These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3121 - 2013-12-11 15:18:49 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

So, please, stop being a douchebag.


You consistently act like you know more about missiles than missile users (some of whom are very experienced), willfully misinterpret hard data to support your arguments, and generally act like you are simply smarter than the rest of us, and I'm the douchbag?

Roll
I'm only pointing the flaws of your arguments and data : since the begining you only use the fastest and smallest cruisers with AB and expect to do full damage on them. The only combat cruiser ever used for baseline was the Rupture, the fastest and the smallest of them all ! And of course with an AB...

So yes, if missile users can't understand that ships designed to reduce missile damage with modules designed to reduce missile damage do actually reduce missile damage, yes I feel a lot smarter than them.

And I yet have to see a misinterpretation of data I would have done : when I said the only frigates which would survive a load of RLML would be AB frigates, AF and interceptors, I was right ; when I say that railguns do not hit orbiting frigate below 20km, it takes a Thorax (tracking bonused, equivalent to CNI) with drones and double web to prove me "wrong", most of the dps being done by the drones ; when I point that buffer tanking rigs will increase missile damage up to 30%, I'm still right, but nobody cares ; and when I say that a ship will very often be scramed, nobody cares either because the dps would probably be too high maybe ?

I'm asking you this : if you are honest about what you are saying with missiles, why are you only using the worse cases missiles can face ?

Without considering T1 logi cruiser which have a signature of destroyer, average T1 cruiser signature is 127.5m and average speed is 274.5m/s. The Stabber is far from these numbers because it makes one end of these averages, hence it's not a good base value to look at missiles numbers.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3122 - 2013-12-11 15:49:41 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
I've filled it full of target painters - for which it gets a bonus.

Just FYI, there's more to be gained with a pair of dual webs than another pair of target painters (although this does entirely defeat the whole range advantage with heavy missiles):

• 3x Target Painters = 37.5% + (86.9% x 37.5% = 32.58) + (57.1% x 37.5% = 21.41) = +91.5% signature
• 2x T2 Webs = 40% + (86.9% x 40% = 34.76) = -74.76% velocity



That is NOT how it works.


Its 1.375*1.3258*1.2141 = > 2.20 => 120% increase in signature. The target painters are not summed and applied all at once. Nothing in eve works like that, except plates and extenders.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3123 - 2013-12-11 16:22:07 UTC
The reason I opted for Target Painters instead of webs in this extreme example, is that typically Heavy Missiles are best used outside of web range.

It is also worth remembering that TP would only work well within the 45 km optimal range. So for long range Heavy Missile fits, you're never going to even get this sort of effect anyway, even if you were mad enough to bring such a Bellicose along.

Typically a gang would include TP and Webs. Naturally this is very difficult in a Caldari gang, given the premium of mid slots. I would typically increase tank and mix two to three points in the gang. If you're going to fix the EM resistance hole and boost overall resists, that is two mids slots gone, and in an active or EHP fit, you want to use the rigs to improve those.

I couldn't always bring a Bellicose along when we used HAM Caracal's as not everyone can fly them - most minmitar trained pilots for example, are gunnery focused, and e-war skills in general eve PvP players are actually typically pretty bad. Very few players trained anything in the electronics bracket properly.

I'd never bring that much target painting along normally, because of the diminishing returns, and for the reasons I've just mentioned.

"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
#3124 - 2013-12-11 16:31:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

So, please, stop being a douchebag.


You consistently act like you know more about missiles than missile users (some of whom are very experienced), willfully misinterpret hard data to support your arguments, and generally act like you are simply smarter than the rest of us, and I'm the douchbag?

Roll
I'm only pointing the flaws of your arguments and data : since the begining you only use the fastest and smallest cruisers with AB and expect to do full damage on them. The only combat cruiser ever used for baseline was the Rupture, the fastest and the smallest of them all ! And of course with an AB...

So yes, if missile users can't understand that ships designed to reduce missile damage with modules designed to reduce missile damage do actually reduce missile damage, yes I feel a lot smarter than them.


We've used a range of ships - again, I told you this last time - and I explained that the reason we might opt to show a stabber in the Precision examples - is that IS the cruiser those missiles are designed to hit well and counter. You'd expect regular heavy missiles to hit regular cruisers well.

Neither missile works against either target.

Its perfectly acceptable to fit to reduce incoming damage. And yes, its a good idea to fit a faster cruiser with a smaller sig and throw in some nano in EVE.

It is also perfectly reasonable, to expect that if a missile user comes across such a ship, that he has a counter to it. He does - its called the Precision missiles.

But as shown, they don't work. Not even close. Not even when you give them epic target painting in an unrealistic fashion, that you won't see in game. They still don't work.

Again, you and your corp mates have very few losses against missiles, and you've never fired them or flown Caldari. We've gone to great detail and lengths to show you why we feel missiles right now aren't worth fitting. It doesn't seem to matter to you. Whatever we say, Missiles are epic and Gallente suck.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#3125 - 2013-12-11 16:56:39 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
Shhhh... PvE doesn't count :)

You could always use Heavy Missiles instead...

Yes I was joking. Reroll guns.





"shrug" with more than 100m in SP, I can use whatever I like. Just observing that these things are useless for anti-frig use for people who use cruisers for PvE. Which means the only options are autocannons or drones.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3126 - 2013-12-11 17:01:15 UTC
Excuse my excessive irony, this thread has been... intense lately. Well since it started really :)

But yes, agree with you. That is why we'd like to have the original RLML mechanics back, in addition to the new burst ones.

CCP Rise has clearly stated though that they wanted to nerf the RLML as they felt it was OP, and this new burst mechanism was meant to try and keep it interesting.

So if we did get the original RLML back some changes would have to happen to it.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3127 - 2013-12-11 18:01:33 UTC
Yet again CCP flies in, hits F1 for maximum derp, unloads their Rapid Derp Launchers in the thread, watches them hit for maximum confusion and outrage, and warps off never to be seen again. What the hell are they smoking in Iceland?

Also, has anyone heard anything about the investigation into the apparent deaths of all the CSM? They've been so quiet about the way they do their "management" that I assumed they bent over for CCP too far, or choked on a bunch of CCP pods.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3128 - 2013-12-11 19:16:59 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
We've used a range of ships - again, I told you this last time - and I explained that the reason we might opt to show a stabber in the Precision examples - is that IS the cruiser those missiles are designed to hit well and counter. You'd expect regular heavy missiles to hit regular cruisers well.

Neither missile works against either target.

Its perfectly acceptable to fit to reduce incoming damage. And yes, its a good idea to fit a faster cruiser with a smaller sig and throw in some nano in EVE.

It is also perfectly reasonable, to expect that if a missile user comes across such a ship, that he has a counter to it. He does - its called the Precision missiles.

But as shown, they don't work. Not even close. Not even when you give them epic target painting in an unrealistic fashion, that you won't see in game. They still don't work.

Again, you and your corp mates have very few losses against missiles, and you've never fired them or flown Caldari. We've gone to great detail and lengths to show you why we feel missiles right now aren't worth fitting. It doesn't seem to matter to you. Whatever we say, Missiles are epic and Gallente suck.
You are wrong.

The counter to speed and signature are EWAR : web and TP. Precision are ammos designed to apply more damage than regular ammo to the targets regular missiles have trouble applying damage. They are not a counter to anything. T2 ammo are meant to give you flexibility, not to counter anything. You counter a fit with another fit, full dot. Null don't counter kiters, they only allow you to hit harder at long range than you normaly would. Same for barrage, scorch, aurora, spike and tremor.

It would be absurd if you could counter something someone fit to its ship to counter your missiles just by swapping ammo. That's not how a counter work. It work like rock/paper/cissor : you fit wrong, you are in a very bad spot.

BTW, the range of ships you used range from insanely fast and small to reasonably fast and small.

Honestly, have you tryed the numbers against one ship with more than 125m sig and less than 275m/s speed ? The Caracal is the closest to these numbers I saw, and it was used once, and yet it's faster than average ! There was once a Rupture too, with average numbers, but no fit or AB fit.

And "unfortunately" all the numbers used are for ships with only a prop mod and no tank ; unfortunately because the tank increase the dps of missiles up to 30% and ship without it are the exception more than the norm...

If you want to show a real picture of missiles, why excluding everything that can possibly goes in their favor, and despite the certainty you will encounter them ? I'm not asking you to use a Blackbird in your test, only something closer to the average, like any combat cruiser.

Another thing too : most cruisers will have a MWD (to not be outrun by a battleship...) ; such a cruiser tackled with a scram will go at normal speed. Numbers showcasing dps against a cruiser at normal speed have been very rare.

That's why I'm going crazy in this thread : you are only focusing on very low signature ships with AB whereas these are meant to decrease missile dps !

And I never said missiles where "epic" or "gallente sux". I'm only trying to open your eyes on the falacies you are using ! You select the numbers to prove your point, which is dishonnest.

Also, I recognized many times that HM might need some love ; I only argued that HAM are fine.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3129 - 2013-12-11 19:46:04 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
We've used a range of ships - again, I told you this last time - and I explained that the reason we might opt to show a stabber in the Precision examples - is that IS the cruiser those missiles are designed to hit well and counter. You'd expect regular heavy missiles to hit regular cruisers well.

Neither missile works against either target.

Its perfectly acceptable to fit to reduce incoming damage. And yes, its a good idea to fit a faster cruiser with a smaller sig and throw in some nano in EVE.

It is also perfectly reasonable, to expect that if a missile user comes across such a ship, that he has a counter to it. He does - its called the Precision missiles.

But as shown, they don't work. Not even close. Not even when you give them epic target painting in an unrealistic fashion, that you won't see in game. They still don't work.

Again, you and your corp mates have very few losses against missiles, and you've never fired them or flown Caldari. We've gone to great detail and lengths to show you why we feel missiles right now aren't worth fitting. It doesn't seem to matter to you. Whatever we say, Missiles are epic and Gallente suck.
You are wrong.

The counter to speed and signature are EWAR : web and TP. Precision are ammos designed to apply more damage than regular ammo to the targets regular missiles have trouble applying damage. They are not a counter to anything. T2 ammo are meant to give you flexibility, not to counter anything. You counter a fit with another fit, full dot. Null don't counter kiters, they only allow you to hit harder at long range than you normaly would. Same for barrage, scorch, aurora, spike and tremor.

It would be absurd if you could counter something someone fit to its ship to counter your missiles just by swapping ammo. That's not how a counter work. It work like rock/paper/cissor : you fit wrong, you are in a very bad spot.

BTW, the range of ships you used range from insanely fast and small to reasonably fast and small.

Honestly, have you tryed the numbers against one ship with more than 125m sig and less than 275m/s speed ? The Caracal is the closest to these numbers I saw, and it was used once, and yet it's faster than average ! There was once a Rupture too, with average numbers, but no fit or AB fit.

And "unfortunately" all the numbers used are for ships with only a prop mod and no tank ; unfortunately because the tank increase the dps of missiles up to 30% and ship without it are the exception more than the norm...

If you want to show a real picture of missiles, why excluding everything that can possibly goes in their favor, and despite the certainty you will encounter them ? I'm not asking you to use a Blackbird in your test, only something closer to the average, like any combat cruiser.

Another thing too : most cruisers will have a MWD (to not be outrun by a battleship...) ; such a cruiser tackled with a scram will go at normal speed. Numbers showcasing dps against a cruiser at normal speed have been very rare.

That's why I'm going crazy in this thread : you are only focusing on very low signature ships with AB whereas these are meant to decrease missile dps !

And I never said missiles where "epic" or "gallente sux". I'm only trying to open your eyes on the falacies you are using ! You select the numbers to prove your point, which is dishonnest.

Also, I recognized many times that HM might need some love ; I only argued that HAM are fine.

Here's a thought:
Instead of being a monumental ****, why not post your own tests, graphs, fits and results? Nobody else can seem to do it right, or to your standards so I'm sure we would all love to see you illustrate with data the suppositions that you have been posting?
I'm sure, with all the experience you have shooting turrets and running away with your MWD tucked between your legs from big scary missile boats that it shouldn't take you long at all to show us how we silly missile pilots are using missiles all wrong. So, how about breaking out your tin foil hat, firing up EFT, Pyfa, and SiSi and posting some verifiable data to backup your claims and rants?
If you are incapable of that, then stop picking apart the people that have been doing that, shut up, and go try to find something you are good at. You've already hinted that running away from missile boats is a specialty of yours, so you could always go work more at perfecting that art.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3130 - 2013-12-11 20:03:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
You are wrong.

The counter to speed and signature are EWAR : web and TP. Precision are ammos designed to apply more damage than regular ammo to the targets regular missiles have trouble applying damage.


Oh dear gods. You do realise that Caldari ships are lucky if they can fit a Point on them right? If you want a web and target painter and point, you know what sort of tank that leaves right?

In a Gallente ship the counter to smaller faster ships IS EWAR - that is why you have so many mid slots free. In shield based Caldari ship - it isn't, because they don't have free mid slots.

That is why they have Precision Missiles.

I've earlier today posted that a Bellicose with five Target Painters on can't do the job - and explained that for Heavy Missiles - you should not expect to be in webbing range.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3131 - 2013-12-11 20:03:15 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Here's a thought:
Instead of being a monumental ****, why not post your own tests, graphs, fits and results? Nobody else can seem to do it right, or to your standards so I'm sure we would all love to see you illustrate with data the suppositions that you have been posting?
I'm sure, with all the experience you have shooting turrets and running away with your MWD tucked between your legs from big scary missile boats that it shouldn't take you long at all to show us how we silly missile pilots are using missiles all wrong. So, how about breaking out your tin foil hat, firing up EFT, Pyfa, and SiSi and posting some verifiable data to backup your claims and rants?
If you are incapable of that, then stop picking apart the people that have been doing that, shut up, and go try to find something you are good at. You've already hinted that running away from missile boats is a specialty of yours, so you could always go work more at perfecting that art.
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3132 - 2013-12-11 20:08:00 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.


Does this mean you'll come on SISI too? I can tell you now, that is the only way to really see if the guns work as expected. I'll bring beer and women if you do.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3133 - 2013-12-11 20:16:47 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.


Does this mean you'll come on SISI too? I can tell you now, that is the only way to really see if the guns work as expected. I'll bring beer and women if you do.


I went on sisi and fought 2 cruise-missile ravens in my deimos (125m2 sig radius). The cruise missiles (coupled with target painters) obliterated the (fully gang-linked) deimos while it was moving at max speed. The gang links included evasive maneuvering so the deimos' sig radius was under 100.

I would encourage die-hard missile fans who are disappointed with HMs to try cruise missile fitted ships if possible. I think you'll be really pleased.

It's a case of life giving you lemons, so make lemonade.

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".
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#3134 - 2013-12-11 20:27:43 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.


Does this mean you'll come on SISI too? I can tell you now, that is the only way to really see if the guns work as expected. I'll bring beer and women if you do.


I went on sisi and fought 2 cruise-missile ravens in my deimos (125m2 sig radius). The cruise missiles (coupled with target painters) obliterated the (fully gang-linked) deimos while it was moving at max speed. The gang links included evasive maneuvering so the deimos' sig radius was under 100.

I would encourage die-hard missile fans who are disappointed with HMs to try cruise missile fitted ships if possible. I think you'll be really pleased.

It's a case of life giving you lemons, so make lemonade.



Shhhh..... don't give them funny ideas or my Raven will be nerved again!

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3135 - 2013-12-11 20:50:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Kagura Nikon wrote:
That is NOT how it works.

This is what happens when sleep deprivation sets in… my point still stands, though: 3 target painters and 2 webs will be more effective than 5 target painters (even if the target painters receive bonuses).

Mournful Conciousness wrote:
I would encourage die-hard missile fans who are disappointed with HMs to try cruise missile fitted ships if possible. I think you'll be really pleased.

I keep asking them to lower the power grid requirement so I can run them on my Tengu, but to no avail… Twisted
Queue cruise missile nerf in 3… 2...

Moonaura wrote:
I've earlier today posted that a Bellicose with five Target Painters on can't do the job - and explained that for Heavy Missiles - you should not expect to be in webbing range.

Agreed. If you find yourself in web range with HMLs, you're already dead...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3136 - 2013-12-11 20:54:19 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.


Does this mean you'll come on SISI too? I can tell you now, that is the only way to really see if the guns work as expected. I'll bring beer and women if you do.


I went on sisi and fought 2 cruise-missile ravens in my deimos (125m2 sig radius). The cruise missiles (coupled with target painters) obliterated the (fully gang-linked) deimos while it was moving at max speed. The gang links included evasive maneuvering so the deimos' sig radius was under 100.

I would encourage die-hard missile fans who are disappointed with HMs to try cruise missile fitted ships if possible. I think you'll be really pleased.

It's a case of life giving you lemons, so make lemonade.



Cruise missiles are definitely better than heavy missiles, but there are reasons you don't see them in PVP much. I'm guessing those fits were completely maxed out for damage application at range. Also did you try a 1v1 fight against just one raven?
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3137 - 2013-12-11 20:58:48 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.


Does this mean you'll come on SISI too? I can tell you now, that is the only way to really see if the guns work as expected. I'll bring beer and women if you do.


I went on sisi and fought 2 cruise-missile ravens in my deimos (125m2 sig radius). The cruise missiles (coupled with target painters) obliterated the (fully gang-linked) deimos while it was moving at max speed. The gang links included evasive maneuvering so the deimos' sig radius was under 100.

I would encourage die-hard missile fans who are disappointed with HMs to try cruise missile fitted ships if possible. I think you'll be really pleased.

It's a case of life giving you lemons, so make lemonade.


I'm not going to argue that cruise missiles are in any way broken with their damage application. I don't even really want to comment on cruise missiles at all. (Although the max velocity makes no sense whatsoever. A max acceleration instead would make much more sense, as well as making long range missile combat viable. By long range I mean well outside of point/scram/disruptor/sand in the eyes range. i.ie Cruise missiles have range well beyond 200km but would take well over 10seconds to get there. But enough about that.)
What does it say about medium missiles if the solution to not applying damage is to start fitting cruise missiles? Rapid lights are a situational weapon, HAMs can be good if you think you can survive in brawl range to be able to apply them, but if you want range you have to use cruise missiles? What I see, for the average situation, is that missiles have 3 decent options: light missiles, HAMs (for close range), and cruise missiles (for "kite" range). Does this not sound like a problem to anyone?
To be clear, I am making a generalized statement that missiles as a whole need rework. I'm sure there are situations where heavies are great, just like rockets and torps, but as a whole there are not a lot of good choices that don't require a metric ****-ton of support. Again, for the hard headed people like Bouh and Mournful, this is a generalized statement. I am not lumping every situation into this. So don't even reach around to pull something out of your ass to argue about special circumstances, save us all the time. However, if it can be shown that heavies, or torps even, fit well in a general, broad role then I will be happy to read that discourse.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3138 - 2013-12-11 21:03:45 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
Oh dear gods. You do realise that Caldari ships are lucky if they can fit a Point on them right? If you want a web and target painter and point, you know what sort of tank that leaves right?
Why ? Because 35kehp is the bare minimum tank for an attack cruiser ? Because shield underperform armor ?

And what about the whole minmatar missile ships line ? And the T2 amarr missile ships ?

There's more than caldari ships behind missiles. You can't think about them only with caldari in mind.

You are mixing here caldari ship balance, shield vs armor balance, missiles vs turrets balance and missile in themselves balance.

If you really wan't to convince CCP that missiles are underperforming, you'll need real arguments, not childish tentatives to fool them with carefully selected numbers.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3139 - 2013-12-11 21:09:21 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Actually I am gathering and compiling data, but that takes time and efforts and I have a life too.
Does this mean you'll come on SISI too? I can tell you now, that is the only way to really see if the guns work as expected. I'll bring beer and women if you do.
Hehe, well, I'll try this weekend.

Though I think Sisi is better as experiment to confirm the numbers and the theory more than the opposite.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3140 - 2013-12-11 21:31:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Zvaarian the Red
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Oh dear gods. You do realise that Caldari ships are lucky if they can fit a Point on them right? If you want a web and target painter and point, you know what sort of tank that leaves right?
Why ? Because 35kehp is the bare minimum tank for an attack cruiser ? Because shield underperform armor ?

And what about the whole minmatar missile ships line ? And the T2 amarr missile ships ?

There's more than caldari ships behind missiles. You can't think about them only with caldari in mind.

You are mixing here caldari ship balance, shield vs armor balance, missiles vs turrets balance and missile in themselves balance.

If you really wan't to convince CCP that missiles are underperforming, you'll need real arguments, not childish tentatives to fool them with carefully selected numbers.


I have a direct question for you and I want a direct answer.

Do you think it's acceptable for a heavy missile launcher with no damage application bonuses of any kind to only apply 67.2% of its damage against a Rupture using no prop mod? Do you think a cruiser should be able to speed tank a third of the damage away without any prop mod?

And let's be clear, turret cruisers under the same conditions have pretty much 100% damage application through the majority of their optimal range in most cases.