These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Fixing HAM and HML

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#1 - 2013-11-01 13:11:36 UTC
Just seeking opinions on their problems and a few possible fixes for them.

IMO

HML: hasn't been worth using since it was patched. I think they lack the volley damage that would make them comparable to cruises and lights. If I could give them one change it would be set their explosion radius to 120 or so and up the damage.

HAM: going in the opposite direction their explosion radius should be about 90 and maybe gain a little explosion velocity. Their range is ok I think the only ship that really projects them a long way is the cerb. A hamgu doesn't have amazing range and the caracal is much the same.

Anyone else?
Dato Koppla
Spaghetti Militia
#2 - 2013-11-01 14:35:42 UTC
HAMs are fine, they have good damage application and projection, ships with a single range bonus like Tengu and Caracal are able to hit to 30km (more like 26km in a real situation) with regular faction missiles and out to 45km (40km) with Javelins, thats far better than most short-ranged weapon systems. If the damage application gets too good there'll be no point in using HAMs over Rapid Lights so that's fine too.

HMs definitely need looking at though.
Lynkon Lawg
Second Six Corporation
#3 - 2013-11-01 14:59:29 UTC
I agree that the HAMs are fine.

In my experience, HAMs fall right in the middle of the pack, range-wise, of the medium short-range, high-dmg weapon systems. The longest being pulse, the shortest being blasters, with HAMs and ACs about the same.

With my PvE HAMgu I can put out 800dps over it's entire 23km range, flying at 600m/s. My AC Vagabond puts out 550dps, but that range is optimal+falloff, however it is flying at 2300m/s. My Scorch Pulse Zealot only puts out 380dps at about 26km optimal, and is slow and sluggish. Taking into account the HAMgu being a billion ISK ship, as opposed to 300 Mil (after fittings) for the HACs, It'd say it's fairly well balanced.
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-11-01 15:06:37 UTC
Heavy missiles are just bad now. I think this was to crush the HM Drake but they made a whole platform worthless.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#5 - 2013-11-01 15:45:37 UTC
Lynkon Lawg wrote:
I agree that the HAMs are fine.

In my experience, HAMs fall right in the middle of the pack, range-wise, of the medium short-range, high-dmg weapon systems. The longest being pulse, the shortest being blasters, with HAMs and ACs about the same.

With my PvE HAMgu I can put out 800dps over it's entire 23km range, flying at 600m/s. My AC Vagabond puts out 550dps, but that range is optimal+falloff, however it is flying at 2300m/s. My Scorch Pulse Zealot only puts out 380dps at about 26km optimal, and is slow and sluggish. Taking into account the HAMgu being a billion ISK ship, as opposed to 300 Mil (after fittings) for the HACs, It'd say it's fairly well balanced.


I am thinking more about applied damage than raw dps. a good eft fit for a cerb gives it like 800+ dps with rages hitting out to 45 km or something crazy like that. But using a ship with the best relevant bonuses for a weapon isn't the best way to look at the problem because a cerb makes even hml look better than crap
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#6 - 2013-11-01 15:52:08 UTC
So the HML / HAM problem is really an all encompassing problem, that begins with the fact that CCP still do not have any idea about how to properly change the current missile damage algorith coding inside of eve. Suffice it to say, there is no quick fix to missiles simply by using explo velocity / radius. This intire problem leads into another issue regarding siganture radius as a whole. Speaking in regards specifically to signature radius- CCP clearly has a large problem, and are determined not to fix the root cause. As a specific example, lets look at the MWD problem. MWDs currently increase signature radius by 500%, deadspeace 433%. Clearly we have a problem with sig / MWD because CCP has used the stale 'mwd sig reduction' bonus on so many ships. Off the top of my head:

Intys
Dictors
HAC's
AF's

Clearly there is something wrong with signature or MWDs in general. I find it dissapointing that CCP is not trying to fix the root of the problem, but instead is looking to bandaid the issue with some MWD sig blood role bonus. This is disgraceful.

However more specifically on HML / HAM Platforms: In their over eagerness to neft the drake, CCP (listening to the incessent wining of the typical eve bads) Threw a ship that was never OP to begin with, and certainly outclassed by ABC's at the time, a huyge nerf. This sent the drake, along with all other HML / HAM boats careening down from PvP viablity, into obscurity. Here again, CCP did not look more indepth into the missile algorithm / coding- but instead just tweaked explo velocity / radius, with a small tweak in DPS to boot.

HML's were never that OP. The only way I could see HMLs / HAMs becoming relevant again is if they were returned to their former base stats. At least then, HML cruisers like the CNI / caracal / drake / nighthawk / tengu could be used again. However barring that, HML / HAM boats either need application bonuses rolled into the hulls, or additional mid and low slot mods that could help affect damage / rof / expo velocity + radius / missile flight time + velocity. Currently BCS and rigors do little to help with application. Turret based weapons offer significantly more choice in weapon tweaking. TC, TE, Damage mods, Locus rigs, Ambit rigs, all of these can be specifically chosen to accentuate a certain part of the weapon system. Currently missiles are lacking this type of precise fitting application, and are suffering.

There is a reason why RLML's and Cruise phoons are the only missiles worth using. Phoon has a built in application bonus, and RLMLs have the application already rolled into the ammo. Any ship not supporting either of those two playstyles, is going to be left in the dust in the current meta.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2013-11-01 19:42:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Xequecal
The problem with HAMs (and missiles in general) is links. That's pretty much the beginning and end of it. Links are why everyone uses RLMs, because links mean HAMs cannot even hit an ABing battleship for full damage.

If you have a MWD active and aren't webbed, skirmish links straight up reduce missile damage you take from anything bigger than RLMs by 50%. Yes, it's that ********. If you overload the MWD, HML/HAM/Cruise/Torp damage is reduced by 63%.

Because of links, RLMs do more damage than any other missile system to basically any prop-modded BC and BS that isn't webbed. Cruisers can actually have 1 web on them and STILL take less damage from HAMs than from RLMs. Most navy/pirate faction cruisers have sigs so low with links that RLMs outperform HAMs on them even if they're completely stationary.

They simply need to add an exp radius reduction to one of the existing links. When both you and your opponent have turret based weapons, both of you are affected equally by the presence or absence of links. However, when you are using missiles and he has turrets, your weapon system's performance is massively degraded if he has links, and getting links of your own does nothing to improve it.

Stacking of boosters and implants makes this problem even worse. You can get a Scythe Fleet Issue's base sig down to about 30m. At this signature radius it's basically immune to damage unless you get a web on it.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#8 - 2013-11-01 20:31:39 UTC
Perhaps rewriting the missile algorithm should be made a high priority by CCP. Cruiser weapons being speed tanked by a battleship is outright bullshit
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#9 - 2013-11-01 22:03:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Walkuris
IIshira wrote:
Heavy missiles are just bad now. I think this was to crush the HM Drake but they made a whole platform worthless.


Not quite, the Drake is actually quite useless also hehehe.
HML are fubar, but the larger problem lies with the missile skill tree.
It is one weapon-system that consumes as much SP as 3, Lasers, Hybrids and Projectiles.
IF, HML being nerfed would still mean you have HAM's to play with it would not be as awful.
But HAM's are a complete new grind to skill level 5.
Just a little fail on the SP mechanics.

P.S. Rereading I realize my fatigue made me miss you didn't exclude the drake from being worthless.
That said I just had to share the morbid giggle fit this gave me...
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2013-11-01 22:11:22 UTC
Missile skills also have far less diminishing returns and require everything at V for real effectiveness. Guided Missile Precision V increases damage by 6.667% relative to Guided Missile Precision IV. That's a support skill, by the way. For comparison, Racial Turret V only increases damage by 4.166% relative to Racial Turret IV.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-11-01 22:20:23 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Perhaps rewriting the missile algorithm should be made a high priority by CCP. Cruiser weapons being speed tanked by a battleship is outright bullshit


Well, the flip side of the coin is that they never miss.

Balance one aspect without considering the other and you've got severe problems.

Hell, the right cruiser hulls are already instant death to small targets.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#12 - 2013-11-01 22:34:36 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Perhaps rewriting the missile algorithm should be made a high priority by CCP. Cruiser weapons being speed tanked by a battleship is outright bullshit


Well, the flip side of the coin is that they never miss.

Balance one aspect without considering the other and you've got severe problems.

Hell, the right cruiser hulls are already instant death to small targets.


True they never miss, but then again- they can't insta blap things, the way BS guns can do to fail cruiser / dessi / frig pilots. Missiles can just do an anemic amount of DPS for a long period of time.
Mnemosyne Gloob
#13 - 2013-11-02 02:31:33 UTC
Chessur wrote:
Clearly there is something wrong with signature or MWDs in general. I find it dissapointing that CCP is not trying to fix the root of the problem, but instead is looking to bandaid the issue with some MWD sig blood role bonus.


Yes and this only applies to missiles of course. I am sorry but as a non missile user i found the ranges that HMLs could project damage to (compared to other weapons) quite ridiculous. I guess that is fixed now and the whines on the forums are just the same as projectile users that got their falloff from TEs reduced.

But, as we know Chessur never brawls, he always wants to retain his GTFO capability. So, maybe because you want to retain that 'perk', you have to accept some disadvantages - namely less dps.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#14 - 2013-11-02 02:50:35 UTC
Mnemosyne Gloob wrote:
Chessur wrote:
Clearly there is something wrong with signature or MWDs in general. I find it dissapointing that CCP is not trying to fix the root of the problem, but instead is looking to bandaid the issue with some MWD sig blood role bonus.


Yes and this only applies to missiles of course. I am sorry but as a non missile user i found the ranges that HMLs could project damage to (compared to other weapons) quite ridiculous. I guess that is fixed now and the whines on the forums are just the same as projectile users that got their falloff from TEs reduced.

But, as we know Chessur never brawls, he always wants to retain his GTFO capability. So, maybe because you want to retain that 'perk', you have to accept some disadvantages - namely less dps.


Brawling or kiting, shooting from 1KM or 100KM, HMLs and HAMs do no damage. Stop talking out of your ass. Either contribute to the discussion, or get out.
Baron' Soontir Fel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#15 - 2013-11-02 05:28:48 UTC
Mnemosyne Gloob wrote:


Yes and this only applies to missiles of course. I am sorry but as a non missile user i found the ranges that HMLs could project damage to (compared to other weapons) quite ridiculous. I guess that is fixed now and the whines on the forums are just the same as projectile users that got their falloff from TEs reduced.



As a non-missile user you have no idea what missile users face. The amount of damage that is evaded due to links and sig radius reductions is incredibly stupid. Case in point: My Kestrel does 370 volley damage with Rage Rockets which apply well against targets who are webbed. If the target is linked, that volley damage is reduced to 100 even with a web applied. I only get 25% of my DPS and there's nothing I can do about it. And these are Rockets we're talking about here, not even HAMs or HMs. There are no pilot tricks to increase your DPS either such as decreasing transversal velocity.



Also... because you don't use missiles, you really have no informed opinion on how missiles work.
Ashina Sito
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2013-11-02 07:15:52 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
The problem with HAMs (and missiles in general) is links. That's pretty much the beginning and end of it. Links are why everyone uses RLMs, because links mean HAMs cannot even hit an ABing battleship for full damage.

If you have a MWD active and aren't webbed, skirmish links straight up reduce missile damage you take from anything bigger than RLMs by 50%. Yes, it's that ********. If you overload the MWD, HML/HAM/Cruise/Torp damage is reduced by 63%.

Because of links, RLMs do more damage than any other missile system to basically any prop-modded BC and BS that isn't webbed. Cruisers can actually have 1 web on them and STILL take less damage from HAMs than from RLMs. Most navy/pirate faction cruisers have sigs so low with links that RLMs outperform HAMs on them even if they're completely stationary.

They simply need to add an exp radius reduction to one of the existing links. When both you and your opponent have turret based weapons, both of you are affected equally by the presence or absence of links. However, when you are using missiles and he has turrets, your weapon system's performance is massively degraded if he has links, and getting links of your own does nothing to improve it.

Stacking of boosters and implants makes this problem even worse. You can get a Scythe Fleet Issue's base sig down to about 30m. At this signature radius it's basically immune to damage unless you get a web on it.


Ever hear of a Target Painter?
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#17 - 2013-11-02 09:31:32 UTC
Ashina Sito wrote:
Ever hear of a Target Painter?


Thats quite the "insert viagra" response.
Trolling?? OR is that how you personally stomp skirmish link scenarios??
Christine Peeveepeeski
Low Sec Concepts
#18 - 2013-11-02 09:33:51 UTC
Chessur wrote:
Mnemosyne Gloob wrote:
Chessur wrote:
Clearly there is something wrong with signature or MWDs in general. I find it dissapointing that CCP is not trying to fix the root of the problem, but instead is looking to bandaid the issue with some MWD sig blood role bonus.


Yes and this only applies to missiles of course. I am sorry but as a non missile user i found the ranges that HMLs could project damage to (compared to other weapons) quite ridiculous. I guess that is fixed now and the whines on the forums are just the same as projectile users that got their falloff from TEs reduced.

But, as we know Chessur never brawls, he always wants to retain his GTFO capability. So, maybe because you want to retain that 'perk', you have to accept some disadvantages - namely less dps.


Brawling or kiting, shooting from 1KM or 100KM, HMLs and HAMs do no damage. Stop talking out of your ass. Either contribute to the discussion, or get out.


Well Chessur he is right... you do fly them because they can engage inside linked point range and no one can touch you. At this point now all you need is 'enough' dps, the real killer is for rml's you can completely murder fast tacklers who come to get you. It's not a dig, it's a fact. It's why many people do it. If you were forced to point at 24km then you'd suffer same issue anyone else does and thats a much higher likely hood to be sling shot into webs/scram OR the target can run on the sling shot instead.

With links that entire defence is removed.

I'm not knocking link users, I do it myself now and then and if you're in a kiting ship and you prefer fleet riding then why would you brawl? Answer; You wouldn't.

Missiles are ridiculous easy mode, it's just that simple. Even HML's are good BUT they can't kill fast tackle quickly which is why they do not rate in the l33t pvp meta. Constant applied dps inside point range + fast kiting ship = epic win. RML's are just that good because of this. Extend point range and they stop just being good and are now op simply because a point can't be broken now unless you have friends with very specific ship set ups.

It's why everyone hates a kiter that's decent. You ship has no chance in countering it as a brawler AND getting the kill without fitting for the occasion which now fucks you against other brawlers.

That said, Kiting does require good skill unlinked especially when fighting another kiter. It's very easy to break point and escape.

So.... links are the issue? Amazing.. WHO KNEW! Actually it's ONLY skirmish links. Point range beyond overheated 28km is just crazy. Tank and eccms strength is inconsequential in the scheme of things. yes it makes brawling a PITA if you are fighting THAT GUY with his implanted, linked incursus with 18km oh'd webs, tank the size of a BC and the sig of a gnats ass but the issue there is again..... can't run cus of the skirmish links. OK kill is harder but running is not an option so you now you die. Skill did not factor into this.

Now this post is longer than I intended and probably rambles, also Chessur while I quoted you it's not really a knock of your 'thing'. Sure you're a cocky a-hole sometimes but the flying style is fun as **** if you can do it :)
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#19 - 2013-11-02 11:06:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Caleb Seremshur
So are you saying that the interactions between links and missiles is unbalanced? I find speed tanking against missiles to be too easy anyway since your relative direction doesn't matter just raw speed.

If I were to redesign missiles I would facilitate at least making it so that a non propped ship isn't passively speed tanking someones missiles. At a very minimum rockets should have an explosion velocity of 500 and HAM explosion velocity of 300. The idea here is they will apply damage properly against targets without AB or if they are propped and webbed.

edit; for clarification I am trying to allow sig tanking to still be a thing as thats a guaranteed damage reduction from missile explosion radius - a bonus you don't get against turrets
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#20 - 2013-11-02 11:31:03 UTC
I think HML's should do about 90% of the dps HAMS do but with much worse application.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

123Next pageLast page