These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#561 - 2013-11-09 19:48:24 UTC
I really hope Rise will at least listen to some really good solo-ers from Exodus or Hydra. Perhaps he's now an expert with fittings and stats being a dev and all but I remember him saying differently doing "bringing solo back" so idk... when one is not sure exactly what to do and how giving some time and thinking twice is never a bad thing.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#562 - 2013-11-09 19:49:16 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Your mistake that you accused me of saying something and editing my posts to cover it up?

Yup, this one and the 30s which are 90s, which is a bit different. But I think people don't really care about your e-honour.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#563 - 2013-11-09 19:53:17 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
Your mistake that you accused me of saying something and editing my posts to cover it up?

Yup, this one and the 30s which are 90s, which is a bit different. But I think people don't really care about your e-honour.


I think you are just trying to score points or something with arguing, and resorting to claiming im editing posts behind your back, because you have basically no idea how small gang pvp works.
X'ret
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#564 - 2013-11-09 19:58:53 UTC
I have absolutely no idea whats wrong with all of you. What are we talking about exactly?

EVE made for spaceships, to fly and SHOOT with spaceships, shoot to npc's and each other.
90% of the basic gameplay is spend to warping all around the space, the remaining 10% is everything else together, including action (pvp, pve, mining lol), and its only a part of that small percentage . Why the hell you playing with the numbers people?? Who the f*ck wana wait 40sec after changing ammo to activate his highslot, when a ceptor will make a 70au warp within 15seconds??!! There is nothing to talk about, its the most horrible idea i've heard about for long time. Garbage.
All of you lost your medicine?? Surely this game isnt time vampire and slow enough, we need 40sec reload/ammo changing timers too, in the middle of action!

BRAVO !
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#565 - 2013-11-09 20:05:17 UTC
X'ret wrote:
I have absolutely no idea whats wrong with all of you. What are we talking about exactly?

EVE made for spaceships, to fly and SHOOT with spaceships, shoot to npc's and each other.
90% of the basic gameplay is spend to warping all around the space, the remaining 10% is everything else together, including action (pvp, pve, mining lol), and its only a part of that small percentage . Why the hell you playing with the numbers people?? Who the f*ck wana wait 40sec after changing ammo to activate his highslot, when a ceptor will make a 70au warp within 15seconds??!! There is nothing to talk about, its the most horrible idea i've heard about for long time. Garbage.
All of you lost your medicine?? Surely this game isnt time vampire and slow enough, we need 40sec reload/ammo changing timers too, in the middle of action!

BRAVO !


The vast majority of us really don't like the idea. Who exactly are you addressing?
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#566 - 2013-11-09 20:08:55 UTC
I'm almost completely certain he's addressing CCP.

As for Rise considering PvE applications of RLMLs, I wouldn't count on the PvE applications of anything being a high priority to anyone at CCP. Except maybe CCP Ytterbium.
Ion Blacknight
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#567 - 2013-11-09 20:11:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Ion Blacknight
I do wish CCP would stop making ridiculously sweeping changes to established ships and weapon systems. It is not 'realistic' or logical. When a technology is improved, the previous technology does not disappear into thin air (especially when the previous technology is better). If you want to make a sweeping change, make it an upgraded option and keep the older version. That is how technology advances.
So basically you cannot undock alone now with your one-load Caracal wonder.

I believe technology changes should be integrated into the game and announced by in-game corps and they should be additions to existing technology. If you want to radically change the stats on a ship, create a new ship instead.

War reports: Blacknight active
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#568 - 2013-11-09 20:12:21 UTC
Obligatory DAM U CCP Y U NERF TENGU comment.


Because as we all know, any change to any missile nerfs the Tengu somehow.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
X'ret
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#569 - 2013-11-09 20:12:34 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
X'ret wrote:
I have absolutely no idea whats wrong with all of you. What are we talking about exactly?

EVE made for spaceships, to fly and SHOOT with spaceships, shoot to npc's and each other.
90% of the basic gameplay is spend to warping all around the space, the remaining 10% is everything else together, including action (pvp, pve, mining lol), and its only a part of that small percentage . Why the hell you playing with the numbers people?? Who the f*ck wana wait 40sec after changing ammo to activate his highslot, when a ceptor will make a 70au warp within 15seconds??!! There is nothing to talk about, its the most horrible idea i've heard about for long time. Garbage.
All of you lost your medicine?? Surely this game isnt time vampire and slow enough, we need 40sec reload/ammo changing timers too, in the middle of action!

BRAVO !


The vast majority of us really don't like the idea. Who exactly are you addressing?


Many of us talking about dps loss, situational things, rate of fire etc. When a GM check this thread what hes thinking/see (over sh*t on it from 2km distance), what? They think here is anything to talk about, anything to discuss, but its NOT TRUE!

This is what i want to let you understand!
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#570 - 2013-11-09 20:23:43 UTC
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Obligatory DAM U CCP Y U NERF TENGU comment.


Because as we all know, any change to any missile nerfs the Tengu somehow.


It pretty much is for anyone who used RLMLs on their Tengu.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#571 - 2013-11-09 20:28:50 UTC
X'ret wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
X'ret wrote:
I have absolutely no idea whats wrong with all of you. What are we talking about exactly?

EVE made for spaceships, to fly and SHOOT with spaceships, shoot to npc's and each other.
90% of the basic gameplay is spend to warping all around the space, the remaining 10% is everything else together, including action (pvp, pve, mining lol), and its only a part of that small percentage . Why the hell you playing with the numbers people?? Who the f*ck wana wait 40sec after changing ammo to activate his highslot, when a ceptor will make a 70au warp within 15seconds??!! There is nothing to talk about, its the most horrible idea i've heard about for long time. Garbage.
All of you lost your medicine?? Surely this game isnt time vampire and slow enough, we need 40sec reload/ammo changing timers too, in the middle of action!

BRAVO !


The vast majority of us really don't like the idea. Who exactly are you addressing?


Many of us talking about dps loss, situational things, rate of fire etc. When a GM check this thread what hes thinking/see (over sh*t on it from 2km distance), what? They think here is anything to talk about, anything to discuss, but its NOT TRUE!

This is what i want to let you understand!


If I'm understanding you correctly you are saying that the idea is bad. Period. And therefore isn't worthy of discussion. Unfortunately, CCP disagrees and has the power to enact these changes. I agree that the idea has almost no merit presently, but it has to be discussed because the people in charge think it does have merit.
X'ret
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#572 - 2013-11-09 20:41:42 UTC
Yes, when i used the word garbage it was suppose to mean this is a very bad idea^^. Like i told dozen times in this thread bfor.
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#573 - 2013-11-09 20:56:26 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, so far I feel like I'm seeing 3 major areas of complaint, alongside a lot of people who think this will be a good change. Those areas are:

  • 40s reload is boring and will be miserable to use please don't do it
  • Switching ammo types (other damage types or to FOF(does anyone actually use fof?)) will be very difficult which is key for missile users
  • This is a nerf to RLML and I love them so please don't do it

    • I'm not convinced at all by the first complaint. As I've said before, this delay creates new kimds of decision making, it creates spikes of tension in fights rather than a flat amount of damage moving around and beyond those things it can be completely mitigated if you want. As others have pointed out, simply splitting your launchers into two groups and alternating them means you are never stuck in reload. It also means you lose the advantage of having your damage front-loaded into a very high DPS number. Still, if you can completely bypass this 'downside' I don't see how you can argue that this mechanic alone ruins the system.

    I commented earlier on the missile switching - I think it is a valid complaint and I'd like to find a work-around for it as an iteration but I don't think it's a show-stopper. Several of the ships using these systems are kinetic bonused which means you don't switch that often. You still have time to switch on the way to a fight based on what damage type might be best. You still have the option to switch as you run out of charges and would be reloading anyway. But again, this is a legit complaint and I want to look into it.

    Most of the complaints about it being a straight up nerf make me feel like going ahead with the old plan and leaving RLML in their current state would have been a mistake. I think most of you feeling this way are just disappointed with the idea of losing a slightly over-powered weapon system, which is understandable. Please keep in mind that this change represents a 15-20% damage drop over long fights but offers a new advantage in trade. I suspect that ships like FW Caracals with RLML will remain very strong. Also, if they don't, it's very easy to tune the reload time down slightly or the rate of fire up slightly to bring them into balance and we would absolutely watch that and make necessary adjustments. I would be extremely unhappy if the numbers were bad and rapid launchers disappeared from Caracals and Fleet Scythes completely.

    Broader complaints about missiles vs turrets or training time often have merit, but they represent much bigger projects that we fully intend to take on, just not during this rebalance. We hear you though and hopefully we can start working on major module balance projects in the coming releases as we are closing in on finishing our first lap of all the ships in the game.

    Hope this answers some of your concerns


    Why do you even ask for player input if you interpret both positive and negative feedback as validation of your approach? I don't use RLMLs. I have no vested interest in keeping "a slightly over-powered weapon system". I also think trying to balance RLMLs and RHMLs in one broad pass is just sloppy and a tad bit lazy. RHMLs will have almost no purpose in this form. RLMLs may remain useful (though I doubt it) but with the current state of HMs, and the fact that range and explosion bonuses won't apply, there will be virtually no reason to use RHMLs with these changes. Why come out with a new module and then make it useless? It doesn't compute.

    Also when you nerf sustained dps 15-20% you are hurting PVE uses massively. Does PVE not even enter your mind when you do these balance changes?



    PvE doesn't exsist to the devs, they don't know how to do it or even consider it a valid option for eve gameplay.
    Wiu Ming
    Garoun Investment Bank
    Gallente Federation
    #574 - 2013-11-09 20:57:55 UTC
    Kat Ayclism wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Kat Ayclism wrote:
    Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea


    Would love if you expanded a bit.

    You really need it expanded that that long of a reload time on a WEAPONS system is freaking horrid?

    Yeah weapon types are situational and all, but this change makes the situation you'd ever want to use these in basically none. I wouldn't ever use this garbage when I could just use something else- hell, anything else that doesn't have a 40s reload time.



    i thought by "expanded" he meant: Holy crap that's terrible f**k**g idea...
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #575 - 2013-11-09 21:07:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
    To be honest, I doubt this thread is actually intended for us to give feedback in. More like it's a "this change is happening no matter what, but now you know about it in advance" sort of thing. Especially when our concerns are either waved aside or taken as validation that it's a good idea. Whatever, it's not important what the devs do, we'll just deal with it and find other weapon systems to use instead and when they break those for being 'too popular" we'll use something else after that.

    The idea of a 40-sec reload creating "interesting choices" and "spikes of tension" seems like too much PR Buzzword Kool-Aid is going around. Mostly I think it's going to result in people annihilating poorly-fitted opponents within the reserves of ammo, becoming very frustrated with the 40-sec reload or attempting to stagger their missile groups and finding the DPS insufficient to justify not using any other sort of missile system. In the first situation people will love the change but in the second two situations people will like it somewhat less.

    On the bright side, maybe this will make people like those kinetic-bonused hulls a bit more.
    Michael Harari
    Genos Occidere
    HYDRA RELOADED
    #576 - 2013-11-09 21:09:22 UTC
    Or you can start fitting frigate weapons to your cruiser hulls to do more dps.
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #577 - 2013-11-09 21:11:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
    Michael Harari wrote:
    Or you can start fitting frigate weapons to your cruiser hulls to do more dps.


    Somehow I think that's just what might start happening.

    The RLML Cerb is dead. Long live the LML Cerb.
    Mhari Dson
    Lazy Brothers Inc
    #578 - 2013-11-09 21:17:35 UTC
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    Michael Harari wrote:
    Or you can start fitting frigate weapons to your cruiser hulls to do more dps.


    Somehow I think that's just what might start happening.

    The RLML Cerb is dead. Long live the LML Cerb.



    also makes the LML + XLASB caracal an idea
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #579 - 2013-11-09 21:22:25 UTC
    Mhari Dson wrote:
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    Michael Harari wrote:
    Or you can start fitting frigate weapons to your cruiser hulls to do more dps.


    Somehow I think that's just what might start happening.

    The RLML Cerb is dead. Long live the LML Cerb.



    also makes the LML + XLASB caracal an idea


    You horrible, evil person.
    Bouh Revetoile
    In Wreck we thrust
    #580 - 2013-11-09 21:30:22 UTC
    Michael Harari wrote:
    I think you are just trying to score points or something with arguing, and resorting to claiming im editing posts behind your back, because you have basically no idea how small gang pvp works.

    And I think you should be good enough to use argument instead of comedy example like the interceptor one.

    Firstly, interceptors and AB are both designed to avoid damage, and especially to avoid missile damage. Asking for a weapon system to go through this without any effort is not reasonable.

    Secondly, RLML are currently OP because they obsolete destroyers and all other medium missile systems. The new RLML address this with a ~20% dps nerf. This should fix all the problems.

    Thirdly, with the nerf, RLML receive a new feature : front loaded dps. That mean you'll have a very high dps, very good to quickly remove a tackle or go through an active tank. The 40s reload is only the downside of this feature ; you can't have the front loaded dps without the 40s reload, but this is actually a good thing for your ship.

    There is two drawback though, one being an edge case :
    - the reload time prevent ammo swapping ;
    - if you needed more than 18 missiles but less than 40, then you will take more time to kill your target than before.

    This is definitely an edge case as there won't be many scenario where you will need more than one clip to kill your target.

    Now, indeed LM having the same base dps as RLML is odd, yet the feature RLML get should compensate for it. But I think nerfing light missiles themselves should be a better solution : reduce the reload time of RLML a bit, or extend the magazine a bit, but remove some damage from LM.