These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3461 - 2013-12-18 22:51:44 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

1. uh huh? Suppose you should check my KM post.. i see a dram there, from what every missile user is stating here, an a/b fit frigate is impossible to kill with RLML within 1 clip.. think my experience begs to differ.

2. I've yet to have a frigate live through my RLML unless i miss point, or he jumps through a gate

3. Yet, you still forget about the ONI for RLML, when i've clearly shown its still more than capable. If a Bellicose can kill a frig, an ONI, and for that matter a caracal, can as well with RLML. So, ScyFI = ONI, and Caracal = Bellicose. Those are your equivalents. Minmatar do have a better ship for RHML, but for anti-frigate, they're about the same. If i had caldari cruiser trained, i would gladly get kills to prove my point.

So you can kill one frig and that makes RLML change valid? Because hey it's usable to your play style, which means everyone could do it the way you do. Completely not broken - kill one Dram and run. Wow, guess I should fit every 200+ million Cerb I have with RLML and go hunt 5 to 50 times cheaper ships. One at a time ofc, sounds like fun.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3462 - 2013-12-18 23:06:06 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Killmails you say?

Yes, and I wasn't trying to imply anything - just curiosity.

Quote:
Yes, its the same guy in both kills (he didn't learn the first time i guess). I was harassing a solar gate camp. I'll keep adding to the KM's, don't worry. RLML are nice change of pace from brawling. Fun to separate people from their gang and obliterate them away from their friends.

Let us know when you kill someone other than the same idiot twice (preferably in an engagement with at least 2 frigates).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3463 - 2013-12-18 23:41:12 UTC
Haha ! That becomes hilarious ! Now that someone manage to use RLML correctly, it's just not enough !

So that's what I said at the begining in fact : whiners here are just looking for an OP weapon system able to blap whole fleets of frigates without even piloting or thinking.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3464 - 2013-12-18 23:52:27 UTC
^ Not welcome here. Shoe troll, shoe.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3465 - 2013-12-19 00:11:12 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Haha ! That becomes hilarious ! Now that someone manage to use RLML correctly, it's just not enough !

So that's what I said at the begining in fact : whiners here are just looking for an OP weapon system able to blap whole fleets of frigates without even piloting or thinking.

Smacking some moron in a firetail twice doesn't suddenly make the weapon worth taking. It actually proves what everyone has been saying about them, they are good for killing a lone, lightly tanked frigate, and NOTHING ELSE. If there are two of them, you die, if it's heavily tanked, you die, if it's not a frigate, you die. (or have to burn off the field) You're better off skilling drones and flying a vexor. Better at killing frigates, and better at killing everything else too.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3466 - 2013-12-19 00:38:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Kills were from a Scythe Fleet Issue (+50% missile damage) and Bellicose (+37.5% target painter), so I'm not really sure what bearing this has on the sad fate that has befallen Caldari cruisers such as the Caracal? How about some kill mails from Caldari cruisers? I know I got one or two in a Tengu...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#3467 - 2013-12-19 00:46:20 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Are people seriously implying that all missiles are bad, or just the new terrible rapid launchers?

Personally, HM need a small buff to damage application, Torps need a little tweaking, Caldari ships need relevant bonuses.
Hams and Cruise are in a good place although the massive range on cruise could be looked at.

RLML, RHML, need to be looked at.
If we are to be stuck with the ridiculous 40 second reload for the new launchers, switch ROF bonuses for an application bonus, increase missile capacity, remove Kinetic bonuses.
Then they may become more than a niche weapon used to kill low EHP frigates

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.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3468 - 2013-12-19 01:03:22 UTC
I'm not holding my breath on heavy missiles or torpedoes. And if the RLML becomes the new gank weapon of choice for the Scythe Fleet Issue, that's all the justification Fall and Fizzle will need to say the new rapid launcher mechanic is working as advertised. Oh how I'm so looking forward to the T3 rebalance next year... I really feel for all the Caracal owners out there, because this has put a serious crimp in PvE and PvP.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3469 - 2013-12-19 01:24:34 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Post moved to a more relevant thread by me. Back to the discussion.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3470 - 2013-12-19 02:05:11 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Back to the discussion.

Indeed. I've grudgingly given up trying to make either of the rapids work and switch back to heavies. Three rigors and a target painter should put them close to on par with the old lights, especially if I utilize Precision ammunition. I think the Caracal Navy has some interesting unrealized potential in that it has a built-in 25% explosion radius, so with three rigors you can probably dispense with the target painter altogether.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3471 - 2013-12-19 02:06:03 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Back to the discussion.

Indeed. I've grudgingly given up trying to make either of the rapids work and switch back to heavies. Three rigors and a target painter should put them close to on par with the old lights, especially if I utilize Precision ammunition. I think the Caracal Navy has some interesting unrealized potential in that it has a built-in 25% explosion radius, so with three rigors you can probably dispense with the target painter altogether.

This was the original post that was there before I realized it doesn't really belong here. You might be interested in the basic idea though. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4018399#post4018399
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3472 - 2013-12-19 03:21:46 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
This was the original post that was there before I realized it doesn't really belong here. You might be interested in the basic idea though. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4018399#post4018399

You wouldn't believe (then again, you probably would) the flak I got for simply proposing a Ballistic Enhancer. "Sure, if tracking disruptors will effect missiles." Yeah, because a Corax has so many low slots to play with anyway... I'm really starting to harbour some serious animosity towards turret players. They know missiles are fundamentally broken, and they know damage application from the "always hit" mechanic is near-zero. They also know that FoF missiles are extremely easy to counter. Yet they're still on the anti-missile pilgrimage to completely wreck this system if they can.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3473 - 2013-12-19 04:19:21 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
This was the original post that was there before I realized it doesn't really belong here. You might be interested in the basic idea though. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4018399#post4018399

You wouldn't believe (then again, you probably would) the flak I got for simply proposing a Ballistic Enhancer. "Sure, if tracking disruptors will effect missiles." Yeah, because a Corax has so many low slots to play with anyway... I'm really starting to harbour some serious animosity towards turret players. They know missiles are fundamentally broken, and they know damage application from the "always hit" mechanic is near-zero. They also know that FoF missiles are extremely easy to counter. Yet they're still on the anti-missile pilgrimage to completely wreck this system if they can.


Oh I definitely believe it. Turret pilots want all the advantages over missiles and none of the vulnerabilities.
We would gain a module, which requires us to change our fits to accommodate it and sacrifice other things while they would receive an added bonus to a module that they are already accustomed to fitting. Sounds balanced to me when I use my bigoted turret pilot goggles. :)
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3474 - 2013-12-19 05:17:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Zvaarian the Red
I have no problem with TDs working against missiles once base damage application on half the missiles in the game isn't totally putrid. Until then I think it would probably be one step forward and one step back.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3475 - 2013-12-19 05:20:13 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I have no problem with TDs working against missiles once base damage application on half the missiles in the game isn't totally putrid. Until then I think it would probably be one step forward and one step back.

Therein lies the problem, which turret players don't seem to be able to fathom.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#3476 - 2013-12-19 05:46:34 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I have no problem with TDs working against missiles once base damage application on half the missiles in the game isn't totally putrid. Until then I think it would probably be one step forward and one step back.

Therein lies the problem, which turret players don't seem to be able to fathom.

Maybe we should feel bad about saying mean things about them when they're not here to insult us for being stupid missile pilots who just want our OP missiles to be even more OP and woe is them for that one time a Drake/Corax/Kestrel/Raven/Tengu blew them up.
Wait... was that mean to turret pilots? Oops.
If anything TDs should be an active countermeasure that acts as a factor in the application of missile damage instead of acting against the ship. But somehow missiles would be OP with that...
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3477 - 2013-12-19 06:08:05 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I have no problem with TDs working against missiles once base damage application on half the missiles in the game isn't totally putrid. Until then I think it would probably be one step forward and one step back.

Therein lies the problem, which turret players don't seem to be able to fathom.

Maybe we should feel bad about saying mean things about them when they're not here to insult us for being stupid missile pilots who just want our OP missiles to be even more OP and woe is them for that one time a Drake/Corax/Kestrel/Raven/Tengu blew them up.
Wait... was that mean to turret pilots? Oops.
If anything TDs should be an active countermeasure that acts as a factor in the application of missile damage instead of acting against the ship. But somehow missiles would be OP with that...


The animosity and misunderstanding between the two groups really could've been avoided if they had simply designed every hull to use turrets and/or missiles (with bonuses to both), and had made missiles the cross-race weapon they seem to have originally intended them to be. Then everyone would understand how bad most missiles are and there would much less resistance to them being halfway decent.

But alas that was a mistake that was made by CCP long ago, and now we live under the tyranny of turret users who quite simply outnumber us.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3478 - 2013-12-19 06:30:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
The animosity and misunderstanding between the two groups really could've been avoided if they had simply designed every hull to use turrets and/or missiles (with bonuses to both), and had made missiles the cross-race weapon they seem to have originally intended them to be. Then everyone would understand how bad most missiles are and there would much less resistance to them being halfway decent.

But alas that was a mistake that was made by CCP long ago, and now we live under the tyranny of turret users who quite simply outnumber us.

I don't have any animosity towards turret players; my resentment is reserved for the jackasses that insist on continually stirring the pot by trolling threads such as these. I use missiles and turrets, I just happen to prefer Caldari ships. These tend to have a predisposition towards missile setups, so there's not a lot I can do about that. I expect most Caldari players are in a similar situation.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3479 - 2013-12-19 09:25:33 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I have no problem with TDs working against missiles once base damage application on half the missiles in the game isn't totally putrid. Until then I think it would probably be one step forward and one step back.

Therein lies the problem, which turret players don't seem to be able to fathom.



Although is much easier to campaign for a better damage applicaiton profile if the TD affect missiles than it is now. Because the TD becomes the scape route against any overpowered status achivment.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3480 - 2013-12-19 11:28:44 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I have no problem with TDs working against missiles once base damage application on half the missiles in the game isn't totally putrid. Until then I think it would probably be one step forward and one step back.

Therein lies the problem, which turret players don't seem to be able to fathom.
Although is much easier to campaign for a better damage applicaiton profile if the TD affect missiles than it is now. Because the TD becomes the scape route against any overpowered status achivment.
The problem if TD affect missiles is that they will become OP or drones will. I think we need a specific counter to missiles, even if it is comparable to TD. Something like working defenders would be great IMO.

Astroniomix wrote:
Smacking some moron in a firetail twice doesn't suddenly make the weapon worth taking. It actually proves what everyone has been saying about them, they are good for killing a lone, lightly tanked frigate, and NOTHING ELSE. If there are two of them, you die, if it's heavily tanked, you die, if it's not a frigate, you die. (or have to burn off the field) You're better off skilling drones and flying a vexor. Better at killing frigates, and better at killing everything else too.
So here is the never answered question : what would be acceptable performances and what could prove it ? The stories of Stitch Kaneland have the exact same values as the stories of Arthur Aihaken. The difference is that Stitch showed scenarios where it works when Arthur showed scenarios where nothing would have worked.

What would convince any of you that RLML are not as bad as you say ?