These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#961 - 2013-11-12 13:06:14 UTC
In this thread we learn that Rise prefers to get his balancing feedback from external forums and only posts here to troll us and/or for posterity.

CCP Rise: If you find this thread difficult to interact with, perhaps it's worth considering how your replies, seeming to have such a dismissive attitude toward everything we've said, might have made it that way. If you don't want to know what we have to say about something, or don't actually care (with the notable and glaring exception of opinions that align with your own), don't insult us by putting up a thread about the matter and ending your post with "Let me know what you guys think".

Just say "This is what we're going to do and it's going to go live this way," and lock the thread.

We've told you what we think, some significantly more loudly than others. We've proposed alternatives and compromises and we've discussed ad nauseum where the problems actually lie and the real reason RLMLs are so popular. What we get for our time and trouble and our posting and our arguing with each other is "I find other resources more valuable for balancing feedback and don't really care what you guys think."

How completely ridiculous. How absolutely and completely ridiculous.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#962 - 2013-11-12 13:06:52 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


.. On top of this, there's no arguing that front-loading damage is powerful. As others have said, artillery is a good example of that. Whether or not it's powerful enough to compensate for the sustained dps nerf is just something we will find out once people get it in their hands.
.



Oo there is arguing.. and we have done it pretty well here. Front loading biased damage ( to differientiate fromt he INSTANTANEOUS front load damage of arties ) is not good when the total damage that can be deployed is not enough to counter as many ships (or nequivalent in power) as the numbmer of ships that will be out of the fight for the next 40 seconds .

In small fights where most fights barely pass over 2 minutes that is a HUGE issue.

So sure, when you have agang of 20 caracals killing 1 solo BC, the thign is great. When you have 2 caracals fighitn 2 rassult frigates.... its a disaster.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#963 - 2013-11-12 13:07:10 UTC
double
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#964 - 2013-11-12 13:07:58 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Chessur wrote:

PS- It is CLEAR to me you don't play the game. And it is clear to most solo / small gang players that you, along with the vast majority of CCP continue to make changes to the PvP landscape, that are un-needed, gimicky, or have no actual relevance on the meta.

Lol, are you aware that CCP Rise is the former Kil2, one of the most renowned solo PVPers of all time?


He streamed a lot, he was never one of the most renowned solo pvpers of all time.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#965 - 2013-11-12 13:08:15 UTC
ludizao wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

PS - saying I don't play the game or use Caracals is completely ridiculous, I think you guys can find more reasonable lines of attack.

Sure we can, you're encouraging blob warfare and discouraging solo and tiny gangs.

! B R I N G I N G - S O L O - B A C K !



when kil2 became rise i had hopes that ccp will now care a little about small/solo

but my hopes were destroyed multiple times now.

problem is that solo needs ships/fits that are some kind of "OP" (or just really good) remember when vagabond was really good? yes it was a good small/solo ship.

but i've never heard of large vagabond fleets just shredding ppl cause it was "OP"
because what made it strong diminished with increasing number of fleet members
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#966 - 2013-11-12 13:10:09 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Chessur wrote:

PS- It is CLEAR to me you don't play the game. And it is clear to most solo / small gang players that you, along with the vast majority of CCP continue to make changes to the PvP landscape, that are un-needed, gimicky, or have no actual relevance on the meta.

Lol, are you aware that CCP Rise is the former Kil2, one of the most renowned solo PVPers of all time?


Most ronowed is a bit of exageration.. famous OK. But we have some genos peopel in this thread that are more renowed and that hate that idea.


Also math is much older and more renowed than any PVPer in this game ever will be.

And I would love to see him do his old streams now in a Rapid launcher caracal with his new rapid missiles.


We are all just posting mathematically supported posts that this will nerf the very small gang style PVP that this expansion says it shoudl promote.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#967 - 2013-11-12 13:10:50 UTC
I want to know who gives CCP rise his metrics, which show that hmls are good weapons and that feedback in this thread is "mixed"
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#968 - 2013-11-12 13:14:12 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Most ronowed is a bit of exageration.. famous OK. But we have some genos peopel in this thread that are more renowed and that hate that idea.


Im not renowned. That said, actual renowned PVPers like Dalikah literally burst into laughter when I told him about this thread on teamspeak.
Fergus Runkle
Truth and Reconciliation Council
#969 - 2013-11-12 13:15:14 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

It really seems there's two different discussions taking place. One is simply whether or not rapid light missiles deserve a nerf of any kind, and the other is whether or not the proposed mechanic will be fun/powerful.



I think you are missing the other discussion, the one where the players are saying we missile specialists have to use RLML's because the correct sized launchers / missiles (HMLS and HAMS) simply do not apply their damage well enough in the modern pvp environment where links are so pervasive.

I think you are trying to fix the wrong problem, the way that all missiles deal their damage needs to be looked at. You are putting a sticking plaster on a bullet hole.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#970 - 2013-11-12 13:15:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Karle Tabot wrote:
Well I was pretty interested in this one thread, and so I have been through almost every post in it twice now. I understand a lot more about the issues now, though do not have the time in game and experience to understand it all completely. There are a couple of things I will take away from this.

Has such a feedback thread in this game actually caused a change before? I cannot say since this is the first one I have followed. It seems from this one that "feedback" threads are likely pretty useless. The decision here was pretty obviously already made when the issue was posted for feedback. No one could read through this thread and objectively and honestly concluded that the positive feedback came anywhere close to the amount of negative feedback. The issue was also posted too late for it to have been so intended, allowing too little time, if the issue were ever truly up for decision.

While I know my time and experience here are too short and little to be sure as to this next conclusion, and what I am saying as to it comes from scattered reading here and elsewhere, and from being in fleets ingame and reading and hearing the comments of others, it sure seems a new player should be clearly warned against spending time training into Caldari. Most of their ships seem to heavily depend on missiles, and it seems pretty clear missiles are an inferior weapon system as far as the other choices, when training times and everything is considered, at least for PVP. For whatever reason, there is a sense that missiles are just not a weapon system that CCP likes itself as much as the others. On my main character I have apparently wasted a lot of my paid for training time in that any idea about "fixing" missiles is always going to be something they do not presently have time for, although they as herein shown always have time to continue to make them less equal.



The Marauders threadnought resulted in two or three changes to the initial proposal.

The feedback threads for all the various ship rebalances have for the most part yielded changes where they were needed.

CCP Rise's other feedback thread - the SoE ships - only yielded change after he talked to people at EVE Vegas; changes which he was very clear would not be modified further.

The feedback thread for loot scattering that's part of hacking and archaeology didn't yield an awful lot of change but I believe they said they'd keep an eye on it - and sure enough I can link you a CCP Dev saying that they're looking at removing it.

So far it's mostly just Rise who appears to give no fucks about what we say. It's just my opinion but I think he's somewhat bitter over having to do two versions of almost everything he's tried to rebalance since becoming a CCP.
Dalikah
TURN LEFT
HYDRA RELOADED
#971 - 2013-11-12 13:17:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalikah
I just hit the preview button and was a little shocked when I saw how much i ended up typing, but I hope you will work your way through it if you value feedback as high as you say.

First off: I will not talk about the apparent problems the launchers with 40s reload will run into as I and many others covered that in other posts sufficently.

But as I already said in my last post, I really appreciate that you want to try out new stuff and play around with a little out-of-the-box ideas - it can definately make Eve a much more interesting and diverse game. I can understand that you´d love to shake shake things up with this fresh idea, I personally really like the extremely fast-shifting Eve-meta ever since the T1-Cruiser rebalance.
When you got hired by CCP and joined the balancing team you were, and probably still are for many players, a big hope for smallscale pvp, simply because of your very own, extensive experience in the area. Make use of this, you may not be the most practiced game designer yet, but instead have a much better insight into the actual day-to-day gameplay of Eve than plenty other devs, which can be way more valuable.

Another thing for you to keep in mind considering the feedback in this thread is the question WHO actually uses RLML currently. You rarely see any ships with these launchers in gangs of more than 30, maybe even 20. A big chunk of the current playerbase does not fly in smaller gangs much, and can not really evaluate the impact of these changes. This thread has gathered up ~50 pages of responses, with the majority of the profound and reasonable reactions being negative.
Now imagine the same situation, a complete revamp of a weapon massively limiting it´s useability, if it would affect large scale pvp - a thread about treating 425mm Railguns the same way would have 100 pages by now.

So, by all means, keep rebalancing things in a reasonable way. Don´t release these changes in a rush and let us be the beta-testers on TQ, those are basically all-new weapon systems, almost comparable to the new ABCs and Destroyers. Did someone come up with them 1.5 weeks before the expansion and just pulled it through? No, they were presented way earlier, and both tested and tweaked extensively on Singularity.
Just ask yourself, does it really make sense to revamp a weapon system completely before testing it properly, just to probably drastically change them again in a follow-up patch because of bad balancing and plain missing but required features like the ability to switch ammotypes without the full 40s reload, and then maybe even again in an upcoming expansion featuring all-around module overhauls and tiericide?

It´s been mentioned in this thread plenty of times already; the main reason why RLML are the medium missile system of choice in smallscale pvp in many cases is the simple fact that there are no good alternatives.
Light missiles hit untackled Frigates decently and do their max dps to basically everything else, whereas HMLs and HAMs have a hard time applying damage to Cruisers (aka ships that are meant to fit them) that is in line with the massive increase in fittings and such loss in tank.
For comparison: Heavy Pulse Lasers hit other Cruisers with close to full dps at roughly HAM range using Scorch, and up close with a web and Multifrequency - HAMs lose a massive amount of damage even against a webbed cruiser.
The only reasonable way of making such drastic changes to RLML would be as part of a complete overhaul of medium-sized missile systems, which might even show that the only rebalancing to RLML needed were slight tweaks, along with adding the alternative launchers with front-loaded dps. You didn´t remove the traditional shield boosters when introducing ASBs either after all - for the sake of diversity.

Fortunately, your idea offers the unique opportunity of both releasing the all-new mechanics onto TQ directly to gather massive feedback AND tweaking an existing weapon system that may be slightly OP. Just let the current RLML keep their behavior and adjust their stats, then add the front-loaded version as a new module.
A slight, further increase to the PG-need of RLML (up to a point where the very popular LSE+XLASB RLML Cerb does not quite work anymore with only 1 fttingmod and genolutions) combined with a ROF reduction of 5-10% would certainly be a reasonable and careful adjustment that can be done without massive testing on SiSi, and does not keep you from adding further changes in a follow-up patch. Same goes for a straight-up release of all-new launchers with front-loaded dps (feel free to name the cosmos/storyline version 'Rise' Burst Light Missile Launcher).
Keep an eye on how people use and abuse them, then react accordingly with Rubicon 1.1 via tweaks to ammo-switching etc. You´d even still have the chance to remove RLML, or rather convert them all into the burst version later on this way, without risking to remove a popular weapon along with releasing one that potentially noone will use before gathering proper ingame feedback.

I really hope that my humble opinion and all the other great posts in this thread will make you rethink your plans, do not underestimate our thoughts and evaluations - the CSM members are not in their positions because of exceptional gameplay knowledge, but because of their insight into the community and major groups of the game.
You are the game designer, we are the people who use, test and abuse the mechanics you implement - together our joint opinions are what make Eve a more fun place for everyone.

.

Chessur
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#972 - 2013-11-12 13:20:01 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Chessur wrote:

PS- It is CLEAR to me you don't play the game. And it is clear to most solo / small gang players that you, along with the vast majority of CCP continue to make changes to the PvP landscape, that are un-needed, gimicky, or have no actual relevance on the meta.

Lol, are you aware that CCP Rise is the former Kil2, one of the most renowned solo PVPers of all time?


He streamed a lot, he was never one of the most renowned solo pvpers of all time.


(Yes i know who Rize is)

^^^ Pretty much this. Streaming =/= good, or inherrent knowledge about PvP. He certainly isn't my 'good pvper' list. And I certainly wouldn't call him renowned lol
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#973 - 2013-11-12 13:21:52 UTC
When can we expect this on the test server?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#974 - 2013-11-12 13:23:53 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
This is definitely the most difficult thread to try and interact with that I've made so far, so please excuse the delay between post if you can find it in your hearts to do so.


Sure, well thought out posts are always better. From a community rep standpoint though, a short post saying "im reading the thread and will get back to you" would calm some of the people here.

Quote:

I've been discussing the response to this change almost constantly since the thread was posted, both with the CSM and with my fellow designers. I'll cut to the chase and say that the conclusion is to go ahead with the change, with the understanding that it needs to be carefully looked at following release.


By CSM you mean "Malcanis and I made this idea", yeah?

Quote:


I understand that the current RLML missiles are very strong and you guys like them and that many people would be very unhappy for them to get a significant change regardless of the method we chose. We definitely feel they need a change though. It's a weapon system designed to be best in a particular kind of situation rather than being the best choice for most situations and so one way or another it was going to get tweaked.


It sounds like they are performing exactly like they should. They are best in some situations, worst in other situations. Your own metrics show that!

Also, if you want to nerf them, then go ahead and nerf them. Dont give them a 20% dps nerf (which is hilariously massive btw) along with a brand new mechanic that removes the main reason to use them.

Quote:
However, if this change means the system isn't powerful in the situations it's meant for (dunking smaller ships), it will get adjusted until it is.


Im sorry, but i just flat out dont believe you here. I literally cannot remember the last time CCP has done anything with a change other than say "the metrics show that this change is successful." I will happily admit I am wrong if you can point out a counterexample though.

Quote:
The second part of this topic is whether or not the other medium weapon systems are actually viable. The way players are behaving says they are, but following this release I'd like to have a conversation internally about missiles as a whole and figure out where we stand. Maybe there is some more changes needed and I'd like to look into that.


"RLMs are the best in every situation"
"Other medium missiles are viable."

These cannot both be true. Pick one.
dreynar swyglou
Riemannian Manifold Torus
#975 - 2013-11-12 13:23:59 UTC
It doesn't surprise me this ridiculous idea is going forward after all it's oposite day at CCP every day.Also I don't see all this positive feedback towards a change that hasn't even hit Singularity.
And as a last thought the only reason RLML picked up any popularity was because HML were nerfed to oblivion and became totaly unreliable as a cruiser/bc weapon.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#976 - 2013-11-12 13:24:42 UTC
Quote:

As far as the long reload mechanic, the feedback is mixed in this thread and mostly positive elsewhere (CSM, internal development, external forums) from what I can tell.


The feedback is overwhelmingly negative in this thead, apart from a few people that have fewer small gang kills in the past 6 months than many of the other posters here have so far in november. And malcanis being vocal in the CSM forum does not really impress or surprise me.

Quote:
Again, I will say that the concerns about ammo swapping are completely valid and I've talked to my team and we can hopefully address that sometime after Rubicon.


"For another few months, RLMs will be entire worthless, maybe we can revist them in a year"

Quote:
Part of the reason I lean towards putting this change in is the common sentiment in most balance threads that homogenization is a big fear among our players. I think favoring new types of interactions rather than adjusting numbers slightly within the same mechanic makes the game more interesting, and everything I've heard from the community points that direction as well (except sometimes when doing something new means changing something old). On top of this, there's no arguing that front-loading damage is powerful. As others have said, artillery is a good example of that. Whether or not it's powerful enough to compensate for the sustained dps nerf is just something we will find out once people get it in their hands.


This is why people still fly arty maelstrom fleets for blobs, and small gang is entirely arty nado gangs, right? Its an interesting mechanic for sure, but not one that should replace RLMs. Either put them in as a new weapon system, or add it to remote reps.

Quote:
I think we will come out of this with a very fun pair of weapon systems. If we don't, it will get changed.


I disagree entirely. It will be not fun for the 2 frigates that get obliterated in 40s, and not fun for the caracal pilot that then has to warp off, reload and warp back. Its a not fun system for everyone. And again, could someone please share with me a single example of CCP reverting a balance changed based on ~metrics~?

Edit: Goddamn it dreynar
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#977 - 2013-11-12 13:25:33 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Most of CSM that are from PVP groups are from alliances, so solo or very small gangs are irrelevant for them.


You mean they are bad pvpers and I agree.

We have various concerns from a Hydra Reloaded member here and I will take all of his opinions very serious.

They practically invented small gang and solo pvp, have tons of videos to look at and pilots that all belong in a hall of fame when piloting ships with small members or even just by themselves.


Dear CCP Rise,

from all your solo piloting experience you should know that a missile launcher doesn't make a weapon system good or bad, the pilot does.

I hate to repeat myself but I already said the those launchers have been as they are right now for about six years.

When heavy missiles got nerfed and missiles had a say in pvp at all, people started looking at other solutions for what they have trained and they didn't want to 'ditch' missiles completly from the table of options.

Light missiles are a long range missile solution for frigate sized ships. The rapid launcher has been a cruiser sized launcher for the sole purpose of anti-support.
For the better part, all things are working as intended.
(Even if they only found out recently and it only lasted a few weeks)

But if piloted by a competent pilot I doubt a Caracal or Cerberus pilot will be succesful in fighting a Thorax or a Deimos with light missiles or any other missiles we have right now for that matter.

For sake of all the killmail hungry folks out there, the new fittings of the Caracal and the Cerberus will be looking like this:

5 / 6x empty high slots
shield tank for taste or at all,point, maybe a mwd for the fun of flying at all
damage control II, 3x nano
and rename the ship at the docking bay to 'mock me naow' or 'kill me first, I can't shoot - need to reload'.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#978 - 2013-11-12 13:28:57 UTC
Karle Tabot wrote:
Well I was pretty interested in this one thread, and so I have been through almost every post in it twice now. I understand a lot more about the issues now, though do not have the time in game and experience to understand it all completely. There are a couple of things I will take away from this.

Has such a feedback thread in this game actually caused a change before? I cannot say since this is the first one I have followed. It seems from this one that "feedback" threads are likely pretty useless. The decision here was pretty obviously already made when the issue was posted for feedback. No one could read through this thread and objectively and honestly concluded that the positive feedback came anywhere close to the amount of negative feedback. The issue was also posted too late for it to have been so intended, allowing too little time, if the issue were ever truly up for decision.

While I know my time and experience here are too short and little to be sure as to this next conclusion, and what I am saying as to it comes from scattered reading here and elsewhere, and from being in fleets ingame and reading and hearing the comments of others, it sure seems a new player should be clearly warned against spending time training into Caldari. Most of their ships seem to heavily depend on missiles, and it seems pretty clear missiles are an inferior weapon system as far as the other choices, when training times and everything is considered, at least for PVP. For whatever reason, there is a sense that missiles are just not a weapon system that CCP likes itself as much as the others. On my main character I have apparently wasted a lot of my paid for training time in that any idea about "fixing" missiles is always going to be something they do not presently have time for, although they as herein shown always have time to continue to make them less equal.



On the first two points. In the past, CCP has listened. You can see that in the Interdictor thread for example - where significant improvements were made based on feedback (The initial interdictor proposal was awful). But it isn't always the case, and naturally players will always be against certain ideas because it might hurt them.

It is unlike CCP to throw in new changes with so little time left before the expansion - and lets be honest - it is a dramatic change, because being unable to reload your missiles to change for the right damage/range type is huge and takes a big part of player skill away from the game.

As for missiles, they do have their advantages. But unlike guns, we are very reliant with missiles with what CCP does with the mechanics, as these have the most profound effect on their use ultimately, because there are no things like tracking computers etc, to improve missile mechanics. Cruise missiles were improved for example, and so more people used them.

Torpedos are awful and without doubt the weakest weapon currently in the game.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 

Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#979 - 2013-11-12 13:30:02 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:


The Marauders threadnought resulted in two or three changes to the initial proposal.

The feedback threads for all the various ship rebalances have for the most part yielded changes where they were needed.

CCP Rise's other feedback thread - the SoE ships - only yielded change after he talked to people at EVE Vegas; changes which he was very clear would not be modified further.

The feedback thread for loot scattering that's part of hacking and archaeology didn't yield an awful lot of change but I believe they said they'd keep an eye on it - and sure enough I can link you a CCP Dev saying that they're looking at removing it.

So far it's mostly just Rise who appears to give no fucks about what we say. It's just my opinion but I think he's somewhat bitter over having to do two versions of almost everything he's tried to rebalance since becoming a CCP.

The marauder thread, we were given plenty of time to discuss the changes then it hit Sisi where we were able to field test the changes and provide further feed back.

With the hacking changes, along with the loot spew, we were given plenty of time and were able to provide feedback as the changes was being implemented. The only thing they did not listen to us about was just removing the loot spew (at least then anyway).

With the SOE thread we have had, 2 weeks maybe(?), to test out the ships, and they did not live up to there exploration hype. Feedback was strong on both sides but like you said was ignored for outside opinions.

This on the other hand, if a find load of BS (and I don't mean battleship) it was posted just over a week before the launch there is most likely going to be no time for testing it on Sisi, and despite extremely strong feedback will still be pushed through.

If nothing else CCP Rise push this steaming pile of crap feature back to 1.1 so we have some time to test it out.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Kaeda Maxwell
Screaming Hayabusa
Neo-Bushido Movement
#980 - 2013-11-12 13:30:07 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
This is definitely the most difficult thread to try and interact with that I've made so far, so please excuse the delay between post if you can find it in your hearts to do so.


You're excused.

Quote:
I've been discussing the response to this change almost constantly since the thread was posted, both with the CSM and with my fellow designers. I'll cut to the chase and say that the conclusion is to go ahead with the change, with the understanding that it needs to be carefully looked at following release.


Why? At least put in on the test server for a reasonable amount of time first.

Quote:
I understand that the current RLML missiles are very strong and you guys like them and that many people would be very unhappy for them to get a significant change regardless of the method we chose. We definitely feel they need a change though. It's a weapon system designed to be best in a particular kind of situation rather than being the best choice for most situations and so one way or another it was going to get tweaked.


I'm sorry but you're flat wrong on this. Light missiles are strong yes. Why are you "balancing" a single delivery system while leaving equally strong talwar fleets untouched because they use a different delivery system?

Quote:
However, if this change means the system isn't powerful in the situations it's meant for (dunking smaller ships), it will get adjusted until it is.


Maybe it will be fine for killing frigates, who knows since won't actually get reasonable amounts of time with this on sisi. But what you have done is put solo missile cruisers in a position where they are either super weak against smaller ships when they fit HM's or HAM's or made them to weak to stand any chance against other cruisers. So even if you "balanced" the delivery system you've ruined the engagement profile of these ships for solo.

Quote:
On top of this, there's no arguing that front-loading damage is powerful. As others have said, artillery is a good example of that. Whether or not it's powerful enough to compensate for the sustained dps nerf is just something we will find out once people get it in their hands.


And by others you mean Malcanis, who is not only wrong but not a small gang pvp'er to boot. If arty is so sexy ask him why Init doesn't fly arty doctrines in recent history while your at it ask him if he'd be cool with Oracles having a 40 second cool down after every 18 shots.