These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3061 - 2013-12-10 23:13:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Okay two things.

Tonight me and the forum alt you know as Niena Nuamzzar went out and did some SISI tests.

First off, I've previously tested my Thorax against my friend in a high tank Incursus (fits below) and just owned him with the Thorax with 200mm rails on. But that didn't happen with Niena. He could tank me.

Its clear now I need to drop down to 150mm Rails, and its also clear how important the tracking enhancers are if you're going to make it anti frigate.

Against any other frigate bar the Punisher (You know, those frigates everyone flys right?... oh wait) and the Incursus - both with very solid tanks, the Thorax struggled to get his tank down. But overall, I will still be taking these out for real as anti frigate cruisers. Niena has perfect skills and flew the Incursus great - and at no time could he do any DPS to me.

The 150mm should do better close in, and I want to try these next time.

Niena clearly was flying them better than my friend, although in fairness he's not really done a lot of frigate flying in the game.

So then I wanted to try another ship that previously we'd popped the Incursus with no problem. The RLML Caracal.

People have said here, that the Incursus can't tank the new Burst RLML - well Niena just did. It was SO close though, I mean, he's going into structure and then getting a hero rep in there before the next missiles land. It was fascinating to watch actually. Damn those little Incursus's are tough nuts.

Then something amusing happened - I stopped shooting. Niena was like, that was close - he thought I'd stopped shooting to save him from refitting. I hadn't. I'd just run out of missiles. He did burn his AB out in the process however. So after those 40 seconds were done, it would have been game over.

Realistically, I think its clear then with lower skilled pilots, the Caracal with RLML will pop the Incursus, but its not 'quick' if they fly it well and the time and missiles it takes (almost all the missiles loaded) means that if he has any friends, then the Caracal is going to be in real trouble. At best then, a solo RLML Caracal is going to be able to pop a couple of frigates.

There is an interesting irony though here as well. The old RLML wouldn't have been even close to troubling an Incursus like that. Its peak DPS wouldn't push the tank anything like as hard, and this Incursus fit means once its shifted, the Caracal DPS drops significantly. It really is a cool little module since they buffed it.

What essentially this means, is that with this 'Nerf', the RLML can now kill several frigates it couldn't before, certainly solo. At least for 50 seconds.

And don't get me wrong - its still a strange, niche ship that leaves us staring darkly at HAMs which as the only alternative left for poor missile cruiser pilots - which in itself is a scary thought.

I will continue in my quest to find a better anti-frigate Cruiser that doesn't have a 40 second reload and get back to you.

[Incursus, Double Tank]
Domination Small Armor Repairer
Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Reactive Armor Hardener

Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400
1MN Afterburner II
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S

Small Nanobot Accelerator I
Small Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Small Anti-Explosive Pump I

Hobgoblin II x1

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#3062 - 2013-12-10 23:16:56 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:

if you're going in with the intention of using jav hams, you may as well be using hmls instead.


Not always. Okay, the extra range is useful, but Jav HAMs do 9% more DPS with better precision than CN HMs, and go to 40 km on a Caracal.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3063 - 2013-12-10 23:20:04 UTC
Oh we also tried that Anti Frigate Raven fit - it will happily kill any frigate you care to mention within its webs, and cap drain anything up to 25km, but it took its time to start to work down a Punishers tank. Probably do better against the Incrusus due to the lower resists.

If you have a Raven and are so inclined, it will worth in a merry strange way. And lets not forget, its a Battleship killing frigates.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3064 - 2013-12-10 23:20:11 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:


if you're going in with the intention of using jav hams, you may as well be using hmls instead.


That should be the case but heavy missiles are such fail. Javelin HAM's apply more dps to the targets your most likely to face in FW.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3065 - 2013-12-10 23:25:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Dr Sraggles wrote:
Arthur, we need Javelin Faction Missiles on the graphs for a complete discussion please. Thx so much for your fine work so far.

Been thinking about a more detailed response to what the graphs show and would love to have the final piece of the puzzle displayed.

Ask and ye shall receive... Here are three (3) updated charts. Since the Caracal has been the most affected, I focused this last effort solely on it. I stuck with RLMLs and HAMLs, because I don't think we'll be happy with HML performance:

• T2 RLML with Faction ammunition
• T2 RLML with Precision ammunition
• T2 RLML with Fury ammunition
• Faction RLML with Faction ammunition
• T2 HAML with Javelin ammunition
• Faction HAML with Faction ammunition

Then I applied this to three different graphs:

1. Base (3x T2 Ballistic Control)
2. Base + rigs (3x T2 Ballistic Control, 2x T1 Rigor, 1x T1 Flare)
3. Base + rigs + painter (3x T2 Ballistic Control, 2x T1 Rigor, 1x T1 Flare, 1x T2 Target Painter)

Caracal, RLML-HAML Comparison (Base)
Caracal, RLML-HAML Comparison (Base + Rigs)
Caracal, RLML-HAML Comparison (Base + Rigs + EW)

I'll let viewers draw their own conclusions, but just a few quick observations:

• vs. Interceptors: T2 RLML/Precision ammo = win (rigs or otherwise)
• vs. Frigates: Faction RLML/Faction ammo w/rigs > T2 RLML/Faction-Precision-Rage ammo w/rigs
• vs. Destroyers: T2 HAML/Javelin ammo w/rigs ~ T2 RLML/Rage ammo w/rigs (Rage has slight edge)
• vs. Cruisers and up: T2 HAML/Javelin ammo w/rigs > T2 RLML/Faction-Precision-Rage ammo w/rigs

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3066 - 2013-12-10 23:28:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Awesome. I have a lot of skills to level up first but I think your right; looks like Javelin HAM's are the way forward for Caracals now, I can see them being useful defending medium plexes, pity the fittings are so tight I really need near perfect skills to get the best out of them. and thanks, at least now I know what to train towards Big smile

The numbers certainly seem to bear it out. You're losing a bit of range with Javelins over light missiles (a hydraulic rig will compensate to some degree), but you do more volley damage - and you have over four times the ammunition.

TrouserDeagle wrote:
if you're going in with the intention of using jav hams, you may as well be using hmls instead.

The only reason to use HMLs would be for the extreme range. The problem then becomes damage application at that range, because you need two target painters to get the same benefit of a single target painter. And Javelin HAMs exceed the DPS and damage application of a Faction HM without the need for a target painter. HMLs are so bad in PvP that with outside of rare exceptions they're almost exclusively limited to PvE activities.

Moonaura wrote:
What essentially this means, is that with this 'Nerf', the RLML can now kill several frigates it couldn't before, certainly solo. At least for 50 seconds.

And don't get me wrong - its still a strange, niche ship that leaves us staring darkly at HAMs which as the only alternative left for poor missile cruiser pilots - which in itself is a scary thought.

I will continue in my quest to find a better anti-frigate Cruiser that doesn't have a 40 second reload and get back to you.

Check out the new graphs above and let me know your thoughts. I'd be curious to see your Caracal fit and what you may have been running for ammunition, rigs and electronic warfare.

I think the Jury has spoken on that one. Javelin HAMs outperform any RLML configuration against cruisers once you start looking at a few rigs. In fact, if you throw in a target painter they actually give RLMLs a run for their money against destroyers, too.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3067 - 2013-12-10 23:52:16 UTC
Coming soon: a nerf to Javelin HAMs
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3068 - 2013-12-11 00:07:11 UTC
Caracal Build
2x Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Precision light missiles
3x Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Javelin heavy assault missiles
2x Hornet II light drones
10MN Microwarpdrive II
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 100
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Medium Shield Extender II
Cap Recharger II
3x Ballistic Control System II
Damage Control II
2x Medium Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
1x Medium Semiconductor Memory Cell I
.....

3m 20s capacitor
14.7k EHP (38.8%, 51.0%, 63.3%, 69.4% shield resistance)
339 DPS (35.9 drone DPS), 758 alpha
31.6km/45.6km range
1881 m/s speed (132/792 signature)

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3069 - 2013-12-11 00:19:17 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Caracal Build
2x Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Precision light missiles
3x Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Javelin heavy assault missiles
2x Hornet II light drones
10MN Microwarpdrive II
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 100
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Medium Shield Extender II
Cap Recharger II
3x Ballistic Control System II
Damage Control II
2x Medium Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
1x Medium Semiconductor Memory Cell I
.....

3m 20s capacitor
14.7k EHP (38.8%, 51.0%, 63.3%, 69.4% shield resistance)
339 DPS (35.9 drone DPS), 758 alpha
31.6km/45.6km range
1881 m/s speed (132/792 signature)


It's kind of sad that RLMLs are probably only usable in this manner (ie secondary weapons).
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3070 - 2013-12-11 00:21:24 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:

I found this graph on the Medium turret thread, Rise himself made it so I'm sure it's not far off being realistic

http://i.imgur.com/E9Dvyqv.png

That's the dps medium turrets can do against a Talwar moving at 1700 m/s at a 60 degree angle, they have 2 tracking enhancers. Just to compare that with a Caracal; against the same target with 2 target painters you can expect to do a steady 34dps using Javelin HAM's out to 45km. If you were to superimpose the HAM damage profile onto the above graph you might see what missile users are talking about, bear in mind Javelin HAM's are the best option we have available for that particular situation as you can see from Arthurs graph above.

(I can't do it myself but if anyone has the knowledge it would just be a horizontal line at 34 on the Y axis going as far as 45 on the x axis and then going directly down to the x axis)

I haven't used any other damage mods because neither did Rise in his example, 2 tracking enhancers vs 2 target painters.

You can see that HAM's are superior to long range turrets in the range from 0-15km, but after that long range turrets are vastly superior all the way out. It's pretty safe to say blasters will be superior for most of the first 10km as well, and light drones from a vexor will eclipse us at all ranges against small fast moving targets.

p.s. we have 2x Warrior II's on the caracal as well and those will further enhance the dps, but the Thorax has 2 full flights of 5.


Okay I just photoshopped the HAM dps curve onto the graph, tbh it should be a fraction higher now I look at it again but it's close enough. I'm not complaining either btw, that dps can be improved with more rigs and BCU's so in the event a lone Talwar wouldn't stand against a HAM Caracal anyway. I just think it illustrates where heavy missiles are at compared to turret users when dealing with ships that are maneuvering.

http://i.imgur.com/H9IkFZY.png

Although HAM's are in pretty good shape generally there is still room for improvement, a low slot tracking enhancer style module that was suggested earlier would give missile users the same capabilities to custom there fits and be flexible as Turret users already enjoy. We would be sacrificing potential dps for better application against smaller targets. Even that won't be enough to save HML, they need to be brought closer into line with where HAM's are at now in terms of damage application, their potential dps is already so low to make up for their range they really need to be able to apply that damage.
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#3071 - 2013-12-11 00:33:29 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Well... about the HAM's lol....

Lets see what those puppies do against those same Cruiser targets huh?

Against the AB fit Cruisers - the ships they are designed to hit a three BCU Caracal with HAM's and Faction Missiles (The best ones for hitting targets with) - On Paper DPS: 395 DPS (Oh dear)

Against another Caracal: 230 DPS
Against the Thorax: 161 DPS .... ahahahahahahahahahaha
Against the Stabber: 103 DPS ..... muhahahahahaha

WTF!!!!

Okay... I'm being unkind, lets really ramp up the DPS and use Rage missiles! Peak DPS now up to 464 DPS over 25km.

Against another Caracal: 140 DPS.... ahahahahahahahahha
Against the Thorax: 96 DPS.... oh dear, I think I just hurt myself...
Against the Stabber: 61 DPS.

Epic. Just Epic.

Yes the HAM is what we are left with.

Once more, this is why all my future gangs I'm arranging don't use missiles, and are not Caldari.


But you do organise gangs consisting of webless ABing cruisers? Because that's what you've given us numbers for.

Seriously, what is this? Are webless ABing cruisers the mainstay of FW? These fits look crazy to me. Why would you insist on using HAMs without web support when you know how much they benefit from webs, both in terms of range control and damage application?

Give us realistic numbers or none at all.


These numbers are fairly accurate, at least were the caracal is concerned. Actually I think hes being generous Caldari cruisers simply dont have the midslots or the to fit webs or scrams, let alone the pg to fit anything other than an afterburner.

You forget that caldari ships need midslots for tank, and in addition to that shields got a resistance nerf a while back making tank even worse.
Missiles dont even do comparable dps compared to turrets, less if your targets moving.

I am in the Caldari Militia. We never use caldari ships or missile ships above frigs and dessies. Cruisers on up we fly amaar < gallente < minmatar. In that order. Since Test joined they have been trying use moas, but they fail in every regard. Moas that is.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#3072 - 2013-12-11 00:35:31 UTC
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:

I am in the Caldari Militia. We never use caldari ships or missile ships above frigs and dessies. Cruisers on up we fly amaar < gallente < minmatar. In that order. Since Test joined they have been trying use moas, but they fail in every regard. Moas that is.


you're pretty awful
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3073 - 2013-12-11 00:40:35 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:


you're pretty awful


Whats awful about that?
Kenshi Hanshin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#3074 - 2013-12-11 00:40:46 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:

I found this graph on the Medium turret thread, Rise himself made it so I'm sure it's not far off being realistic

http://i.imgur.com/E9Dvyqv.png

That's the dps medium turrets can do against a Talwar moving at 1700 m/s at a 60 degree angle, they have 2 tracking enhancers. Just to compare that with a Caracal; against the same target with 2 target painters you can expect to do a steady 34dps using Javelin HAM's out to 45km. If you were to superimpose the HAM damage profile onto the above graph you might see what missile users are talking about, bear in mind Javelin HAM's are the best option we have available for that particular situation as you can see from Arthurs graph above.

(I can't do it myself but if anyone has the knowledge it would just be a horizontal line at 34 on the Y axis going as far as 45 on the x axis and then going directly down to the x axis)

I haven't used any other damage mods because neither did Rise in his example, 2 tracking enhancers vs 2 target painters.

You can see that HAM's are superior to long range turrets in the range from 0-15km, but after that long range turrets are vastly superior all the way out. It's pretty safe to say blasters will be superior for most of the first 10km as well, and light drones from a vexor will eclipse us at all ranges against small fast moving targets.

p.s. we have 2x Warrior II's on the caracal as well and those will further enhance the dps, but the Thorax has 2 full flights of 5.


Okay I just photoshopped the HAM dps curve onto the graph, tbh it should be a fraction higher now I look at it again but it's close enough. I'm not complaining either btw, that dps can be improved with more rigs and BCU's so in the event a lone Talwar wouldn't stand against a HAM Caracal anyway. I just think it illustrates where heavy missiles are at compared to turret users when dealing with ships that are maneuvering.

http://i.imgur.com/H9IkFZY.png

Although HAM's are in pretty good shape generally there is still room for improvement, a low slot tracking enhancer style module that was suggested earlier would give missile users the same capabilities to custom there fits and be flexible as Turret users already enjoy. We would be sacrificing potential dps for better application against smaller targets. Even that won't be enough to save HML, they need to be brought closer into line with where HAM's are at now in terms of damage application, their potential dps is already so low to make up for their range they really need to be able to apply that damage.

Words fail me to describe my shock and horror at your amended graph. Wow! That sucks on so many levels, I am not even sure where to start... So according to this graph, if we maintain a range of ~20km we are better off with a talos, deimos or thorax. Good to know!

CCP Rise, I am going to send you some "For Dummy" books if I can find some on missiles and guns. Also I am thinking that I need to send you a dictionary with the word "balance" highlighted for you.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3075 - 2013-12-11 00:41:46 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
you're pretty awful

Be nice. Big smile

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#3076 - 2013-12-11 00:41:52 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:


you're pretty awful


Whats awful about that?


moas are the ****, and lol, why would anyone fly minmatar except as a joke?
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#3077 - 2013-12-11 00:46:41 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:


Conclusions:
• RLMLs: You get about as much benefit from a single stasis web or target painter, so you might as well use your rigs for tank.
• HMLs: They still suck, man do they suck. The fact that you need full rigors and flares to do 100% damage to battlecruisers speaks volumes.
• HAMLs: The clear winner in all of this, as they have some incredible potential when combined with rigs and webs/target painters (which probably means they're going to get nerfed next).

Comments welcome. Thanks.
Just so my pleb brain can absorb this correctly, the graphs are based on DPS yes / no.
If yes, is it DPS over a period of time to allow for reloads.
If no, how much would reloads affect the damage application

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.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3078 - 2013-12-11 00:48:41 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:


you're pretty awful


Whats awful about that?


moas are the ****, and lol, why would anyone fly minmatar except as a joke?


:-) in 3 years of playing Eve I've been through periods where:

* caldari were OP

* minmatar were OP

* lasers (and therefore amarr) were OP

* and now (astonishingly) gallente are OP

To be honest, this has more to do with fashion than fact.

If you put 6 ships in the same squad, and fire on the same target at the same time, it does not matter what's mounted to your hardpoints - it'll die.

This is Eve. Nothing is fair. It never was. Build a bigger, better organised fleet.

If you don't, you'll be pwned.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3079 - 2013-12-11 00:58:32 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:


you're pretty awful


Whats awful about that?


moas are the ****, and lol, why would anyone fly minmatar except as a joke?


:-) in 3 years of playing Eve I've been through periods where:

* caldari were OP

* minmatar were OP

* lasers (and therefore amarr) were OP

* and now (astonishingly) gallente are OP

To be honest, this has more to do with fashion than fact.

If you put 6 ships in the same squad, and fire on the same target at the same time, it does not matter what's mounted to your hardpoints - it'll die.

This is Eve. Nothing is fair. It never was. Build a bigger, better organised fleet.

If you don't, you'll be pwned.


Yeah it has nothing to do with the heavy-handed balance methods of CCP who over-nerf or over-buff nearly everything they touch. It has nothing to do with that at all...

Roll
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3080 - 2013-12-11 00:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Just so my pleb brain can absorb this correctly, the graphs are based on DPS yes / no.
If yes, is it DPS over a period of time to allow for reloads.
If no, how much would reloads affect the damage application

Yes, based on DPS - but it's applied/effective damage (not paper DPS). Yes, both ammunition capacity and reloads are factored into the equation (hence why you'll see slight variations between Faction and T2 where applicable).

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