These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2721 - 2013-12-05 11:33:08 UTC
Silverbackyererse wrote:
My tin-foil-hattery says this is happening to reduce server loading. I recall a CCP examination of server loading a while back and launcher based weapons are server resource hungry.

Less launcher ships flying around = big win for CCP.
Tell me I'm wrong. ;)

Assuming we're both wearing our tinfoil hats and are tuned into the same frequency…

• Stealth bombers are right up near the top in terms of missile use (torpedoes and bombs)
• All of the mission NPCs in PvE use missiles to some extent (usually the slow-moving variety)
• POS and structure grinding typically sees missiles utilized (and to a lesser degree, POS defenses)

So I'm not entirely sure how you could eliminate missile use per say, but one solution would be to exchange flight time for missile velocity so that missile objects don't last as long. It does seem odd that we introduced 2 new rapid fire "burst" launchers that have the potential to dump a lot of new objects in a relatively short period of time.

Therefore, I see your conspiracy theory and raise you one: the 40-second reload time is intended to reduce server load. Twisted

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

Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2722 - 2013-12-05 11:59:51 UTC
Maxor Swift wrote:
I just bought a cerb about 2 weeks before they ruined it now im desperately trying to make HAMs work on it sigh.

Hey, you don't have to struggle - precision rigged hero Cerb is a way to go! With 2 webs, TP and a long point your HAM's will deal 30% damage to almost anything.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#2723 - 2013-12-05 12:28:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Silverbackyererse wrote:
Personally, I smell a nerf to all launcher based weapons systems to the point where they are little used.

My tin-foil-hattery says this is happening to reduce server loading. I recall a CCP examination of server loading a while back and launcher based weapons are server resource hungry.

Less launcher ships flying around = big win for CCP.

Tell me I'm wrong. ;)
I'm curious, I can see where your coming from and would never presume you to be wrong but would not hundreds of Domis with 5 drones a piece create as much if not more server load as the same amount of Ravens pumping out cruise missiles?

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2724 - 2013-12-05 13:22:32 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Silverbackyererse wrote:
Personally, I smell a nerf to all launcher based weapons systems to the point where they are little used.

My tin-foil-hattery says this is happening to reduce server loading. I recall a CCP examination of server loading a while back and launcher based weapons are server resource hungry.

Less launcher ships flying around = big win for CCP.

Tell me I'm wrong. ;)
I'm curious, I can see where your coming from and would never presume you to be wrong but would not hundreds of Domis with 5 drones a piece create as much if not more server load as the same amount of Ravens pumping out cruise missiles?


Probably more. If you think about it drones are almost certainly more resource intensive that missiles. The bottom line is that CCP are simply clueless when it comes to game balance. There's no nefarious plot to ruin missiles, they just don't know what they are doing.
Aivo Dresden
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2725 - 2013-12-05 13:52:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Aivo Dresden
CCP Rise wrote:

This translates to a Raven with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 926 dps
This translates to a Caracal with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Light Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 409 dps


DPS would suggest it's sustained damage. However, you're only counting the time it's actually launching missiles, not the 40 seconds it takes to reload the launcher. Those numbers should be halved, at least. You don't count DPS and then exclude downtime caused by reloads or cool downs. That's just so misleading I don't even have the words to describe it.

Not to mention that 40 seconds in PvP is the difference between life and death.

Congratulations, after ruining HMs and then HAMs (Although arguably the problem here is more the ammo, and possibly less the launcher platform) you've now broken RLML as well.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#2726 - 2013-12-05 13:55:52 UTC
Yes, in the case of the RLML at least, the sustained DPS is reduced from before by 20%

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

Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#2727 - 2013-12-05 13:57:39 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Silverbackyererse wrote:
Personally, I smell a nerf to all launcher based weapons systems to the point where they are little used.

My tin-foil-hattery says this is happening to reduce server loading. I recall a CCP examination of server loading a while back and launcher based weapons are server resource hungry.

Less launcher ships flying around = big win for CCP.

Tell me I'm wrong. ;)
I'm curious, I can see where your coming from and would never presume you to be wrong but would not hundreds of Domis with 5 drones a piece create as much if not more server load as the same amount of Ravens pumping out cruise missiles?


Didn't they do a ton of optimisation around the way that these missiles were being calculated on the server after realising this. Sure its in an old dev blog.

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

Aivo Dresden
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2728 - 2013-12-05 14:09:44 UTC
The sad, sad truth is that unfortunately there just aren't any alternatives. You pull out stats saying 'well xxx people still use the launchers so from that we conclude they are still good and popular". Again so misleading. There just are no better alternatives for people that only have missile skills. What else are they going to fit on their cruiser? HMs? HAMs? They are even worse of.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2729 - 2013-12-05 16:15:12 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Congratulations, after ruining HMs and then HAMs
Hu ? When did they ruined HAM ? In 3 years I only saw them buffed...
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#2730 - 2013-12-05 16:22:58 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
All zee missiles?


Yes All Zee Missiles.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#2731 - 2013-12-05 16:37:26 UTC
Is anyone keeping track of the last Dev update on what's going on in this "closely followed" thread?
Or is CCP still trying the silent treatment for missile and Caldari pilots?
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#2732 - 2013-12-05 16:40:54 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Seranova Farreach wrote:
ccp needs to un nerf heavy missles, buff explosive speed on hams, completly fix the phoenix and citadel torps/cruises

and finally cut the reload time in half for rapid launchers.

sad as it is i think CCP rise is corrupt and trying to nerf missles and missle ships into the ground cause he has his own agenda against them or perhaps outside influence is trying to get missiles nerfed.

Too long has gunnery been the go to for pvp! missile users rise up! and FIRE ZEE MISSILES!

All zee missiles?


yes, every last one of ZEE MISSILES!

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2733 - 2013-12-05 16:41:19 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Congratulations, after ruining HMs and then HAMs
Hu ? When did they ruined HAM ? In 3 years I only saw them buffed...

That is true - they were buffed, just not enough apparently.
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#2734 - 2013-12-05 16:47:32 UTC
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Congratulations, after ruining HMs and then HAMs
Hu ? When did they ruined HAM ? In 3 years I only saw them buffed...

That is true - they were buffed, just not enough apparently.



Needed a bit more buff than they got, and HM's should have application where HAM's are now with HAM's bieng a bit better.
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#2735 - 2013-12-05 16:48:51 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

This translates to a Raven with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 926 dps
This translates to a Caracal with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Light Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 409 dps


DPS would suggest it's sustained damage. However, you're only counting the time it's actually launching missiles, not the 40 seconds it takes to reload the launcher. Those numbers should be halved, at least. You don't count DPS and then exclude downtime caused by reloads or cool downs. That's just so misleading I don't even have the words to describe it.

Not to mention that 40 seconds in PvP is the difference between life and death.

Congratulations, after ruining HMs and then HAMs (Although arguably the problem here is more the ammo, and possibly less the launcher platform) you've now broken RLML as well.


this this omg this ccp read this gawdamnit.

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2736 - 2013-12-05 17:22:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Is anyone keeping track of the last Dev update on what's going on in this "closely followed" thread?
Or is CCP still trying the silent treatment for missile and Caldari pilots?

There's not much to keep track of - nothing's changed. Priorities have been a) margin trading scams, b) contemplating nerfing Serpentis webs and c) the new uninspired SoE Nestor battleship. They're probably just waiting for this thread to lose interest so they can go "See? People have embraced the new changes."

Considering the number of post-Rubicon patches that have been released, they've had more than enough of an opportunity to make any minor changes. It seems clear that RLML and RHMLs are destined to be niche weapons that only serve to further blobs. Why we would want to encourage this at the expense of solo PvP is beyond me.

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

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#2737 - 2013-12-05 17:42:03 UTC
So.. threw a HM fit together on 2 minmatar cruiser hulls and experimented. I used scyFI and bellicose for these identical fits. I'm on my phone so you'll have to go with the basic explanation.

The fit:

x2 target painters
x2 bcu for belli, x3 for scyFI
Meta dcu
x2 t1 rigors
1 nano
LSE (meta4 on belli)
T2 em screen reinforcer rig
Warp disruptor
Meta mwd
Crash booster

Scythe is 20k ehp
Belli is like 11k

The key is using your speed as tank. I killed a daredevil with the belli. Got me down to half armor but was able to alpha his reps. So HMs are usable.. but your fit tends to be extreme with minimal tank.

I did not fit caracal this way, but should also be semi effective as it also is a quick ship. Works great fot hit n runs, with no 40s reload.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2738 - 2013-12-05 17:59:50 UTC
Every Problem With Rapid Light Launchers In Point Form
TL;DR - If you agree, please "like" this post. We need to continue to get the word out to players and keep this thread active.
…..

These were released on a whim, without any advance notice, testing or consultation with players.
• When factoring in reloads, overall DPS (including Caldari kinetic bonuses where applicable) has dropped a staggering 23%! Contrary to what's been stated, in addition to being a completely radical change - this was also a massive nerf.
• Ammunition capacity has been reduced by 77.75% and fitting requirements have increased almost 100%, which means in addition to the DPS loss - ships now have less configuration for tank or other modules.
• Missiles have the advantage of applying any damage type, which is removed with the inability to quickly switch ammunition. Pre-loading multiple damage types only waters down DPS and prevents adaptation to targets with different resistances. Even an instant ammo swap still wouldn't address the 40-second reload time (because 18 rounds doesn't last long).
• All tactical skill is lost since opponents now need only survive for 45 seconds. The 40-second reload window affords them enough time to repair whatever damage was incurred, reload ancillary boosters/repairers and call in reinforcements.
• Eliminates missile-based ships from solo PvP, because the damage application with heavy assault and heavy missiles is still abysmal.

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

Aivo Dresden
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2739 - 2013-12-05 18:05:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Aivo Dresden
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Text

You don't have a web. Like how bad would the Daredevil pilot have to be, to actually die to that? How did he not get away? Not to mention that a frigate got you in half armor. Now run that again where you run in to a Vexor, or Maller. :P
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2740 - 2013-12-05 18:06:35 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
The key is using your speed as tank. I killed a daredevil with the belli. Got me down to half armor but was able to alpha his reps. So HMs are usable.. but your fit tends to be extreme with minimal tank.

If they're able to intercept and scram you though, you're dead - because you've sacrificed all your tank for target painters and rigors. Range is your only advantage, and if they sensor dampen you you'll either have to close to mitigate that or switch to FoF missiles and hope for the best (but this also prevents the use of target painters). I do applaud your efforts though.

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