These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#801 - 2013-11-11 07:45:59 UTC
Darling Hassasin wrote:
If people think the reload time is too much they can simply pretend it does not exist at all and they are back to business as usual.

You're funny.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Lucretia Magnus
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#802 - 2013-11-11 08:29:17 UTC
To CCP Rise,

Hi , i really your idea of this different weapon system , but i do not like the combination of a weapon system with good aplication and this burst damage .

I would love if this kind of Burst damage weapon system is linked to a more positioning based kind of play . What i mean , reward a player for his good position or patience like this > increase burst < decrease aplication

Do not give me a weapon that can shoot 40km and hit small targets for a modest burst.

my 2 cents.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#803 - 2013-11-11 08:45:31 UTC
Darling Hassasin wrote:
This idea is good and I stand firmly behind it.

A brand new weapon system is a perfect chance to eperiment with something prfoundly different.

If people think the reload time is too much they can simply pretend it does not exist at all and they are back to business as usual.



Are yuou #!#!@ or what? No we cannot preent because the TOTAL DPS of the module has droppped 25% on the infinite time and up to 33% on specific point in the time (just before the reload completes)

Itsa HUGE nerf to anyoen not flying in a blob

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#804 - 2013-11-11 09:06:26 UTC
Darling Hassasin wrote:
This idea is good and I stand firmly behind it.

A brand new weapon system is a perfect chance to eperiment with something prfoundly different.

If people think the reload time is too much they can simply pretend it does not exist at all and they are back to business as usual.


Lolwut?
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#805 - 2013-11-11 09:14:48 UTC
Bob Niac wrote:
I am thinking this is going to be pushed back to a future patch. WAAAY too much negative feedback.


I have no idea where you got that impression. Rise pretty much told us we were full of it the last time he posted.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#806 - 2013-11-11 09:40:51 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Bob Niac wrote:
I am thinking this is going to be pushed back to a future patch. WAAAY too much negative feedback.


I have no idea where you got that impression. Rise pretty much told us we were full of it the last time he posted.



JUst indicates that probably this was his idea and we not liking and pointing how dumb it is (with current numbers) on small scale PVP hurts his ego.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#807 - 2013-11-11 10:01:17 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


Here's the plan to improve the situation:

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). Some specifics:

Rapid Light Missile Launcher rate of fire set to:
Rapid Light Missile Launcher I ------------------------- 7.8s
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II ------------------------- 6.24s
Prototype 'Arbalest' Rapid Light Missile Launcher --- 6.24s
Other meta types not shown

Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher rate of fire set to:
Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher I ------------------------ 6.48s
Rapid Heavy Missile launcher II ------------------------- 5.185s
'Arbalest' Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher I ------------ 5.185s
Other meta types not shown

Reload time for both groups set to 40 seconds.

T2 Rapid Light Launchers can carry roughly 18 charges
T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers can carry roughly 23 charges



The concept of burst weapons is fun and interesting, but if that's the case, either reduce the reload or increase the deeps. If I have to wait the better part of a minute to reload, then I had better do some serious face tearing for the minute I could fire before I had to reload.


Or conversely, if I can't do some serious face tearing, than I sure as hey had better not have to wait a minute to reload. Go one way or the other. Serious burst DPS at long reload, or a more sustained burst at shorter reload, as opposed to relatively constant of current set up.


I think you'd have a better concept though if you aimed for similar DPS over a protracted battle, but applied in significantly different manners.


40 seconds of not firing for only torp/HAM DPS is kinda..... meh.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#808 - 2013-11-11 10:17:51 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
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...

CCP Fozzie said once that overheating is an awesome feature, though very underestimated in the current game design. So - if you want RML to be a burst-type weapon, why dont you make them overheat much better? Up to a point when it's the only reasonable modus operandi. The problem with switching ammo types will disappear itself.

And yes, people use FOF missiles to get rid of jamming guristas.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#809 - 2013-11-11 10:17:55 UTC
Jsut to be clear.. it snot simply WIATING that is a pain. Is waiting after not having Killed an interceptors, AF, Faction frigate, badly fit t1 cruiser or even some t1 frigates


IF we had enough charges to get rid of 1 enemy reliably before waitign 40 seconds, then it would not be as bad. The penalty must be ONE or the other.. not both.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#810 - 2013-11-11 10:19:02 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
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...

CCP Fozzie said once that overheating is an awesome feature, though very underestimated in the current game design. So - if you want RML to be a burst-type weapon, why dont you make them overheat much better? Up to a point when it's the only reasonable modus operandi. The problem with switching ammo types will disappear itself.

And yes, people use FOF missiles to get rid of jamming guristas.



Incredbly interesting Idea.. Dotn knwo it it can be used as simply as that. But the concept on itself is far more interesting.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Luscius Uta
#811 - 2013-11-11 10:44:46 UTC
Since missiles are the dumbest weapon system in EVE (especially T1 missiles, since they differ only in type of damage they do, while different turret ammo offers variations in range, capacitor use, tracking and damage), I believe they need to be nerfed in some way (not saying that missiles don't have weaknesses, of course, but that's a separate issue which can be solved in a variety of ways - someone suggested that they should take less heat damage per cycle and I like that idea).

Therefore I would set the reload time for all missile launchers to 20 seconds but increase their capacity by 25-50%. This wouldn't reduce the effective DPS much, but it would increase the importance of having the proper ammo loaded in PvP.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#812 - 2013-11-11 10:46:23 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:

Therefore I would set the reload time for all missile launchers to 20 seconds but increase their capacity by 25-50%. This wouldn't reduce the effective DPS much, but it would increase the importance of having the proper ammo loaded in PvP.

As soon as Projectile weapons lose the ability to switch damage types, then ok.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#813 - 2013-11-11 10:55:12 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Luscius Uta wrote:

Therefore I would set the reload time for all missile launchers to 20 seconds but increase their capacity by 25-50%. This wouldn't reduce the effective DPS much, but it would increase the importance of having the proper ammo loaded in PvP.

As soon as Projectile weapons lose the ability to switch damage types, then ok.



Not defendign completely his concept. But projectiles do not have same capability

Projectiles can select on 3 damage types for t1 ammo and cannot select damage types on the T2 ammo . And since basically most of the combats that are more or less balanced you need to keep barrage loaded, the damage selection capability is minimal on projectiles except when youa re ganking an defenseless or vastly outpowered target.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kane Fenris
NWP
#814 - 2013-11-11 11:17:32 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Luscius Uta wrote:

Therefore I would set the reload time for all missile launchers to 20 seconds but increase their capacity by 25-50%. This wouldn't reduce the effective DPS much, but it would increase the importance of having the proper ammo loaded in PvP.

As soon as Projectile weapons lose the ability to switch damage types, then ok.



Not defendign completely his concept. But projectiles do not have same capability

Projectiles can select on 3 damage types for t1 ammo and cannot select damage types on the T2 ammo . And since basically most of the combats that are more or less balanced you need to keep barrage loaded, the damage selection capability is minimal on projectiles except when youa re ganking an defenseless or vastly outpowered target.



although it's off topic

thats why is like to see longer ranges on projectile guns and less bonus on barrage this would greatly improve the situation
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#815 - 2013-11-11 11:25:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
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

    • The fundamental problem with this idea is that you are creating a weapon system that can both be massively OP and painfully useless, depending entirely on whether the launcher is reloading or not. You've tried to handwave this away as "consequences!". Now, I'm all for consequences, but these consequence are simply too brutal. The RML user has the consequences of being useless for 40 s, slowing his gang by having to pause on gates to reload and being stuck in a particular selection of damage types, while the frigate pilot has the consequences of getting nuked hilariously in double-quick time. Neither set of consequences makes for particularly engaging gameplay and will enrage both user and recipient.

    A weapon system that can have both user and target raging in righteous fury is really bad mechanics. At least ECM only enrages the victim!

    While I like the idea in principle, the 40 s reload is clearly far too long, aggravating not only for the RML user as he reloads but also for the frigate pilot trying to survive before/after the reload because the burst DPS is too high. I'd say cut the reload down to 25 s, maybe 30 s at the absolute most, and adjust burst DPS accordingly. It'll still be deeply aggravating to both sides, but it'll be a bit more tolerable.
    Kagura Nikon
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #816 - 2013-11-11 11:27:45 UTC
    Gypsio III 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

    • The fundamental problem with this idea is that you are creating a weapon system that can both be massively OP and painfully useless, depending entirely on whether the launcher is reloading or not. You've tried to handwave this away as "consequences!". Now, I'm all for consequences, but these consequence are simply too brutal. The RML user has the consequences of being useless for 40 s, slowing his gang by having to pause on gates to reloadand being stuck in a particular selection of damage types, while the frigate pilot has the consequences of getting nuked hilariously in double-quick time. Neither set of consequences makes for particularly engaging gameplay and will enrage both user and recipient.

    A weapon system that can have both user and target raging in righteous fury is really bad mechanics.

    While I like the idea in principle, the 40 s reload is clearly far too long, aggravating not only for the RML user as he reloads but also for the frigate pilot trying to survive before/after the reload because the burst DPS is too high. I'd say cut the reload down to 25 s, maybe 30 s at the absolute most, and adjust burst DPS accordingly. It'll still be deeply aggravating to both sides, but it'll be a bit more tolerable.


    its even worse. Its a binary system.

    Either you are in a frigate that has no chance to survive the caracal because it has under 12-14k ehp. Or you are in a frigate (faction or t2) that can simply IGNORE the caracal, because there is ZERO chance the caracal can kill you even if you are a horrible frigate pilot, just because his missiles will end at half the job done)

    "If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
    Chris Winter
    Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
    The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
    #817 - 2013-11-11 11:31:45 UTC
    I wish that I hadn't already cancelled my subscription renewal a couple months ago so I could cancel it now and ragequit.

    Between caving to gun user QQ about training time without matching missile training time, and this pants-on-head suggestion, I'm fairly certain that no one at CCP actually uses missiles.

    We know that Rise doesn't. His weapon of choice was always ABCs, which conveniently don't have a missile variant.

    Missiles are a third-class weapon system. Higher training time, fewer ship options (note the total lack of pirate missile ships, they're all drone ships that can use missiles too), ship bonuses that directly conflict with missile's advantage of switchable damage type by only bonusing one type.

    Let's also not forget how unbelievably awful capital missiles are.

    Why exactly are CCP trying so hard to push missiles into the gutter?
    Mike Whiite
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #818 - 2013-11-11 11:32:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Whiite
    Although I understand that with the lack of variables in Missile damage calculation, CCP comes at the point where using reload times as means for ballace.

    That said, I don't understand this change one bit.

    - CCP Rise says they want to make the choise between missile operating systems more intresting.

    But if you look at it from scratch, this is what your choice will be, concering PvP. 1 train a weapon system that has a vluable nice with Rapid launcher, or just train Turrets, which are more valueble in almost any other senario.

    The good thing is that due to a 40 seconds reload, you can skip a few support skills since it woný be worth the training time, when you consider the time saved by faster launching will be neglectable with 40 seconds loading time.

    - I think the major problem with missiles is that there is no middle road, it works or it doesn't, seem to work less or better.

    - Ammo options are limited
    - Launcher options limited
    - Launcher affected mudules are limited.

    In my humble opinion the current proposal is only aceptable if there would be an option for pilot to:


    1) activate the rapid option, if not it wil just be a light missile launcher.

    or

    2) be able to load heavy/Cruise in the rapid launcher against a slower than normal launch rate.

    This wil give people actualy a choice and won't condamn the Rapid launchers to a small niche.
    Gypsio III
    Questionable Ethics.
    Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
    #819 - 2013-11-11 11:33:47 UTC
    Kagura Nikon wrote:


    its even worse. Its a binary system.

    Either you are in a frigate that has no chance to survive the caracal because it has under 12-14k ehp. Or you are in a frigate (faction or t2) that can simply IGNORE the caracal, because there is ZERO chance the caracal can kill you even if you are a horrible frigate pilot, just because his missiles will end at half the job done)


    Be careful that you don't oversimplify things. For a soloer, yes, this is very likely a problem. In small gang, with the appropriate tackle and/or additional DPS, I'd suggest that the frigate would die sooner - if the RLML user started shooting at the appropriate time.
    Moonaura
    The Dead Rabbit Society
    #820 - 2013-11-11 11:59:55 UTC
    Is this idea not dead yet? Half expected CCP to have a good ole 'bad idea's introduced just before expansion' burning out back and say some prayers to the norse gods by now.

    Let me help you guys out:

    http://satireknight.wikispaces.com/file/view/flamethrower.gif/280029248/flamethrower.gif

    "The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans