These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

RLML and HML balance pass

First post First post First post
Author
Jasper Binchiette
The church of Evil Justice
Immaterium
#81 - 2017-04-02 14:14:59 UTC
If this is a joke then it's in poor taste after the March update joke...
Valence Benedetto
South of Heaven Ltd
V.e.G.A.
#82 - 2017-04-02 14:38:22 UTC
Overall - it is nice to see CCP working on missile balance. Some love to heavy missiles is welcome (though I think a light touch is best), and nerfs to RLML are long overdue.

As to the specific changes

1. As others have said, I think you need to start this balance pass with a review and adjustment of launcher PG requirements.

2. As others have said, I think clip size is an important variable that you may be overlooking.

3. Personally I agree with nerfing range. I understand why that bothers some people, as it does fundamentally change the capability of several hulls. But it makes sense to me conceptually that RLML should emphasize shorter range, burst and oppressive anti-support (without also being such a powerful anti-cruiser weapon).

Fozzie, I think much of the recent changes and balance passes to the game have been great. With this one, it feels like you are trying too hard to be non-disruptive to current fits. I suggest you take the opportunity to step back and think conceptually about what you really want the RLML system to be.

Thanks.

Kines Pavelovna
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#83 - 2017-04-02 15:19:06 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:
I'm sorry, these changes do absolutely nothing.

The non application of the hull bonus for RLMLs, is the only thing that might mitigate the RLML caracal meta, but even that doesn't mitigate the absolute superiority of RLMLs. The rest is just not going to do what CCP wants.

A deeper analysis was done almost a year ago here. Even with the numbers CCP wants to use, RLMLs are still the ONLY choice for damage application, out DPSing Heavy missiles.


That article is good. Heavy Missiles basically always do 30-60% paper dps and can't practically use t2 ammo. RLML's always fully apply and the target has to equip a 4+ slot passive tank to survive a full clip.

So what's different with this change is that you have to burn deeper into range before you start firing your RLMLs.
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#84 - 2017-04-02 16:03:44 UTC
Fozzie, why dont you start with an easier task and fix the torpedoes?
Those are ridiculously underperforming. I doubt anyone uses them at all, aside from stealth bombers.
Instead, people use RHMLs as a high damage mid to close-range weapon system that can actually hit a target smaller than an Upwell structure. Cruise missile battleships find some use in PVE and large fleet meta, but their close-range brethren are already a rare breed that can go completely extinct.

HAMLs may also need some love. Once both torps and HAMs are fine, you'll feel more freedom to adjust rapid launchers without screwing up a whole bunch of missile ships.

Fix the torps. Just do it.
Blood Animus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2017-04-02 17:21:59 UTC
I'm honestly not sure if this is a joke or not, if it is then it's a poor one, ditto if this is a real post.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#86 - 2017-04-02 17:26:00 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Fozzie, why dont you start with an easier task and fix the torpedoes?
Those are ridiculously underperforming. I doubt anyone uses them at all, aside from stealth bombers.
Instead, people use RHMLs as a high damage mid to close-range weapon system that can actually hit a target smaller than an Upwell structure. Cruise missile battleships find some use in PVE and large fleet meta, but their close-range brethren are already a rare breed that can go completely extinct.

HAMLs may also need some love. Once both torps and HAMs are fine, you'll feel more freedom to adjust rapid launchers without screwing up a whole bunch of missile ships.

Fix the torps. Just do it.


I use torps all the time. Torps need fitting adjustments and maybe some minor tweaking in application and resulting nerf in bomber application to compensate. Otherwise, they're actually pretty strong when you fit for them. 3 shotting sabre's with a torp RNI is fun.
Muon Farstrider
Partial Safety
#87 - 2017-04-02 18:09:25 UTC
After pondering for a while, I don't think these proposed changes are on the right track.

The problem with RLML isn't their range, or their sustained DPS. The problem is how their raw burst damage, combined with the way their light fitting and perfect application (on cruiser scales) completely frees up the rest of their fit for tank/oversized prop/etc, obsoletes other medium missile systems for fighting other cruisers and up rather than just lighter ships.

Range and velocity are actually necessary for their *intended* role of anti-light support. Unbonused light missiles only go about 40 km @ 5.6 km/s with max skills, which in a fleet context isn't actually much. The battle area is usually notably larger than that, and the low velocity is also problematic - many inties can straight-up outrun them, and even a ship moving 'only' 3 km/s can force the missiles to chase long enough to expire in many cases. Removing the velocity bonuses will weaken RLML, for sure, but not in the right manner. It makes them worse at anti-support without weakening their oppressively strong brawling potential.

RLML nerfs need to focus on making them weaker against cruiser-up targets *without* excessively nerfing them against small targets. This is why I think Suitonia's suggestion of reducing clip size instead of increasing reload time is heading in the right direction - most small ships will still die in a single clip, but the more chance cruisers have to survive one, the better.

However, there's still a fine balance to walk here, mostly because there are a lot of quite tanky small ships these days. Keeping RLML strong enough to properly threaten them can easily make it still too good against cruisers. As such, I'd personally suggest playing with a different stat on RLML - application.

While the application on light missiles is very good, it's often overlooked that it's not *perfect* - a lot of small ships will somewhat reduce the damage from them. If you pyfa up a few examples, you can see that many t1 frigates mitigate 10-30%ish of the damage, while in the extreme case inties often mitigate over 60% with MWD on. Destroyers, meanwhile, don't avoid any faction missile damage, but the advanced versions often avoid significant amounts if the firer is using fury.

As such, playing with application is one possible way to allow for lowering RLML damage against cruisers while keeping it good against small ships. If rapid platforms all had a light missile expvel or exprad hull bonus (or if the launchers themselves applied this bonus to the missiles they fired? not sure if the game mechanics can do that), it would allow the clip sizes or fire rates on RLML to be further lowered to reduce their oppressive damage against cruisers while the application bonus counteracts this against small ships.

TL:DR - leave RLML range alone, reduce RLML clip size, give missile cruisers a light missile application bonus. Probably also increase RLML fitting cost.

Meanwhile, as this article indicates, the problem with heavy missile launchers (and their cousins HAMs) isn't just the damage, it's the application. A 5% damage bonus is all well and good, but when you can't *apply* that damage even to peer targets it doesn't help much. This update really ought to also include buffing HML/HAM *application* by a good 10% or so at least.
DeadDuck
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#88 - 2017-04-02 18:14:41 UTC  |  Edited by: DeadDuck
Congrats CCP on ******* up the only missile system still efficient.

RLML are fine like they are. People complaining about the RLML being overpowered are the ones that fly paper tin fits that sacrifice everything to velocity. If a fit is decent enough to hold the burst damage from a RLML system most probably will beat the other ship using the RLML.

Then the HML buff ? Thats a bad joke. The problem is not the DPS or the Alpha or whatever it's their CRAP APPLICATION. If you fit a Afterburner, you laugh at a ship using whatever Missile system people have available. Except the now nerfed RLML.

Congrats once again CCP...

You want to talk about balance, balance the Keres or the Maulus or do you think they are balanced ships ?
Vic Jefferson
ElitistOps
WE FORM V0LTA
#89 - 2017-04-02 18:23:02 UTC
RLMLs are so much to so many different fits at the moment, there's simply no easy way to adjust them without breaking lots of hulls at the same time. Some parts of EvE reinforce the idea that specialization is a trade-off, but RLMLs have just violated this for so long and simultaneously been a crutch for much of the missile line up that it's going to be impossible to simultaneously present a real fitting choice and have much of the missile line be viable.

I mean we can chew on the numbers for a while, but I don't think that's going to make it much easier - this is a needed change, but not one that will ever achieve the desired result in one step. Echoing others, I think the entire process would go better if any changes were coupled to changes in heavy missiles.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Nightfox BloodRaven
SQUIDS.
#90 - 2017-04-02 18:26:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Nightfox BloodRaven
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njJAnWzKDfQ

At the end of the day.. RLML are not op by any chance.. u can barely kill a properly tanked vexor in an orthrus

properly fit thoraxes can solo tank orthrus no problem. Hell an exequror rep fit can kill orthrus and tank its dps no problem.

What you have are legions of idiots in **** fits hitting approach and mwd right at you and they complain op when they die.

but once again CCP has decided to take a dump on caldari lol.. caracal will be entirely useless... what it gonna be like not even 200dps with reload?

You wanna fix op? Vexor, Algos, Tristan all top of their meta.. for years..
Okuu Reiuji
PEETOOSHKEE PRIMARY OK
#91 - 2017-04-02 20:26:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Okuu Reiuji
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Kendarr wrote:
Yes, finally the ******* RLML nurf!

please buff HML application not damage and also buff the range of HAMs a tiny bit please


The point of buffing the damage is to promote the use of, you know, actual dps application modifiers like tracking computers and target painters, instead of just making all ships a flat X% more effective.


For a ship with 400 dps it will be like +20. Wow, such a reason to throw away something necessary from low or mid for a damage application module. Nobody will even try.

Most players will just abandon missile ships beyond destroyer hull and stick to drones & turrets. I know I will do.

Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njJAnWzKDfQ
but once again CCP has decided to take a dump on caldari lol.. caracal will be entirely useless... what it gonna be like not even 200dps with reload?.


Shhhhhh, don't tell them that Ferox is still viable.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#92 - 2017-04-02 20:44:04 UTC
Jackaryas wrote:
I think we can all agree The orthrus is a bit OP right now..


This is complete bull and you know it.

The problem are the light rapid bajeebus launchers, not the ship.


Those rapid bajeebus IWIN launchers just need to go. The light missiles are a ******* frigate missile system. They need to stay where they belong - in the light launchers.

Those "prototype" launchers failed. Delete them and we can all go back to fighting with proper options. Oh and don't forget to un-nerf heavy missiles to the 2011 state.

Heavy missiles fixed and hams in dire need of love.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Korvin
Shadow Kingdom
Best Alliance
#93 - 2017-04-02 21:26:18 UTC
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njJAnWzKDfQ

At the end of the day.. RLML are not op by any chance.. u can barely kill a properly tanked vexor in an orthrus

properly fit thoraxes can solo tank orthrus no problem. Hell an exequror rep fit can kill orthrus and tank its dps no problem.

What you have are legions of idiots in **** fits hitting approach and mwd right at you and they complain op when they die.

but once again CCP has decided to take a dump on caldari lol.. caracal will be entirely useless... what it gonna be like not even 200dps with reload?

You wanna fix op? Vexor, Algos, Tristan all top of their meta.. for years..

You try to compare long range orthus with the close range fit thorax. Got webbed - deserved to die. Close range is always more dps, for a good reason.

Member of CSM 4&5 ... &8

DeadDuck
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#94 - 2017-04-02 21:31:37 UTC
In the current state of missiles damage application a frigate with an AB or a cruiser with an oversized ab or with AB bonus will laugh at an opponent using HML or HAMS. It's ridiculous when shooting other ship you can make damage of 80-100 HP per volley !

You can nerf the **** out of RLML but just keep in mind that people only use them because the state of the other missiles systems damage application it's awfull. I mean, really, really, bad.

sten mattson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#95 - 2017-04-02 22:57:20 UTC
Quote:
This would mean that the following ships would have their range bonuses only apply to Heavy and Heavy Assault Missiles: Orthrus, Caracal, Cerberus, Onyx, Osprey Navy Issue, Cyclone, Drake, Drake Navy Issue


the sacrilege and gets spared?

IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!

Nightfox BloodRaven
SQUIDS.
#96 - 2017-04-03 01:00:34 UTC
Korvin wrote:
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njJAnWzKDfQ

At the end of the day.. RLML are not op by any chance.. u can barely kill a properly tanked vexor in an orthrus

properly fit thoraxes can solo tank orthrus no problem. Hell an exequror rep fit can kill orthrus and tank its dps no problem.

What you have are legions of idiots in **** fits hitting approach and mwd right at you and they complain op when they die.

but once again CCP has decided to take a dump on caldari lol.. caracal will be entirely useless... what it gonna be like not even 200dps with reload?

You wanna fix op? Vexor, Algos, Tristan all top of their meta.. for years..

You try to compare long range orthus with the close range fit thorax. Got webbed - deserved to die. Close range is always more dps, for a good reason.



I am not trying to compare them .. the people who think RLML are broken are saying that RLML are so op they kill brawlers at brawl range.. which is completely untrue as to the video i posted and from my in game experiences.
Valkin Mordirc
#97 - 2017-04-03 01:12:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
sten mattson wrote:
Quote:
This would mean that the following ships would have their range bonuses only apply to Heavy and Heavy Assault Missiles: Orthrus, Caracal, Cerberus, Onyx, Osprey Navy Issue, Cyclone, Drake, Drake Navy Issue


the sacrilege and gets spared?


Sacrilege

Amarr Cruiser bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile damage

4% bonus to all armor resistances

Heavy Assault Cruisers bonuses (per skill level):
10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile max velocity

5% bonus to Rapid Light Missile, Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile Launcher rate of fire

Role Bonus:
50% reduction in Microwarpdrive signature radius penalty
#DeleteTheWeak
Korvin
Shadow Kingdom
Best Alliance
#98 - 2017-04-03 02:03:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Korvin
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
[quote=Korvin][quote=Nightfox BloodRaven]
I am not trying to compare them .. the people who think RLML are broken are saying that RLML are so op they kill brawlers at brawl range.. which is completely untrue as to the video i posted and from my in game experiences.

He was close on that video.

Anyway, my main point is - the whole rebalance idea we were asking since csm4 was to make low tier ships useful for something, and get a proper role, so new players on a rifter or atron had a role in a serious pvp fleet and be wanted in corporations.
RLMLs and t3 destroyers just ruined that idea like a hummer and the anvil. With those strange immune interceptors on top.

More than that, the whole point of RLMLs were the role of a secondary weapon on an extra slot, if you don't want to use it for the neut or salvager.

Giving the light missile bonuses on a cruiser size was a major mistake from the start.

Member of CSM 4&5 ... &8

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#99 - 2017-04-03 03:06:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
Korvin wrote:
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njJAnWzKDfQ

At the end of the day.. RLML are not op by any chance.. u can barely kill a properly tanked vexor in an orthrus

properly fit thoraxes can solo tank orthrus no problem. Hell an exequror rep fit can kill orthrus and tank its dps no problem.

What you have are legions of idiots in **** fits hitting approach and mwd right at you and they complain op when they die.

but once again CCP has decided to take a dump on caldari lol.. caracal will be entirely useless... what it gonna be like not even 200dps with reload?

You wanna fix op? Vexor, Algos, Tristan all top of their meta.. for years..

You try to compare long range orthus with the close range fit thorax. Got webbed - deserved to die. Close range is always more dps, for a good reason.



I am not trying to compare them .. the people who think RLML are broken are saying that RLML are so op they kill brawlers at brawl range.. which is completely untrue as to the video i posted and from my in game experiences.


I was curious, so i looked up the orthrus loss. I can't post the killboard link (against rules i believe). For one it was not a properly fit orthrus, it did not have max damage, nor did it have a proper tank. It was a terribly fit orthrus that died by being ontop of an AB thorax. Not exactly a normal situation for an RLML orthrus.

The orthrus that died in the video you listed was fit like this:

x5 t2 RLML (using faction inferno missiles, not T2 and also not ideal missile for an armor cruiser)

T2 MWD
T2 Sensor booster
Republic Fleet warp disruptor
T2 Invuln
XLASB

x2 BCU
T2 OD injector
T2 nanofiber

Rigs:
x2 T2hyperspatials
T2 Semiconductor memory cell (lol wat)

This is not the kind of fit we (or Suitonia) are talking about with RLML outbrawling other cruisers. A terrible fit does not mean RLML are fine. Anyone who is competent and knows how to fit a ship and use the right ammo will be far more dangerous than what is shown in that video.

With that in mind, even with how terribly fit that Orthrus is, he still almost managed to kill that thorax while brawling, perfectly illustrating our point.

If that orthrus had a DCU or 3rd BCU and a better midslot layout, along with either fury or explosive ammo (or both, ideally) he would of tanked and killed that thorax no problem.

EVE being EVE, there are always many variables in fights and no one is perfect, especially in videos. But using that one video as your proof that RLML are fine is pretty short sighted.
XJIE6YLLIEK 6OPOgUHCKUU
Harbingers of Reset
#100 - 2017-04-03 03:14:30 UTC
I have a strong feeling nobody from CCP actually playing their own game.