These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#3241 - 2013-12-13 11:46:04 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
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...


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.
The average for my post was based on highest speed in class compared to the other presumed target of the weapon, frigates. The average speed of frigates vs fast cruisers and the ability of RLML to hit them.

Ok lets say we use your, logic (for want of a better word) and use a rupture to balance light missiles. We end up with a light missile that can hit 1 of the slowest ship in its class, now because we want to keep it balanced we tune down how well light missiles hit the rupture so it isn't an easy kill and upset all those who fly them.

This could work, except light missiles are meant for killing frigates and "fast" cruisers which they will not be able to do as they are now balanced for a different class of fighting - they would no longer be any good at all vs the ships they were designed to counter. The job of countering Cruisers and battlecruisers is meant to be HM, sadly they do not perform in this role. Hams will go close to doing their job as long as you don't want to fit a tank as well because those slots will be taken up with prop mod, web and scram, leaving 2 slots for tank. How good is that.

Arthur's charts, if you care to look show how different missiles compare to each other in different configurations and vs different ships. This has nothing at all to do with how they compare to turrets, that is something entirely different. Frankly at this stage it is something I really don't care about. The discussion has been about a way to get missiles to hit their intended targets in the intended way.

Again as you have with almost every one of your posts in this thread, tried to further your own agenda of turrets vs launchers and not contributed anything even vaguely positive to the discussion..

If you really want to concentrate on how OP missiles are compared to turrets, start a thread where that can be discussed.

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.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3242 - 2013-12-13 12:50:17 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
The average for my post was based on highest speed in class compared to the other presumed target of the weapon, frigates. The average speed of frigates vs fast cruisers and the ability of RLML to hit them.

Ok lets say we use your, logic (for want of a better word) and use a rupture to balance light missiles. We end up with a light missile that can hit 1 of the slowest ship in its class, now because we want to keep it balanced we tune down how well light missiles hit the rupture so it isn't an easy kill and upset all those who fly them.

This could work, except light missiles are meant for killing frigates and "fast" cruisers which they will not be able to do as they are now balanced for a different class of fighting - they would no longer be any good at all vs the ships they were designed to counter. The job of countering Cruisers and battlecruisers is meant to be HM, sadly they do not perform in this role. Hams will go close to doing their job as long as you don't want to fit a tank as well because those slots will be taken up with prop mod, web and scram, leaving 2 slots for tank. How good is that.

Arthur's charts, if you care to look show how different missiles compare to each other in different configurations and vs different ships. This has nothing at all to do with how they compare to turrets, that is something entirely different. Frankly at this stage it is something I really don't care about. The discussion has been about a way to get missiles to hit their intended targets in the intended way.
Ok, so we basicaly agree for the graphs I guess.

But you are plain wrong for the roles of the different launchers : RLML are NOT meant to shoot at cruisers, only frigates and destroyers ; and HML are NOT the goto medium missile launcher to shoot at cruisers, this role is HAML one. HML are the missiles you use to shoot at long range. If you don't need long range, don't use HML, use HAML instead. And if you need more firepower against frigates, use RLML, but avoid cruisers then. If you need to shoot both cruisers and frigates, HAML +scram+web will do the job fine.

2 mid slots shield tank is fine BTW when you factor in everything else : with shield, you don't lose speed, and there is no cruiser both as fast as the Caracal and more resilient than him. Just check it : armor attack cruiser with more than a 800mm plate will be very slow, and a Thorax with 800mm plate, DCU + EANM + adaptive plating (4slots) have less ehp than your Caracal with DCU+LSE+invuln (3slots). Also, such a Thorax will only have 400 blaster dps, same as your HAML Caracal, but with three times less range and have to deal with tracking. You don't need 35kehp on your attack cruiser for it to be useful, moreover when you have plenty of range and speed.
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3243 - 2013-12-13 13:24:00 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

2 mid slots shield tank is fine BTW when you factor in everything else : with shield, you don't lose speed, and there is no cruiser both as fast as the Caracal and more resilient than him. Just check it : armor attack cruiser with more than a 800mm plate will be very slow, and a Thorax with 800mm plate, DCU + EANM + adaptive plating (4slots) have less ehp than your Caracal with DCU+LSE+invuln (3slots). Also, such a Thorax will only have 400 blaster dps, same as your HAML Caracal, but with three times less range and have to deal with tracking. You don't need 35kehp on your attack cruiser for it to be useful, moreover when you have plenty of range and speed.

SiSi awaits you! Bring your Thorax..
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#3244 - 2013-12-13 14:31:01 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
So I went out with a T1 RHML-fitted Raven tonight to see what I could see... First, forget about damage application to Interceptors - those things can outrun heavy missiles. I found myself in a scrap with a Malediction that pointed me, then a Thorax which I switched to after watching my heavy missiles spiral around endlessly. I came close - but not quite - to killing it before encountering the dreaded 40-second reload. That's when I really got the screws stuck to me... I was joined by a Harbinger, Vexor and Tormentor. Heck, even a Guristas frigate wandered over to get in on the action. I died, but it was a T1/T2 insured fit - so not unlike losing a frigate any other day in Faction Warfare. I put the Thorax into 16% hull before burning out my RHMLs and having my cap drained, which allowed him to escape.

While I'm still convinced the reload on the new RLML and RHMLs is a big "fail", I still go out every now and then to prove myself wrong - hoping for that elusive one-clip kill. If the 40-second reload/swap is here to stay, I wonder what the chances of increasing the ammunition capacity is. Doubling it would be a good start.
Twisted

Typhoon fi, get one. RoF bonus is useless for rhml. Even so, I find it very strange you couldn't kill a webbed and scrammed thorax. I only have web and scram and do fine.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Viceorvirtue
The Hatchery
RAZOR Alliance
#3245 - 2013-12-13 14:54:48 UTC
It appears he started by shooting the interceptor. He failed to kill it and had to swap to the thorax when t landed on field and became the bigger threat. Sadly because he had shot at the interceptor he did not have enough missiles in the clip to kill the thorax before the 40 second reload. 40 seconds of not shooting was apparently enough to have the rest of the ships land and get secondary tackle.

He lost the fight because he shot at the interceptor, once the thorax landed there really wasn't anything he could have done apart from deagressing that would have saved his ship. Unlike you he obviously did not use rhmls in the only case where they were good (full clip vs single ship) and I have a feeling that is why he died. Also theres also the potential he had the wrong ammotype loaded as well since he would want percisions vs the inty and those might not be able to kill the thorax without an ammo switch anyway.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3246 - 2013-12-13 15:54:01 UTC
Viceorvirtue wrote:
It appears he started by shooting the interceptor. He failed to kill it and had to swap to the thorax when t landed on field and became the bigger threat. Sadly because he had shot at the interceptor he did not have enough missiles in the clip to kill the thorax before the 40 second reload. 40 seconds of not shooting was apparently enough to have the rest of the ships land and get secondary tackle.

He lost the fight because he shot at the interceptor, once the thorax landed there really wasn't anything he could have done apart from deagressing that would have saved his ship. Unlike you he obviously did not use rhmls in the only case where they were good (full clip vs single ship) and I have a feeling that is why he died. Also theres also the potential he had the wrong ammotype loaded as well since he would want percisions vs the inty and those might not be able to kill the thorax without an ammo switch anyway.

Failed to kill it is a mild understatement… failed to even hit the Interceptor would be more accurate. After switching from the Malediction, I emptied the remainder of the clip into the Thorax, reloaded and emptied another full clip. I even had the launchers overheated. Despite being dual-webbed, neutralized and scrammed - I was only able to put the Thorax to 16% hull. While waiting for the second reload I burned the launchers out while overheating the neutralizer and that was the end of that.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3247 - 2013-12-13 16:21:14 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
[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 !



That would actually be a median, not a mean.

Mean is the average, its just a data point there is no assurance that an equal number of hulls are faster or slower, its just the center of the data set. The median is the point that the faster and slower ships equal

Mode would be the most common speed (just to complete the 8th grade algebra lesson)
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3248 - 2013-12-13 16:38:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Why Rapid Launchers Suck
This next essay is titled: "Why Rapid Launchers Suck".

That Slow, Sucking Sound

Case 1: A Caracal fit with LMLs, RLMLs and HAMs.
Despite not receiving any launcher bonuses for standard LMLs, they are 71.9% effective as RLMLs. RLMLs preclude the ability to do a tactical ammo swap, so unless you lucked out with the correct ammunition choice - you're hooped. Then there's the grid requirements, with LMLs being a fraction of RLMLs - so that opens up a ton of configuration options.

Case 2: A Raven fit with HMLs, RHMLs and HAMs.
This one's almost as absurd… Despite receiving zero bonuses, HAMsL are between 78-94% as effective as RHMLs on the Raven. I haven't run the number for battlecruisers and battleships, but the graph seems to indicate HAMs will win out for anything above cruisers. Then there's the insane low grid requirements for HAMLs compared to RHMLs.

Conclusion
I have a really hard time believing any serious testing and analysis went into RLMLs and RHMLs. I mean, these are supposed to be cruiser-class and battle-ship class weapons, respectively - yet the frigate-class and cruiser-class versions are almost as effective, without any of the tactical drawbacks and limitations. Not too mention the fact that this opens up a wealth of possibilities for expanding tank on both ships. My own PvP excursions with both would seem to further confirm this, as I've been unable to kill cruisers in a single magazine with either RLMLs or RHMLs. Those that have run PvE have indicated missions take 2-3x as long (or even longer), so they're definitely not designed with that in-mind.

It's time to reinstate the old launchers.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3249 - 2013-12-13 16:57:38 UTC
Unsucking Rapid Launchers
And there was much rejoicing!

"Herman, set the Wayback machine!"

Were the old RLMLs "Op"? No - far from it. They were actually operating just fine. What about the 1st iteration of RHMLs? Again, only marginally better than what we got in Rubicon, and still borderline useless at hitting anything smaller than cruisers.

It's time for this experiment to end. Reinstate the original RLML and RHMLs.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#3250 - 2013-12-13 17:18:50 UTC
Viceorvirtue wrote:
It appears he started by shooting the interceptor. He failed to kill it and had to swap to the thorax when t landed on field and became the bigger threat. Sadly because he had shot at the interceptor he did not have enough missiles in the clip to kill the thorax before the 40 second reload. 40 seconds of not shooting was apparently enough to have the rest of the ships land and get secondary tackle.

He lost the fight because he shot at the interceptor, once the thorax landed there really wasn't anything he could have done apart from deagressing that would have saved his ship. Unlike you he obviously did not use rhmls in the only case where they were good (full clip vs single ship) and I have a feeling that is why he died. Also theres also the potential he had the wrong ammotype loaded as well since he would want percisions vs the inty and those might not be able to kill the thorax without an ammo switch anyway.


He died because he was relying on 1 xlasb for tank. And, not meaning to pick on arthur here, chose the wrong target to engage. Regardless if it was the only thing on grid. did the ceptor get scrammed/webbed/neuted before you launched your first missile? If the answer is "no", then you wasted missiles on a target. I would have waited for the ceptors buddies. Melted them and degressed back to gate to escape ceptor. You must use target management with a REAL active tank for rhml to be remotely effective when soloing. Like I said previously, you're gimping the fit trying to make your raven hit smaller targets when its not necessary for the playstyle of rhml. Maybe things happened differently than I'm thinking. But he would most likely still be alive if he had at least double xlasb.

This isn't a post about how wrong about missiles arthur is, but stating that the fit is what killed him. Not rhml.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3251 - 2013-12-13 17:49:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
This isn't a post about how wrong about missiles arthur is, but stating that the fit is what killed him. Not rhml.

It's easy to critique things after the fact... However, you can't escape the stark reality that an ideally fit Raven couldn't kill a Thorax. Since heavy missiles are a cruiser-sized weapon, it's not the wrong medium of choice. As for the battle itself, I ran three (yes, 3) x-large ancillary shield boosters with Navy Cap 400 boosters (that's the only thing that kept me alive for 2 reloads against a Malediction, Thorax, Harbinger, Tormentor and Vexer). I actually ran out of cap booster and by the end most of my modules were either burned out or severely damaged from overheating. The only reason the Thorax escaped at the end was because they finally managed to neut/vampire my capacitor to the point that the warp scrambler shut off.

So while I'm always open to constructive criticism, I'm not really seeing any killmails with RLMLs and RHMLs from solo (non-gang) engagements. If they don't exist, I think that speaks volumes.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
kurage87
EVE University
Ivy League
#3252 - 2013-12-13 17:53:52 UTC
Niena Nuamzzar wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

2 mid slots shield tank is fine BTW when you factor in everything else : with shield, you don't lose speed, and there is no cruiser both as fast as the Caracal and more resilient than him. Just check it : armor attack cruiser with more than a 800mm plate will be very slow, and a Thorax with 800mm plate, DCU + EANM + adaptive plating (4slots) have less ehp than your Caracal with DCU+LSE+invuln (3slots). Also, such a Thorax will only have 400 blaster dps, same as your HAML Caracal, but with three times less range and have to deal with tracking. You don't need 35kehp on your attack cruiser for it to be useful, moreover when you have plenty of range and speed.

SiSi awaits you! Bring your Thorax..

As far as my paper warrioring can tell, if they brawl and the Thorax has an AB (irrespective of whether the Caracal has one or not) the Thorax will win. That is with an AAR Thorax or a plated one, both of which are faster than the AB Caracal.

In the situations where the Thorax has an MWD or the Caracal kites, the Caracal wins.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3253 - 2013-12-13 18:09:43 UTC
kurage87 wrote:
As far as my paper warrioring can tell, if they brawl and the Thorax has an AB (irrespective of whether the Caracal has one or not) the Thorax will win. That is with an AAR Thorax or a plated one, both of which are faster than the AB Caracal.

In the situations where the Thorax has an MWD or the Caracal kites, the Caracal wins.
Plated the AB Thorax is slower than the AB Caracal and 800mm plate 4slots tank Thorax have about the same ehp than 3slots (LSE+AIF+DCU) tank Caracal. Thorax will be faster with a second web of course if that's what you meant.

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Let's see if we can get some killmails with RLML and RHMLs. Solo engagements, not in a gang.
Why does the weapon have to be good for solo ?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3254 - 2013-12-13 18:22:23 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Why does the weapon have to be good for solo ?

Where have you been for the last 160 or so odd pages…?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#3255 - 2013-12-13 18:27:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
This isn't a post about how wrong about missiles arthur is, but stating that the fit is what killed him. Not rhml.

It's easy to critique things after the fact... However, you can't escape the stark reality that an ideally fit Raven couldn't kill a Thorax. Since heavy missiles are a cruiser-sized weapon, it's not the wrong medium of choice. As for the battle itself, I ran three (yes, 3) x-large ancillary shield boosters with Navy Cap 400 boosters (that's the only thing that kept me alive for 2 reloads against a Malediction, Thorax, Harbinger, Tormentor and Vexer). I actually ran out of cap booster and by the end most of my modules were either burned out or severely damaged from overheating. The only reason the Thorax escaped at the end was because they finally managed to neut/vampire my capacitor to the point that the warp scrambler shut off.

So while I'm always open to constructive criticism, I'm not really seeing any killmails with RLMLs and RHMLs from solo (non-gang) engagements. If they don't exist, I think that speaks volumes.


I could take ss of them or find a sisi kb. But many don't view those as real kills. Fair enough. If life doesn't get in the way ill roam around in my phoon this weekend and see what happens.

So you died to 2 cruisers, bc, and 2 frigs? Maybe 1800 dps on field if they were max gank fit. You had 3xlasb and couldn't tank them? Should I assume you had very low resistances? And harby/thorax/vexor shooting into a large em/thermal hole? Please post the fit you used so I don't assume wrongly here and draw the wrong conclusion. I took a video of killing deimos. Also killed a torp equipped fi phoon as well. I have video if interested. Actually have many videos of my phoon. All on sisi though. I had tanked a slep and raptor and I think a carrier breifly in one video. Didn't kill slep, but he couldn't break tank. So it was a stalemate. And no, I don't have tank modifying implants on server. Just a standard exhile booster.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3256 - 2013-12-13 18:27:41 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Let's see if we can get some killmails with RLML and RHMLs. Solo engagements, not in a gang.
Why does the weapon have to be good for solo ?[/quote]
Well I would guess-timate that a weapon effective in gang warfare but no solo, means that the weapon is sub-par and requires multiple systems to be effective. This doesn't apply to everything, Capitals or Logistics come to mind, but a medium weapon isn't exactly on the same level as a Carrier.
We've already shown how cruise missiles can be quite effective in solo play if done correctly, which makes them a shatteringly effective weapon for gang play. But the rapid launchers are only effective, outside of a small percentage of scenarios, in gang play which tells me that they're not really worth using.
That's my thought at least
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3257 - 2013-12-13 18:28:12 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Why does the weapon have to be good for solo ?

Where have you been for the last 160 or so odd pages…?
Haven't you seen Rise answer ? If other missiles have a problem, they are those needing a fix, not the rapid launchers.

RLML were OP, and RHML would be too if they had the old rapid launchers mechanic.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3258 - 2013-12-13 18:39:29 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Why does the weapon have to be good for solo ?

Where have you been for the last 160 or so odd pages…?
Haven't you seen Rise answer ? If other missiles have a problem, they are those needing a fix, not the rapid launchers.

RLML were OP, and RHML would be too if they had the old rapid launchers mechanic.

Because we all know that Rise has what is best for missiles in mind. Right.... Pull the other one.

Are you really back to recycling your older, stupider arguments? What a shame.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3259 - 2013-12-13 19:11:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Bouh Revetoile
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Because we all know that Rise has what is best for missiles in mind. Right.... Pull the other one.

Are you really back to recycling your older, stupider arguments? What a shame.
Yeah because Rise having a hate against missile users and caldari pilots is smart, well thought, senseful and proven argument... And I guess Illuminati don't care about this game or we would hear about them.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3260 - 2013-12-13 19:22:51 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Because we all know that Rise has what is best for missiles in mind. Right.... Pull the other one.

Are you really back to recycling your older, stupider arguments? What a shame.
Yeah because Rise having a hate against missile users and caldari pilots is smart, well thought, senseful and proven argument... And I guess Illuminati don't care about this game or we would hear about them.


Based on my one direct interaction with him I believe the "Rise hates missiles" line of thinking is definitely false. That said, just because he doesn't hate missiles doesn't mean he is actually right about their current state in the game or about what needs to be done with them. I think he honestly thought the new rapid launchers were a good idea that would be "fun" to use. He was wrong. It happens.