These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#1181 - 2013-11-12 22:54:47 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Chessur wrote:


Hyperbole? Surely you're joking.


Maybe it was the other Chessur who posted

Chessur wrote:

Welp there goes the:

Cerb
Caracal
Scythe Fleet
Osprey Navy




Quote the entire post.

Quote:
Welp there goes the:

Cerb
Caracal
Scythe Fleet
Osprey Navy

Gotta love CCP for coming up with fail, upon more fail. They destroy HML and HAM with nerfs, and then are shocked when everyone goes back to RLML's. So clearly something must be wrong with RLMLs- better nerf those as well.

40 second reload time is an eternity. The inability to switch damage types based on the ships you are fighting, is really big problem. So too is not being able to switch misisle types between ships / ECM. Rise infuriates me.


That is not hyperbole. HMLs / HAMs are horrible weapon systems, and those ships provide ZERO application bonuses.

40 seconds reload time is not playable. I stand by this post, and the critisisms that I have been posting since this thread arrived.

Again Mclanis: Get your obtuse views out of your ass. If you seriously think that 40 seconds of reload is playable- I want to hear it, so i can quote it later for posterity, as a shining example of how poorly you understand small gang / solo pvp.
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1182 - 2013-11-12 22:55:44 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:

BUT THERE IT IS SmileBig smileLolShockedRoll

Now where did I lay that quote by Rise saying that would be the first thing addressed in the point release... never mind, continue to ignore that inconvenient fact.

No need, I remember that he did but the second question would be WHEN exactly? Soon(TM) is not good enough. Why not fixing it first and THEN deliver it, why rushing so much?
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#1183 - 2013-11-12 22:56:55 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I would not have thought it possible, but it seems a large section of the community either has completely forgotten how to properly apply hit and run tactics... or simply never understood how to do it in the first place.


Or simply doesn't want to be forced into it with fits they've been using for entirely different purposes. And keep in mind that hit and run tactics require the whole fleet to adopt the same approach or you're going to have hit and run RLML ships warping off and leaving the sustained battle ships behind to fend for themselves for 40s at a time.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#1184 - 2013-11-12 22:58:15 UTC
Viceorvirtue wrote:
A 10% rof nerf and a decent increase on powergrid would actually be great for rlm. It tones down the damage slightly while still alowing the ship using it to adapt to a changing situation. It would be massively better than poarizing the damage output in the way you have presently done.

I keep using the example of a frigate warping in mid fight while you have a low clip. This happens, people die and reship, they will get back in a new frigate and you will be stuck reloading. 40 seconds, as shown in the video is a long time, especially with the new warp changes. While you might be able to get similar dps with split weapons you are still ignoring the fact that light missiles especially because of their relatively low damage output (compared to pulse lasers and rails) need to be able to have the option of firing into a resist hole to actually deal the majority of their damage.

If you can not react to a changing situation in a ship, you have a very good reason not to fly the ship if you have any possible other option.

You keep saying this, but what you are hiding is that you are low on clip because you already killed one or two of the ennemy frigates on field, and this faster than before.

In your situation, with old RLML, you would still be shooting the first frigate when renforcement arrive.

This is in fact exactly the situation where burst RLML are better than before : you can kill an ennemy or two before renforcement arrive and turn the tide of a battle. And I'm not talking huge blob here but guerilla warfare with 5+-3 people on each side, and not necessarily on equal numbers.

Killing VERY fast and gtfo is the key here, no matter a 40s reload because you would die if you stay anyway, no matter how many ammo you have left in your hold ; but everyone here know it I guess... I mean, I'm probably the worst at EVE pvp here so I guess everybody already know about guerilla warfare.

And finaly, the difference with rail Thorax or Omen is that if a frigate come near you you are not harmless and awaiting for a certain death because missiles don't have tracking. Not to mention that Omen and Thorax will have a lot less tank than your RLML Caracal.

Oh, and the blabla about the resist hole is absolute crap. Missiles have low base dps because they apply it a lot more consistently. I doubt a railgun Thorax will apply more than 50% of its dps more than 50% of the time against frigates, and that lead to an effective dps of 25% of the paper dps.

But I know, I'm very bad a EVE, or I would be able to perfectly pilote my ship to have 0 (not low, 0, or dps will fall) transversal to all ship I fire at. Frigates are not that fast after all and AB certainly don't affect turrets...
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#1185 - 2013-11-12 22:58:42 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
I would not have thought it possible, but it seems a large section of the community either has completely forgotten how to properly apply hit and run tactics... or simply never understood how to do it in the first place.


Or simply doesn't want to be forced into it with fits they've been using for entirely different purposes. And keep in mind that hit and run tactics require the whole fleet to adopt the same approach or you're going to have hit and run RLML ships warping off and leaving the sustained battle ships behind to fend for themselves for 40s at a time.


Or people will use ships that can do hit and run but with like 3-15x the volley damage (arty ruptures, up to arty nados)
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1186 - 2013-11-12 23:00:12 UTC
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:

BUT THERE IT IS SmileBig smileLolShockedRoll

Now where did I lay that quote by Rise saying that would be the first thing addressed in the point release... never mind, continue to ignore that inconvenient fact.

No need, I remember that he did but the second question would be WHEN exactly? Soon(TM) is not good enough. Why not fixing it first and THEN deliver it, why rushing so much?

Fair question. Apparently they are pretty confident in the concept as a whole, but wish some time with it live before putting the final polish on it. Separating "Reload" from "Change Ammo" in the code will probably take a bit more time than is available before release. Point releases typically don't take long to come out.

Personally I'd rather see the system in place sooner rather than later, but either way works for me.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#1187 - 2013-11-12 23:02:54 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Quote:
And before you say "use other weapons" the other missile choices that will fit on a cruiser are worse by much further degrees. Calculate damage application on HAM's and without a double web they can't keep up with lights. Run the same calculation on heavies and they have no chance to compete without at least a 3x paint scenario, and who can afford 3 option mids and still fit a decent shield tank?


"The other weapon systems cannot possibly compete without an absurd amount of extra support because the penalty against larger targets is so small and the upside against smaller targets is so big" is exactly why RLMLs are getting nerfed, yes.



http://pbrd.co/1anRRKG
Drake vs cane, no links, no drugs, etc.

The high damage region to the left is with dual webs on the cane.

http://pbrd.co/1anS3JV
Raven (fit pretty much as close to the drake as possible) and fury drake vs cane. Raven is not kin locked, is faster, has a heavy neut, etc.

And before you ask, dps with CN missiles is a bit higher at 384


If I'm going to ask anything it's "What do heavy missiles have to do with rapid light launchers", honestly. Ugh


The obvious association of bieng the other 2 weapons systems available to cruiser pilots, do some number crunching and you'll find what we've mentioned multiple times over the last 59 pages. RLML's are bieng chosen because they apply their damage well whereas HAM's are mediocre, and heavies don't apply well to anything under a battleship (excepting stationary targets). Compare HML/HAM to the other medium weapon equivalents and you'll find yourself looking at a scenario where you ask yourself why missiles exsist in this size class.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#1188 - 2013-11-12 23:03:29 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
I would not have thought it possible, but it seems a large section of the community either has completely forgotten how to properly apply hit and run tactics... or simply never understood how to do it in the first place.


Or simply doesn't want to be forced into it with fits they've been using for entirely different purposes. And keep in mind that hit and run tactics require the whole fleet to adopt the same approach or you're going to have hit and run RLML ships warping off and leaving the sustained battle ships behind to fend for themselves for 40s at a time.


Or people will use ships that can do hit and run but with like 3-15x the volley damage (arty ruptures, up to arty nados)


Another good point.
Morwennon
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1189 - 2013-11-12 23:04:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Morwennon
Connall Tara wrote:
innumeracy


Your numbers are all wrong. Your fury caracal does 1008 damage per volley. Assuming for convenience that the missiles hit instantly:

New RLM caracal:
18 volleys in 50 seconds followed by 40 seconds of reload. 18*1008 = 18144 damage, so 202 dps over 90 seconds

Old RLM caracal (3 BCS)

ROF = 3.79s so you get 90/3.79 = 23.7 volleys in over the 90 seconds. Rounding down, that's 23*1008 = 23184 damage or 258 dps over 90 seconds

Compared to the current caracal, the new one loses 22% of its sustained dps, or a little more than 5k damage over 90 seconds.

gj on using maths bro u r reel smrt
Kat Ayclism
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1190 - 2013-11-12 23:04:50 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

I've been discussing the response to this change almost constantly since the thread was posted, both with the CSM and with my fellow designers. I'll cut to the chase and say that the conclusion is to go ahead with the change, with the understanding that it needs to be carefully looked at following release.

This is a ******** thing to do. You have your feedback and yet you're ignoring it, going to other sources to validate your false belief, or trying to handwave off the overwhelming negativity. You're a smarter person than this, Rise- ******* act like it.


Quote:
I understand that the current RLML missiles are very strong and you guys like them and that many people would be very unhappy for them to get a significant change regardless of the method we chose. We definitely feel they need a change though. It's a weapon system designed to be best in a particular kind of situation rather than being the best choice for most situations and so one way or another it was going to get tweaked. However, if this change means the system isn't powerful in the situations it's meant for (dunking smaller ships), it will get adjusted until it is.

Except they aren't. They're rather weak compared to other weapons systems. Compared to other missiles, yes they are currently better because the other missiles have horrid DAMAGE APPLICATION- not theoretic dps, but the actual, practical application.


Quote:
The second part of this topic is whether or not the other medium weapon systems are actually viable. The way players are behaving says they are, but following this release I'd like to have a conversation internally about missiles as a whole and figure out where we stand. Maybe there is some more changes needed and I'd like to look into that.

You're looking at missile use in too much of a vacuum and ignoring the context they're used it.
Use will stay high because:
-They've long been used (word of mouth and recommendations on what to train will hold out over long periods of time).
-They require less understanding of eve mechanics in general- that is, one needn't really understand falloff, tracking, etc... to be able to use them to better effect than just being blindly ignorant of the way turrets work would have.
-People have favorite weapon types that they can be very reluctant to train out of, or when they have trained others to even use.

Use is a factor to look at, for sure, but it is not the be-all-end-all of determining balance. You have to look for potential biasing factors and you have to look at their damage projection and application in comparison to other weapons systems.


Quote:
As far as the long reload mechanic, the feedback is mixed in this thread and mostly positive elsewhere (CSM, internal development, external forums) from what I can tell.

MIXED IN THIS THREAD? Are you ******* blind? 90-10 is not "mixed."

Quote:
Again, I will say that the concerns about ammo swapping are completely valid and I've talked to my team and we can hopefully address that sometime after Rubicon.

This is a terrible approach and you guys have to ******* stop doing it. It's poisonous and lazy. Figure this **** out before shoveling the mechanic in or you damage your user's faith in you.

Quote:
Part of the reason I lean towards putting this change in is the common sentiment in most balance threads that homogenization is a big fear among our players. I think favoring new types of interactions rather than adjusting numbers slightly within the same mechanic makes the game more interesting, and everything I've heard from the community points that direction as well (except sometimes when doing something new means changing something old).

Introduce a different module or set of modules then? RLMLs are one of the few missile systems actually capable of doing what they should, but instead of recognizing that you flatly label them as "OP" and ignore feedback while only seeking confirmation for your own view.
Kat Ayclism
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1191 - 2013-11-12 23:06:18 UTC

CCP Rise wrote:
PS - saying I don't play the game or use Caracals is completely ridiculous, I think you guys can find more reasonable lines of attack.

I would never suggest that you don't play. I know for a fact that you do, this is why I personally hold you to a much higher standard than I would otherwise. I, however, am quite aware that you're attached to your pet project and can see the confirmation bias in even this post from you.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#1192 - 2013-11-12 23:07:21 UTC
Replace 5% RLML ROF bonus on Caracal and Bellicose with 7.5% RLML reload time bonus? It's really odd that the reload time dominates the performance of the RLML module, but that there is no set of skills that will mitigate the impact of the reload.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Adwokat Diabla
WeebFleet
Tsundere Triad
#1193 - 2013-11-12 23:08:16 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Hmls vs cane, compared to medium beam laser naga (no, not a typo)

http://pbrd.co/1anTbgz

Edit: Naga is using IN standard, which most closely matches the drakes performance. With proper ammo selection, it does more dps at every range, except between 43km and however far the drake can shoot (about 60km in general)


iT'S ALL ABOUT THE HEAVY BEAM NAGA


WOOOOOOOT
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1194 - 2013-11-12 23:08:54 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
I would not have thought it possible, but it seems a large section of the community either has completely forgotten how to properly apply hit and run tactics... or simply never understood how to do it in the first place.


Or simply doesn't want to be forced into it with fits they've been using for entirely different purposes. And keep in mind that hit and run tactics require the whole fleet to adopt the same approach or you're going to have hit and run RLML ships warping off and leaving the sustained battle ships behind to fend for themselves for 40s at a time.


Or people will use ships that can do hit and run but with like 3-15x the volley damage (arty ruptures, up to arty nados)

Most of the arguments against center on the scenario of tacklers being on top of the hit and run group immediately... where your arty Ruptures and arty Nado's will be at a distinct disadvantage.

If I were in a group like that I'd absolutely want some missile boats with burst capability with me keeping the small fry off of me.

To look at it another way, if I'm in a group of 5 Caracals vs a group of say 10 mixed vessels of all sizes, the new systems gives me a distinct advantage over a that same group with a straight nerf applied. Starting with the smaller and/or lightly tanked vessels in the group your burst damage allows you to come in, take out a target or two VERY quickly, and leave to rinse and repeat. Only against the most heavily tanked larger ships in the opposing group will you begin to be at any sort of disadvantage... and by then you've cleared out the riff raff. Or, of course, you simply leave as those heavy vessels weren't what you were hunting to begin with.

Seriously, are people's memories that short....

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Kaeda Maxwell
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#1195 - 2013-11-12 23:10:03 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Viceorvirtue wrote:
A 10% rof nerf and a decent increase on powergrid would actually be great for rlm. It tones down the damage slightly while still alowing the ship using it to adapt to a changing situation. It would be massively better than poarizing the damage output in the way you have presently done.

I keep using the example of a frigate warping in mid fight while you have a low clip. This happens, people die and reship, they will get back in a new frigate and you will be stuck reloading. 40 seconds, as shown in the video is a long time, especially with the new warp changes. While you might be able to get similar dps with split weapons you are still ignoring the fact that light missiles especially because of their relatively low damage output (compared to pulse lasers and rails) need to be able to have the option of firing into a resist hole to actually deal the majority of their damage.

If you can not react to a changing situation in a ship, you have a very good reason not to fly the ship if you have any possible other option.


Killing VERY fast and gtfo is the key here, no matter a 40s reload because you would die if you stay anyway, no matter how many ammo you have left in your hold ; but everyone here know it I guess... I mean, I'm probably the worst at EVE pvp here so I guess everybody already know about guerilla warfare.


Having me and a buddy on the field forces an enemy gang to make very different decisions from them having just him on the field after I had to bug out because my clip is empty. If say I'm a continued (albeit lower dps) threat they still need to burn for me and deal with me which can very well create opportunities for my buddy. Even if I stay with an empty clip I'm no threat for 40 seconds allowing them to make very different calls.

Quote:
And finaly, the difference with rail Thorax or Omen is that if a frigate come near you you are not harmless and awaiting for a certain death because missiles don't have tracking. Not to mention that Omen and Thorax will have a lot less tank than your RLML Caracal.


But those ships have a 50m3 and 25m3 drone bay respectively, both can still do something against frigs when their weapons can't track especially if they have a web. Alternatively they can use things like drop boosters to restore their tracking to a degree. (Missiles have crash but the issue with Heavies is explosion velocity much more then radius so sadly that boat doesnt fly :( )

Quote:
But I know, I'm very bad a EVE, or I would be able to perfectly pilote my ship to have 0 (not low, 0, or dps will fall) transversal to all ship I fire at. Frigates are not that fast after all and AB certainly don't affect turrets...


I won't say you're bad at EVE I've never flow with or to my knowledge against you, so I have no way to judge that. And besides how great of a pilot you are or aren't has no bearing on whether a weapon system is good or not anyway. A great pilot will do better with any weapon system and a poor pilot poorer.
Eli Green
The Arrow Project
#1196 - 2013-11-12 23:10:17 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I would not have thought it possible, but it seems a large section of the community either has completely forgotten how to properly apply hit and run tactics... or simply never understood how to do it in the first place.


It's called artillery.

wumbo
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#1197 - 2013-11-12 23:10:47 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm not sure where the idea comes from that this plan came out of thin air in a few days has come from. Yes, it's late in the release cycle, but we spent weeks talking about how to deal with this problem and went through multiple review processes before anything showed up here, just like we do with all changes.

I also assure you that I am not ignoring negative feedback. There are absolutely a lot of people giving that in this thread. In the past when I've gotten negative feedback which is backed with well articulated arguments I don't hesitate to make changes (see industrial rebalance, electronic attack frig rebalance, battleship rebalance), but in this thread the majority of complaint is very disorganized and unhelpful, that's why I'm instead going with the positive feedback coming from the CSM, from our testing and from some posters here.




If it was a problem you noticed "weeks ago," why was it not placed in its own thread? I do not recall any thread addressing RLML before this one. If I am wrong please link it

That being the case THAT IS WHERE "the idea comes from that this plan came out of thin air in a few days" COMES FROM.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#1198 - 2013-11-12 23:11:38 UTC
LOL I'm am truely surprised by how many people are so butthurt that they will no longer be able WTFBBPWN frig gangs with a single RLML cruiser....


Aw go cry a river somewhere else. Name another frig killing cruiser that uses turrets that are as effective as RLML ones? There aren't simple as that. Medium sized turrets have majore drawback when attacking small ship classes. The new RLML will still have good damage application to smaller ship but now you will have to think tactically rather than just pushing keep at range and F1.

Adapt or die!

Actually no don't adapt and die lots more Twisted

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#1199 - 2013-11-12 23:14:52 UTC
Taoist Dragon wrote:

Adapt or die!

Actually no don't adapt and die lots more Twisted


Many many people have already said they plan to abandon RLMs, and caracal hulls in general entirely, in favor of ships that kill frigs without being useless half the time.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1200 - 2013-11-12 23:14:54 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
And let's extend this conversation to RHMLs, since they are getting mostly ignored in this debate. What is the point of these things at this point? They have all the well-documented weaknesses of HMs, don't benefit from range or explosion bonuses, and suffer from all the inflexibility issues mentioned above.

RHMLs are going to totally rock on Ravens for L4s. As for PvP, battleships are basically dead post-Rubicon anyway - so I don't think it matters what benefit or detriment RHMLs have there.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.