Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I'd say 5-10% personally. But still HAMs are in a much better place than every other missile other than light missles, rockets, and cruise missiles. And convincing the EVE community and developers that they need any kind of buff I think is going to be a tough fight. We are living under the tyranny of turret users unfortunately.

I think the flaw here is trying to find the right baseline. Your focusing on a rupture where as Arthur used the far more commonly seen stabber. Oh and Arthur is showing his work with graphs and explaining his ideas, you on the other hand are expecting people to simply take your word for it.

I can see your point but as far as balance goes, the main requirement is to find out what the item you are balancing is capable of in extreme cases and what do you want to do with it.
1st you need to decide what you want from a given missile type. If you want a missile that is capable of hitting small to medium fast moving ships, you don't use a slow moving combat cruiser as a base line for it.
Hams could well be balanced using a rupture as a base line as they are designed more for hitting slower moving targets.

Looking at Arthurs charts, I would put my head on the block and say. I believe light missiles are overpowered BUT the reality is, light missiles are not overpowered, other classes of missile are terribly underpowered (excluding Cruise, which are pretty much where they should be).

In all cases RLML can apply a lot of damage in a relatively short time, they will in most situations not kill anything bigger than a destroyer without a reload and with a 40 second reload vs another cruiser, there is a big chance you are going to die or have to warp out before your 40 second reload is complete. (made worse because you can't see how much longer you have to wait)
1 large ASB will negate close to half the damage your RLML Caracal can apply to most cruiser class ships. If both have to reload at the same time, ASB 60 seconds - RLML 40 seconds, so you have a 20 second window in which to apply enough damage to kill him.
Don't forget the most important thing in this situation - he is going to be shooting back at you, so that 20s window may be a lot smaller

Who knows, maybe if and when HMs get buffed RHMLs will actually be able to kill a cruiser before the reload hits. RLMLs on the other hand just feel hopeless in their current because I simply do not believe CCP will do anything that improves their sustained DPS, and increasing clip size would definitely do that (I'm assuming the x2 suggestion was a joke).

I believe CCP have no intention of doing anything to the new launcher systems in the near future. We have already heard their usage is within acceptable levels so nothing to fix.
HM's "might" get some much needed attention but I'm not holding my breath


I think you have more than proven the failings of HM's.. For the good of your isk wallet, STOP trying to prove yourself wrong,

I'm really having a hard time understanding why CCP put the time and effort into putting a new weapon system into the game without making sure it didn't completely suck at its intended job. I just don't get it. I mean adding a new missile weapon system seems to say they want missiles to flourish and be effective, but then its released almost completely useless and I'm left thinking "maybe this is just a sick joke".

The poster above me seems to have somewhat missed the point.

So you are saying that noone is supposed to do anything on his / her own when they scout ahead or wait for possible fleetmates to join in?



Since when?
If pulse lasers, beam lasers at greater large, railguns at larger range, artilleries at larger range, blasters at short range and autocannons at most ranges they want to,
but that is an odd case of people wanting a short range weapon system to kite with..

Why would heavy missiles be different here? Are you one of the super duper special snowflakes that got poked by a missle and claim they are all op because of it?



Again, since when?
Why should all turret battleships be the only ones that can shoot down cruisers and my Raven should not?

Let me remind you that all the poor boo boo BOB inhabitants used to cry endless tears about Ravens being too stronhkk for them to compete and as a thank you gift we got that terrible 'missile tracking' in the first place.
Read all about it in the old forums from the end of 2005 to the end of 2006 when we got that mess that removed missiles from pvp for a very, very long time.

I have a quick fix that helps all missile systems of EVE,
remove all that tracking mess and remove the range nerf of torpedos, problems solved ALL OF THEM.

Do you understand what average means ? It doesn't mean slow in any way ! It means that about half the ships are faster and about the other half are slower ! Half !

And you just can't say the Stabber is more commonly seen. That assumption is pure fantasy as only CCP have the relevant statistics. You make some kind of assumption with EVE kill, but that'll only be half of the reality, yet that would be a lot closer to it than your assertion regarding the Stabber. People are complaining so much in this thread about the Thorax that this one would make an infinitely better comparison than the Stabber which is almost a destroyer. Can you answer why numbers are all shown against a Stabber and firepower and damage application are all taken from a Thorax ? The irony is that the Stabber is even better than the Thorax to kill frigates in fact, despite the numbers...


Please don't try to explain me how to look at numbers...

Athur numbers talk about one thing : the relative power of medium missile launchers between themselves regarding damage application. They don't tell anything about the balance versus turrets or drones. Yet you don't need more to say that a weapon system able to apply 100% damage to a MWDing average cruiser when sig and speed are the only ways to counter them is OP.

That would be comparable to turret having an tracking working like range, with optimale range where they suffer no penalty and a falloff where dps start to decrease. You don't have any idea of how powerful such turrets would be...

And asking for the worse case scenarios to be not too bad is like asking turrets to have an infinite range with falloff not decreasing dps bellow a given threshold.

Damage application for all weapons range from 0 to full dps. The difference with turrets and missiles is that the turret value fluctuate dynamicaly whereas missile value is selected before the fight started. You can tell if your missiles will kill the target before she land on grid. With turrets, you need to take care of your position the whole fight. Hence there are ways to counter turrets dps during the fight and there should be ways to counter missiles dps before the fight.

Looking at how the weapon system is designed, I think the fact RLML can't kill a cruiser in one load is intended. Same goes for all ships it can't kill in one load.

BTW, it have already be showed in the thread that the frigates you can't kill in one load are the most resilient ones and MWD bonused ones BUT these would have taken more than the time you take for a clip+reload anyway. In fact, the only frigates who take more time to kill than if the weapon hadn't its new mechanic are those whose the ehp range between 15k and 20k.

Your critical error here was wasting ammo shooting an interceptor that you knew you couldn't hit. Had you saved the RHML volleys for the Thorax, you'd have killed it.

The math said I had a better than even chance, but it's also possible they just might have hit the ancillaries earlier too. It was an RHML testing roam, so I shot at every target that presented itself. I tried to take out a Deimos later and put it 35% into hull, but he just waited until the reloads kicked in to light his ancillaries.


I started redoing the chart with actual combat fits and found that the variance was so negligible for heavy missiles that there was simply no point.