These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dato Koppla
Balls Deep Inc.
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#681 - 2013-11-10 15:50:05 UTC
Leave RLML alone! This really limits Caldaris solo potential since the RLML Caracal was pretty much the best solo Cruiser that Caldari had, after this we'll be stuck with HAM Caracals that can't apply their damage, and Moas which can basically be beaten by anything that isn't a Brawler.
Markku Laaksonen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#682 - 2013-11-10 16:03:09 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
...does anyone actually use fof?...
...this delay creates new kimds of decision making...
...the ships using these systems are kinetic bonused which means you don't switch that often...
...switch on the way to a fight based on what damage type might be best. You still have the option to switch as you run out of charges and would be reloading anyway...


FOFs - No one uses FOFs because they're terrible and restrictively over-situational. (Auto-Targeting Missiles, technically.)

Decision Making - The new kinds of decision making is 'to Rapid Light/Heavy Launcher or not to Rapid Light/Heavy Launcher?' The actual decision will be 'no.'

Kinetic Bonus - This is an interesting point about ships with kinetic bonuses. You don't switch that often. The bonus takes away from decision making. The decision is 'to shoot kinetic or not to shoot kinetic.' With a kinetic bonus that can net you +25% damage, the decision is always to shoot kinetic.

Switching - Again, you admit that most ships using missiles are kinetic bonused. You don't switch that often. The only time I would go into a fight with not-kinetic missiles on a kinetic bonused ship is if I knew the resist profile of the target. The only sure fire way to figure this out in a fight is to shoot one of each missile and see which hits harder. And then wait 40s to reload everything to that damage type? No one does that now with a 10s reload. Anything else is assumption.

The problem is in the ammunition, not the launcher.

DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/

EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#683 - 2013-11-10 16:25:06 UTC  |  Edited by: TrouserDeagle
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, so far I feel like I'm seeing 3 major areas of complaint, alongside a lot of people who think this will be a good change. Those areas are:

  • 40s reload is boring and will be miserable to use please don't do it
  • Switching ammo types (other damage types or to FOF(does anyone actually use fof?)) will be very difficult which is key for missile users
  • This is a nerf to RLML and I love them so please don't do it

    • I'm not convinced at all by the first complaint. As I've said before, this delay creates new kimds of decision making, it creates spikes of tension in fights rather than a flat amount of damage moving around and beyond those things it can be completely mitigated if you want. As others have pointed out, simply splitting your launchers into two groups and alternating them means you are never stuck in reload. It also means you lose the advantage of having your damage front-loaded into a very high DPS number. Still, if you can completely bypass this 'downside' I don't see how you can argue that this mechanic alone ruins the system.

    I commented earlier on the missile switching - I think it is a valid complaint and I'd like to find a work-around for it as an iteration but I don't think it's a show-stopper. Several of the ships using these systems are kinetic bonused which means you don't switch that often. You still have time to switch on the way to a fight based on what damage type might be best. You still have the option to switch as you run out of charges and would be reloading anyway. But again, this is a legit complaint and I want to look into it.

    Most of the complaints about it being a straight up nerf make me feel like going ahead with the old plan and leaving RLML in their current state would have been a mistake. I think most of you feeling this way are just disappointed with the idea of losing a slightly over-powered weapon system, which is understandable. Please keep in mind that this change represents a 15-20% damage drop over long fights but offers a new advantage in trade. I suspect that ships like FW Caracals with RLML will remain very strong. Also, if they don't, it's very easy to tune the reload time down slightly or the rate of fire up slightly to bring them into balance and we would absolutely watch that and make necessary adjustments. I would be extremely unhappy if the numbers were bad and rapid launchers disappeared from Caracals and Fleet Scythes completely.

    Broader complaints about missiles vs turrets or training time often have merit, but they represent much bigger projects that we fully intend to take on, just not during this rebalance. We hear you though and hopefully we can start working on major module balance projects in the coming releases as we are closing in on finishing our first lap of all the ships in the game.

    Hope this answers some of your concerns


    light missiles themselves have overpowered range, volley damage, dps and tracking compared to small LR turrets, so fix that first.

    edit: and fofs are amazing, try undocking sometime. no ecm ship is going to ever miss a jam on a lone caracal, so you can either take a hit to your dps and start killing everything, or you can sit there with your mighty faction missiles loaded and do 0 dps. my only issue with fofs is that they shoot drones - this is less of an issue for lights, because they can actually kill drones pretty well.
    Rufus Beinbruch
    NoNames's
    #684 - 2013-11-10 16:26:00 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:

    Reload time for both groups set to 40 seconds.

    T2 Rapid Light Launchers can carry roughly 18 charges
    T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers can carry roughly 23 charges



    omg. no no no no...... Ugh

    Bye Bye Cara/Cerb solo PvP !!! Evil
    Scooter6976
    Order of Celestial Knights
    #685 - 2013-11-10 16:30:27 UTC
    lets see....... like the marauder thread, we only have another 200+pages of ranting to go before whoever writes ccp rise's paycheck's comes down from the corner office and *thumps* him on his forehead. HARD, hopefully.

    I have read every single post on this thread up to this point.....

    the overwhelming consensus (put nicely): This is an un-needed change.

    the overwhelming consensus (put bluntly): This is STOOOPID, poorly thought out, a +1 for blobs, -5 for solo/small gang, and deliberately void of any consideration for alternate methods of implementing changes to cruiser sized missile dmg application.



    rise is not telling us the REAL reason's for wanting this change, probably because the REAL reason(s) are not good, sensible, logical, thought driven, and probably aimed at achieving an end that only serves a very small percentage of niche strategy.....ie, 15 of these rlml cerbs/caracals MAY be able to silence enemy logi in spite of multiple enemy logi on grid. granted they will do little else after their initial burst dmg, but in some scenarios, that may be all that's needed to change the tide of a fight.

    to hell with pve'ers.

    to hell with small gang/solo'ers

    to hell with missile boats in general, as ppl that fly caldari are stunted in some way, and deserve to have it rubbed in their face.

    ^^this is the ccp way, certainly not the first time they've shown us their hand, and frankly, we should not at all be surprised.

    the OP at least was better timed than say, the marauder thread, since only 1 1/2 weeks is hardly enough time for the playerbase to mount 200+ pgs of rage, properly earning ccp rise a good thumping on his brow. To his credit, he is at least learning from his past mistakes!

    just /o\
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #686 - 2013-11-10 17:05:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
    Scooter6976 wrote:

    the OP at least was better timed than say, the marauder thread, since only 1 1/2 weeks is hardly enough time for the playerbase to mount 200+ pgs of rage, properly earning ccp rise a good thumping on his brow. To his credit, he is at least learning from his past mistakes!
    just /o\


    Don't underestimate us.


    Note: Emphasis mine for clarity.
    Thaddeus Eggeras
    Urkrathos Corp
    #687 - 2013-11-10 17:11:21 UTC
    I think it's sweet how missiles are always getting to short stick. I don't care how you "balance" them, but making reload 40sec, that is just crazy. Missiles already have the longeest reload time 10s, guns 5s, or 1s" Lasers". I don't care what you do, but find another way but 40s reload, and 23 missiles loaded? come up these are suppose to hold more then their small brothers, that makes no since at all. Find another way, and give these back their high loads and 10s reload. Find another way!!!
    Motoko Innocentius
    Domus Dei
    #688 - 2013-11-10 17:18:33 UTC
    Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
    I think it's sweet how missiles are always getting to short stick. I don't care how you "balance" them, but making reload 40sec, that is just crazy. Missiles already have the longeest reload time 10s, guns 5s, or 1s" Lasers". I don't care what you do, but find another way but 40s reload, and 23 missiles loaded? come up these are suppose to hold more then their small brothers, that makes no since at all. Find another way, and give these back their high loads and 10s reload. Find another way!!!


    it's 10 seconds missiles and projectiles, 5 seconds hybrids and instant lasers
    Thaddeus Eggeras
    Urkrathos Corp
    #689 - 2013-11-10 17:26:47 UTC
    And if you do decide to go with these changes, instead just get rid of the Rapid launchers all together, they will be pointless. I sure hope this doesn't happen. As missiles have the least amount of options. And all the rapid launchers would have done is what the smallest version of med and large guns would have done already. But hey whatever, it sure is sweet having missile skills, as they always get nerfed, and still can't compete with guns.

    But if you choose to go with 40s reload and an ungodly low load amount, please just throw them out all together.
    TrouserDeagle
    Beyond Divinity Inc
    Shadow Cartel
    #690 - 2013-11-10 17:28:50 UTC
    Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
    As missiles have the least amount of options



    that's a lie
    Scooter6976
    Order of Celestial Knights
    #691 - 2013-11-10 17:30:22 UTC
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    Scooter6976 wrote:

    the OP at least was better timed than say, the marauder thread, since only 1 1/2 weeks is hardly enough time for the playerbase to mount 200+ pgs of rage, properly earning ccp rise a good thumping on his brow. To his credit, he is at least learning from his past mistakes!
    just /o\


    Don't underestimate us.


    Note: Emphasis mine for clarity.




    I would never;)

    but ive been closely watching this thread, as its one of the least creative or expansive ideas suggested in their 'balancing' efforts, and completely unwarranted. as such, 5-6 pgs per day is not enough to turn the tide. need moar volunteer intelligence since ccp refuses to pay for it
    Alvatore DiMarco
    Capricious Endeavours Ltd
    #692 - 2013-11-10 17:31:54 UTC
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
    As missiles have the least amount of options



    that's a lie


    In terms of ammunition, missiles have quite a few options. In terms of launchers, they're all pretty much the same within a size class and range type.
    Scooter6976
    Order of Celestial Knights
    #693 - 2013-11-10 17:35:28 UTC
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
    As missiles have the least amount of options



    that's a lie


    In terms of ammunition, missiles have quite a few options. In terms of launchers, they're all pretty much the same within a size class and range type.


    ^^^true

    medium ac's:
    180mm and meta variants
    220mm '' ''
    425mm '' ''

    medium arty:
    650mm and meta
    720mm and meta

    caldari:

    rlm's and meta
    hml's and meta
    hams and meta

    5 vs 3

    should I continue?
    TrouserDeagle
    Beyond Divinity Inc
    Shadow Cartel
    #694 - 2013-11-10 17:36:51 UTC
    Scooter6976 wrote:
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
    As missiles have the least amount of options



    that's a lie


    In terms of ammunition, missiles have quite a few options. In terms of launchers, they're all pretty much the same within a size class and range type.


    ^^^true

    medium ac's:
    180mm and meta variants
    220mm '' ''
    425mm '' ''

    medium arty:
    650mm and meta
    720mm and meta

    caldari:

    rlm's and meta
    hml's and meta
    hams and meta

    5 vs 3

    should I continue?





    no because you dumb
    Scooter6976
    Order of Celestial Knights
    #695 - 2013-11-10 17:41:14 UTC
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Scooter6976 wrote:
    Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
    TrouserDeagle wrote:
    Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
    As missiles have the least amount of options



    that's a lie


    In terms of ammunition, missiles have quite a few options. In terms of launchers, they're all pretty much the same within a size class and range type.


    ^^^true

    medium ac's:
    180mm and meta variants
    220mm '' ''
    425mm '' ''

    medium arty:
    650mm and meta
    720mm and meta

    caldari:

    rlm's and meta
    hml's and meta
    hams and meta

    5 vs 3

    should I continue?





    no because you dumb



    very well thought out response. you win.
    Mhari Dson
    Lazy Brothers Inc
    #696 - 2013-11-10 17:47:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mhari Dson
    Obviously CCP Rise got a bad evaluation on something in the last week (I wonder......) and he's gone into OMFG SAVE MY JOB mode without thinking it through. A proper thought out version of this would have rails/blasters/autocannons/artillery/pulse/beam/drone applications already prepared and field tested as well.

    Instead we're stuck with halfwitted BS at a point where it won't make it to SISI so we can actually see it til it goes live and players using this weapons system that didn't look into this thread just $#!+can them on sight on the 19th. I'm willing to entertain this weapons system under certaint conditions:

    1- this isn't RLML/RHML it's burst launchers (AKA keep the V1 with only minor adjustments)

    2- it gets released as a separate weapons system from RLML/RHML

    3- there are similar weapons systems for hybrid/projectile/laser/drone YES DRONES

    otherwise don't bother us with it.


    Want to make people happy without the shitfest? give T2 drones T2 resist profiles. and I hate drones but would be very pleased by it.



    edit...

    and with 9 days to go WTF AREN'T THESE STATISTICS ON SISI?
    BORG HELLinHEAVEN
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #697 - 2013-11-10 17:56:59 UTC
    One thing should be add to those rapid launchers to compensate that 40 seconds recharge time:

    Make it possible to exchange ammo (missile) type by just drag drop in the launcher, in the same way you can do with laser lenses.
    Ex: You have 19 scourge missiles loaded. You can drop nova missiles in the launchers to get 19 nova missiles to fire.

    Since its a strategic great dps tank breaker weapon, a compensation in the choice of the damage type without the recharge delay time sounds justified to me.
    Major Killz
    inglorious bastards.
    #698 - 2013-11-10 18:05:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
    Garviel Tarrant wrote:
    Major Killz wrote:
    Garviel Tarrant wrote:
    also i would like to suggests that rlml's aren't op


    LML's are op, rlml's just inherit that.


    Hit with bat please.


    Please enlighten us. Is this a ship stats + modules + hull bonus + ammunition and weapon system together is TO POWERFUL. Or! Is this a ammunition is overpowered argument? If the later then please explain in detail why that is; and if the former. Then things get complicated.

    I have YET TO READ A DETAILED explanation AS TO WHY LIGHT MISSILES ARE OVERPOWERED.


    I'm lazy, so this won't be detailed. Sorry.

    But its mostly the ability to outdps all other long range weapons of its size at any range beyond around 16km. Coupled with not needing to worry about tracking, being able to apply dps further than you can lock and in some ships having selectable damage types.

    Add to that an immunity to TD's while having enough mids to dish out TD's or damps on all ships that use lml's.

    Yeah, when it comes to frigate kiting, lml's are just a step above (And easier to use).

    Lastly and most importantly, I have a corp mate that has around 900 kills with a kestrel in a few months, he needs to be nerfed >=[


    (Basically, its not the ships, its lml's applying too much damage too well too far away)


    So, after digesting your comments; I’m actually for reducing the effectiveness of light missiles. See what swayed my thinking with regard to this subject was certain key words like: long range, tracking and applied damage.

    Light missiles may be the last abnormal long range weapon system left in game. The norm for long-range weapon systems is rather poor tracking and applied damage when unsupported by an immobilizing module like a stasis webifier compared to short-range weapon systems. They should do absolute damage to certain ship classes at common base speed at a certain range.

    Light missiles have no issue “tracking” targets at all. Well, the drop in applied damage is not significant enough to call it an issue. When shooting an afterburning frigate for example. Not to mention its range advantage. Now I can honestly say I was soloing in a kestrel back in 2011 and slowly owning tech 2 frigates and Rifters back then. So, this mechanic has been around for a while but more prevalent now.

    This is the same issue I had with heavy missile versus heavy assault missiles. Heavy missiles had superior tracking compared to heavy assault missiles. The question was. Should a long range weapon system track as well or better than a short range weapon system. Most would say no.

    Anyway, Heavy missiles and Heavy assault missiles tracking values have been effectively switched. So, heavy assault missiles track as well as heavy missiles use to.

    So what I propose to do with light missiles is this. Increase signature resolution by 100%, Increase explosion velocity by 50% and reduce missile flight time so that an absolutely skilled missile users light missiles would have a 36,000m-flight time to a static target. I think that would be enough to put them back in line with most long-range weapon systems.

    So I agree that light missiles are a broken mechanic but not an overpowered one. Rebalance them and move on. This 40-second reload thing is silly though. 20 seconds would be ok and 25 would be bearable but not 40 seconds.

    [u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
    Kagura Nikon
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #699 - 2013-11-10 18:05:20 UTC
    THe last time I saw a dev idea so relentlesly bashed as HORRIBLE , was back at zulupark time, when we got ideas like limiting carriers to only fighters and in special the "dreads should use target painters".

    Yes, this rapid launcher is on same level.

    "If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
    Geingus
    Doomheim
    #700 - 2013-11-10 18:08:06 UTC
    This idea, and other new options are always a good idea as long as they are balanced and ADD options. Do not interfere with the existing missile structure. Create a new class of launchers and stick them there.


    More options = better as long as they don't cause balance problems for other options.
    Don't replace existing RML's with these, create new Ancillary RML's or something.


    I could also see these being great for PvE use.