These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#2681 - 2013-12-04 05:35:34 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
That is plain wrong. Overall and over a 90s period they do 20% less dps. But during the first half of this period, they do about 50% more dps. Not actually double, but quite interesting. And if you can't kill the frigate in this time with this dps, you would have taken about 2 minutes with old RLML to kill it. In fact, the burst dps will often be a lot better to kill active tanked frigate, as active tank is less and less effective as dps increase.

This is completely false. The "50% more DPS" statement is a myth, as it presumes you're utilizing the most effective ammunition in every engagement. Since the 40-second swap precludes any tactical changes once battle has commenced, you have a 1:4 chance of being correct; less if you hedge your bets with different damage types. As most Caldari ships get a kinetic bonus, it's also very easy for opponents to negate this. With the old RLMLs, you could swap ammo out in 10 seconds (more than enough time to influence the outcome) - so all your opponent need do now is survive the initial 50-second onslaught, point you and bat phone support.
FYI, Rise acknowledge the reload problem and said they were working on it.

If this is the only gripe you have against RLML, I'd say "problem solved"...

And still nobody answered the only question I asked : what should be the roles and stats of HML and RLML to not overlap on eachother ?

Because the way I see it, you are only looking for a medium missile system able to **** armies of frigates and still be competitive against cruisers (I'm slightly exagerating). You are looking to do exactly what turret ships can do (blap approching frigates with medium weapons) but with missiles and while keeping all other missiles advantages (not position related damage). Or I didn't understand something (most probably) ? But most missiles "fix" proposed here were insane buff to about all medium missile systems without any care for weapons role and balance (with good exceptions though).

As a side note, actually smart people don't only look to talk only with those who agree with them. Confrontation of ideas is actually a good thing if you are not a stubborn fanatic impervious to reason, logic or new ideas.



The reload time is a horrible concept. Its not that HML and RLML overlapped. Its just that heavy missiles were destroyed by rise and friends almost 2 years ago. They reduced hm damage by 20%, nerfed explo radius and velocity. Which effectively killed the heavy missile launcher in pvp. The t2 varients are even worse as the damage dealing rage's suffere from massive explosive radius limiting you to only bc's and bs's. An utter insult considering these are cruiser sized weapons. Plop on an ab you wont take any damage from heavy missiles.

Light missile caracals have horrible dps, however they have a 1000-1200 volley which is used in alpha fleets. For reasons stated above there are no hml caracals. As for hams, only the t2 versions do any dps, ofcourse without any tp's that will be negated. All in all, only one missile cruiser and bc for caldari. Moa, ****. Ferox, ****. To be quite frank all missile ships have less dps and less applied damage than turret based ships. This being said, caldari have nothing but mission ships above frigs and dessies.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#2682 - 2013-12-04 06:05:03 UTC
Kenshi Hanshin wrote:
Dr Sraggles wrote:
Dear CCP Rise,

Previously we have expanded on the concept of "User Metrics" to assess the acceptance and effectiveness of certain weapon systems and your intent on considering this at least in part when looking at ship/weapon system balance.

I ask that you and the community take a look at these metrics compiled from 12/1 to 12/3.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20


Now, it is my understanding that these are self reported metrics (I could be wrong) and so there would be an inherent bias in this statistical compilation. However, I would welcome your comments and as well, in the spirit of game balance and an open dialogue, ask what it is that you would dispute in the accuracy of these statistics?

In particular I would draw your attention to the "Rank Weapons" where we find the only missile system dead last in the Top 20 and it is the Light Missile II launcher, a frig class weapon.

Note that the RLML and RHML are nowhere to be seen as well as the ships capable of mounting these systems. Needless to say there is not a sign of HAMS or HML or any Caldari ship other than our fine frigates.

Note in the "Rank Ships" list that there is a significant outlier (Dominix) that indicates profound balance issues but the one shining light for Caldari is the Tengu. However as it's perceived weapons system (missiles) is nowhere to be seen apparently they are Rail Tengus which (apparently?) are used in Null Blob fleet doctrine per report.

Regardless, the point is that something missile was not fixed with Rubicon, it was further broken in fact if these metrics have validity. If I knew how I would search pre-Rubicon statistics and expect to find the "old" RLML high on the list if it was in need a such a dramatic nerf? My actual sense is that it was no where to be seen as compared to other light/medium weapons systems.

What exactly is being "fixed" with Rubicon? My humble user sense of things that I am left with is that RLML got nerfed because it was all we used, so it must've been too good without looking at the pathetic performance of missiles over all.

I welcome your feedback and that of any others that can shed light on these issues and how these lists are compiled as there appears to be a disconnect between ship success and weapons success that is not apparent to me.

best

ps. Maybe I have been listening to too many conspiracies theories about server issues in huge missile fights but maybe it is time to change them to a new class of weapons (the Photon Missile) that has extremely high speeds (like projectiles) to instantly apply damage but otherwise retain the explosion velocity and radius characteristics (brought into better balance) so that they can be used in large scale battles without their slow flight and numbers creating lag.

Did you notice the Domix is 3x the number of kills of the 2nd place ship according to that data? Likewise the HML T2 has 750 kills to it compared to 2,747 of 200mm Autocannon T2s (~3.7x the HML). I do not see RLML or any other similar missile launcher system on there. The only other missiles are the Arbalest Torps which are at 1,926 kills. However, the torp figure has more to do with the SBs than anything else I suspect.

CCP Rise, these are user reported statistics. So you cannot tell me that Missiles are Balanced or that the Domi is not OP. Also I would love to hear your explanation for why 200mm Auto IIs and Light Neutron Blaster IIs are so popular compared to everything else.


I dont really know how to approach that. On one hand its a gallente battleship. Gallente are all about drones. in fact there ships often have the most drone bandwidth across the ship classes. And why their drones do the most dps. The fact is I believe we worry to much about making everyone exact equals. Some races are better at certain ****. Gallente: Hybrids/Drones, Caldari: Sheilds, Ecm, and Missiles, Amarr: Lasers, Armor. Minmatar: Agility, Cost, Multiporpose idk.

On the other hand I believe they should be balanced enough so that neither sides is utterly superior. Each of the races should have ships and weapons capable of challenging each other.

Last but not least, some people like certain ships and weapons better than others. Players are not equally spread across the different races. 
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#2683 - 2013-12-04 06:16:47 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:


Too bad Caldari aren't the drone race. If they had the most underpowered weapon systems combined with the most overpowered weapon systems it would kind of balance out...kind of.


I tell people that want to hybrid and caldari to start training gallente early. Merlin is outshined by Incruris on pretty much every level, the AFs are close, cruisers...moa vs thorax? Yeah rax all day, Diemost vs eagle? Do we need to go there. Ferox and Brutix? 820DPS brutix please Rokh vs mega/hype......what is that Rokh thing again.

Gallente do it better and they do it better across the board, you can make an argument for the Rokh, but like I said its a judgement call between Rohk and Mega.

....and I'm not sure what their issue with missiles is, every "balance" pass makes missiles less appealing, with the exception of cruise missiles, which are of dubious use outside of PvE.


Thank you. The Caldari have no business using hybrids as a primary ship weapon as every hybrid ship they have is outclassed in every category. The Caldari are the Missile race . Also, remove the kinetic only missile bonus. Its DUMB AS ****. Caldari ships above dessies are ******. 
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#2684 - 2013-12-04 06:36:37 UTC
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:

outclassed in every category.

Pretty much sums up how I feel as a Caldari pilot...
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#2685 - 2013-12-04 06:55:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Where do you get the idea light missiles got their DPS doubled? They actually over 100 seconds ( close to average fight time?) do half the DPS they did prior to Rubicon.
That is plain wrong. Overall and over a 90s period they do 20% less dps. But during the first half of this period, they do about 50% more dps. Not actually double, but quite interesting. And if you can't kill the frigate in this time with this dps, you would have taken about 2 minutes with old RLML to kill it. In fact, the burst dps will often be a lot better to kill active tanked frigate, as active tank is less and less effective as dps increase.

Quote:
The question about overlap between RLML and HML has been answered many many times in this thread and many other threads. The reason so many started using RLML was because of the heavy missile nerf which made them a worse option than RLML. Heavy missiles have not changed so now there is no option but to cross train
So you are saying that because you don't like HML you deserve RLML to completely take their place ?

That's not adressing overlap between RLML and HML, that's completely abandoning HML for another weapon. And if HML have a problem, HML need fix, not RLML to take their place.

My opinion is that HML were OP, and when they were nerfed, RLML became OP because of LM buff and took the place of HML but nothing really changed.

I'm asking about the role and stats HML and RLML should have to not overlap eachother and not obsolete turrets.

PS : caldari navy light missiles hit frigates more than fine.
Funny, prior to Rubicon I was getting 229 DPS with RLML, post Rubicon I get 260 DPS for 48 seconds. That unless my math is really worse than I thought not a 50% increase. Over a 90 second period I actually get 147 DPs or there abouts closer to 40% less.

Not even close to doubled (without all vlv 5's).

I never said that at all but you are free to interpret what is written any way you see fit.. From your previous posts it is clear you are good at it.

You don't read posts other than those with your name in them do you?? Yes HML were pretty much abandoned because they became less than viable to use. Maybe if you read a few of the posts without your name on them you would see, many people, myself included have made suggestions as to how Heavy missiles and light missiles could be balanced.

So 1 missile out of 4 available will hit the target well. Why should missile users be forced to pay 5 or 6 X more for ammo than others?

As for HML, spend a few months training them up and give them a try, only using them shows just how bad they are. You obviously don't believe the few hundred others posting here, who used to use them. ***Read a few of the hundreds of threads about trying to get HML rebalanced to be usable, all were ignored so people used the next viable option RLML, now it has been taken away too.

Lastly (I'm not going to bother replying to you again as you just can't seem to see past your own opinion)
There was never anything wrong with RLML, "some" of the missiles were a little OP. So rather than spend the time sorting that out CCP Rise in his wisdom took away a perfectly good weapon system and gave us a very niche gimmicky weapon that is not usable as it was previously. It has no PVE application at all and only limited application in pvp.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#2686 - 2013-12-04 07:46:27 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
You guys really can't continue to claim I haven't acknowledged your negative feedback.

I first responded to concerns here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3851753#post3851753
then I responded again here after reading more feedback: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3864075#post3864075
and finally I directly commented on the volume of complaints and why I wasn't acting based on them in this post https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3864922#post3864922

Look at the previous page of feedback. Several posts calling me names or talking about ECM, and one post from someone actually using RLML who says they are enjoying them. This is a really good example of how the thread has gone in general and represents why I haven't made big changes so far.

Since launch, I've been continuing to monitor the effect of the rapid missile change through usage metrics, discussion with CSM, conversation with players I know who are using them and using them myself on TQ. I see that some places, especially in this thread, there's a lot of frustration still about the change in general but the majority of it is lacking any substance except for the simple claim that 40 seconds of reload isn't fun.

I'm going to continue to watch this very closely and won't hesitate to make changes if I'm convinced (or others in my department) are convinced that they are needed.

edit: I want to add that I hope to never make a big balance change this late in a release cycle again. I felt that it was worth it in this case because rolling out Rapid Heavies with the intention of making a big change to their mechanic shortly after release would be worse than getting them out with the right mechanic and time to tune them if the balance wasn't exactly right. This trickled down to RLML as well. I still think that was the right decision but I want to work to avoid having to do it in the future.



Should have waited for the point release to begin with, alot less complaining had that been the case. Also, link us these "other places" you're collecting data from so we can have a say and more importantly show us the numbers don't just talk about them in passing. Also, the HM=bad angle was brought up somewhere between pages 10 and 20 initially. I'm hopeful that sense might come by on that issue since heavies lag behind other medium long range weapons by 20-40%.

Since a 40s reload is prohibitive for PvE application (Especially since the real reason to choose missiles in PvE is for steady damage values) my choice of feedback for the RL/RHML is rightclick for hot reprocess action.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2687 - 2013-12-04 07:48:44 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Funny, prior to Rubicon I was getting 229 DPS with RLML, post Rubicon I get 260 DPS for 48 seconds. That unless my math is really worse than I thought not a 50% increase. Over a 90 second period I actually get 147 DPs or there abouts closer to 40% less.

It's not just you. I ran the numbers and it's worse. About 23% approximately.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2688 - 2013-12-04 11:11:42 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:


Too bad Caldari aren't the drone race. If they had the most underpowered weapon systems combined with the most overpowered weapon systems it would kind of balance out...kind of.


I tell people that want to hybrid and caldari to start training gallente early. Merlin is outshined by Incruris on pretty much every level, the AFs are close, cruisers...moa vs thorax? Yeah rax all day, Diemost vs eagle? Do we need to go there. Ferox and Brutix? 820DPS brutix please Rokh vs mega/hype......what is that Rokh thing again.

Gallente do it better and they do it better across the board, you can make an argument for the Rokh, but like I said its a judgement call between Rohk and Mega.

....and I'm not sure what their issue with missiles is, every "balance" pass makes missiles less appealing, with the exception of cruise missiles, which are of dubious use outside of PvE.


I don't quite follow what this has to do with my post...
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2689 - 2013-12-04 11:59:55 UTC
No comments on my proposed RLML rebalance?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#2690 - 2013-12-04 12:44:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Dr Sraggles wrote:
The outlier that is the Dominix should be a huge red flag. When you analyze stuff like this the outlier is always a concern. 3 times the number of kills as the next ship is a big issue for balance. The data says you take Domi's or you go home in a pod. The only caveat is that if everyone has Domi's then it is fair. Well, for Null fleets that is likely true. BS don't participate in small scale gang stuff much, which is a shame..
I don't want to start a riot here but for the time period used to compile the numbers, there is probably a pretty good reason the Domi came out so far ahead compared to other ships.
When two large nulsec entities meet on a field of battle (in a system) there is a good chance they will be flying similar, Doctrines. Looking at the killboard for this period, would show Domis got a lot of kills, many of those could have in fact been other domis from opposing fleets.

The great and terrible thing about statistics is in the compilation and presentation. Without looking at how those domis got so many kills one could assume the Domi to be way over powered and decide it is in need of rebalancing ( a nerf). Thing is, that 19k of kills came from major fleet battles, ( like the old drake blobs and look what happened there) where two sides lined up with similar doctrines and punched it out till one was left standing. (look at Domi losses for the same period)

A spike of success for a ship or weapon system, is and never should be a reason to "balance" a weapon system or ship, without looking at the whole picture.


NB; Dr Sraggles; You want to use Battleships for smaller gang / fleet fights, Get over to lowsec around Kor Azor, Genesis. I can tell you from experience you will have no trouble finding fights ( with battleships)


Quote:
Arthur Aihaken
No comments on my proposed RLML rebalance?
Give it time M8, CCP need to analyse the incoming data and decide whether they will make missiles usable or just fudge the numbers and say "everything is working as intended"

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2691 - 2013-12-04 13:01:14 UTC
I give up... Switching over to guns and not looking back. Trying to get CCP to recognize and acknowledge that they've made some critical mistakes with respect to missiles is like trying to convince conspiracy theorists that we really did land on the moon. I'm not waiting around for the next update (let alone another year or more) for another set of half thought-out changes that seem to be introduced on a whim.

We've basically seen Drakes and now Caracals eliminated as viable PvP options. Tengus have been relegated to the sidelines by being banned from most FW and DED complexes since Odyssey, and with the recent RLML change in Rubicon they're more or less useless in PvP as well. Even the Cerberus - which was shaping up to be a decent PvP ship - has all but disappeared. It's only a matter of time before Tengus get nerfed to the point where they're no longer viable in PvE, either.

Ironically, I think the new Marauder actually influenced the changes to RLMLs because a few enterprising individuals were conceiving it as the ultimate frigate-gank platform.
Evil

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2692 - 2013-12-04 13:10:58 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Funny, prior to Rubicon I was getting 229 DPS with RLML, post Rubicon I get 260 DPS for 48 seconds. That unless my math is really worse than I thought not a 50% increase. Over a 90 second period I actually get 147 DPs or there abouts closer to 40% less.
Oh, and can you please tell me why you now use precision missiles and compare the dps with fury missiles on the old fit ?

Arthur Aihaken wrote:

• Interceptor ... 80m signature, 4500m/sec velocity ... 20.8% (O) ... 20.2% (P)
• AB Frigate ... 40m signature, 1000m/sec velocity ... 33.9% (O) ... 32.9% (P)
• MWD Assault Frigate ... 135m signature, 2200m/sec velocity ... 43.9% (O) ... 42.6% (P)
• MWD Frigate ... 235m signature, 2800m/sec velocity ... 53.1% (O) ... 51.5% (P)
• MWD Destroyer ... 400m signature, 1800m/sec velocity ... 95.6% (O) ... 88.5% (P)
• AB Cruiser ... 175m signature, 600m/sec velocity ... 99.9% (O) ... 88.5% (P)
• MWD AHAC ... 500m signature, 1500m/sec velocity ... 99.9% (O) ... 88.5% (P)
• MWD Cruiser ... 800m signature, 1500m/sec velocity ... 99.9% (O) ... 88.5% (P)
That's interesting, but why are you not considering the numbers without prop mod, like when a ship is scramed ; and numbers with scram+web ?

Everyone here says that turrets are far better than missiles because they can apply damage to a far away target or to an immobile target, yet missiles seems to need the target to move as fast as possible to be fired ?

This is certainly honesty...

Your Light missiles suggestions are good IMO eventhough I doubt light missile need any damage application buff as this one have been buffed already in the HML nerf and LM hit frigates perfectly fine in almost all cases.

In fact, I would more leave the damage alone and nerf damage application to leave high potential dps possible if you sacrifice enough for damage application ; but that's only my opinion everyone don't care anyway.^^

Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
And still nobody answered the only question I asked : what should be the roles and stats of HML and RLML to not overlap on eachother ?
HMLs should excel against cruisers and be marginally effective against smaller targets. RLMLs should excel against frigs and destroyers and be marginally effective against larger targets. Right now, HMLs are only truly effective against BCs and above, while RLMLs are only truly effective against solo or maybe duo frigs not sporting heavy tank. In other words neither has any real flexibility, and are therefore purely niche weapons.
Ok, so HAM don't exists (I guess a missile not hiting to 50km is not worth considering...)

Can you elaborate though ? What would be an effective anti-frigate weapon ? How many frigates should you **** for your RLML to be convenient ?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2693 - 2013-12-04 13:12:29 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Give it time M8, CCP need to analyse the incoming data and decide whether they will make missiles usable or just fudge the numbers and say "everything is working as intended"

I've been waiting since I started EVE in April. I'm sure there are even more disappointed players who suffered through the first heavy missile nerf. I've lost faith that CCP even knows what they're doing anymore - and not just with missiles. There are so many broken mechanics in this game, but we have time to waste on market scams, renaming auto cannons, introducing another lame and uninspired ship (Nestor), turning the Jita undock into the Indy 500 and other token features.

There's no substance - there's no content. There's no turning back, alright; it's quite apparent to some of us that the direction EVE is taking is akin to a pack of lemmings being driven off a cliff. Except most are going willingly.

CCP Rise, CCP Fozzie - you both get a lump of coal in your stocking this year.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#2694 - 2013-12-04 13:15:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Spugg Galdon wrote:


Yes, the ammo switching is a problem but it is getting looked into. Wait for the point release.

The size of the magazine/clip has been carefully considered (potential damage per clip) so that the burst damage isn't completely OMGWTFBBQAREYOUAWIZARD. Coupled with the length of the reload to give the sustained damge that was desired for this weapon.

Yes, HML's have really, really bad damage application. I imagine Rise and Fozzie have been made aware of that by the community by now and have even stated that they are looking at HM performance between now and the point release.

I have been having a go at using these weapons in PvE as well as PvP and I find that they work as intended. The biggest problem for me is simply the ammo switching. Lets see if the ammo switching fix makes these weapons even more useful and if they make HM's useful again I will be using those even more often than not!

Have patience
Ammo switching is a pain and without reducing the overall reload time there is no way around fixing that.
Reduce reload time for ammo switching only- great, I'll just rotate between Precision and Navies, sort of defeats the whole 40 second reload doesn't it?
Yes indeed clip sizes were carefully considered, for those with all lvl 5 skills, if you have less than all 5's the RLML is far from suitable and as hull bonuses play such a big part in overall performance, without Cruiser 5 you are at a major disadvantage.
The overall damage reduction over 2 mins for someone with less than perfect skills is closer to 40%.



Quote:
Arthur Aihaken
CCP Rise, CCP Fozzie - you both get a lump of coal in your stocking this year.
I was thinking 1 lump between them. ( I was around for the Drake / missile nerf and it still stings)

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2695 - 2013-12-04 13:23:31 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
That's interesting, but why are you not considering the numbers without prop mod, like when a ship is scramed ; and numbers with scram+web ?

Since you specifically asked, I'll reply (even though the answer is obvious). This is about damage application, and how RLMLs were perceived as "OP" and basically able to hit anything. The numbers clearly show that light missiles only apply about 20-50% of their damage against fast-moving targets. If you apply scrams, stasis webs and target painters damage application only increases. So it seemed a moot point.

Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Everyone here says that turrets are far better than missiles because they can apply damage to a far away target or to an immobile target, yet missiles seems to need the target to move as fast as possible to be fired ? This is certainly honesty…

I honestly don't understand this at all.

Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Your Light missiles suggestions are good IMO eventhough I doubt light missile need any damage application buff as this one have been buffed already in the HML nerf and LM hit frigates perfectly fine in almost all cases.

In fact, I would more leave the damage alone and nerf damage application to leave high potential dps possible if you sacrifice enough for damage application ; but that's only my opinion everyone don't care anyway.

The whole point of the damage nerf and damage application buff was to continue to make light missiles as effective as they are against smaller ships (frigates, destroyers) but less effective against cruisers and larger targets.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Gorski Car
#2696 - 2013-12-04 13:25:37 UTC
Tried the new rlmls. All I have 2 say is top lel way 2 ruin a weapon system ccp.

Collect this post
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2697 - 2013-12-04 13:32:04 UTC
Gorski Car wrote:
Tried the new rlmls. All I have 2 say is top lel way 2 ruin a weapon system ccp.

All I can say is that I hope you only tried it out in PvE...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2698 - 2013-12-04 13:47:22 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
And still nobody answered the only question I asked : what should be the roles and stats of HML and RLML to not overlap on eachother ?
HMLs should excel against cruisers and be marginally effective against smaller targets. RLMLs should excel against frigs and destroyers and be marginally effective against larger targets. Right now, HMLs are only truly effective against BCs and above, while RLMLs are only truly effective against solo or maybe duo frigs not sporting heavy tank. In other words neither has any real flexibility, and are therefore purely niche weapons.
Ok, so HAM don't exists (I guess a missile not hiting to 50km is not worth considering...)

Can you elaborate though ? What would be an effective anti-frigate weapon ? How many frigates should you **** for your RLML to be convenient ?


Are you for real?

Your question had nothing to do with HAMs, and the old RLML was an effective anti-frigate weapon. The new one is piece of garbage that can not change ammo and can not kill a heavily tanked T2 frig with the wrong resists before you are forced to wait 40 seconds to start shooting at them again (in which case you will probably die or be forced to warp off).

I seriously think you are a troll at this point...
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2699 - 2013-12-04 15:12:51 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Your question had nothing to do with HAMs, and the old RLML was an effective anti-frigate weapon. The new one is piece of garbage that can not change ammo and can not kill a heavily tanked T2 frig with the wrong resists before you are forced to wait 40 seconds to start shooting at them again (in which case you will probably die or be forced to warp off).
Oh, sorry for this one, HAM where in the first time I asked this question.

Anyway, the question of the ammo swapping is acknowledged by CCP and they are working on it.

And you didn't answered how many frigates you should be able to **** to be happy with RLML. What performances RLML should have to be good ?

And consider destroyers performances too : if a cruiser with the same weapon can do everything better than a destroyer, what is the point of destroyers ?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2700 - 2013-12-04 15:27:08 UTC
// ignore

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