Player Features and Ideas Discussion

These Changes just removed them from my future plans. Not sitting in Combat or a Mission area for 40s Twiddling my thumbs waiting on a reload.

Its nota BUFF> its a massive NERF>. It will not have enough capacity to kil2 (pun intended) well fit frigates

The proposed changes seem to be missing the mark for the intended purpose.

As I see it, Rapid Lights are used to kill tackle (frigs and destroyers) since the warhead is smaller/travels faster than Heavies/HAMs, thus the almighty DPS number is lower overall, but the applied dps on smaller targets is higher than if HAMs were used--due to signature radius/velocity factor.

Keeping in the theme of better damage based on signature radius/velocity factor, Rapid Heavies should be designed to have less applied dps against battleships and more applied dps against cruisers for example. For instance, your Raven fitted with torps lists 1,000dps (and will mostly get that much attacking battlecruisers and above), whereas your Raven fitted with rapid heavies lists 800dps (and will apply that much against cruisers). In this example with made-up numbers, you would not want to take torps against cruisers because you might not hit them for very much, and you would not want to take rapid heavies against a BC/BS gang because you'd miss out on sheer damage output. This makes it a context-based decision where just a few tweaks on numbers are all that's needed due to the nature of warhead size/sig radius factor.

One of the benefits of missiles is being able to switch damage types and have it not take 40 seconds. Having an initial burst is okay, but the detriment is way too huge and kills how missiles work.


TL;DR Rapids are for smaller sig/higher velocity targets, so don't screw up their reload time--just play with the sig radius factor and applied dps potential.

Another issue I have is you can't travel while you're reloading. You have to stay in that system for the whole 40 seconds.

go home kil2

you're drunk

Both examples are far from truth with second one being very far from the truth.

Stop firing with 1 round left, short reload, open fire.
OP.

This.

Since the day i started playing this game i liked missiles - or more precisely the idea behind this weapon system as a whole. Then i learned about all the advantages and disadvantages they have and my initial enthusiasm faded a bit.
Then came the great HM over-nerf and my interest faded even more(while i agreed with the range nerf, the dps nerf made them laughably bad, especially considering the later buff of the other long range medium weapons).
In the end i accepted that life and Eve is not fair and was looking forward to train tech 2 RLML - great versatility, acceptable - not decent - dps, better range than HAM and better damage application than HM.
I was even looking forward to the new RHML - same principle in a bigger class package.

I agree that the pseudo-alpha provided by the burst part of the launcher shoot/reload cycle is interesting and certainly useful in niche situation and that you can partially mitigate the long reload by cleverly grouping launchers. BUT:
- compare it to an ASB - during ASB reload you don't have a dead waiting time cause you have to keep focused on shooting the enemy, keeping range/transversal, and the long reload makes it interesting - will you survive the reload? The ASB takes nothing from the fun of the fight and ads the trill/challenge of survival to the next batch of charges; the long RLML/RHML recharge time just forces you to watch the enemy you could not kill with the initial burst keep shooting you and explode your ship just as you see the reload finishing;
- the purpose for which people currently fit rapid launchers is versatility in small/solo context - with rapid launchers you don't loose much dps against same size ships and can reasonably engage smaller ship gangs - the engagement envelope is much bigger => more fights/more explosions/more fun; with the proposed changes you will pwn 1 maybe 2 ships of smaller size and than get killed by rest of their gang during reload(small ships buddy, were you really expecting to disengage and warp out for the reload?) or you will get that lone cruiser you are fighting in low armor at best and by the time you reload he will be back to full armor and regenerating shields while you will be already in low shield when you finish the initial burst and probably mid structure at the reload end - the proposed changes will work well with bigger kiting/skirmishing gangs, i agree, just sit back, reload and let the rapier/ arazu pilots earn their keep while you pull range; even in bigger fleets, this will be great for some sort of missile alpha fleet comps - but what if you fly with your closest friends which happen to be less than 10/50(for each type of launcher)

Biggest problem of the proposed changes stand in the huge reload that takes a lot and gives back very little. Rise said that 2+0=1+1, problem is that fights are rather 1+1+1 which gets problematic if you die at 2+0 before being able to do 2+0+2. EFT stats sure look sweet but real players have to do the pvp on the server with ships and not on the forums with EFT screenshots.

All being said, i still like the idea behind the weapon system, but as time passes, even if i really want to like the actual weapon system, i am forced more and more to turrets to get what i need - not that is something wrong to using turrets. But missiles seem such a cool idea - and then you see them in practice - and then you learn and start using all the tricks in the book to make them useful - and then CCP comes too and says nooo - you can't have it.
CCP, don't nerf rapid launchers cause they are in some situations better than the overnerfed HM. Your are amplifying an initial mistake by going top down with changes based on it.
What hurts most in this proposal is to see how CCP understands versatility = having 100 weapons systems for 100 different niche situations covers all the bases yes but that is not versatility people - versatility is having a lower number of weapon systems that have decent effectiveness in some situations and acceptable effectiveness in all the others - if change goes trough in this form for the medium class and large class missiles we will have the situation with 3 different launchers for 3 different contexts, compared to what we have now - 2 launchers for specialized situations and 1 versatile one - the rapid launcher.

And for all the would be trolls and l33t forum warriors - this is just my honest, informed opinion. I know how to use missiles and how to overcome their downsides - but it is and it gets easier each expansion to do same things with turrets with much less effort. I would sure like for missiles to be viable choices as versatile weapons, not just niche tools as CCP seem to try to make them every 6 months.

Sounds good to me, but given that EVE is a skill-based game, or at least used to be one, why don't you add a Missile Reloading skill that shaves something 4% off all missile realoding times per level? And a comparable Reloading skill that applies to all gün ammo?