Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hi, time to visit this thread again!

I wanted to let those of you still paying attention here know that we aren't satisfied with the current state of rapid launchers and are expecting to make changes in coming releases to improve the situation.

For now, I don't have details to give you but I want to let you know what we're looking at.

First, and most importantly, it's important to me that this mechanic feels fun to use. It still hasn't been that long since they hit TQ but a lot of the initial feedback is not great on this aspect. It's likely that for Rubicon 1.1 we will make a small adjustment to both RLML and RHML to either give you more active time or less reload time, I'll let you know when that change is pinned down exactly. Going past 1.1 we want to collect more data and feedback so that if we make a larger change (which we are considering) to the system as a whole it's as informed as possible. That larger change would come either in 1.2 or in summer depending on what it was.

Second, I've been working on the ammo swapping issue and will not be able to get in a change for 1.1. Solutions for this have been messy and we aren't satisfied enough with any of them to try and make them fit in this release. As we iterate after 1.1 I want to solve this issue one way or another.

Last, I'm doing some investigation for getting some kind of reload timer work going. Can't say if and when this would happen but it would have enormous value so I'm looking into it.

So when do i get my missle SP refund as for PVE i can only use HAMs /cruises which is far from ideal.

Wild idea fresh of my head
instead of playing with that great idea of huge rate of fire with super long reload why not just give rapids a penalty to application stats ( maybe 10%) while reverting them to pre rubi status - biggest grudge with rapid lights we had that they were to good vs all targets ( nearly perfect application vs all targets ) - this would fix the pesky rapid lights but the problem would remain with the oh god awfull application on heavys ( time to buff those finaly )

Really there is no place in the game for rapid lights. If you want an anti-frigate missile system it should be light missile launchers. Just the same as it is for turrets.

Giving cruisers the ability to destroy frigates easily without a compensating penalty against cruisers simply obsoletes frigates.

Or are we going to also have a proliferation of "rapid 150mm railgun arrays"?

It's time to end the experiment. Dump this wrong-headed idea. Force anti-frigate cruisers to fit light missiles and (probably) buff heavy missiles a little bit.

The "compensating penalty" is the bit where they have around half the dps of competing cruiser weapon systems. The idea that RLML ships somehow obsoleted frigates is quite simply absurd; their roles do not and never did overlap. RLMLs were good at killing frigates, but so are all of the other effective anti-tackle solutions; that's kind of what makes them effective anti-tackle.

Also, based on your argument that cruisers shouldn't be able to destroy frigates efficiently, will you be arguing for all drone damage bonuses to be revised to exclude light drones?

Thanks for the update re: swapping and reload timers!

In regards to the Up-time vs. Reload-time disjunction: Are you of the mind that it is an either/or situation? While it would not make the melodramatic posters happy, I could see a very small change to both being beneficial. By small I mean ~5sec less reload and ~5 more units of ammo in the clip for RLML.

I actually agree here. The old system was way too effective against all targets and the new one is just dull to fly in combat(though I do think the ammo swap compounds the issue.)

I don't like the idea of making weapon systems for larger ships that let them very easily apply high DPs to small signatures and large signatures. It seems to go against the very grain of the class system that makes eve PvP so unique.

LML always gave cruisers the option to fight frigates with a large penalty to DPs to larger signatures which is a fair trade off.

What is the intended purpose for rlml and rhml?

Use the standard reload, give 100% bonus to ROF while overheated. Balance using module HP.

Firstly, I agree with Arthur in that it is good to see an update of any kind and especially of the more positive sort. While I'm not entirely satisfied with the limited scope of your update, it is positive and fits this thread well so thank you.

On to the post I chose to quote and highlight, I am of the opinion that a quick fix to RLML/RHML's will help to improve the overall missile atmosphere but the larger goal should be to take a long hard look at missiles as a whole and individually. How does each missile function on it's own, and how does it function as part of the entire progression? And, as a missile pilot and given the discussions I have seen/heard, I feel that the opinion of turret pilots in regard to missiles being "fine" is taken without a big enough grain of salt. Without claiming trolls it is not a far-fetched idea, given the careers available in Eve, that certain factions of players have a vested interest in missiles staying in their current state.

Take for example the incursion community as a whole, they are highly set in their ways, stubborn, and overall resistant to any changes in the "incursion formula". I am not arguing a missiles-in-incursions" point, that does not belong here, instead I bring that up to illustrate that a community like that is highly resistant to anything which might change their accepted play style. A more viable system of missiles, with more than 1 missile-specific module, could hamper certain play styles or force changes and those groups are being represented in some of the posters claiming that missiles do not need changes.

Missiles might have been balanced in the past, but currently they do not measure up to turrets equally and choosing to play with missiles is much too situational a choice to force on an entire weapon group. As a missile pilot I roam the digital Eve-verse feeling like I am harboring a handicap, and coming to the forums and seeing everyone telling me that missiles are "fine" is an affront everyone that has tried to make missiles competitive outside of their, mostly, PvE niche.

In closing, a "quick fix" to make the Rapid launchers more usable is definitely a good thing, but missiles as a whole are due for a lot of love and I know that I would very much appreciate some clarity and feedback as the process evolves to help mitigate the feeling that missile pilots are marginalized and that representatives of the dug-in "don't mess with my play formula" groups have too much of a voice in the process.

Personally I would rather the rlm nerf be reverted, keep the pg increase to prevent tripe lse from happening and lower rof by 10% instead of raising rof and reload time. Reasoning is simple, extended reload time, especially in a ship with low damage makes you regret undocking it whenever you have to reload or swap ammo. Now I know you wouldn't want to do this mostly because it would be sen as a failure of a 'fun new interesting tense mechanic' that the 40 second reload was intended to be but until you can disassociate the act of ammo swapping with actually reloading the launcher then any extended reload is going to be punishing and unfun.

Also this will make rlms less binary than they are now, right now they can act as a frigate blender but against multiple targets or anything reasonably tanky such as assault frigs or cruisers you wish you had used a different ship instead. Fofs, while I know Rise does not claim to use them or see them as good, are situationally fantastic yet without a 10 second reload time you start playing the 'will I be jammed twice in a row or not' game trying to figure out if you should swap to them or not against common things like ecm drones. Currently you would need to be jammed 3-4 times in a row to make fofs worth it, with a 20 second reload you would need to be jammed twice in a row, 10 second reload means you can switch to fofs and actually immediately respond to being jammed.

The biggest complaints about the rlm is that you can't respond or react well to things with a 40 second reload and that sucks all the fun out of using them. The solution is separating the act of swapping ammo from the act of reloading but since you can't do that then even a 20 second reload time is probably going to be unhelpful. Releasing burst launchers as an entirely different missile launcher would be far preferable as it gives you much more time to actually balance it (no, internal testing and a week on sisi is not enough time for proper balancing) from the ground up as well as potentially having the reload and ammo swap disassociation be specific to the launcher itself for better overall weapon balancing.