These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

[Aegis] Missile balance package

First post First post First post
Author
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1081 - 2015-08-21 17:16:47 UTC
Atuesuel wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Heyo

It's getting pretty close to release and I have a lot of balance changes we need to talk about!

This thread is for discussion on a package of missile changes that we are pretty excited to see the results of. So what's in this package?

  • Missile Guidance Enhancers - Low slot modules that increase missile explosion velocity, lower explosion radius, increase missile flight time and increase missile velocity
  • Missile Guidance Computers - Mid slot modules that increase missile explosion velocity, lower explosion radius, increase missile flight time and increase missile velocity. These modules can use Missile Precision and Missile Range scripts and can of course be overheated.
  • Heavy Missile Damage is being increased by 5% for all Heavy Missile Types
  • Torpedo volume is being reduced by half, meaning you can fit twice as many Torpedo's in all launchers (except polarized, which have had their capacity reduced) as before.

  • Some specifics on the new modules:

    We are starting with 3 types in each group. Tech I, Compact (lower fitting requirements), and Tech II. Faction variations would certainly be on the table for later releases when we are happy with the tuning of numbers on these first mods.

    The numbers:

    Missile Guidance Enhancer I
    10 CPU, 1 PG, 4.5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Pro-Nav Compact Missile Guidance Enhancer
    8 CPU, 1 PG, 5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 5.5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Missile Guidance Enhancer II
    15 CPU, 1 PG, 5.5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 6% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time

    Missile Guidance Computer I
    28 CPU, 1 PG, 5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 4% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Astro-Inertial Compact Missile Guidance Computer
    24 CPU, 1 PG 6% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 4.5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Missile Guidance Computer II
    35 CPU, 1 PG 7.5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 5.5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time

    These are set very close to the corresponding turret module numbers and may need adjustment after deployment.

    We would have liked to include disruption modules to go along with these enhancement modules but there are actually some technical hurdles we need to figure out and we didn't want to keep holding back on adding these in the mean time. Look for those sometime in the future.

    Let us know what you think!



    So now that missiles have enhancers when the ****! are we going to get e-war that works on missiles ??


    When missiles are effective enough to actually need e-war.
    No need to make missiles worse without making them better first.
    Sobaan Tali
    Caldari Quick Reaction Force
    #1082 - 2015-08-22 00:21:47 UTC
    When CCP releases them...which, unfortunately, won't likely have anything to do with timing it to when missiles actually need them. Joe is at least right about when they should be released, just not necessarily when they will be released.

    "Tomahawks?"

    "----in' A, right?"

    "Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

    "----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

    Imryn Xaran
    Coherent Light Enterprises
    #1083 - 2015-09-02 09:19:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Imryn Xaran
    I don’t think Defenders are the answer to mitigating missile damage here.

    Turret damage can be mitigated by ECM, damps, and TP’s. A turret ship pilot can fit ECCM, Sebos, tracking computers, and turrets with high tracking to counter this.

    Missile damage can be mitigated by ECM, damps, and defenders. A missile ship pilot can also fit ECCM and Sebos, but can’t do anything about defenders.

    Defenders are unique (and terrible) in that they require ammunition and a regular missile launcher – none of the other counter measures have this requirement, and there are plenty of ships out there that can’t fit a missile launcher at all.

    What is needed is a new mid slot module – call it a “Missile point defence” module. It would represent something like the Phalanx CIWS LINK used today, but with lasers to explain the lack of an ammo requirement.

    Each module fitted should be capable of engaging a certain number of missiles per second (so it can be overwhelmed by large numbers of incoming missiles) and have a percent chance of destroying each missile engaged. It should be possible to load scripts which give it a better chance of destroying different types of missiles (small / medium / large?) at the cost of reduced chance of destroying the un-scripted types. The module cycle time should be long enough to prevent rapidly switching scripts – this makes the script choice a bit more important.

    The number of missiles that each module can engage should be limited, something like 10 small, 6 medium or 3 large (modified by scripts).

    Very importantly, the speed of the ship mounting the system should have a negative impact on the chance to destroy incoming missiles. This means that very fast ships that already mitigate lots of missile damage do not benefit as much from this module.

    Missile pilots still cannot directly counter this through their fiting choices like turret pilots can, but at least they can overwhelm it with numbers or play mind games with script choices.

    Higher meta versions would be able to engage more targets or have a better chance of destroying a missile, or even have a better base chance of destroying one type but worse for others, etc

    As for defenders, they should be either removed from the game or given a different role. They could be given a "Fleet Defence" role if they were changed into something like a mini FOF missile that only targeted enimy missiles, or maybe drones as well. This option would be hell on the hamsters so probably not a good idea.

    Just my 2c.
    O2 jayjay
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1084 - 2015-09-02 13:33:16 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Heyo

    It's getting pretty close to release and I have a lot of balance changes we need to talk about!

    This thread is for discussion on a package of missile changes that we are pretty excited to see the results of. So what's in this package?

  • Missile Guidance Enhancers - Low slot modules that increase missile explosion velocity, lower explosion radius, increase missile flight time and increase missile velocity
  • Missile Guidance Computers - Mid slot modules that increase missile explosion velocity, lower explosion radius, increase missile flight time and increase missile velocity. These modules can use Missile Precision and Missile Range scripts and can of course be overheated.
  • Heavy Missile Damage is being increased by 5% for all Heavy Missile Types
  • Torpedo volume is being reduced by half, meaning you can fit twice as many Torpedo's in all launchers (except polarized, which have had their capacity reduced) as before.

  • Some specifics on the new modules:

    We are starting with 3 types in each group. Tech I, Compact (lower fitting requirements), and Tech II. Faction variations would certainly be on the table for later releases when we are happy with the tuning of numbers on these first mods.

    The numbers:

    Missile Guidance Enhancer I
    10 CPU, 1 PG, 4.5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Pro-Nav Compact Missile Guidance Enhancer
    8 CPU, 1 PG, 5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 5.5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Missile Guidance Enhancer II
    15 CPU, 1 PG, 5.5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 6% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time

    Missile Guidance Computer I
    28 CPU, 1 PG, 5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 4% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Astro-Inertial Compact Missile Guidance Computer
    24 CPU, 1 PG 6% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 4.5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time
    Missile Guidance Computer II
    35 CPU, 1 PG 7.5% bonus to explosion velocity, explosion radius and 5.5% bonus to missile velocity and missile flight time

    These are set very close to the corresponding turret module numbers and may need adjustment after deployment.

    We would have liked to include disruption modules to go along with these enhancement modules but there are actually some technical hurdles we need to figure out and we didn't want to keep holding back on adding these in the mean time. Look for those sometime in the future.

    Let us know what you think!


    Why do missles need a buff? Since blaster have no range and requires you to sit on top of your target while dealing only therm and kin damage, are they going to get a buff? Or are is every weapon system going to do %10 less damage then blasters but have %2000 the range. Im just asking for a better isolation when it comes to different weapons. Nothing should hit harder then blasters but with all these buffs to other weapons lately and their ability to switch damage types. Blasters are staring to become to dumb man weapon.
    Mike Whiite
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #1085 - 2015-09-03 10:40:08 UTC
    Has there been any feedback, from CCP, since the deployment of these modules?

    In combination with the introduction of the stacking penalties?
    Nafensoriel
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #1086 - 2015-09-03 12:33:27 UTC
    Unfortunately no there has been no response.
    The topic has quite obviously been deemed hostile or toxic and standard practice is to ignore such things.

    I know chance is still trying to get a statement but how much traction he is getting is still unknown.
    Zan Shiro
    Alternative Enterprises
    #1087 - 2015-09-03 13:50:10 UTC
    Nafensoriel wrote:
    Unfortunately no there has been no response.
    The topic has quite obviously been deemed hostile or toxic and standard practice is to ignore such things.

    I know chance is still trying to get a statement but how much traction he is getting is still unknown.



    This.


    Or probably half jest/half truth.....they'd have to be used en masse to have something to say about it really lol. Saw em, eft'd them, ran them a little and....said well let me put that TP back on as well I have maxed skills for them and just one tp seemed to fair pretty good against what was becoming a 1 mid 1 lo slot missile mod fit.

    For how I run my ships....range was never an issue I needed fixing tbh. Range was not a missile issue, to me and many others I assume. I will even state, again, I'd have given the caveat of less range to boost the stats I do care about. And the 2 slots was too deep a tradeoff when tp did me fine with just 1 slot (assuming typical 1 tp fit, not say golem).

    Did a rather unscientific study here for proof of heavy use. Googled say tengu fit and looked for new mods used. Cricket cricket. Saw fits prepatch galore. very few saying omfg yes......run these new mods. I tbh fit blind here and just swapped crap....I could not find a front runner to be the new "vanilla" fit with these to be a base to work from.

    When marauders got bastion....google would find these edge out old school marauders hit wise not even asking for it in the query as a comparison.

    My off the cuff evaluation of this....people didn't rush to the market for these. They have to be used heavily to be abused or to even make comment.
    Joe Risalo
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1088 - 2015-09-03 14:02:23 UTC
    Zan Shiro wrote:
    Nafensoriel wrote:
    Unfortunately no there has been no response.
    The topic has quite obviously been deemed hostile or toxic and standard practice is to ignore such things.

    I know chance is still trying to get a statement but how much traction he is getting is still unknown.



    This.


    Or probably half jest/half truth.....they'd have to be used en masse to have something to say about it really lol. Saw em, eft'd them, ran them a little and....said well let me put that TP back on as well I have maxed skills for them and just one tp seemed to fair pretty good against what was becoming a 1 mid 1 lo slot missile mod fit.

    For how I run my ships....range was never an issue I needed fixing tbh. Range was not a missile issue, to me and many others I assume. I will even state, again, I'd have given the caveat of less range to boost the stats I do care about. And the 2 slots was too deep a tradeoff when tp did me fine with just 1 slot (assuming typical 1 tp fit, not say golem).

    Did a rather unscientific study here for proof of heavy use. Googled say tengu fit and looked for new mods used. Cricket cricket. Saw fits prepatch galore. very few saying omfg yes......run these new mods. I tbh fit blind here and just swapped crap....I could not find a front runner to be the new "vanilla" fit with these to be a base to work from.

    When marauders got bastion....google would find these edge out old school marauders hit wise not even asking for it in the query as a comparison.

    My off the cuff evaluation of this....people didn't rush to the market for these. They have to be used heavily to be abused or to even make comment.


    In my playing, the only time MGCs have outperformed TPs is when firing fof missiles.
    Oddly enough, it gave fof much needed love, but is fail for everything else.
    That said, you'll notice I only mention MGCs... the MGE is useless in all manners.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1089 - 2015-09-03 18:46:54 UTC
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    In my playing, the only time MGCs have outperformed TPs is when firing fof missiles.
    Oddly enough, it gave fof much needed love, but is fail for everything else.
    That said, you'll notice I only mention MGCs... the MGE is useless in all manners.

    This is more or less my take on them as well. I did find that when range-scripted these do make torpedoes a more viable option for PvE, but only on certain ships and missions (cruise missiles still reign supreme overall). On Golems two precision-scripted MGCs can replace two of three or four TPs that one typically finds - allowing Hyperspacial rigs to be used for boosting warp speed.

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

    Joe Risalo
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1090 - 2015-09-03 19:07:57 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    In my playing, the only time MGCs have outperformed TPs is when firing fof missiles.
    Oddly enough, it gave fof much needed love, but is fail for everything else.
    That said, you'll notice I only mention MGCs... the MGE is useless in all manners.

    This is more or less my take on them as well. I did find that when range-scripted these do make torpedoes a more viable option for PvE, but only on certain ships and missions (cruise missiles still reign supreme overall). On Golems two precision-scripted MGCs can replace two of three or four TPs that one typically finds - allowing Hyperspacial rigs to be used for boosting warp speed.


    the problem with that is, MGCs still give less effect that TPs, especially on the Golem with its TP bonus.
    However, there's also the issue with range. Torps can have decent range with bastion, but not enough to make up for immobility.
    I typically fit 2x t2 range rigs in order to give me about 80km range with Javs.
    You can't use range scripts on MGC or else you lose application, which in the case of torps, is extremely important.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1091 - 2015-09-03 19:17:25 UTC
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    the problem with that is, MGCs still give less effect that TPs, especially on the Golem with its TP bonus.
    However, there's also the issue with range. Torps can have decent range with bastion, but not enough to make up for immobility.
    I typically fit 2x t2 range rigs in order to give me about 80km range with Javs.
    You can't use range scripts on MGC or else you lose application, which in the case of torps, is extremely important.

    Yes, but the damage application with two meta TPs and two precision-scripted MGCs is greater than four Faction TPs - without the use of rigors or flares, either (you can one-shot frigates using T2 Fury ammunition, V skills and missile implants). The problem with torpedoes is that they're just so freakin' slow. Even with hydraulics, range-scripted MGCs and Bastion you're hard-pressed to get the speed above 6km/sec. So shooting out to targets @80km with Javelin torpedoes is literally like watching paint dry.

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

    Joe Risalo
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1092 - 2015-09-03 19:21:29 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    the problem with that is, MGCs still give less effect that TPs, especially on the Golem with its TP bonus.
    However, there's also the issue with range. Torps can have decent range with bastion, but not enough to make up for immobility.
    I typically fit 2x t2 range rigs in order to give me about 80km range with Javs.
    You can't use range scripts on MGC or else you lose application, which in the case of torps, is extremely important.

    Yes, but the damage application with two meta TPs and two precision-scripted MGCs is greater than four Faction TPs - without the use of rigors or flares, either (you can one-shot frigates using T2 Fury ammunition, V skills and missile implants). The problem with torpedoes is that they're just so freakin' slow. Even with hydraulics, range-scripted MGCs and Bastion you're hard-pressed to get the speed above 6km/sec. So shooting out to targets @80km with Javelin torpedoes is literally like watching paint dry.


    Agreed.. I hate torp velocity.

    My point on the scripts though is, if you're going for range, stick with rigs, as you'll need the mids for application, when using torps.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1093 - 2015-09-03 19:47:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    Agreed.. I hate torp velocity. My point on the scripts though is, if you're going for range, stick with rigs, as you'll need the mids for application, when using torps.

    Surprisingly enough, you don't need as much damage application with torpedoes because they do a lot more damage than cruise missiles. What I found is that a pair of MGCs to alternate between range-boosting and damage application in conjunction with a pair of target painters worked best. I've since switched back to cruise missiles because even with the slower rate of fire I almost never have to maneuver around and am rarely forced to use Bastion.

    If torpedoes were twice as fast as cruise missiles - then we'd be talking.

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

    Joe Risalo
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1094 - 2015-09-03 20:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    Agreed.. I hate torp velocity. My point on the scripts though is, if you're going for range, stick with rigs, as you'll need the mids for application, when using torps.

    Surprisingly enough, you don't need as much damage application with torpedoes because they do a lot more damage than cruise missiles. What I found is that a pair of MGCs to alternate between range-boosting and damage application in conjunction with a pair of target painters worked best. I've since switched back to cruise missiles because even with the slower rate of fire I almost never have to maneuver around and am rarely forced to use Bastion.

    If torpedoes were twice as fast as cruise missiles - then we'd be talking.


    I use range rigs and 3x PWNAGE.

    Though, I too typically only use cruise due to range, application, and engagement time; with dps and em shield rigs.

    I will say though, I've had fun using fof missiles lately with 3x MGC precision scripted.

    I'm probably going to revert back to 2 MGCs with precision and fit a cap booster.
    I get a lot of missions with neuts, which just recently got me killed.
    Granted, cap isn't why I died.... I tried to disengage bastion, so that I could warp before I was capless.
    However, when bastion cycle ended, it kept blinking red, but would not dis-engage... So I clicked it a couple times and it wouldn't do anything.
    So I waited for a few more seconds and once it stopped blinking, it engaged a new cycle, which got me neuted out and killed...
    Currently have a ticket in on this, so we'll see how that goes.

    Point is, You don't need more than 3 application mods and none of them are MGEs... Those things just suck...
    Sobaan Tali
    Caldari Quick Reaction Force
    #1095 - 2015-09-04 00:20:53 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    If torpedoes were twice as fast as cruise missiles - then we'd be talking.


    This is the one sole issue I have with torps on something like a Golem (or anything for that matter) at this point. For me, the projection, not application, is the more problematic situation regarding torpedoes. And, since Rubicon and these modules, I would say that largely projection overall is in a much better place with the idea of a torp Golem, but the missile velocity when I ran the numbers in Pyfa when these modules were first announce, my jaw literally dropped. Cruise missiles on my build WITHOUT projection rigs or MGC's hit nearly 14km, and torps WITH projection rigs and MGC's barely make less than half that. Oddly, I had halfway thought I would have disliked the application numbers more so that range, but they were in fact fine, even compared to Cruises the raw damage largely makes the weaker application seem pretty irrelevant as long as you are in range to hit.

    I know I would likely switch to torps on my Golem in a heartbeat if CCP were to trade flight time for velocity evenly to maintain the same ranges but give a little more speed to the damn things (fingers are crossed). I would even start using MGC's more often to boot, too. I just wish they weren't so seemingly niche, but either CCP is fine with where they are or at the very least don't have enough data to go off of. The MGE's are still another story and, quite honestly, could be scrapped for all I care. They may just leave them in anyways for consistency's sake.

    "Tomahawks?"

    "----in' A, right?"

    "Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

    "----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

    Nafensoriel
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #1096 - 2015-09-04 01:46:51 UTC
    Actually one of the few hulls I don't see mentioned by pretty much anyone is the RHML snake.
    It's one of the few CPU limited hulls that can't "quite" use its full potential... unless you slap RHMLs on it. MGCs work more effectively in this case by giving a range option without really hurting application since obviously you are using HM. Bling of course not required.. This fit skirts with a vindicator for top end damage with a significantly higher tank and considerably more effective range.

    [Rattlesnake, RHML Flex]

    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

    Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
    Kinetic Deflection Field II
    Thermic Dissipation Field II
    Omnidirectional Tracking Link II (no script.. actually allows for earlier application of damage)
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    100MN Afterburner II

    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Drone Link Augmentor II

    Large Drone Speed Augmentor II
    Large Drone Speed Augmentor II
    Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II


    The switch to HM also allows for this hull to use a native warp speed implant which puts the snake on par with marauders.

    Eifyr and Co. 'Rogue' Warp Drive Speed WS-615
    Zainou 'Snapshot' Heavy Missiles HM-705
    Zainou 'Deadeye' Guided Missile Precision GP-805
    Zainou 'Deadeye' Target Navigation Prediction TN-905
    Zainou 'Deadeye' Rapid Launch RL-1005


    Downside is.. the fits pretty much HiSec only and honestly one of the only ship in the game where MGCs are functionally superior to TPs.

    So bluntly.. MGCs are useful.. MGE are barely functional(phoenix can use them) but both are niche mods that really didn't warrant dev time in their current configuration. They offer no real options and actually caused a global nerf of all other missile fits in the process.
    Joe Risalo
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1097 - 2015-09-04 03:47:10 UTC
    Nafensoriel wrote:
    Actually one of the few hulls I don't see mentioned by pretty much anyone is the RHML snake.
    It's one of the few CPU limited hulls that can't "quite" use its full potential... unless you slap RHMLs on it. MGCs work more effectively in this case by giving a range option without really hurting application since obviously you are using HM. Bling of course not required.. This fit skirts with a vindicator for top end damage with a significantly higher tank and considerably more effective range.

    [Rattlesnake, RHML Flex]

    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

    Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
    Kinetic Deflection Field II
    Thermic Dissipation Field II
    Omnidirectional Tracking Link II (no script.. actually allows for earlier application of damage)
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    100MN Afterburner II

    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Drone Link Augmentor II

    Large Drone Speed Augmentor II
    Large Drone Speed Augmentor II
    Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II


    That is the most Odd fit I've ever seen.
    Did I miss something, cause snakes used to be passive shield tanking kings..

    IDK.. that fit just seems.... weird..
    Sobaan Tali
    Caldari Quick Reaction Force
    #1098 - 2015-09-04 03:59:15 UTC
    Yeah, the rarity of use where these modules are actually better or even on par with TPs or other already used modules sucks, but the rig penalties and prospects of a dedicated missile EWAR module in the future to add to it is what stung me the most, too. Granted, the HP buff is nice as it negates NPC defenders quite nicely (though that's an unintended side-effect) and the torpedo volume being halved is okay, the nerfs hurt nearly anyone using missiles and neither the modules nor the honestly laughable damage buff on heavies make up for it. Feels like it was a timid shuffle forward and two hops backwards to me.

    "Tomahawks?"

    "----in' A, right?"

    "Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

    "----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

    Sobaan Tali
    Caldari Quick Reaction Force
    #1099 - 2015-09-04 04:03:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Sobaan Tali
    Joe Risalo wrote:
    Nafensoriel wrote:
    Actually one of the few hulls I don't see mentioned by pretty much anyone is the RHML snake.
    It's one of the few CPU limited hulls that can't "quite" use its full potential... unless you slap RHMLs on it. MGCs work more effectively in this case by giving a range option without really hurting application since obviously you are using HM. Bling of course not required.. This fit skirts with a vindicator for top end damage with a significantly higher tank and considerably more effective range.

    [Rattlesnake, RHML Flex]

    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Imperial Navy Drone Damage Amplifier
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
    Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

    Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
    Kinetic Deflection Field II
    Thermic Dissipation Field II
    Omnidirectional Tracking Link II (no script.. actually allows for earlier application of damage)
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    100MN Afterburner II

    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II, Inferno Fury Heavy Missile
    Drone Link Augmentor II

    Large Drone Speed Augmentor II
    Large Drone Speed Augmentor II
    Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II


    That is the most Odd fit I've ever seen.
    Did I miss something, cause snakes used to be passive shield tanking kings..

    IDK.. that fit just seems.... weird..


    Now, hit reload...

    Granted, Snake drones do well even on their own, but I've never seen a rapid launcher build for PVE work I've liked. Also, Snakes use to be nothing but tank because we didn't always have drone mods to throw in the lows or good reasons for BCSs and fewer drone mods to throw in the mids that made sense, so more room for SPRs and Extenders. They can still tank, but can now serve up some nice Vindi-level woop-ass too.

    "Tomahawks?"

    "----in' A, right?"

    "Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

    "----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

    Zan Shiro
    Alternative Enterprises
    #1100 - 2015-09-04 04:52:05 UTC
    Joe Risalo wrote:

    That is the most Odd fit I've ever seen.
    Did I miss something, cause snakes used to be passive shield tanking kings..

    IDK.. that fit just seems.... weird..



    RLML I can't comment on....the reload headaches I hear make them not so liked to some people. Others like them though so to each their own as always. Will try at some point but have not rushed to it tbh.


    Not being passive though...snakes run very decent being active tanked. This can get you a 3 slot mid slot tank (passives usually 4, so a 1 slot saving there for something else) and frees up all lows for damage and such. Has the 100mn AB and not all the sig radius hits of passive tank/mods...while not great at it being a BS its also getting some damage reduction with ghetto sig tanking (ghetto as well besides mach....this not really a BS's thing lol).