These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Rapid Missile Update

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#201 - 2014-01-23 16:21:56 UTC
Can we add Defender missiles to the rapid launchers?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Ice Cream Truck
#202 - 2014-01-23 16:23:14 UTC
BadAssMcKill wrote:
Giving the Drake an RML bonus would take it from garbage to top tier


+ 1
starvoid
Perkone
Caldari State
#203 - 2014-01-23 16:27:00 UTC
BadAssMcKill wrote:
Giving the Drake an RML bonus would take it from garbage to top tier


+1

Let the dreaded drake fleets of Intrepid Crossing rise again \\o//
Maxor Swift
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#204 - 2014-01-23 17:29:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Maxor Swift
CCP Rise wrote:
Please focus on the part of the post where I said we considered bigger changes because of how people felt about the extended reload in general, but decided to make a tweak and wait for more data and feedback rather than reversing things too quickly.

If you want to help us out on this topic, try to give specific reasons or examples and then just hang in there and watch for updates heading into the next few months.

Also, a small response to the comparison with jamming: I think parts of the experience are obviously the same (not being able to fire for a period of time), but there a lot of other parts to compensate (or at least that is the idea). With RML you get to choose when that period of time will be, you get to control a lot of factors that contribute to how significant that period of time is (how your ship is fit, where you're located in space, what targets you choose etc), and you get the huge benefit of very high front-loaded damage. Not disregarding the fact that not being able to shoot doesn't feel good, just pointing out that they are different situations in some important ways.


Please focus on the part of our feedback where we say we hate the reload time and ammo capacity and given that HMLs are just awful the options for medium missile systems are pitifully small.

"What you talking about willis"
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#205 - 2014-01-23 17:39:51 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
...You are throwing pathetic answers without even understanding the other posts. If you could read, a minimal level, you woudl see we were discussing targets standign still or nearly standign still, like double webbed scrammed targets.

Now.. if you cannot read or use the brain to answer, please, stay out of the conversation.


Hurling abuse at people with an opposing point of view is a good way of ensuring that their view will never change.

You're clearly an intelligent guy, but this does not come across in the above exchange.

Your point that HMs do not so much damage to a stationary AF is accepted. We will have to differ on whether it represents an extreme case. A stationary AF with a full set of halo implants would certainly seem like an extreme case to me.

Nevertheless, even then, HMs are not a great weapon against this target. No one is denying this. In the more normal case where that AF is moving or orbiting, a railgun, beam laser or artillery cannon is not an optimal weapon either.

Blapping frigates that are heading straight towards you is an ability that is really only useful in PVE, with very few exceptions, no?

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#206 - 2014-01-23 17:53:58 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
...You are throwing pathetic answers without even understanding the other posts. If you could read, a minimal level, you woudl see we were discussing targets standign still or nearly standign still, like double webbed scrammed targets.

Now.. if you cannot read or use the brain to answer, please, stay out of the conversation.


Hurling abuse at people with an opposing point of view is a good way of ensuring that their view will never change.

You're clearly an intelligent guy, but this does not come across in the above exchange.

Your point that HMs do not so much damage to a stationary AF is accepted. We will have to differ on whether it represents an extreme case. A stationary AF with a full set of halo implants would certainly seem like an extreme case to me.

Nevertheless, even then, HMs are not a great weapon against this target. No one is denying this. In the more normal case where that AF is moving or orbiting, a railgun, beam laser or artillery cannon is not an optimal weapon either.

Blapping frigates that are heading straight towards you is an ability that is really only useful in PVE, with very few exceptions, no?



I was not referencign to you. Was referencign to the guy that is tryign to claim that RApids are incredble and powerful, yet when I point exactly a situation when they are good he attacks me saying its an absurd situation.

Just attacking the fact that he did nto even read and tried to interpret the text before spewign his nonsense, regardless of the nonsense orientation.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2014-01-23 18:21:54 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

I was not referencign to you. Was referencign to the guy that is tryign to claim that RApids are incredble and powerful, yet when I point exactly a situation when they are good he attacks me saying its an absurd situation.

Just attacking the fact that he did nto even read and tried to interpret the text before spewign his nonsense, regardless of the nonsense orientation.


Yes of course I understand that, but the point still stands that the other guy is not going to change his point of view as a result of textual abuse either Smile

Anyone can abuse me all they want. It won't make the least bit of difference. I form my opinions through rigorous mathematical analysis, empirical observation and practical application on SiSi and TQ - particularly TQ where it really counts.

I believe that a green killboard comes through acceptance and adaptation to that which is, rather than the expressions of opinions of that which I believe should be.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#208 - 2014-01-23 18:25:54 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:


Its called a huginn/rapier. If you're in a missile gang its wise to bring one. Run some graphs with double web against a cruiser and heavies. You get all dps on target.

I know heavies and hams don't do full damage to a frig, that's the point. If that were the case all your weapon systems would be like rlml in application.


You trying to tell us that there's absolutely no problem with a cruiser mounted weapon system (ie. HMLs) absolutely NEEDING two webs (which completely disregards their range advantage and brings you into a range at which you WILL get completely toasted) in order to actually engage other cruisers?

You're deranged. "Durrhurrhurr, you want better damage application against your own ship size? Throw away literally every advantage your weapon system has (RANGE) and try not to die to things you could deal with otherwise!" Yes. The point of the Cruiser mounted weapon systems is primarily for fighting cruisers and larger. But they fail to apply damage to cruisers properly, with cruiser grade weapons- something very few other ships have to deal with. If there are people whining about "wah my T2 fury HMLs aren't scratching frigates buff HMLs", then they're dumb because they should be using precision/faction if they HAVE to- or better yet letting smaller ships take care of said frigates if possible. The PROBLEM here, is that CRUISERS ARE HAVING PROBLEMS FIGHTING OTHER GODDAMN CRUISERS. The removal of RLMLs as an alternative to these subpar systems exacerbates the problem and that's why people are complaining so much. A lot of people are trying to campaign for reverting RLMLs because they have no faith in CCP fixing the actual problem (HAMs and HMLs), I think.
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#209 - 2014-01-23 18:41:42 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:


Its called a huginn/rapier. If you're in a missile gang its wise to bring one. Run some graphs with double web against a cruiser and heavies. You get all dps on target.

I know heavies and hams don't do full damage to a frig, that's the point. If that were the case all your weapon systems would be like rlml in application.


I'm sorry, how could I be so delusioned to call it unballanced all you need to do is bring a Recon ship and the medium missiles can hit medium targets for full damage, how could I be so stupid.

and so stupid to engage in this discusion.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#210 - 2014-01-23 18:58:14 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:


Its called a huginn/rapier. If you're in a missile gang its wise to bring one. Run some graphs with double web against a cruiser and heavies. You get all dps on target.

I know heavies and hams don't do full damage to a frig, that's the point. If that were the case all your weapon systems would be like rlml in application.


You trying to tell us that there's absolutely no problem with a cruiser mounted weapon system (ie. HMLs) absolutely NEEDING two webs (which completely disregards their range advantage and brings you into a range at which you WILL get completely toasted) in order to actually engage other cruisers?

You're deranged. "Durrhurrhurr, you want better damage application against your own ship size? Throw away literally every advantage your weapon system has (RANGE) and try not to die to things you could deal with otherwise!" Yes. The point of the Cruiser mounted weapon systems is primarily for fighting cruisers and larger. But they fail to apply damage to cruisers properly, with cruiser grade weapons- something very few other ships have to deal with. If there are people whining about "wah my T2 fury HMLs aren't scratching frigates buff HMLs", then they're dumb because they should be using precision/faction if they HAVE to- or better yet letting smaller ships take care of said frigates if possible. The PROBLEM here, is that CRUISERS ARE HAVING PROBLEMS FIGHTING OTHER GODDAMN CRUISERS. The removal of RLMLs as an alternative to these subpar systems exacerbates the problem and that's why people are complaining so much. A lot of people are trying to campaign for reverting RLMLs because they have no faith in CCP fixing the actual problem (HAMs and HMLs), I think.


Did I touch a nerve? Reread what I quoted. He indicated that HML could not apply their dps. I countered that with 2 webs hml will apply all their damage using fury ammo against a low sig cruiser (scyfi). Stop thinking eve is built for solo players. If you're in a gang, then heavies are usable. I never said that this is fair, but it seems that ccp want medium missiles, particularly heavies to have support ships to apply their damage.

Explain this. Solo, you have a HML ship. You want to use that great range to your advantage. How do you expect to keep a target tackled at 40-60km by yourself? Maybe links and faction point? Seems excessive on most hulls. So then I ask.. why not use hams? That makes more sense in a solo enviroment where unbonused reach out to 20km, well within point range, and apply dps better than heavies without the need for double webs. Maybe just a single web which is workable into most fits.

Kagura, you're right. I misread your previous post. Sorry bout that **** happens.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2014-01-23 19:03:03 UTC
aaaaaaaand BOOM!!!!!

With this buff we're back to Caracals everywhere.


Oh, and this also kills HML's again as it completely muscles them out.



EDIT: WTB light missile bonuses for Drake and Cyclone please
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#212 - 2014-01-23 19:05:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
BadAssMcKill wrote:
Giving the Drake an RML bonus would take it from garbage to top tier

How is this going to move it to top tier exactly? It's not like RLMLs excel in either PvE or PvP… They're only marginally useful if you use them in a limited capacity as a secondary weapon system. Emphasis on "marginally".

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Elusive Panda
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#213 - 2014-01-23 19:21:05 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:

Blapping frigates that are heading straight towards you is an ability that is really only useful in PVE, with very few exceptions, no?


No, it’s of paramount importance in PvP when you’re trying to keep tacklers at bay. It allows you to create a « deathfield » around you for any frigs that would want to burn straight at you and land scram. You force them to come at you at an angle or die, this in turn allows you to better dictate range. The fact that missiles do not have this property make them ill suited for fighting outnumbered against smaller ships. (I’m talking medium weapons here).

The Nomen is a prime exemple of this fighting style.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#214 - 2014-01-23 19:24:16 UTC
Elusive Panda wrote:
No, it’s of paramount importance in PvP when you’re trying to keep tacklers at bay.

Yeah, one. If there's more than one you're screwed.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#215 - 2014-01-23 19:26:53 UTC
We're not going to see any changes for Rubicon 1.1, are we?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Ice Cream Truck
#216 - 2014-01-23 19:37:47 UTC
Drake Hater
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#217 - 2014-01-23 19:42:41 UTC
Ice Cream Truck wrote:
Drake Hater

I actually love the Drake. That still doesn't change the fact that it sucks...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#218 - 2014-01-23 19:56:48 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
BadAssMcKill wrote:
Giving the Drake an RML bonus would take it from garbage to top tier

How is this going to move it to top tier exactly? It's not like RLMLs excel in either PvE or PvP… They're only marginally useful if you use them in a limited capacity as a secondary weapon system. Emphasis on "marginally".


you quite plainly have no idea what you're talking about. RLMLs used to be death incarnate against Frigates, and they're still pretty damn effective in numbers.

Removed a killmail. -ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

gay gamers for jesus
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#219 - 2014-01-23 19:58:21 UTC
maybe i was too harsh i'm efting that fit and it looks pretty visionary. hats off to you for thinking outside the box i guess?

gay gamers for jesus
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#220 - 2014-01-23 20:00:56 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Elusive Panda wrote:
No, it’s of paramount importance in PvP when you’re trying to keep tacklers at bay.

Yeah, one. If there's more than one you're screwed.


You're ******** and have no idea wot you're talking about.