These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Rapid Missile Launchers - v2

First post First post First post
Author
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2301 - 2013-11-27 18:55:56 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
The fight was over very quickly, with most of them warping off once it was clear their friends were dying at a decent rate. Most of them lived.

At the end, we were quite pleased, but I would not say that sort of occasion was common place, far from it, its the only such occasion I can recall.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=15880788
Just to be sure, you are saying that 3 cruisers taking on a 15 frigates gang under gate guns won't happen again and it's sad but that wasn't OP ?

What would do 3 T1 BS against 15 T1 cruisers on a gate ?
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#2302 - 2013-11-27 19:07:44 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
but atm we dont have a proper missile systems outside of spacialised frig owning system
and brawling HAMs, (yes you need webs to apply damage)


I mean if this is actually the root of a lot of the problem then that's a different issue that we need to address. I'm not totally sure it is, but I want to take a hard look at HML before the point release and make sure we're okay with where we're at. If that needs a tweak then we should be doing that, not focusing on RLML as a solution to a HML problem.


People were using old RLMLs in place of HMLs because HMLs are so trash. The HML nerf was justified at the time, but not after the med turrets got fixed. The problems was that RLMLs with Fury did almost the DPS of CN HMs, but applied it much better. Consider a triple BCS Caracal:

Old RLMLs (Fury): 266 DPS
HMLs (CN): 284 DPS
(HAMs (CN): 395 DPS)

That was a 6.8% increase in raw DPS using HMLs, but with much worse precision. HMLs were only used where the extra range was really needed, and quite often it wasn't needed. This is a result of recentish changes to increase damage of LMs and Fury variants, it created an overlap between RLMLs and HMLs.

I'd say repeal the 10% damage cut that HMs got, but keep the precision nerf. It we end up with a Drake problem again, nerf the Drake, although I suspect we won't given its reliance on kinetic damage and the fact that BCs don't obsolete cruisers any more.


Good post Gypsio. When you look at those numbers its depressing. Why fit a weapon that uses more power grid and CPU yet fires poorer hitting missiles and doe less DPS overall.

The only way I can make HAM's work close to their potential in a gang, is to always include a dedicated target painting ship. We wouldn't undock without one.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#2303 - 2013-11-27 19:18:30 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
The fight was over very quickly, with most of them warping off once it was clear their friends were dying at a decent rate. Most of them lived.

At the end, we were quite pleased, but I would not say that sort of occasion was common place, far from it, its the only such occasion I can recall.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=15880788
Just to be sure, you are saying that 3 cruisers taking on a 15 frigates gang under gate guns won't happen again and it's sad but that wasn't OP ?

What would do 3 T1 BS against 15 T1 cruisers on a gate ?


It wasn't overpowered. Read the post. I explained why we won, and why we risked it. I wouldn't risk it against experienced pilots. And I most certainly wouldn't risk it with just 18 missiles loaded and whistling for 40 seconds while we got the crap kicked out of us.

The time it would take 3 Caracals with RLML to get down a well tanked Incursus alone, would mean we'd have lost the fight very quickly. We'd have taken the Incursus, but lost three Caracals.

As to your question about Battleships. Me and my friend Unakk have gone out in Rokh's before now, out against far less cruisers before now and lost, with implants, boosters and still come off worse.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15573545

Although the way the Hyperion melted was amusing. He landed on the field to 'get in on the kill' and left in a pod. Overload is a lovely thing.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15572813

I have given you a fair example, please show me these frigate farming Caracal's that wipe you and your corp mates out so often?

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2304 - 2013-11-27 19:22:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
CCP Rise wrote:
I mean if this is actually the root of a lot of the problem then that's a different issue that we need to address. I'm not totally sure it is, but I want to take a hard look at HML before the point release and make sure we're okay with where we're at. If that needs a tweak then we should be doing that, not focusing on RLML as a solution to a HML problem.

Here would be my suggestions for HMLs and HAMs (as well as a few others). These are base values, before skill (etc.) modifications. The biggest changes are to torpedoes (drastically improved damage application) and cruise missiles (range nerf). Rockets are a bit better, light marginally worse - and heavies and heavy assaults have slightly improved damage application. The velocity on rockets, heavy assault missiles and torpedoes has been substantially increased (flight time reduced to compensate).

Rocket … 20m explosion radius, 170(+20) m/sec explosion velocity, 1.0(-1)s flight time, 4500(+2250) m/sec velocity
Light Missile … 40m explosion radius, 150(-20) m/sec explosion velocity, 5.0s flight time, 3750 m/s velocity
Heavy Assault Missile … 100(-25)m explosion radius, 125(+24)m/sec explosion velocity, 2.0(-2)s flight time, 5000(+3500) m/s velocity
Heavy Missile … 125(-15)m explosion radius, 100(+19)m/sec explosion velocity, 6.5s flight time, 4300 m/s velocity
Torpedo … 300(-150)m explosion radius, 85(+14) m/sec explosion velocity, 1.5(-4.5)s flight time, 6000(+4500) m/s velocity
Cruise Missile … 325(-5)m explosion radius, 75(+6) m/sec explosion velocity, 10.0(-4)s flight time, 4700 m/s

As for RLMLs and RHMLs, I think if the reload times were revised to 20 and 30 seconds respectively, that would probably balance them out nicely.

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

Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2305 - 2013-11-27 19:54:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
Kenshi Hanshin wrote:


Really? You gotta be kidding me... Alright, I am going to be honest and call bullshit. Here is why! CSM is a bunch of lobbyists we all know that from the CSM elections every year. We also know that the majority of them have specific agendas towards...wait for it...BLOBs! Now let's be honest and ask ourselves if RLMLs have any use in blobs...Probably not as missiles are not used in blobs that much anymore since the nerfs to HMLs and Drakes.



Missiles are used in blobs, both from Ravens and Phoons, and I assure you they are cruise missiles, no one uses rapids in a proper fleet fight.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2306 - 2013-11-27 19:59:06 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
but atm we dont have a proper missile systems outside of spacialised frig owning system
and brawling HAMs, (yes you need webs to apply damage)


I mean if this is actually the root of a lot of the problem then that's a different issue that we need to address. I'm not totally sure it is, but I want to take a hard look at HML before the point release and make sure we're okay with where we're at. If that needs a tweak then we should be doing that, not focusing on RLML as a solution to a HML problem.



Where they are at is 45% below comparable LR turrets (excepting arties) BEFORE you factor in damage loss, from things like afterburning battleships being to fast for Heavies.

Come on now, we all know this, you gave the OTHER LR medium weapon systems the 20% damage (at least) that you took off of heavies. Considering that missiles can't critical, this is a monstrous disadvantage in power balance, as in heavies have no power none.

....the issue with HAMs is needed to give up tank, and a lot of it to get even a marginal range out of them, beacause all there is, is rigs.


.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2307 - 2013-11-27 20:23:38 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
The fight was over very quickly, with most of them warping off once it was clear their friends were dying at a decent rate. Most of them lived.

At the end, we were quite pleased, but I would not say that sort of occasion was common place, far from it, its the only such occasion I can recall.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=15880788
Just to be sure, you are saying that 3 cruisers taking on a 15 frigates gang under gate guns won't happen again and it's sad but that wasn't OP ?

What would do 3 T1 BS against 15 T1 cruisers on a gate ?

I can almost guarantee that those frigates lost because they burned straight at the caracals across 15-20 km of space eating missiles to the face the entire time before most of them were even in range to do anything.

Also like moonmoon said, most of them were **** fits and the majority survived. It's not like they warped in and oneshot all 15 of them in the span of 30 seconds or something.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#2308 - 2013-11-27 20:27:51 UTC
I find it funny that people complain about needing web or tp to apply damage to same-size targets with missiles.

Should missiles just do full damage at all ranges instead? Stop being bad.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#2309 - 2013-11-27 20:30:34 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
but atm we dont have a proper missile systems outside of spacialised frig owning system
and brawling HAMs, (yes you need webs to apply damage)


I mean if this is actually the root of a lot of the problem then that's a different issue that we need to address. I'm not totally sure it is, but I want to take a hard look at HML before the point release and make sure we're okay with where we're at. If that needs a tweak then we should be doing that, not focusing on RLML as a solution to a HML problem.


People were using old RLMLs in place of HMLs because HMLs are so trash. The HML nerf was justified at the time, but not after the med turrets got fixed. The problems was that RLMLs with Fury did almost the DPS of CN HMs, but applied it much better. Consider a triple BCS Caracal:

Old RLMLs (Fury): 266 DPS
HMLs (CN): 284 DPS
(HAMs (CN): 395 DPS)

That was a 6.8% increase in raw DPS using HMLs, but with much worse precision. HMLs were only used where the extra range was really needed, and quite often it wasn't needed. This is a result of recentish changes to increase damage of LMs and Fury variants, it created an overlap between RLMLs and HMLs.

I'd say repeal the 10% damage cut that HMs got, but keep the precision nerf. It we end up with a Drake problem again, nerf the Drake, although I suspect we won't given its reliance on kinetic damage and the fact that BCs don't obsolete cruisers any more.


dps isn't the problem imho, it's dps application. Sig tanking is far too effective against missiles, speed tanking is far too effective against missiles, either of these on their own would be a problem, but both? Shooting at an ab frigate doing 900 m/s you'll be doing about 10dps with your HML Fury example, an extra 10% on top of that won't fix it. Frigates should be able to either speed tank with an MWD fitted, or Sig Tank with an Afterburner, but when an Afterburner frigate can speed tank and sig tank at 900m/s they are invincible no matter what the missile user does or how he's fitted, it's just out of your hands. An ab frigates top speed should not be high enough to come into the damage equation, the tiny sig radius already makes any frig with an active tank invincible. ie if he wasn't moving at all you'd only hit it for 66dps, take the resists off after that and its about 20 damage a single rep module will take care of it. This is why nobody is going to use heavy missiles for pvp, there are better alternatives for every role you can think of, RLML were one of the alternatives but now they've been nerfed too.

Speed should only come into the missile dps formula when you get past the top speed of afterburner frigates.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#2310 - 2013-11-27 20:31:20 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
I find it funny that people complain about needing web or tp to apply damage to same-size targets with missiles.

Should missiles just do full damage at all ranges instead? Stop being bad.


LOL target painter+web = full dmage?
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2311 - 2013-11-27 20:45:37 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
I find it funny that people complain about needing web or tp to apply damage to same-size targets with missiles.


It's actually about needing both and yet still doing bad damage to targets LARGER than you. As opposed to turrets which need only a web or sometimes not even that if you fly it right.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#2312 - 2013-11-27 20:50:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Fourteen Maken
3 webs a scram and 5 target painters will get you to about 45% dps against a frig
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2313 - 2013-11-27 20:50:42 UTC
Adding a low slot weapon upgrade called Missile Guidance System with scripts for explosion radius and explosion velocity should be the first step in fixing larger missiles. It probably isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but webs, TPs, and rigs as the only options for damage application is extremely gimped versus the options for turrets.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2314 - 2013-11-27 20:58:16 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Adding a low slot weapon upgrade called Missile Guidance System with scripts for explosion radius and explosion velocity should be the first step in fixing larger missiles. It probably isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but webs, TPs, and rigs as the only options for damage application is extremely gimped versus the options for turrets.

Except it needs to be mid-slot, since lows are already at a premium. If they introduce a ballistics tracking computer, guaranteed you're going to see it affected by tracking disruptors.

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

Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2315 - 2013-11-27 21:06:40 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Adding a low slot weapon upgrade called Missile Guidance System with scripts for explosion radius and explosion velocity should be the first step in fixing larger missiles. It probably isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but webs, TPs, and rigs as the only options for damage application is extremely gimped versus the options for turrets.

Except it needs to be mid-slot, since lows are already at a premium. If they introduce a ballistics tracking computer, guaranteed you're going to see it affected by tracking disruptors.


That pretty much completely negates their purpose. You can already use mid slots to improve missile damage application. Turrets have Tracking Enhancers and these would basically be the missile version of those. Besides most missile ships are shield tanks so mid slots are at more of a premium than lows.

A mid slot option on par with Tracking Computers would be a good move too though.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#2316 - 2013-11-27 21:12:44 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Adding a low slot weapon upgrade called Missile Guidance System with scripts for explosion radius and explosion velocity should be the first step in fixing larger missiles. It probably isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but webs, TPs, and rigs as the only options for damage application is extremely gimped versus the options for turrets.

Except it needs to be mid-slot, since lows are already at a premium. If they introduce a ballistics tracking computer, guaranteed you're going to see it affected by tracking disruptors.


That pretty much completely negates their purpose. You can already use mid slots to improve missile damage application. Turrets have Tracking Enhancers and these would basically be the missile version of those. Besides most missile ships are shield tanks so mid slots are at more of a premium than lows.

A mid slot option on par with Tracking Computers would be a good move too though.


It requires a combination of mods and changes to missile damage application stats. As long as frigates are immune to heavy missiles nobody is going to use them for pvp.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2317 - 2013-11-27 21:40:16 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Adding a low slot weapon upgrade called Missile Guidance System with scripts for explosion radius and explosion velocity should be the first step in fixing larger missiles. It probably isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but webs, TPs, and rigs as the only options for damage application is extremely gimped versus the options for turrets.

Except it needs to be mid-slot, since lows are already at a premium. If they introduce a ballistics tracking computer, guaranteed you're going to see it affected by tracking disruptors.


That pretty much completely negates their purpose. You can already use mid slots to improve missile damage application. Turrets have Tracking Enhancers and these would basically be the missile version of those. Besides most missile ships are shield tanks so mid slots are at more of a premium than lows.

A mid slot option on par with Tracking Computers would be a good move too though.


It requires a combination of mods and changes to missile damage application stats. As long as frigates are immune to heavy missiles nobody is going to use them for pvp.


That may well be true, but I think the wise thing for CCP to do is incrementally address the issue rather than adding new damage application modules and buffing larger missiles at the same time. Too many variables involved. Too great a possibility of unforeseen results.

They could also completely rework the missile damage formula, but I really don't see that happening.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#2318 - 2013-11-27 22:02:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Adding a low slot weapon upgrade called Missile Guidance System with scripts for explosion radius and explosion velocity should be the first step in fixing larger missiles. It probably isn't the only thing that needs to be done, but webs, TPs, and rigs as the only options for damage application is extremely gimped versus the options for turrets.

Except it needs to be mid-slot, since lows are already at a premium. If they introduce a ballistics tracking computer, guaranteed you're going to see it affected by tracking disruptors.


That pretty much completely negates their purpose. You can already use mid slots to improve missile damage application. Turrets have Tracking Enhancers and these would basically be the missile version of those. Besides most missile ships are shield tanks so mid slots are at more of a premium than lows.

A mid slot option on par with Tracking Computers would be a good move too though.


It requires a combination of mods and changes to missile damage application stats. As long as frigates are immune to heavy missiles nobody is going to use them for pvp.


Well to be clear - technically, heavy precision missiles should be aimed at hitting smaller targets well, but still not as well as lights against frigates, that is for sure, somewhere in-between and close enough that fitting a normal Heavy Missile launcher is always more flexible than a RLML. If I'm flying a ship with heavy missiles, Normal T2 Heavy Missiles should be focused on hitting mid size targets decently and precisions against fast, small signature cruisers and frigates.

Here is an old CSM wiki page describing just that :)

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Precision_heavy_missiles_%28CSM%29

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2319 - 2013-11-27 22:05:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Niena Nuamzzar
Fourteen Maken wrote:
3 webs a scram and 5 target painters will get you to about 45% dps against a frig

Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System (x4)

Corelum A-Type 10MN Afterburner
Federation Navy Stasis Webifier (x3)
Republic Fleet Target Painter (x2)

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Precision Heavy Missile (x6)

Medium Warhead Rigor Catalyst II (x2)
Medium Warhead Flare Catalyst II

Tengu fitted for max damage with max skills and +5 implants can do about 83% applied damage against 2053 m/s OH ab Executioner (max skilled pilot as well). Drop one web and dps will decrease 18%. Drop one TP and almost half of your total dps will be wasted. With only one web left and precision rigs applied damage will be 29% or 163dps, which is enough to kill the damn T1 frig but are we going to consider that to be good for a T3 ship worth idk, one billion?
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2320 - 2013-11-27 22:28:42 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
It wasn't overpowered. Read the post. I explained why we won, and why we risked it. I wouldn't risk it against experienced pilots. And I most certainly wouldn't risk it with just 18 missiles loaded and whistling for 40 seconds while we got the crap kicked out of us.

The time it would take 3 Caracals with RLML to get down a well tanked Incursus alone, would mean we'd have lost the fight very quickly. We'd have taken the Incursus, but lost three Caracals.

As to your question about Battleships. Me and my friend Unakk have gone out in Rokh's before now, out against far less cruisers before now and lost, with implants, boosters and still come off worse.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15573545

Although the way the Hyperion melted was amusing. He landed on the field to 'get in on the kill' and left in a pod. Overload is a lovely thing.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15572813

I have given you a fair example, please show me these frigate farming Caracal's that wipe you and your corp mates out so often?
The thing with battleships was exactly what I was saying. 3 BS can't go in a gang of hafly competent cruisers under gate guns and have any hope to survive.

RLML was the only weapon allowing a ship to be completely immune to a lower class of ship as long as numbers didn't spike. Even a good gang of frigates had to be careful when taking on a RLML Caracal to not lose too many of the gang.

And RLML also completely took on the role of destroyers.

Tacticaly, the role of destroyers is frigate predatation. But RLML cruisers were plain better than them : they had a lot more tank, more speed, more dps, same or more range, perfect or near to perfect damage application. RLML was the ultimate frigate predation interdiction weapon : no frigate could stay in a range of a Caracal. They completely obsoleted destroyers and the only saving grace for them was small plexes and people with no missile skills.

So you're not gonna find a lot of these frigate farming Caracals, and I admit it was a little exagerating on this, but that's because EVE don't work like that : you just don't warp in when you have no chance, and you warp off if you see the Caracal coming.

New RLML still are very dangerous to lone frigates. Their new role is obvious to me : protecting a cruiser fleet against a fast tackle and anti-frigate fire support in guerilla warfare. That's indeed niche roles, but people will certainly find more creative ways to use them than I can imagin, and that's a niche weapon to begin with anyway. And they will still have the advantage against destroyers of not dying if a cruiser looks at them. Most people here cry about what they used as a main versatile weapon system ; they should be using HML.

Cruisers are not meant to be frigate predators, exactly like battleships are not meant to be cruiser predators. Battleship is not often endangered by a lone cruiser, yet cruisers still can be threats to them, and even more so if their friends are behind. The same is true for missile cruisers and frigates : if 50 dps look low on paper, that's enough to kill a frigate, yet there's no reason a frigate shouldn't have any chance against a cruiser if she don't fit for it.

That is the big picture, where a lot of ships interract between themselves, of different classes, with different weapons, in different scenarios. In this big picture, RLML were simply too good for the health of the game. And if it happen that HML can't take their role (they never have been really tested because RLML instantly took their place when they were nerfed), then you might cry for them to be buffed, but hopefully with a comprehensive vision of them and not with the point of view of a children wanting a blue bioman and not a red one because red sux.

@some stupid whiners : if you ever get tackled by an AB Incursus in your Caracal, you just deserve to die and be poded after that. Caracal is TWICE as fast as the AB Incursus. You can KITE him to death. If he have railguns, he will barely pass your shield passive regen, and if he is blaster fit, any frigate will murder him. Think about him as a counter to your missile ship, because he will do just that and die to everything else.

No one would complain that a frigate take 0 dps from medium LR turret below 30km, and no one would complain that a turret is rendered useless by TD. AB is the TD of missiles. Just deal with it and stop crying.