compose your fleets at least, you crybabies.

The reload timer mechanic itself cleary isn't a problem for acceptance, people lapped up the ASB and its timer when it was OP, and now it still has tradeoffs that are very reasonable. Likewise I'm sure people will work out to do 2 or more sets of rapid launchers and manage them should these changes happen.

I thus quite like the idea of the burst & reload dps, letting these 'support' fits do that just as effectively as ever(if not far more so), but then facing a real tradeoff when tankier BCs, BSs, or 1 or 2 smart logi can simply deaggro from them if on a gate/station/POS, or force them off through greater sustained combat effectiveness. If you wanted to burn through cruiser, BCs and larger targets, you should have to bring medium & large weapon systems to get the job done with comparable numbers.

The only real point I still want to raise is light missiles in general, and on the Talwar specifically. They're everywhere, minimal-cost-meta fitted, and have a disgusting range & volley for their isk & SP cost. I like new players having something they get basic fleet experience in, but this mindless anchoring & missile spam just reeks of drakes of old. Maybe their fitting, or light missile's range/volley needs a look at? They are a frigate-scale weapon after all.



the only man with sense here

"The stone exhibited a profound lack of movement."
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#65 - 2013-11-08 13:19:55 UTC
Morwennon wrote:
I think that this is a deeply misguided approach to solving what is basically a non-problem. You claim that RLMLs are "almost always the right choice", which I think is a pretty ridiculous assertion. There are two good cruiser-sized missile options at the moment, RLMs and HAMs. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, and they both see a lot of use in pvp. HMLs aren't much good, but that's nothing to do with the strength of RLMs, it's because HMLs are colossal turdpiles that are outperformed by just about every alternative, including the various long-range medium turrets, the other medium missile types, scorch M, and typing bad words in local. Breaking all of the current RLML use cases won't magically make HMLs more attractive, it'll just consign a currently useful weapon system to the scrapheap.


Links make HAMs ****. It's true. HAMs have a very high DRF so any ship that has a speed of 160% of its signature radius or higher takes reduced damage from CN HAMs on an almost 1:1 basis. When links simultaneously provide a speed increase and a sig radius reduction, any missiles bigger than RLMs become garbage. Links mean RLMs are vastly superior to all other missiles on basically all other non-webbed targets. (even some battleships) RLMs also outdamage HAMs on most cruisers with a single web applied and will actually outdamage HAMs on the really low-sig cruisers (scythe fleet) even if they have two webs applied.

A linked ABing Machariel takes half damage from CN HAMs. A freaking battleship, but links mean you're doing half damage with a cruiser-sized weapon. That's with no mass/agility mods, no snakes or speed implants, and no overheating. Overheating the AB on the Mach drops HAM DPS down to 38.16%.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#66 - 2013-11-08 13:21:56 UTC
Awesome change. Provides the ability for a battleship to screen a fleet against interceptors, though you have to overcome the extremely long lock time of a battleship.

People will need to get on Singularity and fly fleets of frigates, cruisers and battlecruisers against their navy ravens with RHMLs in order to understand the difference between a burst of 1000DPS against an interceptor with RHMLs versus sustained 1000DPS with cruise missiles against the same target.

CCP Rise, what about the possibility of reducing the reload time and reducing the firing rate, and shifting the high-DPS mode of this weapon system to overloading? This means the pilot has the option of:

  • firing for, say, 70 seconds until the RHML burns out
  • firing in bursts and applying paste to prepare for the next burst, or
  • firing a sustained stream of missiles at far lower DPS without heat.


Just move the DPS bonus and "40 second reload timer" to the overheat mechanics of this weapon system. And then provide some means for battleships to lock frigates in reasonable amounts of time so the front-loaded DPS can actually be applied.

The "screen" ability would especially be enhanced with a special targeting system, similar to a passive targeting system, which allows any ship to "save up" a triple-speed target lock. This targeting assistance module would be exclusive to sensor boosters, sensor amplifiers or sensor links, with a penalty of one-third target locking speed while recharging.

So interceptor arrives, tries to light cyno. You (the pilot of the fighter-screen battleship) use the targeting assistance module to lock the interceptor, and you overheat the RHMLs to bring the interceptor down. Once the interceptor is dead you are now "down for the count" while repairing your launchers and recharging the targeting assistance module.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#67 - 2013-11-08 13:22:02 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


People who are actually good at this game wouldn't shoot T1 thermal missiles from T2 launchers on a kinetic bonused hull. Hope this helps.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
CptBipto
Bare Minimum Bandits
I Showed You My Probes... Please Respond...
#68 - 2013-11-08 13:23:09 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Kat Ayclism wrote:
Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea


Would love if you expanded a bit.



40 seconds is far to long for how little ammo you give them
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#69 - 2013-11-08 13:24:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Gypsio III wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


You're not nearly as clever as you think you are. Lol


No desire to be clever. I actually thought it was pretty obvious, but nobody had mentioned it yet so I decided I would.

CptBipto wrote:
40 seconds is far to long for how little ammo you give them


This sums up a lot of my dislike towards these changes. Unless you use them as a supplementary weapons system you're going to quickly find yourself out of ammo. That's great if you only have to kill one target, but if there's more than one target and either of them has any kind of tank... yeah, no.

Rather than making Rapid launchers extremely questionable, how about fixing the damage application of the missiles they're allegedly almost always better than?
Volstruis
Kybernauts
Kybernauts Clade
#70 - 2013-11-08 13:26:25 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


People who are actually good at this game wouldn't shoot T1 thermal missiles from T2 launchers on a kinetic bonused hull. Hope this helps.


And now the Goon CSMS are coming on an insulting people instead of addressing the issue.

Yayness. Thread officially now made of win.
Morwennon
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#71 - 2013-11-08 13:27:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Morwennon
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


You're not nearly as clever as you think you are. Lol


No desire to be clever. I actually thought it was pretty obvious, but nobody had mentioned it yet so I decided I would.

The caracal doesn't have a kinetic-only bonus; its bonuses are to missile ROF and missile velocity, both of which apply equally to missiles of all damage types.

edit: and even if that wasn't the case, he was comparing the proposed new launchers to the current ones with the same ammo, so it would be a perfectly reasonable comparison even if the caracal had a kinetic bonus.
Gorski Car
#72 - 2013-11-08 13:28:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Gorski Car
Yeah no. This is not a good idea. That reload time = no more damage type selection more or less. You are stuck with scourge. I suggest you start with making sure hmls are actually good before you actually touch anything else with missiles.

How is killing 2 ships then warping/being worthless fun pvp?

Oh and a bs with rhmls still won't do **** to a good ceptor pilot so gg whoever thinks this will shield bs fleets vs frigs.


Based god out

Collect this post
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#73 - 2013-11-08 13:29:10 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


You're not nearly as clever as you think you are. Lol


No desire to be clever. I actually thought it was pretty obvious, but nobody had mentioned it yet so I decided I would.


Pretty obvious to whom? Raven and Caracal are not kinetic-bonused ships. Straight
GallowsCalibrator
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2013-11-08 13:29:28 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


People who are actually good at this game wouldn't shoot T1 thermal missiles from T2 launchers on a kinetic bonused hull. Hope this helps.


oh god is that what I was doing wrong

Just done some back-of-envelope calculations (don't have a calculator in front of me at the moment), and you should have approximately 20k damage potential in a clip with the numbers given for the RLML/Caracal combo in the OP before needing a reload. That's really not bad and should be enough to smash through, say, an interceptor or two before a clip reload.

RHML setups should probably be able to get a cruiser off your behind relatively quickly. (Wouldn't want to take it solo/solo versus something T2, but a pile of say, 5 ravens might make any HICtor jumping onto a fleet think twice...)
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#75 - 2013-11-08 13:30:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Harari
This is a terrible idea.

1) Having a lot of downtime is just bad gameplay design. In a gang, you might stay on the field to provide point and webs, but if you are solo, you basically are going to kill 1-2 targets and warp out. And then nobody gets to do anything for the next 40s while you reload. It promotes non-interactive gameplay.

2) Its not intuitive. Its yet another thing that vets know that noobs dont.

3) Its not that people use rapid lights because they are really good. We use them because the other medium missile systems are utter trash. I would love to be able to use heavy missiles again, but there is just no reason since they are currently the worst weapon system in the entire game for anything but giant blobs.

4) There is no alternative. You can use normal shield boosters instead of ancillary boosters. You can use normal armor reps instead of ancillary reps. There are good reasons to choose each. For medium missile launchers, there isnt any alternative to rapid lights. Heavy missiles are too slow, do too little damage for the fitting, and apply too poorly. Heavy assaults are too short range, and apply even more poorly.

5) While roaming, its can be very difficult to make a 40s reload when going gate to gate. This will just slow gangs down, with no real reason to do so.

Making this change will basically just end the use of missile ships in small gangs. People will just go to other ships, instead of dealing with the possibility of being tackled and having to wait for close to a minute to return fire.

If you want people to choose heavy missiles, then make heavy missiles be something besides a trash tier weapons system.
Pertuabo Enkidgan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2013-11-08 13:34:19 UTC
Mmmmm as a mostly solo player I can't agree with this kil2

Is there truly no other way? surely you can balance the weapon out without the Ancillary-like cooldown, that itself is sickeningly long. Nobody likes downtime.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#77 - 2013-11-08 13:34:39 UTC
Quote:
Summary: Burst DPS increases by 53.8%, prolonged DPS decreases by about 9.9%.


This made me scared for a second and then I realized you used the RHML charge amount instead of the RLML. So instead of 23 charges it should be 18 which will lower the DPS a bit more.

I think the ammo switching problem is valid, but I don't think it's a show stopper and I think it might be possible in the .1 release to find a work-around like the one mentioned above where ammo switching doesn't take as much time as reloading but doesn't fully refill your charges.

The comparison to ECM and not getting to be active doesn't seem right to me. This mechanic is much better because you have control over it rather than it being random, and also the gameplay around deciding when to fire and what to do during reload are both very active.

Overall this is good discussion. Obviously there's a pretty wide range of reactions and I think that's probably a good sign. Please keep raising concerns if you have them so we spot as many potential problems as possible.

Also, keep in mind that we will absolutely iterate following these changes (whether it's the first version, this version or some other).

@ccp_rise
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#78 - 2013-11-08 13:38:07 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Volstruis wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?


People who are actually good at this game wouldn't shoot T1 thermal missiles from T2 launchers on a kinetic bonused hull. Hope this helps.


And now the Goon CSMS are coming on an insulting people instead of addressing the issue.

Yayness. Thread officially now made of win.


What's the issue? I see a bunch of people who think these are an interesting and fun approach, I agree with them. I see someone who thinks it would be good if you had a normal reload time while swapping ammo but that swapping under this circumstance should not reload your ammo bay - I agree with that as well. I also see a bunch of people who are assmad. I disagree with them.

If there's an issue here it's that you seem to think my job is to agree with the players every time. This is impossible, as the players rarely agree with each other.

e: And if you think I'm being rude, you should see Malcanis when he goes off on someone. Big smile

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#79 - 2013-11-08 13:38:18 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Summary: Burst DPS increases by 53.8%, prolonged DPS decreases by about 9.9%.


This made me scared for a second and then I realized you used the RHML charge amount instead of the RLML. So instead of 23 charges it should be 18 which will lower the DPS a bit more.


Yep, just spotted that myself. Updating the post above.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#80 - 2013-11-08 13:38:31 UTC
You dont really have a choice about when you reload, unless you just stop shooting at stuff for some reason.

The swapping ammo types is actually quite a big deal. If you have EM missiles loaded and a jaguar shows up to tackle you, if you cant swap ammo, you are ******, regardless of how fast you shoot all your 0 damage missiles into him. You also cant reload between gates, or while jammed.